Saturday, March 31, 2012
The 3/30/12 episode of Fringe featured a Sumerian cult obsessed with directed transgenic evolution for the purposes of bringing about the New World Order. Will mostly likely be the last season of this series. There is only so much truth elites will allow. Like how no one will ever see again the episode of The Lone Gunman that predicted the flying of a jetliner into a skyscraper.
Friday, March 30, 2012
Thursday, March 29, 2012
Marko Rubio is being considered for the Vice Presidency in part because he can allegedly bring in the Hispanic vote. Had anyone considered the importance of solidifying the “White Vote”? Does anyone realize that if Rubio shoots a Black man, given Rubio’s light pigmentation, he’d likely be considered a “White Hispanic”?
Black Rabblerouser Threatens Riot If Welfare Benefits Cut
TheBlaze.com
Am not sure what's more shocking: the threat of violence or that one of these deadbeats would actually get off their backside and exert themselves.
Am not sure what's more shocking: the threat of violence or that one of these deadbeats would actually get off their backside and exert themselves.
DC Mayor Vincent Gray is justifying the erection of additional speed and red light cameras as way to protect bicyclists. Will cameras also be set up to protect motorists and especially perambulating pedestrians from narcissistic bicyclists that just as blatantly flout the standards of vehicular propriety and decorum?
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Tuesday, March 27, 2012
Monday, March 26, 2012
Friday, March 23, 2012
Thursday, March 22, 2012
An associate insists it is inappropriate for a woman to openly criticize a pastor. The associate also invokes some of the same Scriptures opposing women speaking in church and holding ecclesiastical office to oppose the involvement of women in politics. Thus, it must be asked, if the hardline Reconstructionist allies of this associate ever seize power, what would prevent them from eventually enacting laws and regulations that would abolish the public expression of women altogether?
Do The Ultrapious Want To Silence Women?
An associate has raised the issue if it is proper for a woman to express her disagreement with the pastor over an ecclesiastical concern.
I say let a couple of deacons place a pillowcase over her head and drag her down to the kitchen.
Some scullion duty should silence her spiteful tongue.
What's gotten into women these days thinking they can just speak to any man they aren't even related to?
Seriously though, there is nothing in Scripture forbidding a woman from sharing thoughts and concerns with the pastor.
I Corinthians 14:34 says, "Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak...And if they will lean any thing, let them ask their husbands at home; for it is a shame for women to speak in the church."
This would seem to indicate during the church service.
Would pastors rather for the sake of their own egos prefer women to lie as women walk out the church door and act as if all things are hunky-dory?
If this injunction is to be absolute, shouldn’t we also condemn those women congratulating the pastor as to how wonderful they found the message to be?
I guess soon, as in the case of Barbara Streisand and pre-World War II Japanese emperors, we mere lay people won’t even be allowed to gaze upon clergy.
by Frederick Meekins
I say let a couple of deacons place a pillowcase over her head and drag her down to the kitchen.
Some scullion duty should silence her spiteful tongue.
What's gotten into women these days thinking they can just speak to any man they aren't even related to?
Seriously though, there is nothing in Scripture forbidding a woman from sharing thoughts and concerns with the pastor.
I Corinthians 14:34 says, "Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak...And if they will lean any thing, let them ask their husbands at home; for it is a shame for women to speak in the church."
This would seem to indicate during the church service.
Would pastors rather for the sake of their own egos prefer women to lie as women walk out the church door and act as if all things are hunky-dory?
If this injunction is to be absolute, shouldn’t we also condemn those women congratulating the pastor as to how wonderful they found the message to be?
I guess soon, as in the case of Barbara Streisand and pre-World War II Japanese emperors, we mere lay people won’t even be allowed to gaze upon clergy.
by Frederick Meekins
Wednesday, March 21, 2012
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
Boomeranging Your Own Business
In discussing the phenomena of boomerang children where young adults return to live with their parents, the hosts of the WMAL morning show conducted the discussion as if the trend was disgusting and shameful.
It was even asked if those engaged in the practice ought to be embarrassed.
Did this particular program take a similar tone discussing the Flukeys out having so much sex that they demand that birth control be provided for them at public expense?
Has it been asked on this station if those having children outside of marriage ought to be embarrassed or the increasing number shacking-up without sanction of matrimony?
These practices are condemned from the pages of Scripture and religious tradition.
On the other hand, provided the young adults are not abusing their parents or on the public dole as a result of their own indolence, the pages of Holy Writ are quite silent regarding young adults that decide to live with their parents.
The Hebrew Patriarchs such as Isaac lived with their parents well into their adulthoods.
Interesting, when it happens to be regular Americans that are usually White in terms of their ethnic backgrounds and genetic phenotypes that live together as extended family it is apparently a living arrangement one step above cultic or abusive in terms of social condemnation.
However, if nearly entire Central American villages pile into single family domiciles, one is denounced as racist or jingoistic if one reacts with anything other than fawning praise of how beautifully family oriented and delightfully communal for a practice that drags essentially drags down property values and makes neighborhoods less desirable places in which to live.
by Frederick Meekins
It was even asked if those engaged in the practice ought to be embarrassed.
Did this particular program take a similar tone discussing the Flukeys out having so much sex that they demand that birth control be provided for them at public expense?
Has it been asked on this station if those having children outside of marriage ought to be embarrassed or the increasing number shacking-up without sanction of matrimony?
These practices are condemned from the pages of Scripture and religious tradition.
On the other hand, provided the young adults are not abusing their parents or on the public dole as a result of their own indolence, the pages of Holy Writ are quite silent regarding young adults that decide to live with their parents.
The Hebrew Patriarchs such as Isaac lived with their parents well into their adulthoods.
Interesting, when it happens to be regular Americans that are usually White in terms of their ethnic backgrounds and genetic phenotypes that live together as extended family it is apparently a living arrangement one step above cultic or abusive in terms of social condemnation.
However, if nearly entire Central American villages pile into single family domiciles, one is denounced as racist or jingoistic if one reacts with anything other than fawning praise of how beautifully family oriented and delightfully communal for a practice that drags essentially drags down property values and makes neighborhoods less desirable places in which to live.
by Frederick Meekins
Monday, March 19, 2012
Friday, March 16, 2012
Where Will Cylon Sinks Lead Next?
In a public restroom, these new cylon sinks are a delight as one doesn't have to touch a filthy faucet for the water to turn on.
However, the question must be asked.
At some time in the future, will government force this upgrade on the residential sector?
No longer would individuals be allowed to determine for themselves whether the water will be cold or hot.
Instead, a bureaucrat will determine the tepid in between.
Don't laugh.
Need one be reminded of low flush toilets?
Already, utility authorities are taking steps through the proliferation of so-called "smart meters" so that they might ultimately be the ones to make your climate control decisions for you.
Eventually, those insisting on determining for themselves the temperature of their water will be painted as opposing energy conservation or exhibiting burn sensitivity in children.
However, the question must be asked.
At some time in the future, will government force this upgrade on the residential sector?
No longer would individuals be allowed to determine for themselves whether the water will be cold or hot.
Instead, a bureaucrat will determine the tepid in between.
Don't laugh.
Need one be reminded of low flush toilets?
Already, utility authorities are taking steps through the proliferation of so-called "smart meters" so that they might ultimately be the ones to make your climate control decisions for you.
Eventually, those insisting on determining for themselves the temperature of their water will be painted as opposing energy conservation or exhibiting burn sensitivity in children.
Thursday, March 15, 2012
Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Pathetic Black Father Exhibits Ethnic Favoritism By Allowing Indian Tribe To Slaughter Bald Eagles
If American Indians can be granted an exemption to laws protecting bald eagles, why can’t Catholics and conservative Evangelicals be granted an exemption for having to provide abortion and birth control coverage to the carnally incontinent?
Religious leftists will no doubt work themselves up into an outrage that most Southerners still don’t cotton up to the notion of interracial marriage. It is claimed there is nothing in Scripture forbidding the individual from believing in interracial marriage. But neither is there saying in the Bible that you are required to believe in it.
A Gingrich campaign ad mocks Mitt Romney by insinuating that the former Massachusetts governor isn't the type to pump his own gas. And you are going to tell me Gingrich pumps his own regularly? And what about Gingrich's high maintenance ball-and-chain. Didn’t he about go into bankruptcy trying to placate her with fancy trinkets?
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
The head of the NAACP is flying to Switzerland to sing to a UN rights of organization of how nobody knows the troubles he's seen. It seems laws in America requiring not only that shiftless minorities must show identification but that also make provision for state personnel to chauffer you to get your idea are an atrocity of near historic proportions. Wouldn't UN efforts be better directed at investigating other alleged outrages such as the forced virginity examinations in Egypt?
The head of the NAACP is flying to Switzerland to sing to a UN rights of organization of how nobody knows the troubles he's seen. It seems laws in America requiring not only that shiftless minorities must show identification but that also make provision for state personnel to chauffer you to get your idea are an atrocity of near historic proportions. Wouldn't UN efforts be better directed at investigating other alleged outrages such as the forced virginity examinations in Egypt?
Tourists Go On Safari In Black Harlem Churches
Since elites lecture those of us that have never set foot outside of the United States as to why we should feel shameful about the pushiness about the reputation of the ugly American abroad, do we get to sneer down our noses now about foreigners disrespecting this nation's religous culture and practices?
Monday, March 12, 2012
Saturday, March 10, 2012
Leftist Commemoration Undermines Resolve Against Terror
Yes. Perhaps this is being posted a bit late. However, the points are still valid. If you are going to be that condescending, perhaps you should be reminded that you seem to be spending an inordinate amount of time online obsessively reading columns and articles of those you snidely dismiss as less accomplished than yourself.
It is said that the only thing we learn from history is that we don't learn anything from history. Following the attack on 9/11, the nation's leaders as epitomized by the members of Congress joining on the steps of the Capitol in patriotic chorus vowed that they would be vigilant against the laxity of policy and perspective that left the door wide open allowing such a tragedy to transpire in the first place. However, in the decade since then, little has changed in the hearts of many that would prevent an occurrence of similar or greater magnitude from happening again in the future.
Under the auspices of the National Cathedral, an interfaith memorial was to be held in Washington, DC. Since the President and a number of representatives from a variety of religious perspectives were scheduled to speak at the service, the event was billed as and assumed to be one promoting an inclusive brand of diversity and spirituality.
It is estimated that nearly 20% hold to a theology or worldview classifiable as Evangelical in nature. Critics might respond that is only a small percentage of the population and as such the perspective should not be catered to with a proverbial seat on the dais.
If that is the case, then why should a number of other faiths have been included that did next to nothing in laying the foundation upon which this country was built or offer little in addressing the 9/11 attack. One could argue that, at least, Islam should have been allowed on stage to offer an apology for the entire awful mess.
The number of Hindus, Buddhists and Jains in this country no doubt come in at a percentage far below that of the Evangelical Right. A number of these Eastern faiths are emphasized over that of Evangelicalism because of the tendency of these creeds of the Orient to ignore the reality of the troubles plaguing mankind rather than addressing how to really resolve them as in traditional Christianity.
Leftwing religionists, such as those organizing the memorial service sponsored by the National Cathedral, despite clinging to the Christian name do not like to admit evil manifesting in human lives known as sin exists. Pantheism --- the philosophical backbone of Hinduism --- denies the objective reality of sin altogether.
Popular conceptions of Hinduism further down the chain of enlightenment consist of an infinite number of gods (though adherents of a multiplicity of deities still get as jacked out of shape as a monotheistic Jew if a family member comes to Christ as Lord and Savior). However, among elites, the multitude of divinities are not so much distinct personalities but rather representations of the singular unified reality known as “Brahman”.
In fact, according to the adherents of this outlook, we ourselves are not really independent consciences distinct from the comprehensive totality (“Atman is Brahman”). What we perceive as the self is merely an illusion. This is summarized by the teaching of “maya”.
Thus, instead of grappling with the overwhelming horror of sin on such a grand scale as an objective reality such as 9/11, the Eastern perspective just glosses it all over by insisting that the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon never really happened in the ultimate sense. And if by some small chance that it really did, such an act at its core couldn’t possibly be evil at its most profound depth. One of the beauties the pantheist insists upon in the All Is One mentality of philosophical monism is that at such a level everything is beyond the limited concepts of good and evil.
One religion invited to the interfaith prayer service is so obscure that it is a safe wager that the majority of Americans have likely never heard of it and even fewer understand it. It was in all likelihood selected as it represents the kind of religion Episcopalian elites would like to impose upon the masses in the future.
As a system of belief, there is very little that Jainism can provide to defend a civilization against the onslaught of terrorism. It does posses a number of tenets that are the equivalent of where liberalism ends up if followed to its logical conclusions.
For example, Jainism does not believe in a personal God as found in the monotheistic traditions. Rather, what is thought of as the ultimate has more in common with a form energy. When considering Jainism, one is reminded of Yoda in “The Empire Strikes Back” when he describes the Force of that series as “surrounds us. binds us.”
As such, a ratiocinative consciousness cannot be seen as the characteristic separating the higher order lifeforms more worthy of additional ethical concern and reflection. Since this characteristic is not possessed by what Paul Tillich would categorize as the ultimate concern of this creed now under consideration, those life forms possessing it are no more superior or much higher along the chain of being than those that do not.
The way this principle manifests itself is reminiscent of how things would operate if PETA had its way. Jainists are fanatic vegetarians. Not only do they refuse to eat meat, but they also sweep the ground in front of them so as to not inadvertently step on any bugs.
Jains also wear a cloth over their mouths and also abstain from certain vegetables so as to avoid inflicting undue harm on microorganisms. In other words, during the outbreak of a killer epidemic, if they want to remain philosophically consistent, they would have to remain no more in favor of the triumph of man over germ than germ over man in such a biological survival of the fittest.
Certain schools of Eastern thought construed through a Western New Age mindset hold that we create our own reality, largely through how we conceptualize the world around us. This has to be the reason to justify how the Obama administration decided to commemorate the anniversary of September 11th.
To fully appreciate what happened that tragic day, one cannot avoid who it was and what motivated these scumbags to carry out an act of such evil that the average person cannot fully grasp the magnitude of the deed's animus. By emphasizing this act of Islamist terror, the nation would be reminded that the price of liberty is eternal vigilance and that there exists those in the world whose highest goal is the destruction of that with which we have been blessed.
Instead, the Obama administration issued directives that the specifics of the attack were to be downplayed (as if the Twin Towers simply collapsed and a large gaping whole split the Pentagon all on their own). Instead, government officials and spokesmen were to present a "positive forward looking narrative" emphasizing trivialities such as community service.
However, some things that happen aren't positive. To be historically accurate, one cannot deny or sweep under the rug that several thousand Americans died that day and who it was that killed them.
Religion and/or spirituality is one of the most important pillars embraced by an individual influencing how they will cope with what transpires in the world around them. And though the state should have virtually no say in determining what path one ultimately decides upon for oneself, it has to be admitted that some creeds optimize one's chances of survival over others in that they approach the world as it actually exists rather than how we would like it to be.
by Frederick Meekins
It is said that the only thing we learn from history is that we don't learn anything from history. Following the attack on 9/11, the nation's leaders as epitomized by the members of Congress joining on the steps of the Capitol in patriotic chorus vowed that they would be vigilant against the laxity of policy and perspective that left the door wide open allowing such a tragedy to transpire in the first place. However, in the decade since then, little has changed in the hearts of many that would prevent an occurrence of similar or greater magnitude from happening again in the future.
Under the auspices of the National Cathedral, an interfaith memorial was to be held in Washington, DC. Since the President and a number of representatives from a variety of religious perspectives were scheduled to speak at the service, the event was billed as and assumed to be one promoting an inclusive brand of diversity and spirituality.
It is estimated that nearly 20% hold to a theology or worldview classifiable as Evangelical in nature. Critics might respond that is only a small percentage of the population and as such the perspective should not be catered to with a proverbial seat on the dais.
If that is the case, then why should a number of other faiths have been included that did next to nothing in laying the foundation upon which this country was built or offer little in addressing the 9/11 attack. One could argue that, at least, Islam should have been allowed on stage to offer an apology for the entire awful mess.
The number of Hindus, Buddhists and Jains in this country no doubt come in at a percentage far below that of the Evangelical Right. A number of these Eastern faiths are emphasized over that of Evangelicalism because of the tendency of these creeds of the Orient to ignore the reality of the troubles plaguing mankind rather than addressing how to really resolve them as in traditional Christianity.
Leftwing religionists, such as those organizing the memorial service sponsored by the National Cathedral, despite clinging to the Christian name do not like to admit evil manifesting in human lives known as sin exists. Pantheism --- the philosophical backbone of Hinduism --- denies the objective reality of sin altogether.
Popular conceptions of Hinduism further down the chain of enlightenment consist of an infinite number of gods (though adherents of a multiplicity of deities still get as jacked out of shape as a monotheistic Jew if a family member comes to Christ as Lord and Savior). However, among elites, the multitude of divinities are not so much distinct personalities but rather representations of the singular unified reality known as “Brahman”.
In fact, according to the adherents of this outlook, we ourselves are not really independent consciences distinct from the comprehensive totality (“Atman is Brahman”). What we perceive as the self is merely an illusion. This is summarized by the teaching of “maya”.
Thus, instead of grappling with the overwhelming horror of sin on such a grand scale as an objective reality such as 9/11, the Eastern perspective just glosses it all over by insisting that the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon never really happened in the ultimate sense. And if by some small chance that it really did, such an act at its core couldn’t possibly be evil at its most profound depth. One of the beauties the pantheist insists upon in the All Is One mentality of philosophical monism is that at such a level everything is beyond the limited concepts of good and evil.
One religion invited to the interfaith prayer service is so obscure that it is a safe wager that the majority of Americans have likely never heard of it and even fewer understand it. It was in all likelihood selected as it represents the kind of religion Episcopalian elites would like to impose upon the masses in the future.
As a system of belief, there is very little that Jainism can provide to defend a civilization against the onslaught of terrorism. It does posses a number of tenets that are the equivalent of where liberalism ends up if followed to its logical conclusions.
For example, Jainism does not believe in a personal God as found in the monotheistic traditions. Rather, what is thought of as the ultimate has more in common with a form energy. When considering Jainism, one is reminded of Yoda in “The Empire Strikes Back” when he describes the Force of that series as “surrounds us. binds us.”
As such, a ratiocinative consciousness cannot be seen as the characteristic separating the higher order lifeforms more worthy of additional ethical concern and reflection. Since this characteristic is not possessed by what Paul Tillich would categorize as the ultimate concern of this creed now under consideration, those life forms possessing it are no more superior or much higher along the chain of being than those that do not.
The way this principle manifests itself is reminiscent of how things would operate if PETA had its way. Jainists are fanatic vegetarians. Not only do they refuse to eat meat, but they also sweep the ground in front of them so as to not inadvertently step on any bugs.
Jains also wear a cloth over their mouths and also abstain from certain vegetables so as to avoid inflicting undue harm on microorganisms. In other words, during the outbreak of a killer epidemic, if they want to remain philosophically consistent, they would have to remain no more in favor of the triumph of man over germ than germ over man in such a biological survival of the fittest.
Certain schools of Eastern thought construed through a Western New Age mindset hold that we create our own reality, largely through how we conceptualize the world around us. This has to be the reason to justify how the Obama administration decided to commemorate the anniversary of September 11th.
To fully appreciate what happened that tragic day, one cannot avoid who it was and what motivated these scumbags to carry out an act of such evil that the average person cannot fully grasp the magnitude of the deed's animus. By emphasizing this act of Islamist terror, the nation would be reminded that the price of liberty is eternal vigilance and that there exists those in the world whose highest goal is the destruction of that with which we have been blessed.
Instead, the Obama administration issued directives that the specifics of the attack were to be downplayed (as if the Twin Towers simply collapsed and a large gaping whole split the Pentagon all on their own). Instead, government officials and spokesmen were to present a "positive forward looking narrative" emphasizing trivialities such as community service.
However, some things that happen aren't positive. To be historically accurate, one cannot deny or sweep under the rug that several thousand Americans died that day and who it was that killed them.
Religion and/or spirituality is one of the most important pillars embraced by an individual influencing how they will cope with what transpires in the world around them. And though the state should have virtually no say in determining what path one ultimately decides upon for oneself, it has to be admitted that some creeds optimize one's chances of survival over others in that they approach the world as it actually exists rather than how we would like it to be.
by Frederick Meekins
Thursday, March 08, 2012
Wednesday, March 07, 2012
Tolerancemongers Issue Death Threats Against Rush Limbaugh
Seems to me calling for someone's murder is a greater verbal faux pas that calling someone a slut that expects everyone but the responsible party to finance a promiscious lifestyle.
Those that want to be such sticklers as to verbally ream those wishing them an innocuous “good luck” shouldn’t be surprised that they will be bestowing this admonishment decreasingly over time. However, it is not because people are taking your message to hurt. It is more likely that they are avoiding you altogether because no one wants to be berated for simply attempting to extend a little human kindness.
Homeschool Leader Calls For The Abolition Of Social Security
On the 2/27/12 edition of Generations Radio, Kevin Swanson advocated the abolition of Social Security.
And what is to be done with the elderly that, for whatever reason, didn’t have the opportunity to procreate?
Many such as Swanson would likely suggest that such individuals become wards of the church.
But is it such a wise idea to give churches that degree of authority over the life of an individual where whether or not you receive care is dependent upon ascent to a particular congregation’s doctrinal peculiarities?
For example, will the pastor hold final sway as to whether or not you will be permitted to take a particular class of medication?
And what is to be done with the elderly that, for whatever reason, didn’t have the opportunity to procreate?
Many such as Swanson would likely suggest that such individuals become wards of the church.
But is it such a wise idea to give churches that degree of authority over the life of an individual where whether or not you receive care is dependent upon ascent to a particular congregation’s doctrinal peculiarities?
For example, will the pastor hold final sway as to whether or not you will be permitted to take a particular class of medication?
Obama's Fossil Fuel Hyocrisy
Obama condemns Americans for holding 2% of the world's oil reserves but for using 20% of the world's oil.
Before condemning us, perhaps he and his battle ax should not have revved up Air Force 1 or the motorcade to take dozens of lavish vacations and nearly one hundred rounds of golf.
If we have to sit our rearends home, even more so his.
Before condemning us, perhaps he and his battle ax should not have revved up Air Force 1 or the motorcade to take dozens of lavish vacations and nearly one hundred rounds of golf.
If we have to sit our rearends home, even more so his.
Tuesday, March 06, 2012
Girl Scout Goons Demand Robbed Girls Still Render Tribute
If the organization's CEO makes a salary of around $300,000, you'd think she'd be willing to absorb the cost so as to not punish the victims of this crime.
Monday, March 05, 2012
So I guess it would be wrong now to call members of NAMBLA pedophiles since that is about the most vile thing a person can possibly be accused of. Or is such an assumption incorrect since the members of that particular criminal racket are men and not WWWWOMENNNN (that’s how these leftists pronounce that particular gender category).
Sunday, March 04, 2012
Saturday, March 03, 2012
One of those truths pounded into our heads incessantly by television over the years is that woman suffer higher rates of constipation than do men. So in the name of WWWWWWWomennnnnn's health will Obamacare provide laxatives and stool softeners for free or are they just not as glamorous as birth control pills?
Most Respect Needs To Be Earned
An associate is insinuating that Rush Limbaugh’s remarks regarding the testimony of Sandra Fluke before a congressional Democratic committee coupled with the broadcaster’s three divorces indicates a lack of respect for women.
Rush has given this woman all the respect she deserves.
He has neither laid hands on her or forced himself upon her though she's so easy that I doubt she'd refuse anyone.
Limbaugh's divorces don't really have any relevance to this issue.
He is not the one demanding public subsidy to finance his debauchery.
At least one of Limbaugh's divorces was the result that the little woman didn't like it he was not much for going out and partying.
So if one’s wife one day leaves you for being of a studious retiring nature, should we conclude that you "don't respect women"?
Conversely, are those making the assertion that Limbaugh’s divorces indicated a lack of respect for women going to make as big of a fuss that Limbaugh's former wives insufficiently respected men?
Women that want the level of respect where they are not called sluts should earn that honor.
One shouldn't be fawned over with a degree of deference just because of how their reproductive tract is hooked up.
Should a wife beater still be considered a gentleman and all manner of condemnation heaped upon those refusing to publicly recognize him in such a lofty manner?
Had this woman been a 500 pound diabetic demanding free insulin while confessing to Congress of consuming extravagant amounts of chocolate, wouldn’t she have been called a "glutton"?
If she was complaining to Congress about a Catholic university refusing to pay for her multiple abortions shouldn’t she be considered an accessory to murder?
Had Sandra Fluke confessed to the national legislature that she had embezzled millions of dollars wouldn’t one have called her a thief?
So why shouldn't someone that proudly testifies to the wanton escapades of herself and her classmates expect to be called exactly what they are?
by Frederick Meekins
Rush has given this woman all the respect she deserves.
He has neither laid hands on her or forced himself upon her though she's so easy that I doubt she'd refuse anyone.
Limbaugh's divorces don't really have any relevance to this issue.
He is not the one demanding public subsidy to finance his debauchery.
At least one of Limbaugh's divorces was the result that the little woman didn't like it he was not much for going out and partying.
So if one’s wife one day leaves you for being of a studious retiring nature, should we conclude that you "don't respect women"?
Conversely, are those making the assertion that Limbaugh’s divorces indicated a lack of respect for women going to make as big of a fuss that Limbaugh's former wives insufficiently respected men?
Women that want the level of respect where they are not called sluts should earn that honor.
One shouldn't be fawned over with a degree of deference just because of how their reproductive tract is hooked up.
Should a wife beater still be considered a gentleman and all manner of condemnation heaped upon those refusing to publicly recognize him in such a lofty manner?
Had this woman been a 500 pound diabetic demanding free insulin while confessing to Congress of consuming extravagant amounts of chocolate, wouldn’t she have been called a "glutton"?
If she was complaining to Congress about a Catholic university refusing to pay for her multiple abortions shouldn’t she be considered an accessory to murder?
Had Sandra Fluke confessed to the national legislature that she had embezzled millions of dollars wouldn’t one have called her a thief?
So why shouldn't someone that proudly testifies to the wanton escapades of herself and her classmates expect to be called exactly what they are?
by Frederick Meekins
Friday, March 02, 2012
Straight Out Of Central Casting
A screenwriter couldn’t pick a better name for a new Bond girl.
It seems sex addict Sandra Fluke’s name might correctly be pronounced “Fluk”?
So does make her mom “Mother Fluk”? Since she has such loose morals, does that make her a “cheap Fluk”?
If she really does go bankrupt from her acute promiscuity, would that make her a “worthless Fluk”?
If she falls down in the mud does that make her a “dirty Fluk”?
And most importantly, should she find herself alone in the dorm by herself, does that imply “Fluk herself”?
So if Sandra Fluke and Anthony Weiner ever got together, would the wedding invitation be pronounced "Fluk Weiner"? Maybe infamous AIDS activist Luke Sissyfag could serve as flower girl.
It seems sex addict Sandra Fluke’s name might correctly be pronounced “Fluk”?
So does make her mom “Mother Fluk”? Since she has such loose morals, does that make her a “cheap Fluk”?
If she really does go bankrupt from her acute promiscuity, would that make her a “worthless Fluk”?
If she falls down in the mud does that make her a “dirty Fluk”?
And most importantly, should she find herself alone in the dorm by herself, does that imply “Fluk herself”?
So if Sandra Fluke and Anthony Weiner ever got together, would the wedding invitation be pronounced "Fluk Weiner"? Maybe infamous AIDS activist Luke Sissyfag could serve as flower girl.
Sandra Fluke insists Rush Limbaugh's response to her consists of the kind of language men have traditionally used to silence women. Will she also heap condemnation on the kinds of things women say to control men such as threatening to call the police over nothing more than a raised voice or harsh tone?
Thursday, March 01, 2012
The cover of the March 2012 issue of Christianity Today examines the state of Christian colleges. One of the headlines reads, “The Browning Of Campuses Catering To White Elites”. This is a euphemism claiming that these schools don’t pander enough to racial minorities by failing to brainwash students as to how they should feel guilty for being White and for holding all students irrespective of pigmentation to the same academic standard.
It’s not that Pat Buchanan is obsessed with race. He is merely advocating the survival of his own ethnicity or genetic kinsmen. That is the very same thing done by the leftist Jews wanting the commentator banned from the airwaves advocate for themselves but seek to deny to others. And what areas without White majorities are worth living in? Given the opportunity, usually even racial minorities rather live around White folks. So what will it be? Will you rather survive or rather be applauded as open-minded by liberal elites?
The God advocated by the Calvinist is an inherently schizophrenic deity. On the one hand, He commands sinners to repent and be saved. Yet despite supposedly being omniscient, God has apparently forgotten that He is the one pre-selecting whom will accept this salvation and whom will be tossed into Hell.
In announcing his death, ABC News Radio insinuated that Andrew Breitbart pulled news out of context. In announcing the death of Walter Cronkite, did the network emphasize how he was often a dupe of the Soviet Union and a shill for the establishment of world government? And when Dan Rather passes, will it be pointed out how his bias against Republicans ran so deep that he failed to corroborate allegations against George W. Bush?
Virginia Representative Jim Moran is outraged that children might be exposed to an advertisement posted a Washington, DC subway station telling President Obama to go to Hell. Did the Congressman raise objections when advertisements for female condemns were plastered all over the nation capital’s bus fleet under the auspices of the “DC’s Doin It” campaign since he is so concerned for the purity of innocent eyes?
If from criticism of Rick Santorum we are taught by our benighted archons that Satan does not exist, why is it wrong for an advertisement posted in a DC subway station to tell Obama to go to Hell? Because if Satan doesn't exist, shouldn't we also conclude that the clammy region of he netherworld is imaginary as well?
The cover of the March 2012 issue of Christianity Today examines the state of Christian colleges. One of the headlines reads, “The Browning Of Campuses Catering To White Elites”. This is a euphemism claiming that these schools don’t pander enough to racial minorities by failing to brainwash students as to how they should feel guilty for being White and for holding all students irrespective of pigmentation to the same academic standard.
Wednesday, February 29, 2012
Tuesday, February 28, 2012
Monday, February 27, 2012
Critics of Act of Valor, a film reportedly featuring actual Navy SEALS, claim those starring in the film should stick with what they know, calling into question the quality of the cinematic thespianism. Perhaps we citizens should remember to vocalize that same suggestion when actors proceed to lecture us on nearly every topic under the sun.
Sunday, February 26, 2012
Hillary Sides With Rabble Killing American Soldiers Instead Of Republican Candidates
If the Muslims take over, at least someone will likely put a bag over the head of Hillary Clinton and we will never again have to gaze upon the visage of that contemporary Medusa.
Terrorist Sympathizers Disrupting Noonie Darwish Portrayed As Victims
Why shouldn't those disrupting a speech expect to get the snot knocked out of them?
Maybe a judge will recognize this as an inherent component of "Red Neck" culture if tantrums are to be legally applauded as an inherent component of an Islamic mindset?
Maybe a judge will recognize this as an inherent component of "Red Neck" culture if tantrums are to be legally applauded as an inherent component of an Islamic mindset?
Thursday, February 23, 2012
Joe Scarborough remarked that transvaginal sonograms weren't the way to win swing voters (in other words those wanting to hack their unborn babies to pieces without a smeared conscience). Neither was desegregating lunch counters and water fountains. But don't some human rights need to take precedence over others?
If Obama apologized to Karzi over the burning of the Korans with Jihadist crib notes scribbled all over them, do the likes of the Taliban and the Afghan government intend to apologize over outrages perpetrated upon Christians. The only thing that Obama should have said in the letters is that, if the Afghan mobs didn't stop their rampaging, more than a few texts are going to be set aflame.
Wednesday, February 22, 2012
If good is epitomized by the supernatural personality referred to as "God", why should there not be a literal supernatural entity personifying evil? And if one is going to claim that actual evil does not exist, on what grounds does one insist it is wrong to mention the personification of evil in the consciousness known as "Satan"?
If a White philanthropist donates significant sums of money to a museum commemorating the achievements and struggles of the White race but not a similar museum memorializing the history of all American people, wouldn't the philanthropist be considered racist? Then shouldn't Oprah Winfrey be considered as such?
Tuesday, February 21, 2012
Will Summer Youth Program Teach Students To Rampage In The Streets?
Will lessons include how to defecate on police cruisers, how to defile church buildings, and how to toss condoms at private school pupils?
School Lad Blacklisted As Racist For Expressing Cross Cultural Curiousity
Interesting we can't ask those that look different from us where they are from, but are we are suppose to fawn all over their cultures as superior to our own or have hand outs dug out our rear ends to lavish all over them.
Monday, February 20, 2012
Saturday, February 18, 2012
Some Mormons Less Cultic Than Others?
For obvious and justifiable reasons, a number of Evangelical leaders often cast a suspicious gaze at Mormon figures in American public life. After all, though the two systems of belief share a similar vocabulary at certain points and often both hold to traditionalist assumptions regarding social morality, these perspectives differ considerably regarding the nature of God as well as the origins and destiny of man.
However, the least that the orthodox Christian commenting on public affairs ought to do is to try and maintain some kind of consistent policy towards those advocating what could be considered a doctrinally questionable religious viewpoint. It seems that instead of basing such characterizations solely upon the beliefs such voices claim must take precedence above all other considerations, such analysis is often skewered in favor of those most likely to ensure that the particular pundit in question can retain a position as the water carrier of the entrenched political establishment.
For example, in his 9/16/11 commentary transcript, Cal Thomas mentions Rick Perry presenting his testimony before an audience at Liberty University. Thomas closes his brief analysis by concluding Perry's testimony isn't all that important beyond its existential value as it is more important how one's faith works itself out in a President's policies. Thomas astutely observers that believers have had the wool pulled over our eyes numerous times in terms of politicians saying one thing and doing another.
Thomas concludes, "But if Mitt Romney, a Mormon turns out to be better to defeat the President and advance policies with which most Evangelicals agree, then he should be the one the President's opponents get behind."
From the standpoint of an objective political calculation, Thomas is correct. However, since the publication of "Blinded By Might: Why The Religious Right Can't Save America" in which he and co-author Ed Dobson heaped criticism upon the Religious Right by exposing the shortcomings of Jerry Falwell and the Moral Majority (an organization both men saw from the inside), Thomas has gone out of his way to downplay the role conservative Christians ought to play in politics.
Since Thomas's coauthor went from a standpoint of being apolitical to losing his marbles by taking on the less than kept grooming habits of an Old Testament prophet insisting that the Scriptures insist that the only properly cast ballot had to be for Barack Obama, you'd think Thomas might have realized he might have been duped into castigating conservative Christians into a state of hyperpious quietism. However, it seems Thomas continues advocating this perspective selectively whenever he thinks doing so might win him a few scraps of dwindling recognition from media and Republican elites.
For whereas we are suppose to gleefully march behind Romney (Thomas no doubt in part so he can ask the former Massachusetts governor who does the candidate's cranial dye job), his tone regarding Glenn Beck, another prominent Mormon, is markedly different.
In the transcript of the 4/11/11 Cal Thomas commentary, the columnist warns, "Beck is not only a Mormon, he frequently drifts into universalism." Writing in particular to the news of Beck's ouster from Fox News, Thomas muses, "They come and they go in this business...and eventually flame out..Put not your trust in princes and kings. That goes for show hosts, too."
This from the very same media figure that just a few paragraphs back was getting all aboard the Romney express.
Evangelicals do need to be cautious regarding Mormon theology. For example, in his book "The Real America: Early Writings From The Heart & Heartland", Beck said a number of things that would make a true believer's hair stand on with goosebumps had it come from the lips of anyone else.
In one passage, Beck said that he thought the Trinity, the idea that the Godhead is composed of the three distinct personages of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, was laughable and that there was no such thing as Hell.
Which brings us to another point. It is interesting how Beck can ridicule the most profound belied and mystery of the greatest number of Christians in the world (that being those that grant assent to the ecumenical creeds such as the Nicene) but the entire Republican Party stands ready to burn at the stake a single pastor that dared enunciate as to why he would not be endorsing Mitt Romney for the nomination.
What the pastor said was technically correct. If Americans inclined themselves a bit more towards religious reflection, they would know that the word "cult" does not necessarily denote a sect that ultimately meets with a violent end as a result of authoritarian leadership as in the cases of Johnstown, Heaven's Gate, and the Branch Davidians.
A cult can be any group that splits off from one of the larger world religions and is distinct from the parental creed it has separated itself from by either renouncing the more orthodox formulations of a doctrine or by promulgating a new dogma or revelation that the more orthodox adherents of the larger faith cannot embrace in good conscience.
For example, Mormonism holds that God was once a man not all that different than the rest of us who worked his way up to that status and that we too can also one day become deities over our own little planets as well. Traditional Christianity holds to the idea, that Beck snidely derided, that God exists externally from everlasting to everlasting in the form of three distinct unified persons. God is complete in Himself and does not grow or learn over time as claimed by the Later Day Saints.
The prominence played by Mormonism in the 2012 election cycle has presented American Christians in general and Evangelicals in particular with a unique set of challenges. On the one hand, believers are obligated by Scripture to speak in a firm but loving manner in defense of their own beliefs while pointing out distinctively where that faith is incompatible with Mormonism. And on the other, in a constitutional republic recognizing the freedom of religion we each posses as individuals created in the image of God, Mormon citizens have every right to engage in the same forms of civic participation that all Americans enjoy and sense a profound duty towards.
by Frederick Meekins
However, the least that the orthodox Christian commenting on public affairs ought to do is to try and maintain some kind of consistent policy towards those advocating what could be considered a doctrinally questionable religious viewpoint. It seems that instead of basing such characterizations solely upon the beliefs such voices claim must take precedence above all other considerations, such analysis is often skewered in favor of those most likely to ensure that the particular pundit in question can retain a position as the water carrier of the entrenched political establishment.
For example, in his 9/16/11 commentary transcript, Cal Thomas mentions Rick Perry presenting his testimony before an audience at Liberty University. Thomas closes his brief analysis by concluding Perry's testimony isn't all that important beyond its existential value as it is more important how one's faith works itself out in a President's policies. Thomas astutely observers that believers have had the wool pulled over our eyes numerous times in terms of politicians saying one thing and doing another.
Thomas concludes, "But if Mitt Romney, a Mormon turns out to be better to defeat the President and advance policies with which most Evangelicals agree, then he should be the one the President's opponents get behind."
From the standpoint of an objective political calculation, Thomas is correct. However, since the publication of "Blinded By Might: Why The Religious Right Can't Save America" in which he and co-author Ed Dobson heaped criticism upon the Religious Right by exposing the shortcomings of Jerry Falwell and the Moral Majority (an organization both men saw from the inside), Thomas has gone out of his way to downplay the role conservative Christians ought to play in politics.
Since Thomas's coauthor went from a standpoint of being apolitical to losing his marbles by taking on the less than kept grooming habits of an Old Testament prophet insisting that the Scriptures insist that the only properly cast ballot had to be for Barack Obama, you'd think Thomas might have realized he might have been duped into castigating conservative Christians into a state of hyperpious quietism. However, it seems Thomas continues advocating this perspective selectively whenever he thinks doing so might win him a few scraps of dwindling recognition from media and Republican elites.
For whereas we are suppose to gleefully march behind Romney (Thomas no doubt in part so he can ask the former Massachusetts governor who does the candidate's cranial dye job), his tone regarding Glenn Beck, another prominent Mormon, is markedly different.
In the transcript of the 4/11/11 Cal Thomas commentary, the columnist warns, "Beck is not only a Mormon, he frequently drifts into universalism." Writing in particular to the news of Beck's ouster from Fox News, Thomas muses, "They come and they go in this business...and eventually flame out..Put not your trust in princes and kings. That goes for show hosts, too."
This from the very same media figure that just a few paragraphs back was getting all aboard the Romney express.
Evangelicals do need to be cautious regarding Mormon theology. For example, in his book "The Real America: Early Writings From The Heart & Heartland", Beck said a number of things that would make a true believer's hair stand on with goosebumps had it come from the lips of anyone else.
In one passage, Beck said that he thought the Trinity, the idea that the Godhead is composed of the three distinct personages of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, was laughable and that there was no such thing as Hell.
Which brings us to another point. It is interesting how Beck can ridicule the most profound belied and mystery of the greatest number of Christians in the world (that being those that grant assent to the ecumenical creeds such as the Nicene) but the entire Republican Party stands ready to burn at the stake a single pastor that dared enunciate as to why he would not be endorsing Mitt Romney for the nomination.
What the pastor said was technically correct. If Americans inclined themselves a bit more towards religious reflection, they would know that the word "cult" does not necessarily denote a sect that ultimately meets with a violent end as a result of authoritarian leadership as in the cases of Johnstown, Heaven's Gate, and the Branch Davidians.
A cult can be any group that splits off from one of the larger world religions and is distinct from the parental creed it has separated itself from by either renouncing the more orthodox formulations of a doctrine or by promulgating a new dogma or revelation that the more orthodox adherents of the larger faith cannot embrace in good conscience.
For example, Mormonism holds that God was once a man not all that different than the rest of us who worked his way up to that status and that we too can also one day become deities over our own little planets as well. Traditional Christianity holds to the idea, that Beck snidely derided, that God exists externally from everlasting to everlasting in the form of three distinct unified persons. God is complete in Himself and does not grow or learn over time as claimed by the Later Day Saints.
The prominence played by Mormonism in the 2012 election cycle has presented American Christians in general and Evangelicals in particular with a unique set of challenges. On the one hand, believers are obligated by Scripture to speak in a firm but loving manner in defense of their own beliefs while pointing out distinctively where that faith is incompatible with Mormonism. And on the other, in a constitutional republic recognizing the freedom of religion we each posses as individuals created in the image of God, Mormon citizens have every right to engage in the same forms of civic participation that all Americans enjoy and sense a profound duty towards.
by Frederick Meekins
Friday, February 17, 2012
Insightful Santorum Policy Tome Dismissed As "Mysterious"
To paraphrase Chesterton, in these times "common sense" is viewed as anything but common.
Judeosupremacists Oust Pat Buchanan From MSNBC
Certainly lays to rest the notion about the "you-know-whos" controlling the media.
Thursday, February 16, 2012
Public School Chorus Sings Song In Praise Of Allah
Even if "Allah" is simply the Arabic word for God, we speak English in America.
Can we sing a German tune with the word "Fuehrer" in it when we simply mean a leader?
Can we sing a German tune with the word "Fuehrer" in it when we simply mean a leader?
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
Food Gestapo Deems Chicken Nuggets Healthier Than Ham & Cheese
Is this about nutrition or about manipulating us into Shariah law without even realizing it?
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
Monday, February 13, 2012
In a CSPAN interview, leftwing commentator Bill Press jumped down the throat of a caller for saying "Democrat Party" rather than "Democratic Party". Press snapped that proper English be spoken. Is he going to be as vehement about English being made the official language and that concessions to bilingualism be abolished?
Sunday, February 12, 2012
Saturday, February 11, 2012
Has news of the invention of the fishing pole and net yet reached Hillybilly Handfishers? The next hit cable show will probably consist of those that hunt alligators by sticking their limbs into the mouths of the massive reptiles. Producers could probably find someone from either the deepest South or the New York metropolitan area stupid enough to do it.
The Golden Corral chocolate fountain looks like a health hazard waiting to happen. I can imagine the roaches and the rats each night taking a leisurely dip after the establishment closes. If diners can dip a piece of fruit into a chocolate fountain, just think what else they are sticking in their. I doubt they are given a crash course in proper food handling techniques before being allowed to plunge on in.
Friday, February 10, 2012
Those Denying Resurrection Keep Religious Language To Spread Deception
In the 9/20/11 issues of Sojourners magazine is an advertisement for the 2012 Gladdening Light Symposium featuring Jesus Seminar scholar John Dominic Crossan. Part of the ad copy reads, "Feed the soul, savor the beauty, and experience the communion love of Agape in the Gladdening Light of God."
However, if Crossan is being heralded as what in show business and prize fights circles is called the main event, those in attendance will have very little to ultimately be glad about. Given the name of the symposium, the event frankly borders on false advertising.
Anyone that has subscribed to the History Channel or A&E before both networks went nearly all alien autopsy and rummage sales has no doubt seen Crossan. He is a talking head that use to get dragged out around Christmas and Easter time for those specials that posture as giving viewers the latest dirt on the events of the Bible being bantered about in the halls of respectable academia.
However, seldom do these programs confirm the accuracy of the Biblical accounts. Rather, the intended purpose is often to heap as much skepticism upon these narratives as possible.
Crossan’s ticket to never picking up a bar tab (or in this case midwinter accommodations in sunny Florida) is that Jesus didn’t rise from the dead. Instead, Crossan believes Christ’s body was instead most likely eaten by dogs.
But rather than surrendering to a life as a squeegee man if religion is such a colossal waste of time, Crossan has taken up the mission of destroying other people’s faith as well. It’s just that Crossan continues to hold onto Christian terminology to accomplish this task. And it’s quite the incentive to keep at it that mildly entertaining eccentric skeptics are invited on midwinter Florida speaking tours and squeegee men are not.
Over the centuries, most have been drawn to Christianity as a result of its hope and promise of a blissful afterlife at the conclusion of this so very brief existence of terrestrial mortality. Crossan’s vision of Christianity’s allure is markedly different.
On the surface, what Crossan and the Gladdening Light Foundation are calling for sounds quite a bit like Communism, but of a milksop variety lacking the backbone to do so without reference to God and along with the hopes that the religious buzzwords will draw in the easily duped.
The ad copy reads, “...Crossan’s vision of God’s longing for a just and loving community representative of all (‘loving thy neighbor as thyself’ from Leviticus and the Gospel of Mark).” The paragraph concludes that, along with Crossan, a number of whom couldn’t otherwise get real jobs such as a “community choreographer” will speak about “their own creative aspirations struggling for transformation beyond societies that marginalize the disenfranchised.”
This may need to be translated for those that don’t speak stoned hippy. What this really means is that your rights and property as an individual mean very little or even nothing.
It is only the group that counts since that is the only thing that lives on. In a materialistic universe without a Resurrection, we pass out of existence at death (or at best make a guest appearance as a garbled electronic voice phenomena on one of those cable TV spiritism shows that took the place of the kind programming Crossan used to be featured on when A&E and the Discovery Channel attempted to appeal to the educated).
"Struggling for transformation" is the new euphemism for the old revolutionary phrase "by any means necessary". For now, the saps at the Gladdening Light Symposium are so naive that they think you will be so dazzled by COMMUNITY choreography (must be something like a Glee cast dance number) and Cherokee story telling that you will gladly hand everything you have over to what the ideological forbearers of these sorts of activities use to call the vanguard of the proletariat.
Of course, they will skim some extra off the top for themselves. I'm sure John Dominic Crossan didn't come cheap and at least had his first class airfare provided while no doubt working into his lectures why the rest of us ought to flagellate ourselves over the developed world's carbon footprint.
This still doesn't answer the most important question. What will prevent the likes of those worked up into such a froth of imminent expectancy from turning violent when they discover you aren't quite as moved as they thought you would be by fancy footwork and the cute little parables many American Indians seem to have a knack for?
One should not try to deny that there will not be any bashing of Western civilization in general and America in particular at the symposium. This will be an automatic given.
This can be discerned from the phrase "societies that marginalize the disenfranchised". But is a symposium where "Pilgrims concerned with the plight of the world's people will gather for an entire weekend of vigorous discussion, enlightened teaching, and thoughtful reflection" where the attendees don't actually travel to assist the disenfranchised but rather to the state whose very name epitomizes delightful winter comfort and luxury really going to accomplish all that much?
About the closest any of the attendees will come to a Third Worlder is the picture of the African refugees placed in the left hand corner of the advertisement announcing the symposium. What this vigorous discussion, enlightened teaching, and thoughtful reflection will likely consist of is a bunch of moderately wealthy former hippies and their young adult children dreaming up additional ways to shame you out of your own money or how to swindle it away from you at the end of the taxman's gun if you aren't gullible enough to go along with the obsequious self-loathing.
I Corinthians 15:19 says in regards to the Resurrection, "If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable." I Peter 1:16 assures, "For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty." Any doubting this central teaching of the Christian message while continuing to employ the imagery and rhetoric of the faith is not out to instill hope but rather the most enslaving form of tyranny.
by Frederick Meekins
However, if Crossan is being heralded as what in show business and prize fights circles is called the main event, those in attendance will have very little to ultimately be glad about. Given the name of the symposium, the event frankly borders on false advertising.
Anyone that has subscribed to the History Channel or A&E before both networks went nearly all alien autopsy and rummage sales has no doubt seen Crossan. He is a talking head that use to get dragged out around Christmas and Easter time for those specials that posture as giving viewers the latest dirt on the events of the Bible being bantered about in the halls of respectable academia.
However, seldom do these programs confirm the accuracy of the Biblical accounts. Rather, the intended purpose is often to heap as much skepticism upon these narratives as possible.
Crossan’s ticket to never picking up a bar tab (or in this case midwinter accommodations in sunny Florida) is that Jesus didn’t rise from the dead. Instead, Crossan believes Christ’s body was instead most likely eaten by dogs.
But rather than surrendering to a life as a squeegee man if religion is such a colossal waste of time, Crossan has taken up the mission of destroying other people’s faith as well. It’s just that Crossan continues to hold onto Christian terminology to accomplish this task. And it’s quite the incentive to keep at it that mildly entertaining eccentric skeptics are invited on midwinter Florida speaking tours and squeegee men are not.
Over the centuries, most have been drawn to Christianity as a result of its hope and promise of a blissful afterlife at the conclusion of this so very brief existence of terrestrial mortality. Crossan’s vision of Christianity’s allure is markedly different.
On the surface, what Crossan and the Gladdening Light Foundation are calling for sounds quite a bit like Communism, but of a milksop variety lacking the backbone to do so without reference to God and along with the hopes that the religious buzzwords will draw in the easily duped.
The ad copy reads, “...Crossan’s vision of God’s longing for a just and loving community representative of all (‘loving thy neighbor as thyself’ from Leviticus and the Gospel of Mark).” The paragraph concludes that, along with Crossan, a number of whom couldn’t otherwise get real jobs such as a “community choreographer” will speak about “their own creative aspirations struggling for transformation beyond societies that marginalize the disenfranchised.”
This may need to be translated for those that don’t speak stoned hippy. What this really means is that your rights and property as an individual mean very little or even nothing.
It is only the group that counts since that is the only thing that lives on. In a materialistic universe without a Resurrection, we pass out of existence at death (or at best make a guest appearance as a garbled electronic voice phenomena on one of those cable TV spiritism shows that took the place of the kind programming Crossan used to be featured on when A&E and the Discovery Channel attempted to appeal to the educated).
"Struggling for transformation" is the new euphemism for the old revolutionary phrase "by any means necessary". For now, the saps at the Gladdening Light Symposium are so naive that they think you will be so dazzled by COMMUNITY choreography (must be something like a Glee cast dance number) and Cherokee story telling that you will gladly hand everything you have over to what the ideological forbearers of these sorts of activities use to call the vanguard of the proletariat.
Of course, they will skim some extra off the top for themselves. I'm sure John Dominic Crossan didn't come cheap and at least had his first class airfare provided while no doubt working into his lectures why the rest of us ought to flagellate ourselves over the developed world's carbon footprint.
This still doesn't answer the most important question. What will prevent the likes of those worked up into such a froth of imminent expectancy from turning violent when they discover you aren't quite as moved as they thought you would be by fancy footwork and the cute little parables many American Indians seem to have a knack for?
One should not try to deny that there will not be any bashing of Western civilization in general and America in particular at the symposium. This will be an automatic given.
This can be discerned from the phrase "societies that marginalize the disenfranchised". But is a symposium where "Pilgrims concerned with the plight of the world's people will gather for an entire weekend of vigorous discussion, enlightened teaching, and thoughtful reflection" where the attendees don't actually travel to assist the disenfranchised but rather to the state whose very name epitomizes delightful winter comfort and luxury really going to accomplish all that much?
About the closest any of the attendees will come to a Third Worlder is the picture of the African refugees placed in the left hand corner of the advertisement announcing the symposium. What this vigorous discussion, enlightened teaching, and thoughtful reflection will likely consist of is a bunch of moderately wealthy former hippies and their young adult children dreaming up additional ways to shame you out of your own money or how to swindle it away from you at the end of the taxman's gun if you aren't gullible enough to go along with the obsequious self-loathing.
I Corinthians 15:19 says in regards to the Resurrection, "If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable." I Peter 1:16 assures, "For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty." Any doubting this central teaching of the Christian message while continuing to employ the imagery and rhetoric of the faith is not out to instill hope but rather the most enslaving form of tyranny.
by Frederick Meekins
Thursday, February 09, 2012
Obama Undermines No Child Left Behind
If Bush has done this, he'd had been condemned as an enemy of education and America's children.
How about in those areas where Scripture doesn't say much or could be interpreted validly in a number of certain ways without damaging the essential message that we are more careful in promulgating heavy-handed proclamations? In so doing, one might find fewer decent people leaving particular congregations.
Wednesday, February 08, 2012
Tuesday, February 07, 2012
Monday, February 06, 2012
Interesting philosophical contrast. Gingrich would expand our technological horizons through the development of a lunar colony. Democrats want to limit our choice of lightbulbs, restrict where America can search for additional energy resources, and likely even eliminate the private automobile if given the opportunity.
Friday, February 03, 2012
Thursday, February 02, 2012
Wednesday, February 01, 2012
First Lady Embarrasses Nation On Late Night TV
Would Martha Washington have gone on TV to lecture Jay Leno regarding his dietary habits?
Leno's diet must not be too bad. He seems quite active, lively, and relatively young looking for his age.
What an outright hypocrit. Frau Obama confesses about her birthday cake while lecturing Leno on junkfood.
Is it any First Lady's business how an American gets their fiber, as Frau Obama interrogated of Jay Leno?
It is more offensive for Frau Obama to inquire of Leno's fiber intake than Sam Donaldson asking if there was blood in Reagan's stool.
Would Martha Washington have been on national TV with a skirt so short that her ass was just about sticking out?
Leno's diet must not be too bad. He seems quite active, lively, and relatively young looking for his age.
What an outright hypocrit. Frau Obama confesses about her birthday cake while lecturing Leno on junkfood.
Is it any First Lady's business how an American gets their fiber, as Frau Obama interrogated of Jay Leno?
It is more offensive for Frau Obama to inquire of Leno's fiber intake than Sam Donaldson asking if there was blood in Reagan's stool.
Would Martha Washington have been on national TV with a skirt so short that her ass was just about sticking out?
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
Who is the greater fearmonger? Is it the person warning of pending cataclysm and by so doing allowing those hearing the warning to potentially escape the tragedy or prepare for the upheaval? Or is it the person that repeatedly emphasizes the glories of predestination and the erroneous assumptions about free choice? Because if there is no choice there is nothing that can be done about it anyway.
Monday, January 30, 2012
Stream Of Consciousness Observations Regarding The 2012 State Of The Union
Obama insists he doesn't want our energy needs linked to unstable parts of the world. Then why did he veto the Keystone Oil Pipeline?
Obama remarked his grandparents' generation triumphed over fascism. Yet fascism is the very economic system that he advocates. Perhaps not yet in terms of wide scale deprivation of human rights but rather in the technical sense of the means of production remaining privately owned but strictly controlled by the government.
If we are all to play by the same set of rules, then why has it taken months for the National Park Service to do anything about the Occupy beatniks laying siege to a number of parks in Washington, DC?
Why should it be portrayed as a greater tragedy when a "single mother" loses her job rather than a man with a wife that stays at home? Seems both domestic arrangements are in similar positions without income.
In calling for a single source for the unemployed to seek information on training opportunities, doesn't that involve the federal government assuming more control over education?
Obama insists it should be illegal for students to drop out of school before they are 18. Why should this be a matter of federal interference and what will the punishment be for those leaving prior to that age?
If no country is better than any other according to multiculturalist dogma, then why should foreign students be allowed to remain here after graduation?
If women are to earn equal pay for equal work, then make them lug the same weight around the stockroom or warehouse without having to seek masculine assistance to do so.
If lightweight vests are being developed by federal researchers that can stop any bullet, will such protective garments be made available to civilians as well or do we have an obligation to be shot by law enforcement?
Interesting how it was mentioned derisively about a company that at one time ONLY produced yachts.
If it should be impermissible for insurance companies to charge more for women’s health coverage, then why should men have to pay more for motor vehicle policies?
Obama claimed politics is not about clinging to rigid ideologies. So why is it conservatives that must always surrender their basic ideals and ideas?
Obama claimed that government ought to only do what people are unable to do for themselves. Thing of it is, given his Frau's desire to manipulate and meddle in your dietary intake, the First Couple doesn't think you are really capable of doing anything for yourself.
Obama wants to grant tax credits to businesses hiring veterans. Why should the military status of a business's employees be any business of the federal government?
The best way to insure opportunities for veterans, as well as all other Americans, is for the federal government to know the least amount possible regarding the nation's workforce.
If it doesn't matter in the military what color or gender you are, as Obama insists, why are certain standards lowered for females seeking advancement and White males held back because of the color of their skin rather than the content of their character. If color has no bearing in the military, why are we often reminded that Colin Powell was the first Black Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff as if that is suppose to immunize him against all criticism and scrutiny?
Would Bob Gates have been kept on as Secretary of Defense had he been a solid conservative Republican rather than an ardent establishmentarian compromiser?
Obama admonished the American people to look at what the nation could accomplish if the people were organized along military lines. However, the purpose of the military is to defend democracy, not practice it. In a civilian state, the average person is allowed to question the decrees and decisions of leaders at all levels: elected, appointed, and bureaucratic. Such bottom up scrutiny is not allowed in the military and is punished severely.
This analyst tabulated approximately 80 rounds of applause in the 2012 State of the Union Address.
by Frederick Meekins
Obama remarked his grandparents' generation triumphed over fascism. Yet fascism is the very economic system that he advocates. Perhaps not yet in terms of wide scale deprivation of human rights but rather in the technical sense of the means of production remaining privately owned but strictly controlled by the government.
If we are all to play by the same set of rules, then why has it taken months for the National Park Service to do anything about the Occupy beatniks laying siege to a number of parks in Washington, DC?
Why should it be portrayed as a greater tragedy when a "single mother" loses her job rather than a man with a wife that stays at home? Seems both domestic arrangements are in similar positions without income.
In calling for a single source for the unemployed to seek information on training opportunities, doesn't that involve the federal government assuming more control over education?
Obama insists it should be illegal for students to drop out of school before they are 18. Why should this be a matter of federal interference and what will the punishment be for those leaving prior to that age?
If no country is better than any other according to multiculturalist dogma, then why should foreign students be allowed to remain here after graduation?
If women are to earn equal pay for equal work, then make them lug the same weight around the stockroom or warehouse without having to seek masculine assistance to do so.
If lightweight vests are being developed by federal researchers that can stop any bullet, will such protective garments be made available to civilians as well or do we have an obligation to be shot by law enforcement?
Interesting how it was mentioned derisively about a company that at one time ONLY produced yachts.
If it should be impermissible for insurance companies to charge more for women’s health coverage, then why should men have to pay more for motor vehicle policies?
Obama claimed politics is not about clinging to rigid ideologies. So why is it conservatives that must always surrender their basic ideals and ideas?
Obama claimed that government ought to only do what people are unable to do for themselves. Thing of it is, given his Frau's desire to manipulate and meddle in your dietary intake, the First Couple doesn't think you are really capable of doing anything for yourself.
Obama wants to grant tax credits to businesses hiring veterans. Why should the military status of a business's employees be any business of the federal government?
The best way to insure opportunities for veterans, as well as all other Americans, is for the federal government to know the least amount possible regarding the nation's workforce.
If it doesn't matter in the military what color or gender you are, as Obama insists, why are certain standards lowered for females seeking advancement and White males held back because of the color of their skin rather than the content of their character. If color has no bearing in the military, why are we often reminded that Colin Powell was the first Black Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff as if that is suppose to immunize him against all criticism and scrutiny?
Would Bob Gates have been kept on as Secretary of Defense had he been a solid conservative Republican rather than an ardent establishmentarian compromiser?
Obama admonished the American people to look at what the nation could accomplish if the people were organized along military lines. However, the purpose of the military is to defend democracy, not practice it. In a civilian state, the average person is allowed to question the decrees and decisions of leaders at all levels: elected, appointed, and bureaucratic. Such bottom up scrutiny is not allowed in the military and is punished severely.
This analyst tabulated approximately 80 rounds of applause in the 2012 State of the Union Address.
by Frederick Meekins
Friday, January 27, 2012
Wednesday, January 25, 2012
Christmas Irritants Pervasive
Use to be during the Christmas season in modern America, if the individual wanted a little buzz during the holidays, they would slip a bit of something into their eggnog. Now, all you have to do to feel that surge of agitated surliness is to turn on the news or read about those turning themselves into the hind quarters of the species the Holy Family rode into Bethlehem in order to pay the assessed tax (an existential financial matter it seems fewer and fewer could possibly relate to).
If you think it is only secularists making an overall nuisance of themselves, you are in for a bigger disappointment than finding a lump of coal in your stocking Christmas morning.
For better or worse, the Internet is widespread enough that most are aware that there is nothing in the Bible compelling believers to participate in the celebration of the birth of Christ even though His miraculous arrival is documented in the pages of Scripture and that many of the trappings such as decorations and related customs now imbedded with meanings symbolizing the spiritually profound account have (to invoke a word of sectarian irony) less than kosher origins.
However, for the most part, Christians on either side of the divide have established a kind of amicable truce where for the most part about the worst that they do to their counterparts is to look down their noses at one another and snicker how peculiar or inconsistent the ones on the side of the debate opposite their own happen to be.
That has changed in one Michigan town. There, an anonymous equivalent of Dana Carvey’s Church Lady character from Saturday Night Live sent a letter to those daring to adorn their abodes with Christmas lights.
Usually, those going to such lengths as to put the criticism of such decorations into writing make a point of accusing either the decorations or the individual putting them up of being too religious. This time, the victims of such in your face busybodyism have been accused of not being religious enough.
The note insists that the homeowners ought to reevaluate their beliefs. This is because decorative lights, mistletoe, and yule logs can be traced back to pagan origins.
While nothing should be done about the doofus posting the letter since the First Amendment is pretty much a get out of jail free card for unbridled stupidity, it makes you wonder just how much authority over what goes on in homes or on our property should be granted to those insistent upon a hardline implementation of America’s Puritan heritage.
Most years, it seems many of the Christmas time outrages such as the one detailed above occur on the local level such as a school child having their constitutional religious liberties trampled upon in the attempt to forge Christmas-free school zones or as result of the directors of homeowners associations overly eager to enforce Soviet-style architectural conformity. However, it now seems the partisans of the White Witch of Narnia are attempting to assert themselves at the center stage of U.S. national government.
Irrespective of the overall decline in respect for the body brought about by the often unconscionable behavior on the part of the institution, Congress is often looked upon as the greatest deliberative body in the world in that its members are suppose to be able to speak their consciences freely to their fellow members, their particular constituencies, and the nation as a whole.
However, it now seems that an authority within the legislative branch may be attempting to curtail expression that, to most Americans not having jumped off the cliff into one variety of fanaticism or the other, would be about one of the least partisan things one could say as such sentiments are usually enunciated freely irrespective of the party affiliation of those to whom the greeting was intended. One of the perks extended to members of Congress is the so-called franking privilege where taxpayers pick up the tab for the postal correspondence between legislators and their respective constituencies.
In exchange for this benefit, the outgoing communications are required to adhere to certain criteria regarding content. For example, these items aren’t suppose to be of a campaign nature.
It seems now though that, at least in regards to the House of Representatives, wishing someone a Merry Christmas via these official dispatches has been deemed the equivalent of saying, “Vote for me because the other guy kicks puppies.” Proponents of the prohibition insist epistolary interference is necessary as today one never knows who might be offended by the platitude.
I’ll tell you what ought to offend people. It’s that these clowns don’t only get to send any mail at someone else’s expense but that they’ll get to enjoy lavish retirements while the last words from your dieing lips will likely be “Hello. Welcome to Walmart” because Social Security will be nothing but a memory.
This snide disrespect towards the religion and customs of the vast majority of the American people on the part of parts of the Legislative Branch extends beyond the House mailroom. It has even come to infiltrate the symbols this branch of government has adopted to commemorate this particular holiday. In so doing, it has attempted to manipulate the meaning of the occasion in the minds of the American people.
On the Capitol grounds, each year a stately tree is erected. As with countless other trees the world over, this one is adorned with a variety of ornaments.
By tradition, the ornaments are donated by the residents of the state from where that year’s particular tree originated. The 2011 tree came from California. So hence the theme “California Shines”.
CNSNews correspondent Terrence Jeffery observed that, while the decoration is a Christmas tree, other than a reference to Psalm 19 symbolizing that the Word of God is more precious than gold, not a single ornament on the visible part of the tree references Christmas as the celebration of Christ’s birth. There is also an ornament declaring how much the creator of that particular bulb loves President Obama, the figure many concluded worthy of adoration as a new Christ figure for no other reason than that he emerged from his mother's womb of racially mixed pigmentation but who came up disappointingly short perhaps even more so than many other aspiring pseudo-messiahs.
When informed of this incongruity, officials from the U.S. Forest Service and the Architect of the Capitol both sheepishly feigned an unawareness as to the nature of the tree's adornment and insisted that there is no stipulated prohibition regarding decoration content. However, that does not mean that hullabaloo surrounding the tree will remain objective and neutral.
To get students particularly to contribute ornaments to the tree effort, a special curriculum was developed. Yet if you assumed the lesson plan was about how these trees came to be replete with Christian metaphor and symbolism, you are sadly mistaken.
Instead, the Christmas tree has become merely an additional prop in the unending effort to indoctrinate students with environmentalism. According to Jefferies, the website sponsoring the decoration contest intones, "We ask that all ornaments for the Capitol Christmas Tree be made of natural or recycled materials...There is No Away with your students when they create an ornament for the Tree. Ask students where they think that trash goes when they throw it away. Work with them until they understand that trash eventually ends up in a landfill. Show students the image of a landfill."
Can't the students of today simply be allowed to do something for fun without being politically browbeaten? Why ought they be made to feel guilty for simply living and enjoying their lives when greater examples of waste occur at the levels fostering environmentalism not so much as a way to steward finite resources but rather as a way to control those of us deemed to be the lesser breeds of man.
If we are to lead lives of constant ecological vigilance as epitomized by the constant admonitions to buy locally grown produce, carpool to work, and these guidelines insinuating the environment will collapse if ornaments aren't crafted from recycled material, isn't one of the most profound examples of unnecessary excess the annual felling of a tree and the shipping of it to Washington, DC for no other reason than to titillate Congress’s sense of Yuletide vanity?
Between 1964 and 1968, the tree decorated was one planted permanently on the Capitol grounds. So in this era where environmental concerns are suppose to triumph over other concerns such as convenience and enjoyment, shouldn’t our so-called leaders set the example by planting a permanent tree rather than harvesting one at the close of each year?
The U.S. government is divided into three branches: the executive, the legislative, and the judicial. Each of these have played their own role as a social irritant in the disputes regarding Christmas.
The courts have eroded the Judeo-Christian foundations of the legal system through rulings such as those removing Nativities and Menorahs from public land and decisions curtailing religious expression in the public school system.
In this exposition, it has already been examined the role played by the legislature in fomenting Christmas discord. Readers should not expect the executive branch to go unscathed.
Regarding the other examples examined thus far, each has been about those attempting to undermine the celebration of Christmas. However, it seems the Executive Branch may have gone overboard in commemorating Christmas 2011.
During his ascent to power as well as throughout the duration of his reign, Barack Obama has consistently called for shared sacrifice on the part of all Americans in the hopes of getting the nation through challenging economic times. One would think such a plea for austerity would result in the White House erecting only one or two trees not all that different than those enjoyed by Americans in most of our homes. And the cost for such a decoration ought to come out of the Obamas’ personal pockets given that they are multimillionaires several times over and it is doubtful they have been burdened with picking up the tab for their own Washington utility bills while we let them bunk in the servants’ quarters.
However, White House decorators didn't exactly take the spirit of the Charlie Brown Christmas special to heart with that program's classic message that even the scrawniest tree possesses its own form of inner beauty. Not only were thirty-plus Christmas trees jammed under the White House roof but also a gingerbread house weighing nearly 500 pounds. I am sure it wasn't wasted and was distributed for consumption once it was no longer needed for ornamental purposes.
When this incongruity of calling upon the rest of us to give a little more up for the good of the COMMUNITY while she herself wallows and frolics amongst extravagant opulence was pointed out, Michelle Obama feigned what a burden it really was dwelling in the light of such splendor. The First Lady assured the trees are really there to uplift the spirits of the struggling in America, especially the unemployed and the families of U.S. military personnel.
But try showing up unannounced (even if you belong to one of these two unassailable classes invoked to nullify and evade nearly every form of known criticism) insisting you are there to see YOUR trees and see how far you get. The only holiday greenery you'd get to see after that would be the mold on the bread in the prison cafeteria.
The First Family spent the lion's share of their Christmas vacation in Hawaii. So few Americans get to see the White House (as well as numerous other sites around Washington, DC) thanks in part to the security procedures put into place as a result of the Jihadist Third Worlders Obama so admires in the darkest depths of his heart.
There is really little reason for the White House to be decorated at all other than for a sprig or two of evergreen in the windows or on the pillars for the tourists to take pictures of from the sidewalk. But I doubt the common American is even allowed to do that anymore given that glorified rentacops so inebriated on their trivial amount of power that they don't enforce properly enacted laws but rather ones pulled from their doughnut-fed backsides.
Even though fewer and fewer Christians or conservatives want to admit to the existence of the culture wars anymore either out of the weariness that inevitably results from nearly constant struggle or for fear of losing any status they might have gained as a result of silent compromise, these disputes for the most part have become a permanent feature of American society. And until the triumphant return of the King so humbly born in that simple manger, these disputes surrounding the day celebrating His birth will no doubt ring out as among that conflict’s most contentious.
by Frederick Meekins
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
Scientists have discovered that, through the application of certain hormones, they can activate dormant genes in an ant's genome to create monstrosities of enhanced ability. Wonder how long until they attempt to do the same thing to human embryos in the attempt to create the supersoldiers of the future.
Interesting some that would denounce Glenn Beck as a danger because the broadcaster urges the stockpiling of provisions during a time of upheaval have little problem positively extolling ministries that hint at a desire to curtail the constitutional liberties of those that differ over matters of soteriology, Christology, and ecclesiology.
Saturday, January 21, 2012
Given their mindset, it's a wonder that supporters of the bag tax allow those of us below them on the social ladder to select our own foods or even eat. Think that such a claim is outlandish? It is only a matter of time. It's just that those that can't get their minds around the concept "just don't like change" to quote one bag tax proponent.
Insisting that the residents of Montgomery County, Maryland shouldn't complain about a five cent bag tax because a twenty cent one is being proposed in Virginia is almost akin to saying Black folks shouldn't complain about being forced to the back of the bus in the American south because Jews were forced into boxcars in Germany.
Friday, January 20, 2012
The cover of the Jan 2012 issue of The Freeman insists that "Tough On Immigration Is Tough On Economic Growth". Would the analysts writing the article feel that way if foreign academics would do their particular jobs for less or moved nearly half of a village into a house next door to these particular eggheads.
Thursday, January 19, 2012
The Old Retcon Bait & Switch
A number of the ultrapious are attempting to promote the notion that if there are no godly candidates running in an election, then the true believer should perhaps refrain from voting all together.
What we have here is a derivative of the old bait and switch tactic.
Both Michelle Bachmann and Rick Santorum are both deeply motivated by their respective Christian faiths.
However, in numerous Facebook status updates posted by proponents of this perspective, it is constantly reiterated that neither of these candidates is good enough.
Those advocating such a position are not being fully open about their true position.
According to this form of Christian Reconstructionism, if a candidate disagrees on so much as a single issue not even directly related to issues of soteriology or Christology, you are not only forbidden from electing them to elected office but are also to toss them into outer darkness as one would any other unbeliever.
What we have here is a derivative of the old bait and switch tactic.
Both Michelle Bachmann and Rick Santorum are both deeply motivated by their respective Christian faiths.
However, in numerous Facebook status updates posted by proponents of this perspective, it is constantly reiterated that neither of these candidates is good enough.
Those advocating such a position are not being fully open about their true position.
According to this form of Christian Reconstructionism, if a candidate disagrees on so much as a single issue not even directly related to issues of soteriology or Christology, you are not only forbidden from electing them to elected office but are also to toss them into outer darkness as one would any other unbeliever.
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
The lamentation that America is so far gone that the only hope is for foreign missionaries to rescue us undermines the professed Calvinism of the individual making the plea. If things are already predetermined with man unable to exert any influence one way or the other, missionary work is the equivalent of flatulence in a wind tunnel. Furthermore, if one is going to sneer down one's nose in condemnation of their fellow Americans and claim that only foreigners (who are often more debauched than Americans) are the only ones that can drag us out of our cultural mire, aren't you as condemned as the rest of us for simply talking and not really doing?
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
Monday, January 16, 2012
Pastor Greg Locke tweets that if you attend an all White church, that doesn’t proclaim an all nation’s Gospel. But a White church should alter its liturgy or order of service to allow Blacks to jump all over the pews instead of reverently sit in them.
If you gripe about a church being all White, aren't you the one considering the color of skin rather than content of character?
Rats Granted More Rights In DC Than Unborn Children
A law has been enacted by the DC city council not only requiring that must most forms of rodentine vermin be captured for rerelease, but that they must also be relocated as family units.
These creatures are not a pod of whales, a herd of elephants, or a troop of gorillas.
Given that they will even eat their young and produce another liter a few months or weeks later, I doubt they form deep meaningful bonds with their offspring.
The same fanatics that don't want rats harmed by human hands are the same ones that decimate feral cat colonies that would otherwise keep these pests in check.
It's not like rats are on the verge of going extinct in the nation's Capitol (and given the nature of the city it's doubtful that they ever will).
According to one DC health official from Pakistan, the rat problem at Occupy movement shantytowns exceed those in Third World refuge camps.
Some will snap that the law applies only to pest control officials.
But for how long?
Often as in regards to other expansive laws, eventually this dictatorial regulation will be expanded to homeowners trying to handle these vermin themselves.
And speaking of plagues and such, it wouldn't surprise me if such laws were being enacted as a way to allow some kind of new strain of the plague to develop with the hopes of systematically eliminating vast swaths of the human population.
by Frederick Meekins
Sunday, January 15, 2012
Some are quite worked up as to whom took out an Iranian nuclear scientist. Would you rather we strategically eliminate those plotting our destruction or prefer that your loved ones and everything you have ever known be incinerated at 10,000 degrees. Or perhaps an electromagnetic pulse set off in the atmosphere wiping out the vast majority of our electronics. We would be reduced to such such a medieval state that you would wish you had been incinerated at 10,000.
Thursday, January 12, 2012
Why Shouldn't The Amish Have To Obey The Law Like Everybody Else?
By refusing to obey the law requiring them to put orange triangles on the back of their buggies, the members of one Amish sect in Kentucky are basically saying that their own ostentatious sense of piety is more important than the lives of other motorists.
One of the group's members insisted that he would rather rely on God for protection than the disputed safety apparatus.
If the Amishman really wants to trust God, there ought to be no reason why he needs to be out on the road at night.
One of the group's members insisted that he would rather rely on God for protection than the disputed safety apparatus.
If the Amishman really wants to trust God, there ought to be no reason why he needs to be out on the road at night.
Wednesday, January 11, 2012
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Constitution does not compel you to vote for members of theologically aberrant sects. Nor does it forbid you from voting for members of theologically aberrThe ant sects. Nor does the document proscribe taking away the property or liberties of theologically aberrant sects as certain Reconstructionists hint at but don't really come out and admit directly but who often threaten you if you point out the implications of their ideology.
Monday, January 09, 2012
Haley Barbour Soft On Crime
Would he have released these individuals if they had brutalized his own family?
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
Sunday, November 27, 2011
Thursday, November 24, 2011
Those already jacked out of shape of the possibility of folks skipping church this upcoming Christmas morning need to take a chill pill. Is it that they are enthusiastic for the House of the Lord or can't stand the prospect of people making a decision different than their own in regards to something that will ultimately be inconsequential. There are 52 Sunday's a year. A missed handful really aren't going to matter all that much.
Wednesday, November 23, 2011
Department Of Homeland Security Denounces Frying Turkey As A Public Safety Threat
No doubt the first step in conditioning the American people into accepting the ultimate prohibition of fried turkey.
Is this really the kind of thing the national government was instituted to handle?
Eventually, all food preparation in the home will be forbidden since technocrats will conclude we are no capable of handling the life threatening task of selecting and handling our own nutritional sustenance.
Is this really the kind of thing the national government was instituted to handle?
Eventually, all food preparation in the home will be forbidden since technocrats will conclude we are no capable of handling the life threatening task of selecting and handling our own nutritional sustenance.
Tuesday, November 22, 2011
DC Welfare Deadbeats Demand Bribe From Walmart
Mind you, these are the same people that whine incessantly about inner city ghettos being "food deserts". So, by simply being in the jurisdiction and that these stores are going to be robbed blind anyway by these concrete savages is all the COMMUNITY benefits that Walmart ought to extend to anyone.
Playground Kiss Results In Police Raid
Interesting how in an era where we are assured morality doesn't exist and one is free to have one's privates jiggled by nearly anyone one pleases, things have grown so prudish that incidents that in the past would at most simply result in a pedagogical admonishment to desist from a certain behavior now result in police intervention.
Very little prevented these students from being entered into a sex offender registry that would compell the children to seek residence deep in the woods with what amounts to the postmodernist equivalent of a leper colony or under a bridge.
Very little prevented these students from being entered into a sex offender registry that would compell the children to seek residence deep in the woods with what amounts to the postmodernist equivalent of a leper colony or under a bridge.
In The Land Of The Free Ought The Government Care Whether You Caught A Fish On A Hook Or In A Net
You know what. There will be some set off by this headline not so much because of the curtailment of a basic liberty such as the ability to earn a living for yourself but because I used the word "damn".
Saturday, November 19, 2011
Are Vodka Tampons The Latest Intoxication Danger?
So, eventually, as in the case of certain nasal decongestants, will consumers be forced to show their identification for entry into a government database to prevent them from purchasing what bureaucrats have deemed to large of a quantity of this particular medical product?
Thursday, November 17, 2011
Radio Hosts Insist Regulations More Important Than Innocent Human Life
Alleged conservatives on the WMAL morning show applauded the termination of a Walgreen's pharmacist who stopped a robbery with a concealed weapon.
The hosts insisted the decision was correct because a workplace policy was violated.
So will slavishly adhering to workplace policy miraculously prevent brigands from taking the lives of those that abide by managerial decrees above all else?
Better yet, should a similar incident occur at the radio station, given the choice would these broadcast personalities rather ne'er-do-wells take their innocent lives or be saved by someone competent to use ballistics technology to neutralize the threat?
by Frederick Meekins
The hosts insisted the decision was correct because a workplace policy was violated.
So will slavishly adhering to workplace policy miraculously prevent brigands from taking the lives of those that abide by managerial decrees above all else?
Better yet, should a similar incident occur at the radio station, given the choice would these broadcast personalities rather ne'er-do-wells take their innocent lives or be saved by someone competent to use ballistics technology to neutralize the threat?
by Frederick Meekins
Elderly Or Pregnant Occupiers Deserve No Special Police Handling
If pregnant teens and the elderly don't want to be pepper sprayed, perhaps they ought not to be rampaging in the streets.
If these beatniks don't any other time think an unborn baby is alive anyway, why should we care if a pregnant woman is sprayed over any other individual?
The reprimanded woman claims she is only two months pregnant.
Other than her claims, is their any verifiable proof other than her word that she is with child?
And if she is part of this rabble, that's not very trustworthy to begin with.
If these beatniks don't any other time think an unborn baby is alive anyway, why should we care if a pregnant woman is sprayed over any other individual?
The reprimanded woman claims she is only two months pregnant.
Other than her claims, is their any verifiable proof other than her word that she is with child?
And if she is part of this rabble, that's not very trustworthy to begin with.
Interesting that a fanatic Reconstructionist that says a true Christian can never support torture and celebrates the Puritan legal/penal code says very little about the punishments provided for in that system such as the placing in the stocks of a man that kissed his wife publicly after having been away at sea for 3 years. If one is going to condemn waterboarding, doesn't one also have to criticize the dunking stool of that era in question? Interesting those advocating such think women that gossip should be treated more harshly than Islamists piloting jetliners into skyscrapers and other attacks of mass destruction.
Wednesday, November 16, 2011
A public pool in Columbia, Maryland has set aside hours for women only in order to placate Islamic patrons. If Muslims don't like mixed swimming, they should either stay home or construct a pool of their own at a private facility. What if someone didn't want to get in the water with Black people? Public facilities funded by all taxpayers or residents should not go out of their way to brownnose philosophical foolishness.
Tuesday, November 15, 2011
Pastor Equates Living Independently With Moral Degeneracy
According to Tom Cunningham on the 10/27/11 edition of Viewpoint with Chuck Crismier, it is not enough to remain abstinent.
You are little better than a fornicating reprobate if you have delayed marriage.
This likely means that, as a youth, Cunningham was likely the greatest whoremonger among his peer group.
Usually, those having lived the most debauched lives prior to finding salvation in Christ are the ones that end up imposing legalistic demands found nowhere in the pages of Scripture.
For example, in the interview Cunningham equates living independently with the "doctrine of demons".
Instead this pastor admits to pressuring youth into getting married between their junior and senior years of college.
But when those heeding his counsel don't have enough to pay their bills, is he going to bail them out of eviction and a ruined credit score?
If churches are going to increasingly come to the conclusion that singles are less than welcome, than neither should our tithe dollars be in the collection plate.
Balanced theologians have suggested that where the Bible is silent, that perhaps it would be best if we followed a similar course.
As God's complete revelation, His word teaches that, whether married or single, life is a mix of blessings and curses.
Perhaps the American family would not be in the mess it is in today if meddlers did not pry into matters best left to individual decision rather than to the preferences of clergy racked by guilt from their own questionable life choices.
by Frederick Meekins
You are little better than a fornicating reprobate if you have delayed marriage.
This likely means that, as a youth, Cunningham was likely the greatest whoremonger among his peer group.
Usually, those having lived the most debauched lives prior to finding salvation in Christ are the ones that end up imposing legalistic demands found nowhere in the pages of Scripture.
For example, in the interview Cunningham equates living independently with the "doctrine of demons".
Instead this pastor admits to pressuring youth into getting married between their junior and senior years of college.
But when those heeding his counsel don't have enough to pay their bills, is he going to bail them out of eviction and a ruined credit score?
If churches are going to increasingly come to the conclusion that singles are less than welcome, than neither should our tithe dollars be in the collection plate.
Balanced theologians have suggested that where the Bible is silent, that perhaps it would be best if we followed a similar course.
As God's complete revelation, His word teaches that, whether married or single, life is a mix of blessings and curses.
Perhaps the American family would not be in the mess it is in today if meddlers did not pry into matters best left to individual decision rather than to the preferences of clergy racked by guilt from their own questionable life choices.
by Frederick Meekins
A Yahoo headline asks why Penn State students lashed out violently. The article goes on with fancy psychological gobbledygoop. But it all boils down to that these pissants have too much time on their hands and not enough to do in terms of school work or in working to pay for their education as most are likely on some kind of government handout.
Monday, November 14, 2011
Saturday, November 12, 2011
Friday, November 11, 2011
Thursday, November 10, 2011
Duggers Apparently Don't Know When To Quit
If no one is suppose to comment on the Dugger parents procreating out of control, then perhaps the couple should refrain from making public appearances.
No one is forcing the family into the spotlight.
If not for making a media circus of their fecundity, could they afford so many progeny?
Hypernatalists will remark none of this is the concern of outsiders since the Duggers provide for themselves.
Fair enough.
If so, perhaps leaders of the homeschool movement such as Kevin Swanson and sympathetic theologians such as Albert Mohler should also keep their noses out of the affairs of others and stop insisting that you don't really love children if you have fewer than five or are not married by 22 years of age.
Often those sympathetic to high birthrates applaud migrants both legal and criminal for families of multiple children.
However, if entitlement handouts were cut to these constituencies, the fertility of these demographics would fall more in line with that of Americans that actually earn their way in life.
Children can indeed be a blessing from the Lord.
So is chocolate.
And as any one that has overindulged in that delightful confection knows, you can reach a point where you have too much of a good thing.
by Frederick Meekins
No one is forcing the family into the spotlight.
If not for making a media circus of their fecundity, could they afford so many progeny?
Hypernatalists will remark none of this is the concern of outsiders since the Duggers provide for themselves.
Fair enough.
If so, perhaps leaders of the homeschool movement such as Kevin Swanson and sympathetic theologians such as Albert Mohler should also keep their noses out of the affairs of others and stop insisting that you don't really love children if you have fewer than five or are not married by 22 years of age.
Often those sympathetic to high birthrates applaud migrants both legal and criminal for families of multiple children.
However, if entitlement handouts were cut to these constituencies, the fertility of these demographics would fall more in line with that of Americans that actually earn their way in life.
Children can indeed be a blessing from the Lord.
So is chocolate.
And as any one that has overindulged in that delightful confection knows, you can reach a point where you have too much of a good thing.
by Frederick Meekins
Wednesday, November 09, 2011
Tuesday, November 08, 2011
Lessons In Apologetics #9: Theism
The next worldview examined by Geisler in "Christian Apologetics" is Theism. Theism is the belief that a transcendent God created the universe as a reality distinct from Himself but which He actively sustains through both a system of natural law which He created and through divine intervention at the moments He deems such action appropriate for the accomplishment of His divine will. It is Geisler's intention that, since the other worldviews thus far are contradictory and therefore false, Theism is the true worldview.
However, Geisler does not leave readers dangling by requiring them to embrace Theism simply for the lack of another viable alternative. Instead, Geisler provides an argument more positive in its orientation incorporating analytical and evidential components.
The argument is stated as such: "(1) Some things undeniably exist. (2) My nonexistence is possible. (3) Whatever has the possibility not to exist is currently caused to exist by another. (4) There cannot be an infinite regress of current causes of existence. (5) Therefore, a first uncaused cause of my current existence exists. (6) This uncaused cause must be infinite, unchanging, all powerful, all knowing, and all perfect. (7) This infinitely perfect being is called "God". (8) Therefore, God exists. (9) This God who exists is identical to the God described in the Christian Scriptures. (10) Therefore, the God described in the Bible exists.
Borrowing from Descartes' conclusion "cogito ergo sum", Geisler posits that, in order to deny that one exists, one must exist in order to do so. From reflections upon the nature of our own existence, one concludes that our nonexistence is possible. For even though we do not like to admit it, there was a time when the world was at least able to hobble along crippled without us in it.
We know that whatever has the possibility of not existing is currently caused to exist by another. Each of us resulted from the physical union of the genetic material of our respective parents who in turn came from the union of their parents, etc, etc. However, physical laws such as those of thermodynamics point out that this chain must have a cause that does not need to be caused. To accomplish this, the uncaused cause would need to be infinite, unchanging, all-powerful, all-knowing, and all perfect. Anything less would be unable to be this uncaused cause.
It is appropriate to call this cause "God" since it possesses the attributes traditionally assigned to divinity. Therefore, God exists.
Geisler further argues that the God affirmed by this proof is the God described in the Bible because there can only be one infinitely perfect and changeless eternal being. However, at this point in the apologetic task Geisler is careful to point out that, "This does not mean that everything the Bible claims that this God said or did, he actually said or did. Whether or not what the Bible says about this God is another question. What we conclude here is ... the God described in the Bible exists; second, whatever the Bible claims for this God that is not inconsistent with his nature, it is possible that he did indeed do and say (250)."
Having reached this conceptual plateau, the apologist can rest for just a moment before he must begin the sectarian and denominational wrangling to make the case that the Christian path into fellowship with God is indeed the correct one.
by Frederick Meekins
However, Geisler does not leave readers dangling by requiring them to embrace Theism simply for the lack of another viable alternative. Instead, Geisler provides an argument more positive in its orientation incorporating analytical and evidential components.
The argument is stated as such: "(1) Some things undeniably exist. (2) My nonexistence is possible. (3) Whatever has the possibility not to exist is currently caused to exist by another. (4) There cannot be an infinite regress of current causes of existence. (5) Therefore, a first uncaused cause of my current existence exists. (6) This uncaused cause must be infinite, unchanging, all powerful, all knowing, and all perfect. (7) This infinitely perfect being is called "God". (8) Therefore, God exists. (9) This God who exists is identical to the God described in the Christian Scriptures. (10) Therefore, the God described in the Bible exists.
Borrowing from Descartes' conclusion "cogito ergo sum", Geisler posits that, in order to deny that one exists, one must exist in order to do so. From reflections upon the nature of our own existence, one concludes that our nonexistence is possible. For even though we do not like to admit it, there was a time when the world was at least able to hobble along crippled without us in it.
We know that whatever has the possibility of not existing is currently caused to exist by another. Each of us resulted from the physical union of the genetic material of our respective parents who in turn came from the union of their parents, etc, etc. However, physical laws such as those of thermodynamics point out that this chain must have a cause that does not need to be caused. To accomplish this, the uncaused cause would need to be infinite, unchanging, all-powerful, all-knowing, and all perfect. Anything less would be unable to be this uncaused cause.
It is appropriate to call this cause "God" since it possesses the attributes traditionally assigned to divinity. Therefore, God exists.
Geisler further argues that the God affirmed by this proof is the God described in the Bible because there can only be one infinitely perfect and changeless eternal being. However, at this point in the apologetic task Geisler is careful to point out that, "This does not mean that everything the Bible claims that this God said or did, he actually said or did. Whether or not what the Bible says about this God is another question. What we conclude here is ... the God described in the Bible exists; second, whatever the Bible claims for this God that is not inconsistent with his nature, it is possible that he did indeed do and say (250)."
Having reached this conceptual plateau, the apologist can rest for just a moment before he must begin the sectarian and denominational wrangling to make the case that the Christian path into fellowship with God is indeed the correct one.
by Frederick Meekins
Afrosupremacists Plot Buchanan's Demise
Don't efforts like this prove Buchanan's claims?
Interesting how minorities can plot for cultural dominance yet Whites aren't even suppose to express concerns regarding their own survival.
Say what you want about Pat if he convicts you about participating in the demise of your own race, but he would never call to have someone removed from the media for merely expressing an opinion.
Interesting how minorities can plot for cultural dominance yet Whites aren't even suppose to express concerns regarding their own survival.
Say what you want about Pat if he convicts you about participating in the demise of your own race, but he would never call to have someone removed from the media for merely expressing an opinion.
Monday, November 07, 2011
Litigation Whore Gloria Allred Interjects Herself Into The Cain Witch Hunt
I guess a witch hunt should have a real witch involved.
The accuser's name is pronounced "Buy-A-Lick".
Some headlines just write themselves.
The accuser's name is pronounced "Buy-A-Lick".
Some headlines just write themselves.
If false detention is defined as consisting of unlawful restraint against the will of an individual's personal liberty or freedom of locomotion and the Occupy DC protests were perpetrating this against vehicles of a perceived economic status such as luxury automobiles and SUV's, shouldn't this human excrement be charged with a hate crime? This act is not all that different than inhibiting the free movement of a targeted ethnic minority.
Sunday, November 06, 2011
And What If We Do Begrudge?
Apart from being the first President elected primarily for the color of his skin rather than the content of his character, Barack Obama will be remembered for a number of other peculiarities as well.
Foremost among these is wallowing himself in a number of opulent luxuries he believes you as a mere commoner ought to curtail and possibly even be denied.
Often, when those in the press pool, who have to be leery when steeping off a curb afterwards, point out the incongruities of a Chief Executive that called for shared sacrifice while the First Family enjoys pleasures the rest of us can only dream about, we are told that the American people would not begrudge the President a vacation.
But what if we do?
Barack Obama, not the American people, was the one lamenting that we eat what we want, drive around in SUV’s, and keep our homes climate controlled at 70 degrees.
Barack Obama, not the American people, is the one with a deep sense of elation each time fuel costs rise. After all, he was the one that told us that, under his system of cap and trade, utility bills would necessarily skyrocket anyway.
As part of the fleet of presidential vehicles, the Secret Service unveiled to the public two modified passenger buses.
These alterations included security enhancements such as armor plating and state of the art electronics. It does not take an engineering degree to realize that neither of these contributed to the mileage and fuel economy of the vehicles in a positive manner.
So while Obama will ride around in comfort and safety, you (on the other hand) if you dare have the nerve to step outside the house since you aren’t really suppose to go anywhere these days, with all the propaganda extolling the wonders of locally grown produce and social planners corralling people into developments of higher population density, are to ride around in rolling death traps that provide little protection whatsoever.
Around the time of the debut of these behemoth additions to the presidential motorcade, Obama announced that fuel efficiency standards were being raised to 54 miles per gallon.
A true leader does not require of those he is charged with overseeing things he is not willing to require of himself.
Barack Obama might hold the highest elected office in the United States. However, he does not do so as a true leader one would gladly follow irrespective of whether or not he was the one that had all the firepower and lawyers at his disposal.
by Frederick Meekins
Foremost among these is wallowing himself in a number of opulent luxuries he believes you as a mere commoner ought to curtail and possibly even be denied.
Often, when those in the press pool, who have to be leery when steeping off a curb afterwards, point out the incongruities of a Chief Executive that called for shared sacrifice while the First Family enjoys pleasures the rest of us can only dream about, we are told that the American people would not begrudge the President a vacation.
But what if we do?
Barack Obama, not the American people, was the one lamenting that we eat what we want, drive around in SUV’s, and keep our homes climate controlled at 70 degrees.
Barack Obama, not the American people, is the one with a deep sense of elation each time fuel costs rise. After all, he was the one that told us that, under his system of cap and trade, utility bills would necessarily skyrocket anyway.
As part of the fleet of presidential vehicles, the Secret Service unveiled to the public two modified passenger buses.
These alterations included security enhancements such as armor plating and state of the art electronics. It does not take an engineering degree to realize that neither of these contributed to the mileage and fuel economy of the vehicles in a positive manner.
So while Obama will ride around in comfort and safety, you (on the other hand) if you dare have the nerve to step outside the house since you aren’t really suppose to go anywhere these days, with all the propaganda extolling the wonders of locally grown produce and social planners corralling people into developments of higher population density, are to ride around in rolling death traps that provide little protection whatsoever.
Around the time of the debut of these behemoth additions to the presidential motorcade, Obama announced that fuel efficiency standards were being raised to 54 miles per gallon.
A true leader does not require of those he is charged with overseeing things he is not willing to require of himself.
Barack Obama might hold the highest elected office in the United States. However, he does not do so as a true leader one would gladly follow irrespective of whether or not he was the one that had all the firepower and lawyers at his disposal.
by Frederick Meekins
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)