Thursday, June 13, 2013
Wednesday, June 12, 2013
Fox host Brian Kilmeade called into question the allegations of Edward Snowden in large part because the intelligence leaker is only 29 years old. Is he as dismissive if Fox reporter Peter Doocy who is also under 30 and likely has his professional position at Fox News in large part because he is the progeny of Fox & Friends cohost Steve Doocy.
A minister opposed to entertainment not so much from the standpoint of content but rather out of opposition to the concept as a whole denounced that particularly communicational methodology as inherently manipulative. Couldn’t the same be said of any ecclesiastical informational transference apart from a stentorian reading of the Scriptures?
Looking down one's nose at those wanting to see loved ones again someday in Heaven is akin to looking down one's nose for having to take a leak after a large glass of water or getting the runs after eating Taco Bell. One can't demand one beg God for forgiveness for those aspects of finite creaturehood that are not inherently sinful.
I will not apologize for one of the things keeping me going in this life is the hope that I will one day see my grandparents again in Heaven. If that makes me less of a Christian, I do not care to be affiliated with your brand of religion. The only thing I feel sorry for is the fact that an individual has been so deprived of human love and devotion that their version of an idealized eternity does not consist of an unending reunion with the dearly departed but rather the obliteration of the realization that they were in one's life at all.
Tuesday, June 11, 2013
Lack Of Global Warming Invoked To Justify Increased Environmental Dictatorship
Will Immigration Reform Prompt Employers To Discriminate Against REAL Americans?
Monday, June 10, 2013
No wonder articles seemed to hint next year's Revolution story line will center on Texas. In the final moments of the season finale, it looked like the US colony of Guatanimo Bay was successful in launching ICBM's at the Monroe and Georgia Republics. Now that the lights were turned on as a result of deactivating the nanites, will the resultant EMP from the nuclear bombs knock the lights back off for good in the series?
Is the perspective exhibited on the part of the Obama administration seeking to curtail the expression of assorted Tea Party organizations really all that much different than that exhibited by a number of these very same Tea Party organizations that refused to allow me to post my column on their own social networking sites or threatened to bar me for simply referring to God in a explicitly nonsectarian manner?
Frau Obama Cracks Under Minimal Pressure
However, Frau Obama's threat to leave if a heckler did not cease and desist at a fundraiser is instructive regarding the mindset and worldview embraced by this administration.
Instead of viewing the matter initially as that of an individual needing to be corrected, the reflexive response on the part of the Queen of Communalism was to punish the entire group.
So if this is the way that the Obama's treat their most enthusiastic supporters willing to dish out more money than many common laborers bring home in a single year just to sit at the feet of their gods, just think what this regime would inflict upon those they actually dislike in the name of spiteful retribution?
This entertaining exchange of tantrums is worthy of notice for another reason as well.
In the rush not to draw too much attention, it is either overlooked or hurried through in a number of accounts of the incident that the originator of the outburst was a lesbian at a lesbian function.
So shouldn't the media now commence with the obligatory banalities about how such verbal eruptions undermine civility, coarsen the public dialogue, and other related blather designed to intimidate the critical into silence?
by Frederick Meekins
Is Georgetown University So Reprobate That It Could Lose Its Catholic Backing?
Is The Department Of Homeland Security Predicting A War That Will Kill Millions?
Sunday, June 09, 2013
Does "Star Trek: Into Darkness" Give A Nod To Ancient Astronaut Theory?
Isn't that the planet of the Anunnaki, the spirit beings from Mesopotamian mythology that advocates of the ancient astronaut theory believe where actually extraterrestrials that interfered in the development of early human civilization?
This idea was referenced in the film in a reversal where the primitives of that world ended up worshipping an image of the Starship Enterprise after watching it ascended into the heavens after it arose from beneath the ocean.
A Conservative Environmental Statement
This is not some radical departure from the norm. After all, Theodore Roosevelt and Gifford Pinchot, two individuals responsible for laying the framework of America's federal resource preservation programs, were Republicans.
While acknowledging that there are others in the country having different religions, American and Western civilization must reembrace its Judeo-Christian foundations in order to save the environment. Many environmentalists criticize Christianity for providing a philosophical justification for the degradation of the Earth. However, what these critics have failed to realize is that this is only one interpretation of this faith in regards to the environment.
Even though man is given the instruction to subdue the Earth, no where in Christian Scripture is he given permission to wantonly destroy what he has not created. In fact, it could be argued that the opposite is true. According to theologian Tony Campolo in "How To Rescue The Earth Without Worshipping Nature", it is in fact contradictory to man's Biblical role of stewardship over the Earth to callously destroy nature (194).
Furthermore, it could be reasoned that, since God created the universe, only He has the right to destroy it forever. Therefore, man's attempts to do so could be deemed a form of idolatry violating the First and Second Commandments.
By getting back to their religious, political and economic roots, Americans would also be helping the environment as well. In essence, modern conservatism can be good for the environment.
Often, environmental ideologues and activists promote the message that we must be saved from ourselves and that it must be accomplished through a totalitarian revolution on par with the one undertaken by the Bolsheviks. This is not the case.
The key to ecological preservation and to an extent restoration lies not in collectivism but in the very cornerstone of liberty. That is none other than private property.
No doubt to the dismay of many socialists masquerading as guardians of the biosphere, there can exist a body of thought derived from Christian and conservative conceptions of property ownership concerned with the notion of environmental preservation. Several of these works were reviewed in the 9/11/95 edition of the Washington Times Weekly Edition by Jonathan Adler, at the time director of Environmental Studies at the Competitive Enterprise Institute.
One book reviewed, "Property Rights In The Defense Of Nature" by Elizabeth Brubaker argues that property ownership is the best form of environmental protection. When individuals own something, for instance land as property, they are more apt to care for it because their futures and prosperity are intertwined with it.
In a sense, this notion is related to Garret Hardin's tragedy of the commons. The commons did not ultimately suffer because of insufficient bureaucratic regulation. The commons were ravaged because the people saw them as a public resource and were not psychologically invested in the preservation of this resource in the same way if these plots were privately held.
Likewise, big government is not necessarily the savior of the environment it is often made out to be. If anything, the evidence points towards the opposite conclusion.
The largest, most pervasive governments in human history behind the Iron Curtain were guilty of the most atrocious environmental tragedies. The receding Ural Sea and the Chernobyl nuclear reactor both were within the borders of the Soviet Union, the very epitome of a planned economy.
Often in trendy environmental circles one hears that “small is beautiful”. The very same individuals mouthing this platitude then turn around and advocate for large global bureaucracies.
Historian Anna Branwell notes in “Ecology In The Twentieth Century” that it is contradictory to advocate grassroots participatory democracy as an environmental cure while at the same time laying the groundwork for a coercive globalist agenda which utterly ignores the expressed will of the people. Centralized government planning fails for the same reason that the commons ended up as such a tragedy.
A hierarchical bureaucracy takes away freedom of the individual, causing him to have no stake in the outcome. Thus, bureaucracy has the tendency to thwart many of the laudable goals it was allegedly intended to achieve.
Despite this discrepancy between the small-is-beautiful crowd and their affinity towards heavy-handed government solutions, society would do well to remember this axiom of social organization.
Surprisingly, there is a consensus developing between a number of grassroots activists on both the left and the right that Washington is often ill prepared to handle local environmental problems. Too many environmental bureaucrats, institutions, and special interest groups have intertwined themselves with the entrenched political establishment. Certain varieties of both liberals and conservatives have lamented the tragedy wrought by government subsidies such as the case of the Forest Service selling the nation’s timber resources below their assessed market value.
The tone of this analysis should not be taken as that of a libertarian manifesto. As a fallen and sinful creature, man will always need some level of governmental regulation.
However, at the same time, it needs to be realized that government must have checks placed upon it because it is ultimately staffed by those having the same sin nature these agencies were instituted to guard against. Rather than harassing an innocent individual for removing a tree from his wetland property, governments should instead concentrate their efforts on rogue corporations harboring loyalties to no nation or overriding moral principles. Profit, in and of itself, is not evil; however the way it can be earned is.
The preservation of the environment does not require a radical transformation of human values and society. Rather, the effort requires Americans to reembrace those core values at the heart of their unique national identity --- thrift, nobility, and individual responsibility. Over the years, a number of Americans have lost touch with these values in part as a result of interferences on the part of a government thinking it knows best.
However, through the curtailment of government subsidies and through the punishment of known polluters, the beneficent invisible hand described by Scottish economist Adam Smith will guide the nation in the selection of policies felicitous to freedom, flora, and fauna. Dominion over nature does not always translate into its conquest or destruction, but rather the oversight of these treasures and resources in the name of their omnipotent Creator.
by Frederick Meekins
Friday, June 07, 2013
Is the perspective exhibited on the part of the Obama administration seeking to curtail the expression of assorted Tea Party organizations really all that much different than that exhibited by a number of these very same Tea Party organizations that refused to allow me to post my column on their own social networking sites or threatened to bar me for simply referring to God in a explicitly nonsectarian manner?
Thursday, June 06, 2013
Wednesday, June 05, 2013
Why Should What Turns You On Get You Special Medical Treatment?
The Secretary of Health & Human Services announced certain preferences will be extended to the members of the gay COMMUNITY in terms of directing resources to address the health struggles plaguing those insisting upon pursuing this lifestyle preference.
Data to guide the oversight of these programs will be collected through a variety of questionnaires and surveys. So apparently what one does in the privacy of one’s bedroom is indeed the government’s business after all.
Will these survey’s also include questions as to what positions those answering prefer to conduct carnal relations?
Such information could prove invaluable in determining which partner in a respective relationship might be eligible for knee replacement surgery.
Will there be questions determining if an individual is attracted to those of significant physical girth so that doctor’s can screen for injuries resulting from being squashed such as hernias and the like?
