Monday, January 09, 2012
Saturday, January 07, 2012
Christmas Billboards Point In The Culture War's Direction
Christmas is the time of year when the thoughts of most Americans grow to be at their most devout. It is increasingly the time of year that the avowed despisers of the Almighty are at their most disrespectful.
Before now, the most culturally embarrassing thing to come out of the wastelands of the Garden State was likely Snooki and her Jersey Shore compatriots. However, it now seems even their debauched escapades have been surpassed in terms of deliberately thumbing one’s nose at God.
For decades, one municipality there has draped across a main street a banner reading that horrible bit of wordplay “Keep Christ In Christmas”. As has become customary, leftist subversives have stepped forward insisting that the banner be taken down to placate one or two discombobulated by the message.
Those holding to this position contend that the feelings of a handful must be upheld at all costs for the sake of social cohesion. So if it cannot be urged to keep Christ in Christmas, are these diversitymongers going to be consistent and call for the decoupling of “Black” from “History Month”? That commemoration is even more divisive and controversial, but most Whites are too afraid to speak up as to what they really think of it.
In what could be categorized as a battle of the banners, to express their disdain regarding public displays of belief, a gaggle of atheists have hoisted an ensign emblazoned with the following: “At this season of the winter solstice, there are no gods, no devils, no angels, no heaven or hell. There is only the natural world. Religion is but a myth and a superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds.”
Perhaps the greatest gift such deluded infidels could be given this Christmas season would be for someone to point out that their countersign is itself fraught with a number of faith-based assumptions as ultimately improvable as anything held by the most ardent adherents of traditional religious belief.
For example, can the atheist really irrefutably prove that only the natural world exists? If one wanted to get really snotty about it, couldn’t one make the argument that, since man’s knowledge is finite, God is floating a mere two inches out of range of the most powerful telescopes ever designed?
The banner hoisted by the unbelievers attempts to strike an eminently scientific pose. However, its conclusion has nothing whatsoever to do with experimental objectivity.
Furthermore, aren't we often chided in response to the most ludicrous postulations to keep an open mind? So why is the existence of God an invalid assumption?
The banner concludes, “Religion...hardens hearts and enslaves minds.” But if nothing exists beyond physicality and materiality, on what grounds are hard hearts and enslaved minds such a negative thing?
With power and brute force being the only true values since they promote survival and existential optimization of those that wield them, why are hard hearts and enslaved minds less than optimal states of being? You see, in a materialistic context, one cannot even use the word “bad”.
During Christmas each year, St. Matthew's-In-The-City Church in Aukland, New Zealand sponsors a billboard that the congregation considers provocative. This year, the church went with a billboard depicting the Virgin Mary holding a home pregnancy test with an expression of shock and dismay upon her face.
This work does attempt to take the viewer beyond the quaint romanticism of the Christmas story as popularly presented to better appreciate how the lives of those involved were profoundly impacted and altered. Yet this depiction is still wrong on a number of levels.
There is one thing the observant notices right out of the gate. That is just how long would you live if you drew the portrait of the founder of a particular world religion with a proclivity for loud explosions holding a home pregnancy test?
Secondly, depicting Mary with a look of befuddlement on her face ignores the facts and implications of the Biblical account. A surprised look would indicate a couple of things.
A pregnancy test suggests that the angel did not make the announcement to Mary as chronicled in Luke Chapter 1. According to the artistic depiction in question, she would not have suspected she was with child until whatever it is that prompts a woman to suspect she might be and seeks confirmation through the highlighted pharmaceutical apparatus.
If the angel did appear as detailed, the taking of a home pregnancy test would indicate that Mary did not believe the angel. And though there were no doubt times that her heart grew heavy as did that of her child in the Garden of Gethsemane, there is no indication from Holy Writ that she ever doubted the veracity of the message sent to her and the move of God upon her. In Luke 1:38, Mary says, "I am the Lord's servant. May it be to me as you have said (NIV)."
Many dismiss billboards as nothing but blights upon the landscape. But if one takes a closer look, one discovers how a number of these oversized signs can highlight the ideas clamoring for prominence in public perception and a remind Christians why they must always be ready to give an answer in response to the confusion and despair that has gripped mankind in various forms throughout history.
by Frederick Meekins
Before now, the most culturally embarrassing thing to come out of the wastelands of the Garden State was likely Snooki and her Jersey Shore compatriots. However, it now seems even their debauched escapades have been surpassed in terms of deliberately thumbing one’s nose at God.
For decades, one municipality there has draped across a main street a banner reading that horrible bit of wordplay “Keep Christ In Christmas”. As has become customary, leftist subversives have stepped forward insisting that the banner be taken down to placate one or two discombobulated by the message.
Those holding to this position contend that the feelings of a handful must be upheld at all costs for the sake of social cohesion. So if it cannot be urged to keep Christ in Christmas, are these diversitymongers going to be consistent and call for the decoupling of “Black” from “History Month”? That commemoration is even more divisive and controversial, but most Whites are too afraid to speak up as to what they really think of it.
In what could be categorized as a battle of the banners, to express their disdain regarding public displays of belief, a gaggle of atheists have hoisted an ensign emblazoned with the following: “At this season of the winter solstice, there are no gods, no devils, no angels, no heaven or hell. There is only the natural world. Religion is but a myth and a superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds.”
Perhaps the greatest gift such deluded infidels could be given this Christmas season would be for someone to point out that their countersign is itself fraught with a number of faith-based assumptions as ultimately improvable as anything held by the most ardent adherents of traditional religious belief.
For example, can the atheist really irrefutably prove that only the natural world exists? If one wanted to get really snotty about it, couldn’t one make the argument that, since man’s knowledge is finite, God is floating a mere two inches out of range of the most powerful telescopes ever designed?
The banner hoisted by the unbelievers attempts to strike an eminently scientific pose. However, its conclusion has nothing whatsoever to do with experimental objectivity.
Furthermore, aren't we often chided in response to the most ludicrous postulations to keep an open mind? So why is the existence of God an invalid assumption?
The banner concludes, “Religion...hardens hearts and enslaves minds.” But if nothing exists beyond physicality and materiality, on what grounds are hard hearts and enslaved minds such a negative thing?
With power and brute force being the only true values since they promote survival and existential optimization of those that wield them, why are hard hearts and enslaved minds less than optimal states of being? You see, in a materialistic context, one cannot even use the word “bad”.
During Christmas each year, St. Matthew's-In-The-City Church in Aukland, New Zealand sponsors a billboard that the congregation considers provocative. This year, the church went with a billboard depicting the Virgin Mary holding a home pregnancy test with an expression of shock and dismay upon her face.
This work does attempt to take the viewer beyond the quaint romanticism of the Christmas story as popularly presented to better appreciate how the lives of those involved were profoundly impacted and altered. Yet this depiction is still wrong on a number of levels.
There is one thing the observant notices right out of the gate. That is just how long would you live if you drew the portrait of the founder of a particular world religion with a proclivity for loud explosions holding a home pregnancy test?
Secondly, depicting Mary with a look of befuddlement on her face ignores the facts and implications of the Biblical account. A surprised look would indicate a couple of things.
A pregnancy test suggests that the angel did not make the announcement to Mary as chronicled in Luke Chapter 1. According to the artistic depiction in question, she would not have suspected she was with child until whatever it is that prompts a woman to suspect she might be and seeks confirmation through the highlighted pharmaceutical apparatus.
If the angel did appear as detailed, the taking of a home pregnancy test would indicate that Mary did not believe the angel. And though there were no doubt times that her heart grew heavy as did that of her child in the Garden of Gethsemane, there is no indication from Holy Writ that she ever doubted the veracity of the message sent to her and the move of God upon her. In Luke 1:38, Mary says, "I am the Lord's servant. May it be to me as you have said (NIV)."
Many dismiss billboards as nothing but blights upon the landscape. But if one takes a closer look, one discovers how a number of these oversized signs can highlight the ideas clamoring for prominence in public perception and a remind Christians why they must always be ready to give an answer in response to the confusion and despair that has gripped mankind in various forms throughout history.
by Frederick Meekins
Friday, January 06, 2012
Shouldn't You Expect To Be Shot For Waving A Gun At Cops?
Yet another piece of common sense that doesn't apply since an Hispanic is involved.
Dead Girl Found On Queen's Estate
Wonder if someone forgot to cover up one of their Bohemian Grove-type rituals?
To those lacking perceptual awareness beyond the obvious or to ratiocinate beyond what their betters allow, a five cent bag tax doesn't sound like much. However, to those of us that eat at home and don't stuff our gullets with restaurant swill, that will amount to hundreds of dollars per year. Oh well, just take it out of what you would put into your church collection plate. If we are told in the NT that government is a ministry of God, than any of the taxes going into the state coffers are a part of your tithe. It is not your fault if the state takes up the entire 10%.
Wednesday, January 04, 2012
If one is going to couch one's opposition to Bachman & Gingrich from the standpoint of feigned sophistication by going on how their experience has only been in the House of Representatives rather than as a Senator or Governor and thus are unqualified to be President, shouldn't you be consist and come out against Ron Paul as well?
An effusively pious associate is aghast that Gingrich is seeking "revenge" over verbal distortions propagated by Romney regarding the former Speaker of the House. It is the associate's contention that such an attitude is not Biblical or Christlike. Yet, most positions held by Ron Paul is accepted nearly as Holy Writ. So I ask is advocating the legalization of hardcore narcotics Biblical and Christlike?
Tuesday, January 03, 2012
Monday, January 02, 2012
Sunday, January 01, 2012
Wednesday, December 28, 2011
Tuesday, December 27, 2011
Zany Might Be An Improvement
Romney insists in regards to Gingrich that "zany is not what we need in a President".
By that, one must assume Romney considers as "zany" a willingness to at least consider approaches to issues outside of the box and observing where our time fits with the overall flow of history.
To Romney, it seems how things are going now are, to use vocabulary fitting with his own patterns of speech, "just peachy".
But one supposes there really isn't anyway of ascertaining such since Romney also informed us that we really didn't need an historian either.
And just think, he could have likely gotten by with it if it weren't for those pesky kids.
Thought I would toss that in if candidates are going to start sounding like they are doing voiceovers for Scooby-do episodes from the mid 70's
By that, one must assume Romney considers as "zany" a willingness to at least consider approaches to issues outside of the box and observing where our time fits with the overall flow of history.
To Romney, it seems how things are going now are, to use vocabulary fitting with his own patterns of speech, "just peachy".
But one supposes there really isn't anyway of ascertaining such since Romney also informed us that we really didn't need an historian either.
And just think, he could have likely gotten by with it if it weren't for those pesky kids.
Thought I would toss that in if candidates are going to start sounding like they are doing voiceovers for Scooby-do episodes from the mid 70's
Monday, December 26, 2011
Tragic Story Exhibits Elitist Tone
A story regarding a Conn. fire claiming the lives of three children exudes the tone that the tragedy is some how compounded that the mother was an ad executive and the dwelling a Victorian.
Is this somehow a tragedy more befitting of youngsters residing in suburban tract housing?
Is this somehow a tragedy more befitting of youngsters residing in suburban tract housing?
Sunday, December 25, 2011
Friday, December 23, 2011
New Yorker Cartoon Exposes Bias & Not Historical Realities
It has been observed that often a picture is worth a thousand words. By this, it is meant that often a witty image can more quickly convey an idea than a written exposition.
Another truism nearly as classic insists that the only thing we learn from history is that we don't learn anything from history.
A prime example of these working in tandem could be found on the cover of a late 2011 edition of the New Yorker Magazine. Depicted violating the U.S. southern border were migrants adorned not in sombreros but rather in what would be considered traditional Thanksgiving pilgrim garb.
Such doodling, though admittedly humorous, displays a number of questionable assumptions.
For starters, the cartoon assumes that the illegal aliens of today are the equivalent of the Pilgrim settlers.
In addressing this issue, emphasis must be placed upon ILLEGAL.
The migrants coming here today are doing so in violation of the agreed upon governing authorities of the territorial United States.
The English Separatists voyaging here aboard the Mayflower committed no such transgression. In fact, the pioneers making that trek were so eager to see law and order established that among their first acts was to promulgate the Mayflower Compact. They are not to blame if the Indians did not have an as developed sense of property as we have in our own Western tradition or that there was not as much of a need to enforce borders back then as there is today.
The naive will likely respond but, if our Founders were all immigrants, who are we to forbid entrance to those that come here after us?
If that is the case, should those making such a case (especially if they are White) be forced to not only provide shelter to any minority squatter that crawls in through an open window but also cook daily meals and provide laundered sheets for the uninvited house guests? If not, how is amnesty and assorted social welfare benefits going to those that have not earned them any different?
Those fawning all over the border violators of today will gush incessantly how moral and family oriented these blatant criminals are just like the Pilgrim settlers coming here to start a new life. Even the likes of alleged conservatives such as Dr. Dobson of Focus on the Family have at times been duped by this as evidenced by the time he got atop his Colorado high horse and proceeded to castigate Pat Buchanan regarding the syndicated columnist's classic "The Death Of The West".
However, just how moral are these new arrivals when one of their foremost weekend activities is bawdy drunkenness that often results in public urination? It's doubtful many Pilgrims blared music until 3 AM given the solemnity and austerity for which the rigorous Protestants of that era were renowned.
Often leftists like to harp on the decline that befell the American Indians once the historical paths of these people groups intersected with those of the Europeans. Then let's draw on some lessons from that episode as to why the United States of today must curtail the numbers crossing over the nation's frontiers.
If the migrants of today are to be construed through the prism that they are the equivalent of the Pilgrim "foreparnets" (no need to set off radical feminists among fanatic grammarians), it must be pointed out that their famed work ethic wasn't the only thing the early Puritans brought with them. They also brought a number of diseases against which the population already residing here had little immunity.
Sadly, little can be done to prevent the suffering and death from the epidemics that swept across the New World centuries ago. But with the germ theory of disease that has developed since that time, shouldn't we honor those passing in that tragedy by clamping down on our own borders by only granting admittance to those from beyond our borders that adhere to the most rigorous of health standards?
Don't think this is a valid concern? Then why are not only diseases once thought conquered or at least under control such as tuberculosis but even bedbugs as well making a resurgence?
Nation-states exist primarily for the benefit of those already living within the boundaries of a particular delineated territory that have a proper legal basis for being there. Once a culture loses its wherewithal to defend this particular principle, it won't be long until it is swept into the dung heap of history.
by Frederick Meekins
Another truism nearly as classic insists that the only thing we learn from history is that we don't learn anything from history.
A prime example of these working in tandem could be found on the cover of a late 2011 edition of the New Yorker Magazine. Depicted violating the U.S. southern border were migrants adorned not in sombreros but rather in what would be considered traditional Thanksgiving pilgrim garb.
Such doodling, though admittedly humorous, displays a number of questionable assumptions.
For starters, the cartoon assumes that the illegal aliens of today are the equivalent of the Pilgrim settlers.
In addressing this issue, emphasis must be placed upon ILLEGAL.
The migrants coming here today are doing so in violation of the agreed upon governing authorities of the territorial United States.
The English Separatists voyaging here aboard the Mayflower committed no such transgression. In fact, the pioneers making that trek were so eager to see law and order established that among their first acts was to promulgate the Mayflower Compact. They are not to blame if the Indians did not have an as developed sense of property as we have in our own Western tradition or that there was not as much of a need to enforce borders back then as there is today.
The naive will likely respond but, if our Founders were all immigrants, who are we to forbid entrance to those that come here after us?
If that is the case, should those making such a case (especially if they are White) be forced to not only provide shelter to any minority squatter that crawls in through an open window but also cook daily meals and provide laundered sheets for the uninvited house guests? If not, how is amnesty and assorted social welfare benefits going to those that have not earned them any different?
Those fawning all over the border violators of today will gush incessantly how moral and family oriented these blatant criminals are just like the Pilgrim settlers coming here to start a new life. Even the likes of alleged conservatives such as Dr. Dobson of Focus on the Family have at times been duped by this as evidenced by the time he got atop his Colorado high horse and proceeded to castigate Pat Buchanan regarding the syndicated columnist's classic "The Death Of The West".
However, just how moral are these new arrivals when one of their foremost weekend activities is bawdy drunkenness that often results in public urination? It's doubtful many Pilgrims blared music until 3 AM given the solemnity and austerity for which the rigorous Protestants of that era were renowned.
Often leftists like to harp on the decline that befell the American Indians once the historical paths of these people groups intersected with those of the Europeans. Then let's draw on some lessons from that episode as to why the United States of today must curtail the numbers crossing over the nation's frontiers.
If the migrants of today are to be construed through the prism that they are the equivalent of the Pilgrim "foreparnets" (no need to set off radical feminists among fanatic grammarians), it must be pointed out that their famed work ethic wasn't the only thing the early Puritans brought with them. They also brought a number of diseases against which the population already residing here had little immunity.
Sadly, little can be done to prevent the suffering and death from the epidemics that swept across the New World centuries ago. But with the germ theory of disease that has developed since that time, shouldn't we honor those passing in that tragedy by clamping down on our own borders by only granting admittance to those from beyond our borders that adhere to the most rigorous of health standards?
Don't think this is a valid concern? Then why are not only diseases once thought conquered or at least under control such as tuberculosis but even bedbugs as well making a resurgence?
Nation-states exist primarily for the benefit of those already living within the boundaries of a particular delineated territory that have a proper legal basis for being there. Once a culture loses its wherewithal to defend this particular principle, it won't be long until it is swept into the dung heap of history.
by Frederick Meekins
Thursday, December 22, 2011
Wednesday, December 21, 2011
Baffling Bawdy Broadside
Only at Christmas time it seems we are reamed a new one for attempting to convey greetings of kindness.
Perhaps those attempting to guilt trip over what kinds of Christmas cards people send would prefer not to be sent any Christmas cards at all.
I know some no doubt consider me some kind of moral reprobate since I don't go along with every decree in "Churchianity" just because someone in a clerical collar or holds an established ecclesiastical position hands it down.
But frankly I'd rather receive a card with an artist's tasteful rendition of the Christ Child on it than one where a dog insinuates he's about to cock his leg and piss all over the living room tree.
Don't like my language? Don't get after me.
The cards I send are considerably more sedate.
Take it up with those that are held up as exemplary church leaders who send such cards.
Want to declare me an apostate for telling it like it is, go right ahead.
Usually, I don't have a problem with that kind of humor.
However, I do when there is a hypocrisy involved that sneers down it's nose at those whose faith is not considered as rigorous or straightlaced while mailing something that can't be described as anything other than scatological.
Perhaps those attempting to guilt trip over what kinds of Christmas cards people send would prefer not to be sent any Christmas cards at all.
I know some no doubt consider me some kind of moral reprobate since I don't go along with every decree in "Churchianity" just because someone in a clerical collar or holds an established ecclesiastical position hands it down.
But frankly I'd rather receive a card with an artist's tasteful rendition of the Christ Child on it than one where a dog insinuates he's about to cock his leg and piss all over the living room tree.
Don't like my language? Don't get after me.
The cards I send are considerably more sedate.
Take it up with those that are held up as exemplary church leaders who send such cards.
Want to declare me an apostate for telling it like it is, go right ahead.
Usually, I don't have a problem with that kind of humor.
However, I do when there is a hypocrisy involved that sneers down it's nose at those whose faith is not considered as rigorous or straightlaced while mailing something that can't be described as anything other than scatological.
The same crowd regularly ranting about women wearing pants is now in an uproar that women's boxing is being planned for the Olympics. But It's not like Feminists are grabbing women off the street and forcing them to fight one another. So why is it more appropriate for a man to knock the teeth and snot of another man but not for a woman to do it to another woman?
Tuesday, December 20, 2011
Monday, December 19, 2011
If Brad House is going to castigate those Christians that prefer solitude, shouldn't it be pointed out that the church he's an associate minister at, Mars Hill, is so borderline cultic that it can't stand the notion of its planted churches being operationally independent. Rather, these outlying satellites function under the ecclesiological paradigm of "multi-site". That's where you drive in to watch the pastor on some jumbotron like he is Big Brother or Max Headroom. Wasn't the People's Temple multi-site there too for awhile?
Sunday, December 18, 2011
Faith in Christ is indeed what saves. However, that does not mean that the intellect is not a route to faith. So why is it denigrated more homiletically than other approaches such as overwhelming existential crisis or intense emotional need? So if it's all faith and nothing else, perhaps the JW's and the Mormons should circle around the parking lot and pick off the dimwitted Fundies reveling in their ignorance as the step out the church house door.
Friday, December 16, 2011
Leftist Factions Co-opt Rather Than Abolish Holidays
For about the past two decades, those to the left side of the sociopolitical spectrum have made such a fuss over their hostility towards traditional American holidays and celebrations that the arising disputations have themselves become an anticipated aspect of the close of each year. It was claimed such festivities promote values so vile that these sentiments must be expunged from the civic calendar and the very names seldom mentioned for fear of irrevocably harming those not participating for whatever the reason.
Though not always cognizant of the epic spiritual and philosophical struggle taking place all around them, Americans can be a remarkably stubborn and independent lot. As such, a number sympathetic to the process of communalization have realized that they might be more successful in accomplishing their goals through a subdued gradualism rather than through sudden revolutionary upheaval.
The first of the remembrances of the waning year subverted by manipulative social engineers is Thanksgiving. This holiday is despised for a number of common liberal reasons.
For starters, it is argued that Thanksgiving is racist because of the hostilities that eventually erupted between Americans of European origins and the American Indians. However, such criticism fails to recognize that, at the time of the first Thanksgiving Feast, these distinct groups were at accord with one another over the blessings shared amidst hardships and struggle.
Frankly, if you have a problem over the concept of Thanksgiving, you have a serious attitude problem. No one is saying that at points that the Indians weren't screwed over. Yet it must be remembered that some of them gave as good as they got in terms of inflicting violence upon innocent Whites not responsible for crafting or implementing policy.
So if you can't take a few moments to express gratitude for what you do have in this country as a result of the values set in motion there at the beginning even if they weren't adhered to in full at every step along the way, you are yourself harboring a degree of animosity bordering on racism.
The next and probably deeper reason as to why Thanksgiving is really despised despite all the lofty platitudes regarding honoring indigenous cultures and the like is that the day expresses gratitude towards God. In this era of postmodern enlightenment, such homage is to be directed more towards terrestrial sources, the COMMUNITY being foremost among them.
Usually when given the opportunity in a public forum such as the popular press to provide words of encouragement and understanding, those holding positions as professional clergy worthy of their hirer tend to draw focus to what God has done for us, how we have fallen short of the glory of God, and how He still loves us anyway with restoration available for those placing themselves under His mercy. Interestingly, pastors of Emergent Church inclinations would rather go along with the flow rather than prevent the nation's downward slide into tyranny and desolation.
Writing in the November 2011 edition of the Hyattsville Life & Times, pastor of the town's First Baptist Church Todd Thomason asserts that the thing he is grateful for this Thanksgiving season is not so much his God, his freedom, or even his family Chesterton is credited with saying that one should not take a fence down until you know why it was put up. Sometimes the best way to maintain amicable relations is to limit one's interactions with those whose values are diametrically opposed to one's own.
Rev. Thomason, on the other hand, advocates such a compulsory and contrived degree of togetherness that one ought to willingly surrender those convictions of the heart one holds most dear. For usually in those kinds of situations where the parties involved hold to conflicting perspectives, it is the party holding to the higher standard that is forced to adopt the more lax principle.
For example, in terms of religion, if this is not to be one of the categories by which we determine those from the within from those from the without, it is usually the ones that believe that faith alone in Jesus Christ without reliance upon good works is the only means of eternal salvation and not those that believe all paths are equally valid so long as our good works outweigh our evil deeds that are forced to compromise in the name of ecumenical unity. Likewise in regards to sexual orientation, when we supposedly come together setting aside our differences, in the postmodern context that does not mean the promiscuous elevate their behavior by henceforward living lives of repentant abstinence, covenantal monogamy, or at least keep their mouths shut regarding what kinky proclivities they might be into. Rather, it ends up that those espousing a traditional morality are the ones not only shamed into silence but forced to smile and applaud in affirmation under threat of punitive denunciation.
Until recently, the disputes regarding Thanksgiving have for the most part been of a more subdued or subtle nature. Some of the really great battles of the culture war have instead broken out over Christmas.
The key to winning any conflict is controlling how that conflict is expressed in terms of language and conceptualization. Those that despise Christmas and the Christ that the celebration was originally intended to honor have gone to considerable lengths to minimize the mention of the day's very name.
Occasionally this is accomplished under threat of some kind of punishment on the part of the state. More often, this is achieved by attempting to shame these words out of common usage by crafting elaborate reasons as to why the values given lip service by petty despots such diversity, inclusion, and hyperpluralism are to be extolled at the expense of those preferred by the average person.
For example, the Hyattsville Reporter insert of the November 2011 edition of the Hyattsville Life & Times lists a number of events to be held by the municipality throughout the month of December such as the "Annual Holiday Tree Lighting", breakfast with Santa, and a memorial toy drive. At no point in the announcement is the reader informed as to why these events are being held this time of year rather than in the middle of the summer as Christmas is never mentioned.
In the past, it was claimed in connection with this very issue that the phraseology "holiday" has to be utilized since not everyone celebrates Christmas. If so, then why is the word invoked in the column immediately to the left?
The heading reads none other than "We're Dreaming Of A Green Christmas". However, what follows does not so much detail what certain individuals plan to do themselves but rather what they hope to guilt trip everybody else into.
For example, in regards to gifts, it is literally insinuated "You shouldn't have." Instead of traditional gifts, the responsible consumer rather gives donations to charities or purchases locally made items. In other words, things nobody really wants.
As in the case of the blurb about domestic artificial and locally grown trees, the reason behind locally produced gift items has nothing to do with bolstering the U.S. economy. Rather, it is about reducing the distance for ecological reasons the miles goods and supplies are transported. But unless an artist or craftsman forges, smelts, or mixes their own supplies, does it really matter if the assorted petrochemicals are assembled down the street or across the country since they will still have to travel the exact same distance?
In "The Lion, The Witch & The Wardrobe", the tyranny imposed by the White Witch upon Narnia is categorized as it being always winter but never Christmas. It seems now the next stage of villainy has developed where the White Witches of our own time and realm instead wish to use the trappings of this celebration as a tactic in the attempt to implement their assorted agendas.
by Frederick Meekins
Though not always cognizant of the epic spiritual and philosophical struggle taking place all around them, Americans can be a remarkably stubborn and independent lot. As such, a number sympathetic to the process of communalization have realized that they might be more successful in accomplishing their goals through a subdued gradualism rather than through sudden revolutionary upheaval.
The first of the remembrances of the waning year subverted by manipulative social engineers is Thanksgiving. This holiday is despised for a number of common liberal reasons.
For starters, it is argued that Thanksgiving is racist because of the hostilities that eventually erupted between Americans of European origins and the American Indians. However, such criticism fails to recognize that, at the time of the first Thanksgiving Feast, these distinct groups were at accord with one another over the blessings shared amidst hardships and struggle.
Frankly, if you have a problem over the concept of Thanksgiving, you have a serious attitude problem. No one is saying that at points that the Indians weren't screwed over. Yet it must be remembered that some of them gave as good as they got in terms of inflicting violence upon innocent Whites not responsible for crafting or implementing policy.
So if you can't take a few moments to express gratitude for what you do have in this country as a result of the values set in motion there at the beginning even if they weren't adhered to in full at every step along the way, you are yourself harboring a degree of animosity bordering on racism.
The next and probably deeper reason as to why Thanksgiving is really despised despite all the lofty platitudes regarding honoring indigenous cultures and the like is that the day expresses gratitude towards God. In this era of postmodern enlightenment, such homage is to be directed more towards terrestrial sources, the COMMUNITY being foremost among them.
Usually when given the opportunity in a public forum such as the popular press to provide words of encouragement and understanding, those holding positions as professional clergy worthy of their hirer tend to draw focus to what God has done for us, how we have fallen short of the glory of God, and how He still loves us anyway with restoration available for those placing themselves under His mercy. Interestingly, pastors of Emergent Church inclinations would rather go along with the flow rather than prevent the nation's downward slide into tyranny and desolation.
Writing in the November 2011 edition of the Hyattsville Life & Times, pastor of the town's First Baptist Church Todd Thomason asserts that the thing he is grateful for this Thanksgiving season is not so much his God, his freedom, or even his family Chesterton is credited with saying that one should not take a fence down until you know why it was put up. Sometimes the best way to maintain amicable relations is to limit one's interactions with those whose values are diametrically opposed to one's own.
Rev. Thomason, on the other hand, advocates such a compulsory and contrived degree of togetherness that one ought to willingly surrender those convictions of the heart one holds most dear. For usually in those kinds of situations where the parties involved hold to conflicting perspectives, it is the party holding to the higher standard that is forced to adopt the more lax principle.
For example, in terms of religion, if this is not to be one of the categories by which we determine those from the within from those from the without, it is usually the ones that believe that faith alone in Jesus Christ without reliance upon good works is the only means of eternal salvation and not those that believe all paths are equally valid so long as our good works outweigh our evil deeds that are forced to compromise in the name of ecumenical unity. Likewise in regards to sexual orientation, when we supposedly come together setting aside our differences, in the postmodern context that does not mean the promiscuous elevate their behavior by henceforward living lives of repentant abstinence, covenantal monogamy, or at least keep their mouths shut regarding what kinky proclivities they might be into. Rather, it ends up that those espousing a traditional morality are the ones not only shamed into silence but forced to smile and applaud in affirmation under threat of punitive denunciation.
Until recently, the disputes regarding Thanksgiving have for the most part been of a more subdued or subtle nature. Some of the really great battles of the culture war have instead broken out over Christmas.
The key to winning any conflict is controlling how that conflict is expressed in terms of language and conceptualization. Those that despise Christmas and the Christ that the celebration was originally intended to honor have gone to considerable lengths to minimize the mention of the day's very name.
Occasionally this is accomplished under threat of some kind of punishment on the part of the state. More often, this is achieved by attempting to shame these words out of common usage by crafting elaborate reasons as to why the values given lip service by petty despots such diversity, inclusion, and hyperpluralism are to be extolled at the expense of those preferred by the average person.
For example, the Hyattsville Reporter insert of the November 2011 edition of the Hyattsville Life & Times lists a number of events to be held by the municipality throughout the month of December such as the "Annual Holiday Tree Lighting", breakfast with Santa, and a memorial toy drive. At no point in the announcement is the reader informed as to why these events are being held this time of year rather than in the middle of the summer as Christmas is never mentioned.
In the past, it was claimed in connection with this very issue that the phraseology "holiday" has to be utilized since not everyone celebrates Christmas. If so, then why is the word invoked in the column immediately to the left?
The heading reads none other than "We're Dreaming Of A Green Christmas". However, what follows does not so much detail what certain individuals plan to do themselves but rather what they hope to guilt trip everybody else into.
For example, in regards to gifts, it is literally insinuated "You shouldn't have." Instead of traditional gifts, the responsible consumer rather gives donations to charities or purchases locally made items. In other words, things nobody really wants.
As in the case of the blurb about domestic artificial and locally grown trees, the reason behind locally produced gift items has nothing to do with bolstering the U.S. economy. Rather, it is about reducing the distance for ecological reasons the miles goods and supplies are transported. But unless an artist or craftsman forges, smelts, or mixes their own supplies, does it really matter if the assorted petrochemicals are assembled down the street or across the country since they will still have to travel the exact same distance?
In "The Lion, The Witch & The Wardrobe", the tyranny imposed by the White Witch upon Narnia is categorized as it being always winter but never Christmas. It seems now the next stage of villainy has developed where the White Witches of our own time and realm instead wish to use the trappings of this celebration as a tactic in the attempt to implement their assorted agendas.
by Frederick Meekins
What does it matter if the Walmart family has more wealth than the bottom 30% put together if the family has acquired that wealth providing goods and services most desire or find satisfactory? If not for this corporation, wouldn't the lives of these lower tiers of the socioeconomic ladder be even more impoverished?
Wednesday, December 14, 2011
Monday, December 12, 2011
Hulk Hogan's Ex-Wife Accuses Legendary Grappler Of Sodomy
He did rise to the top of a profession where one essentially rolls around on the mat entwined around another man.
Sunday, December 11, 2011
An associate informed me that the forms one signs to go into a junk yard such as Crazy Ray's are not simply to absolve the property owner of liability. They are also handed over to the government for the purposes of keeping track of who has visited the junk yard. What is even more troubling and offensive is that authorities are more interested in who has been there rather than who has taken what parts.
Saturday, December 10, 2011
Wednesday, December 07, 2011
Cloaked Object In Orbit Near Mercury
And is a cult going to commit suicide over this as in the case of the Hale-Bopp Comet?
Tuesday, December 06, 2011
Sidwell Friends School To Serve Japanese Food On Pearl Harbor Day
So does this mean the cafeteria will serve pork chops to commemorate the death of Bin Ladin or barbecued sushi in remembrance of Hiroshima?
Monday, December 05, 2011
Thursday, December 01, 2011
If Obama really cared about spreading the wealth and ensuring that everyone paid their fair share, he should have insisted those coughing up $35,000 a plate to attend a New York fundraiser instead donate that financial outlay towards servicing the national debt. Those attending this function are the very same elites insinuating you are not patriotic enough unless you submit gleefully to higher tax rates.
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
Monday, November 28, 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)