Thursday, December 31, 2020

Medical Profession Needs To Stay In Its Designated Lane

A meme of a women on a stretcher being put into an ambulance “Are You Taking Me To The Hospital?” “No ma'am. You need top medical experts. We're taking you to the comments section”.

But neither should these "experts" be allowed to run roughshod over the rights of individuals.

Also, if the non-medical laymen is to refrain from remarking on medical technicalities, how about medical professionals refrain from upending and destroying an entire social order in the name of a pestilence that while serious is likely not as deadly as propagandists have duped many into believing?

When we are told to "follow the science", what we are also being given is an overwhelming dose of philosophy and policy prescription as well.

Maybe a growing number would not be as leery of medical professionals if the rules were not changed midstream like those scenes in the Hunger Games when it appeared the characters were beginning to get the upper hand. 

Might also help if those threatening harsh penalties for disobeying the rules also abided by them with their lives and livelihoods brought to the brink of destruction like nearly everybody else.

by Frederick Meekins

Monday, December 28, 2020

Sunday, December 27, 2020

Santa Decoration

Church Planting 101

Episcopal 101

Will Obama Be Pulling The Strings Of The Biden Regime?

Will Obama Be Pulling The Strings Of The Biden Regime?

-- DoctorIssachar DoctorIssachar Wednesday, December 30, 2020

Some Covid Vaccines The Equivalent Of Soylent Green

 Click On The Headline

Alien Abductions, Mad Scientists & Dystopian Worlds

Over 3000 Adversely Affected During Plague Vaccination Debut

 Click On The Headline

History Of The Future?

Dad Escorting Intruders Over The Afterlife’s Threshold Worthy Father Of The Year Nominee

 Click On The Headline

Independent Baptist vs Church Of The Brethren: What’s The Difference?

The Unique Comfort Of Lutheran Theology

Are UFO’s Really Out There?

Black Pastor Resigns From SBC Over Failure To Affirm His Racial Superiority

 Click On The Headline

Plague Cult Alchemy Still Experimental

 Click On The Headline

Plague Vaccine Suspected In Facial Paralysis?

 Click On The Headline

Monday, December 21, 2020

Have Yourself A Coronavirus Christmas

In “The Lion, The Witch, & The Wardrobe” by C.S. Lewis, one of the hardships Narnia suffers under is that it is always winter but never Christmas. Imposed upon the realm by the White Witch, the plot point serves as a powerful symbol of the extent to which despots are willing to suppress the basic joys of existence for the purposes of advancing their own agendas at the expense of those that they conspire to rule over.

For decades now, secularists along with those thinking they know how to organize the details of your life better than you do have conspired to impose any number of policies intended to disabuse the American people of their Christmas habits and more importantly the religious source from which such traditions stem. Fortunately, the nation has yet to fully yield to this particular assault against their liberties and most have at least been alerted regarding this threat arrayed against our own underlying Western culture.

Unfortunately, the agents of tyranny are seldom discouraged. Such operatives are always eager to try new strategies in the attempt to achieve their nefarious objectives.

Often the issue and policies are formulated in the following manner. A government authority forbids the erection of Christmas decorations or the holding of a holiday celebration on public property. But take heart, the discouraged yuletide reveler is admonished, you are perfectly free to commemorate these holidays in any way that you desire in the confines of your own home with whomever it is that you please.

However, now with the Conornavirus Plague, there exists a pretext by which thoroughgoing statists are unabashed regarding the extent to which assorted government bureaucrats and agencies intend to intrude into the lives of average Americans to an even more unprecedented level.

For example, a number of jurisdictions have decreed the number of visitors that that will be allowed into your home, often limiting the number to ten guests. And what if you allow eleven to fourteen; does it somehow though off the occultc numerology or Masonic geometry?

If that means cutting off family members from the family during Thanksgiving or Christmas, then so be it. In the opening days of the New World Order or what is being called “The Great Reset”, the primary disease to be eradicated is not so much a virulent microorganism but rather the notion that you as a free individual should be able to decide for yourself the risks one is willing to take in a world fraught with any number of dangers.

Like the giddy urchins depicted in propaganda posters erected by dictatorships spanning the ideological spectrum, your joy is no longer to be derived from traditional notions of family or even personal relationships. Rather that satisfaction is to be derived from knowledge of your dutiful obedience to the regime even if that means those small pleasures that gave life much of its meaning are obliterated in pursuit of collectivist goals and agendas. After all, to paraphrase the motto of the Psi Corps from the drama “Babylon 5”, “The State is Mother. The State is Father.”

Just as bad and perhaps even worse than the state telling you how many may enter into your domicile is its functionaries telling you which otherwise perfectly legal activities you may or may not engage in while ensconced within the four walls for which you will no doubt be required to pay increasingly crippling taxes on in the years to come in order to finance economic amelioration efforts to address conditions imposed by the state to not only address the virus but also manipulate the masses into embracing extensive authoritarian intrusion into their lives.

For example, the state of California views itself as so all-pervasive that, in an act of beneficence, permission has been granted for the occupants of structures (for at this point of existential regulation can one really be considered a “home owner” any longer) and their permitted guests to engage in the basic excretory functions in the confines of the domicile's designated facilities.

In a number of microtyrannies (a phenomena I foretold the pending of over a decade ago), the assembled are forbidden from singing or chanting. But it must be asked if the phrases articulated include “Black Lives Matter” or “This is what democracy looks like” (which apparently consists now of riotous mobs looting in the streets or assorted state functionaries imposing an increasing array of arbitrary restrictions in no way authorized by legislative law) does the edict still apply? After all, one of the main lesson learned in 2020 is that the rules promulgated by the technocratic elites do not have to be obeyed when countermanding them in violent protest advances the revolutionary conception of social justice advocated by the aspiring planetary administrators.

In the attempt to make these deprivations and impositions supposedly easier to bear, propaganda disseminated through various venues assures that “We are all in this together.” Nothing could be farther from the truth.

For example, throughout the 2020 presidential campaign, the rallies at which Trump devotees gathered to bask in their candidates stream of consciousness orations were condemned as “super spreader events” by the most thoroughgoing adherents of Harris/Bidenism. Yet as soon as the establishment media declared victory for the Democratic ticket, these partisans and their affiliated masses swarmed into the streets ignoring most CDC decrees that have been invoked for months to keep you away from cherished loved ones, recreational pursuits, and houses of worship and are still in place to prevent you from enjoying the simple pleasures of life most fully. Perennial media whore Charles Schummer was caught with his mask down until he realized a video camera was focused on his shenanigans.

In Washington DC, residents are discouraged from traveling outside the boundaries of the federal city and those coming into the district from jurisdictions characterized by high rates of Plague are threatened with demands to quarantine. Yet Mayor Muriel Bowser traveled to Biden's victory announcement in Wilmington, Delaware. This mere municipal functionary insisted such a pilgrimage was essential even though the office she holds is so insignificant that government there would probably operate more efficiently if it didn't even exist in the first place.

Relatedly, Mayor Lori Lightfoot of Chicago invoked what listeners of “The Sean Hannity Program” might recall as the Ariana Huffington Doctrine when that perennial airhead responded as to why she was riding around in private jets when the average American was obligated to flagellate themselves over their own use of automobiles and fossil fuels in that these aircraft were going there anyway. In a voice significantly less sultry than that of the flip-flopping Grecian pundit, Lightfoot excused her own frolicking amongst the Biden throng conspicuously failing to socially distance in that these celebrations would have taken place whether or not she participated. Mind you, Lightfoot's contempt for the Almighty runs so deep that in the name of the Coronavirus dictatorship that she blocked access to church buildings and threatened to tow the vehicles of assembled parishoners.

Throughout nearly every level of government across America, pronouncements have been issued threatening punishment ranging from punitive fines to outright jail time for citizens daring to decide for themselves what otherwise perfectly legal and inherently moral activities can take place in their own homes. Yet when the elected officials that ironically rank among the most strident in insisting upon unwavering obedience within their respective police state fiefdoms are caught violating their own restrictions, the errant such as California Governor Gavin Newson seem to think a rendition of Brenda Lee's “I'm Sorry” with Covid-specific lyrics ought to be enough.

See if the articulation of such formulations of contriteness prove sufficient when law enforcement operatives are beating down your door to enforce edicts that technically don't even arise to the procedural specifics of law. These statements on the part of governors such as Gavin Newsom insinuate that the vanguards of the proletariat such as himself should be showered with celebratory gratitude for providing an incarnate example of exactly how we ought not to do in furtherance of the grand experiment of transformative revolution we now find ourselves thrust into.

This holiday season your once-vibrant elderly loved ones will slip deeper into cognitive twilight locked away in their once mentally stimulating assisted living communities now likely not much different than a cross between a prison and a loony bin. Remember that as the governors yuck it up Etruscan vomitorium style ironically maskless and shoulder to shoulder in violation of social distancing decrees with the very hierarchs of the medical establishment bent on turning the nation into a pharmaceutical police state.

By Frederick Meekins

Friday, December 18, 2020

Christmas Owl Decoration

Photo by Frederick Meekins

Pastor Attempting To Expose Unquestioned Cultural Assumptions Exhibits Some Of His Own

The pastor in this sermon categorizes those opposed to masks as idolaters that have elevated personal freedom above science.

How about those that have turned science into an idol where the term is no longer viewed as a methodology to question claims in light of evidence but rather as a priestly guild whose edicts the uncredentialed are forbidden from questioning?

The minister also claimed that many are being crushed by student loan debt because of the idolatrous notion that a college education is part of the American dream. But would someone be allowed to be a minister in the Anglican church without a degree or even one acquired from a more affordable unaccredited yet still quality seminary or would such souls forever be consigned to the role of mere pewfiller?

In Part 2 on confronting the idols of culture, this pastor references the account of Gerhard Kitell, a German Biblical scholar accused of crimes against humanity for his opposition to Judaism during the Nazi regime.

Standing in contrast to German Christians such as Kitell deceived by notions of nationalism (one must stop and ask what this pastor might be making a veiled reference to), reference is made to Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Karl Barth.

Kitell is to serve as a warning as to the dangers of viewing scripture through the eyes of culture while Bonhoeffer and Barth are extolled as examples of viewing culture through the lens of scripture.

While Kitell might be viewed as a Nazi collaborator and Bonhoeffer and Barth as standing against tyranny, in terms of the issue of idolatry at hand, is this duo really much different than Kitell?

Both Bonehoffer and Barth denied the inerrancy of Scripture.

Bonehofffer tended to downplay the importance of individual salvation (so why even bother with the faith).

The teachings of Christianity were so important to Barth that it is believed that he not only carried on what amounted to a thirty year affair during in which Barth’s student and research assistant was brought into the horny professor’s marital home to be his concubine during which she also resided in the domicile along with his wife (where is the outrage from the MeToo movement over that one).

By Frederick Meekins

Debunking The Issachar Anointing

Are Churches In High Plague Areas Obligated To Remain Open To Placate Wilderness Dwelling Fanatics?

 Click On The Headline

Osteen Whores His Church For Welfare Handouts

 Click On The Headline

Thursday, December 17, 2020

If Medical Professionals Won’t Submit To Plague Cult Alchemy, Why Should The Rest Of Us?

 Click On The Headline

Gingerbread House Decoration

Photo by Frederick Meekins

What Is Astrotheology?

Preparing For Extraterrestrial Contact

Christmas Hijacked As Another Pretext To Foment White Guilt

According to this article, common Whites are obligated to incorporate Third World Christmas traditions into their own celebrations.

It’s fascinating to study about these celebrations from an historical or anthropological standpoint.

However, as soon as it gets to the preachy liberal hand wringing is when my attention is lost.

Do what you want in your home and I won’t make you eat any sauerkraut.

Could Face Masks Lead To Blindness?

 Click On The Headline

Four Reasons Not To Wear A Mask

Covid, The Vaccine & The Mark Of The Beast

Plague Cult Downplays Vaccine’s Long Term Consequences

 Click On The Headline

Adoration Of Christ Child Equated With Pornography & Terrorism

 Click On The Headline

CNN Downplays Likelihood Of Post-Vaccination Deaths

 Click On The Headline

Sunday, December 13, 2020

If Vaccine As Effective As Propaganda Claims, Why Will You Need Booster?

The American people are constantly reminded by news propaganda that the nation is on the cusp of being extended the beneficence of the Coronoavirus vaccine by the technocrats that seemingly grant us permission to exist.

And now, by the way, it has been admitted that this might not be a one time deal. 

Those wishing to comply with the increasingly dictatorial mandates imposed upon them by their overlords might have to get a booster inoculation sometime down the road. 

This raises a serious question.

Much of what we have been forced to endure for nearly a year and in the months to come has been justified in the name of a looming “herd immunity”.

If that is achieved, theoretically months or years could pass with almost no one suffering from the affliction.

Thus, if the virus allegedly can only survive for a few hours on a surface, how would it be reintroduced to the human population having gone so long without opportunistic hosts other than through a deliberate release on par with an orchestrated biological attack?

By Frederick Meekins

Church In Snow

Saturday, December 12, 2020

Friday, December 11, 2020

Sunday, December 06, 2020

Workshop Santa

Click On The Headline

Thursday, December 03, 2020

Trustee Warns Southern Baptist Flagship Seminary Totters Along Apostasy

Can You Start A New Career After 50?

Biden Propagandist Calls For Elimination Of First Amendment

 Click On The Headline

Manwhore Minister Back To Pounding Pulpits After Pounding Prostitutes

 Click On The Headline

UFO’s, Politics & Religion

Plague Cult Threatens To Withhold Basic Necessities From The Unvaccinated

Plague Cult Strategizes To Tighten Grip On Power

 Click On The Headline

How to Pivot Industries Using a Blog and a Podcast

Brannon Howse Advocates Military Dictatorship

If Brannon Howse is endorsing the establishment of a military dictatorship in response to Biden election shenanigans, how is that any different than the abridgements of liberty he harps about in his videos and podcasts? One would think that someone that markets themselves as a worldview expert would be discerning enough that when one advocates the suspension of habeas corpus, there really is nothing to prevent than from being turned against one’s own church, affiliated ministries and assorted ideological allies.

Anti-Lockdown Music Legend Condemned For Comments Nearly Half Century Old

 Click On The Headline

Biden/Harris Regime’s Racism Exposed

The History & Theology Of Independent Fundamentalist Baptists

American Protestant Denominations

What Does Psychology Have To Do With Theology?

Plague Cult Threatens Liquidation Of Dissidents Refusing To Embrace New Gospel

 Click On The Headline

Plague Cult Conspires To Impose Perennial Dictatorship

 Click On The Headline

Willie Brown Demands His Whore Be Replaced With Another Black Wench

 Click On The Headline

World Population Rallies Against Vaccination Tyranny

 Click On The Headline

Tuesday, December 01, 2020

Fireman Santa

Photo by Frederick Meekins

Monday, November 30, 2020

Caroler Figurines

Photo by Frederick Meekins


Saturday, November 28, 2020

The Political Philosophy Behind The Global Resent

 Click On The Headline

Jabba The Hutt Conspires To Destroy Last Vestiges Of Freedom In The So-Called “Free State”

 Click On The Headline

Former Plague Cult Bishop Suggests Extent Of Second Covid Wave Possibly Fake News

 Click On The Headline

Plague Cult Sacrement Likely To Spark Symptoms Supplicants Attempting To Avoid

 Click On The Headline

A Critique Of Online Ministry

Transhumanism: Should We All Be Microchipped?

Multimillionaire Select To Guilttrip Americans For Having Too Much

 Click On The Headline

Is Russell Moore A Soros Operative?

 Click On The Headline

Plague Cult Gestapo Interdicts Freedom Of Movement

 Click On The Headline

Pope Lavishes Praise Upon NBA Racial Agitation

 Click On The Headline

The Cult Of Soft Totalitarianism

Click On The Headline

Plague Cult Exaggerates Disease Threat To Maintain Stranglehold On Power

 Click On The Headline

The Fall of the Episcopal Church & the Rise of Biblically Faithful Episcopal Bodies

 Click On The Headline

Harvey Cox On The Future Of Faith

 Click On The Headline

Lady Mao Condemns Those Unwilling To Surrender As Revolutionary Sacrifice

 Click On The Headline

Could Plague VACCINES Potentially Kill Millions?

 Click On The Headline

The Next Battlefield: Connected, Augmented & Urban

Listen to "The Next Battlefield: Connected, Augmented and Urban" on Spreaker.

Thursday, November 26, 2020

A Heeping Helping Of Thanksgiving Parade Snark

In the opening of the 2020 Macy's Parade, Jimmy Falon remarks in light of the Pandemic, you can't take the Parade away from America. Ashame most aren't as adamant about the Constitution and basic liberties.

Why aren't the maskless announcers and dances at the Macy's Parade in violation of Commissars Cumo's concealed visage edicts?

NBC propagandist Savanah Guthrie assures parade viewers that all safety precautions have been taken. That is reassuring, given from her Presidential town hall performance we all know she wouldn’t spin the truth for her own advantage or that of her media overseers.

Given that the Macy’s Parade musical numbers are always lip-synched, forcing these court jesters to wear masks like the remainder of the serfs in the population would not have impacted the audio quality of the performances any.

Does Cumo intend to hand down a Castro-like performance in condemnation of parade dancers engaging in the sort of human contact he has created an atmosphere surrounding causing residents of his state to fear could run them afoul of law enforcement and over which sheriffs stating they will not enforce such edicts are viewed with more contempt in his eyes than Antifa and BLM subversives that he did next to nothing to stop?

A gay marching band being celebrated. Does each sort of fetish get to field a band? The gas mask freaks ought to be prominent right now. Those preferring partners of more substantial girth could march to the tune about liking big butts.

If the Plague is as virulent as technocrats insist, should a recent sufferer of cancer such as Al Roker be on the front lines of the parade?

Al Roker was closer than six feet from a parade performer dressed as a stick of butter. But don’t you dare hug a relative.

The dynamics of the Macy’s Thanksgiving spectacle are reinforcing the new cultural expectation that only those of sufficient importance will be allowed to appear maskless in public.

The Thanksgiving Parade commemorating the Puerto Rican Parade. Does the Puerto Rican Parade take time to acknowledge the Thanksgiving Day Parade?

Given that so many of the floats and performers at the Thanksgiving parade are going out of their way to beat viewers over their heads with minority supremacism, will there be any explicitly celebrating White accomplishments?

Given the extent to which so many of them probably have AIDS, shouldn’t these broadway types be wearing masks and standing more than six feet apart in their parade performances if the Coronavirus really is such a deadly threat that the rest of us can’t even eat Thanksgiving dinner around others without threats and fear of WACO style raids?

It’s your house. Do whatever the Hades you want in it in terms of dinner and who you eat it with.

Turkey is notorious in plugging a certain percentage of the population up with constipation. If the government issues an edict how we shouldn’t be eating it for Thanksgiving, should we simply acquiesce to that command as well?

If that balloon is being celebrated for being the first in the Thanksgiving Parade designed by a woman, perhaps its appearance is pretty much a testament why there have been no others.

During the Smokey the Bear Balloon presentation, it was pointed out that most wildfires were the result of human activity. Perhaps it should be pointed out that these fires --- both manmade and natural --- are now exacerbated by lack of human activity in that for whatever reason combustible debris is not being managed on these public lands, threatening wildlife, human lives, and property.

Lifetime Christmas movies? So the network has apparently expanded beyond the men are scum, kill your abuser fantasies.

If this goes down as one of the lowest rated Macy’s Parade’s in history, that can’t all be blamed on the Plague.

by Frederick Meekins

Tuesday, November 24, 2020

Pilgrim Girl

Photo by Frederick Meekins   


Monday, November 23, 2020

Thanksgiving Owl

No photo description available.
Photo by Frederick Meekins

Friday, November 20, 2020

Luciferians Confer Yearning For Rise Of Antichrist

 Click On The Headline

What Is Apologetics?

Stealing Souls: The Grey Alien Agenda

Listen to "STEALING SOULS~ The Grey Alien Agenda" on Spreaker.

Does Edifi Christian Podcast App Allow Cyborg Vaccination Theories But Not Actual Theology?

Listen to "Edifi The Christian Podcast App" on Spreaker.

Fauci Urges Globe To Embrace Spirit Of The Antichrist

 Click On The Headline

Nephilim & DNA Experiments

The God We Need

WIll The Mark Of The Beast Be Justified As Plague Prevention?

 Click On The Headline

Mennonite Theology 101: Pacifism

 Click On The Headline

The Chronicles Of Narnia Turn 70

 Click On The Headline

Tolerancemongers Attack Americans Expressing Divergent Viewpoints

 Click On The Headline

Christmas Mistletoe, Yule Logs & Witches

Biden’s Plans To Destroy America

 Click On The Headline

Plague Cult Deems Blacks An Expendable Population To Be Experimented Upon

 Click On The Headline

Steven Anderson: Is He A Cult Leader?

Thursday, November 12, 2020

How To Become A Christian Apologist

Democrats & Their Mobocracy Dreams

Plague Cult Cleric Baptizes Acolytes With Sacerdotal Sputum

 Click On The Headline

Should I Get An MDiv Or An MA?

Duggar Barely Allowed Out Of House Accused Of Campaign Finance Violations

 Click On The Headline

Bible College Or The Liberal Arts

 Click On The Headline

Should You Get A DMin Or PhD?

Biden Regime Likely To Reimpose Coercive Anti-White Indoctrination

 Click On The Headline

Stephen Bedard What Theology Degree Should You Get?

The Nature Of Church History

H.P. Lovecraft: In His Defense

Sasquatch: Distant Relative Or Close Cousin?

Did Gospel Coalition Propagandist Telegraph That Election Would Be Hacked?

 Click On The Headline

Call For Unity A Veiled Threat To Suppress Dissent

 Click On The Headline

Voting Machines Linked To Virulent Democrat

 Click On The Headline

H.P. Lovecraft: Life, Atheism & Mythos

Sunday, November 08, 2020

Rusted Caboose Downloadable Card

Rusted Caboose Card image 0
Photo by Frederick Meekins


Biden Deserves No Reprieve From Trump Social Media Offensive

If Trump is compelled by election results to relinquish the Oval Office, the moment he steps out of the White House he should commence tweeting and podcasting in opposition to the shortcomings of the looming Biden regime.

For there will no doubt be many.

There should be none of this “a former President remains quiet for a year” hooey.

That is nowhere required by the Constitution.

It is a mere tradition.

The Democrats are the ones that have been threatening to undo any number of traditions in what will amount to little more than a third Obama term.

For whom do you think it will be guiding a President that most days couldn’t make it from the basement up the stairs into the living room?

Do those respecting tradition conspire to pack the Supreme Court or abolish the Electoral College?

Inflicting those changes upon the nation would do more to upend America’s precarious political balance than an once-elected official returning to the status of private citizen speaking his mind ever could.

By Frederick Meekins

Saturday, November 07, 2020

Tuesday, November 03, 2020

Pilgrim Figurine

 No photo description available.

Photo by Frederick Meekins

The Christian Origins Of Halloween

Monday, November 02, 2020

Sunday, November 01, 2020

Plague Cult Celebrates Perennial Dictatorship

Click On The Headline

Tuesday, October 27, 2020

Stool Pumpkins

Photo by Frederick Meekins

Monday, October 26, 2020

Pumpkin Witch

Feathered Witch


Robertson Warns Collision With Wormwood Draws Nigh

 Click On The Headline

Saturday, October 24, 2020

Steam Punk Lady With Gun

 Image may contain: 1 person

Dementia Meme

 Image may contain: 1 person, text that says 'DEMENTIA MY ASS! I'VE ALWAYS BEEN THIS DUMB!'

Coyote Meme


Wednesday, October 21, 2020

Sunday, October 18, 2020

FBI Accused Of Refusing To Protect Ministry Threatened By Antifa Terrorists

Did Ravi Zacharias Have More In Common With Mafia Kingpin Than Gospel Minister?

 Click On The Headline

Whore Of Babylon Coalesces To Undermine Life, Liberty & Property

 Click On The Headline

Cat and Books


The Megachurch Megamess

Halloween Mice


Art Erected In Favor Of Racial Handouts

A mural painted on a building in an undisclosed municipality depicts the Statue of Liberty wearing Air Jordans along with the words “equality” and “reparations”.

The proponents of such propaganda urging the confiscation of resources from one group of people to be lavished upon another that did nothing to earn them apart from being born a particular skin color will make the argument that it’s nobody’s business what message a business might decide to plaster across the side of its building.

If that’s the case, then don’t in the local press insist that the purpose for the erection of such public art is to elicit a conversation.

For if such a sentiment is actually sincere, isn’t that an invitation for criticism as well?

However, by this point most realize that when ardent liberals these days call for conversation what that really means is that you had better agree with them unless you want your property pillaged.

Even so, it will be replied, it is not the place of local government to curtail free speech in regards to these substandard doodles the brainwashed dupes are celebrating as high art.

If that’s the case, will an apology be issued to the homeowner forced by city authorities to remove a lawn jockey from private property over its failure to comply with prevailing mob sympathies?

By Frederick Meekins

Wednesday, October 14, 2020

The New Monasticism & The Global Pandemic

One should be allowed to hunker down to the extent one desires to avoid contact with the Plague.

However, it should be concerning when statements regarding such are formulated in such a way insinuating something is mentally wrong with you if you long for an eventual return to the way things once were in regards to freedom of movement and such.

Ironically, most of these individuals look and sound like the sorts that would gravitate to the "keep your laws off my body" or "how dare you impose your morality on me sort of churches".

As such, just because they might want to be locked inside for the rest of their lives, who are they to demand that from the rest of us?

Also the discerning will find it somewhere along the spectrum between bored and irritated to the extent capitalism was bashed.

But was it not capitalism that allowed for the development of the technology that allows them to communicate across such vast distances and to pursue such bourgeoisie pursuits as artisanal chocolate making while quarantined?

Mysterious Woman

Click On The Headline


Is There Life Out There?


The Best Books On Church History

Church History & Its Importance To The Christian Faith

No Rest In Hell

Sunday, October 11, 2020

Pumpkin Decoration

Photo by Frederick Meekins
Click On The Image


Whites Ordered To Assume Servile Status

 Click On The Headline

Making Comics: When Are You Good Enough To Start?

Left Behind….NOT

Friday, October 09, 2020

To What Extent Compromise?

One must sympathize with musician Jason Aldean for having endured one of the most horrifying sort of events imaginable in the form of the mass shooting that occurred in Las Vegas on 10/1/17 during his performance at a music festival in which sixty were killed and over 400 wounded.

However, the solution he offered itself could potentially generate its own set of nightmares.

The performer lamented, “At the end of the day, we aren't Democrats or Republicans, Black or White. We are all human beings and we are Americans and it's time to start acting like it and stand together as one.”

On the surface that sounds all well and good.

But whose opinion is going to prevail when it comes to differences on profound moral and policy issues? Just what exactly is there left to compromise?

For the sake of this idealized unity, is Aldean going to surrender his no doubt significant bank account when socialists of the Occupy Wall Street and Bernie Sanders variety come to seize these assets in the name of economic equality?

Just how far are we to compromise for the sake of unity and oneness when the adherents of Sharia law demand displays of temptation such as concerts from which Aldean has derived his livelihood and notoriety be abolished?

At one time, such dichotomies seemed abstract and highly unlikely.

However, the question of just how far you are willing to compromise becomes shockingly relevant amidst the tyranny of cancel culture and mobs pillaging supposedly in the name of an amorphous justice the terms of which never seem to be defined.

by Frederick Meekins

Tuesday, October 06, 2020

Religious Progressives Abet Dictatorial Agendas

It could be argued that the United States of America holds an unique position in the world in that for the most part the nation's sociopolitical system attempts to balance the competing needs of both the group and the individual. This impressive feat is accomplished in part as a result of distinctive foundations such as a constitutional framework of government and the underlying moral assumptions shared by various interpretations of the Judeo-Christian philosophical tradition.

Without these restraints, eventually this way of life so easily taken for granted would collapse in favor of tyranny or anarchy with it becoming increasingly difficult to tell such extremities apart. Startlingly, one does not have to expend too much time and effort to find influential voices advocating for the abolition of these safeguards. Often such thinkers do so from a perspective claiming to be religions in terms of its motivating orientation or at least on behalf of organizations having accumulated a significant percentage of the largess upon which they operate by appealing to that particular underlying behavioral motivation.

For example, in the 12/30/12 edition of the New York Times, Georgetown University Professor of Constitutional Law Louis Michael Seidman published an essay titled “Let's Give Up On The Constitution”. In this analysis, an intellectual employed by a prominent Roman Catholic institution advocates abolishing the document upon which the foundations of the governing structures of the Republic rest because of the numerous instances throughout American history in which adherence to the strictures of the document proved too burdensome and in which deviation from proved the expeditious thing to do. Examples cited include Justice Robert Jackson's admission that the decision handed down in “Brown vs. Board of Education” was based on moral and political necessity rather than any explicitly constitutional provision and Franklin Roosevelt's presupposition that the Constitution was a declaration of aspirations rather than binding possibilities.

Louis Seidman remarks with the condescension endemic to the professorial class, “In the face of this long history of disobedience, it is hard to take seriously the claim of the Constitution's defenders that we would be reduced to a Hobbesian state of nature... Our sometimes flagrant disregard of the Constitution has not produced chaos or totalitarianism; on the contrary, it has helped to grow and prosper.”

The Americans of Japanese, German, and Italian ancestry interred during World Wat II might argue otherwise. Therefore, invoking Roosevelt's admonition that the Constitution is only a set of suggestions rather than an obligation might not be that good of an idea after all.

In the remainder of his analysis, Professor Seidman attempts to assure the reader that what ensures the continuation of America's fundamental liberties and semi-functioning government (at least in comparison to what prevails in most other parts of the world) is not some piece of paper that would literally disintegrate if not kept under the strictest climate-controlled conditions. Rather, the proverbial American way of life is continued by what Professor Seidman categorizes as “entrenched institutions and habits of thought and, most important, that sense that we are one nation and work out our differences.”

But without paper the Constitution to keep competing and disparate interests and factions in check within a clearly delineated framework, would what we enjoy as Americans endure for very long? As examples of what he suggests as viable political regimes that provide civilized structures without relying upon a formalized written constitution are the United Kingdom and New Zealand.

But while these countries might hold hours of endless fascination of the setting of many a BBC drama or picture postcards, are either really a place the average American would really want to live? To put it bluntly, the population of New Zealand is about as white as the sheep for which that pastured land is famous. Would that country be able to survive and endure if its population were as varied as the United States with sizable hordes refusing to abide by the values that make a viable society possible?

In terms of the diversity we are obligated to applaud as nothing but positive or face accusations of assorted thought crimes, the United Kingdom might be more akin to its sibling society in the United States. However, in many profound ways, in this regard Great Britain is nothing to be proud of or desire to emulate.

There swarms from the Third World, like plagues of grasshoppers, eagerly consume the sustenance that is provided like none other. And like these ravenous insects, significant percentages of these migrants would rather destroy than preserve the bounty set before them.

For example, in Britain, instead of exhibiting a little respect and gratitude for being extended the privilege of even being allowed to reside in such a land to begin with, one Islamist of African origins murdered a member of that nation's military along the roadside and then proudly documented the act by testifying to the atrocity in a video while still soaked in the blood of his victim. Elsewhere in that same country, others sharing in this same particular so-called religion expect their hosts to accommodate their alien peculiarities rather than for the newcomers to tone these down as any polite guest might.. For example, a number practicing polygamy demanded that each wife be allowed entrance into the country where she is in turn granted additional welfare benefits for each new whelp she continues to push out at a rate that would probably exhaust a tribblbe (the fuzzy aliens from the original Star Trek that Bones McCoy pointed out were born pregnant).

In both the United Kingdom and New Zealand, those daring to articulate perspectives against this sort of cultural subversion could be charged with assorted thought crimes on the grounds of racial or ethnic disparagement. That is because, unlike in America, the United Kingdom and New Zealand have not enshrined freedom of expression as a fundamental right in a constitution, the very thing Professor Seidman cavalierly suggests we abolish in favor of a proposed brave new world.

In his proposal, Professor Seidman even goes out of his way to address concerns raised by those shocked by what it is their discernment warns he is suggesting. He assures, “This is not to say that we should disobey all constitutional commands. Freedom of speech and religion, equal protection of the laws and ... against governmental deprivations of life, liberty, and property are important, whether or not they are in the Constitution. We should continue to follow those requirements out of respect, not obligation.”

But if these are not protected by a constitution that exists somewhat to an extent beyond the whims of ordinary politics and expediency, who is to say such niceties should not be abolished or withheld from non-compliant segments of the population when doing so would be convenient. For example, is gay marriage any longer a “right” should fifty-one percent in a plebiscite or whatever other methods are utilized to determine these kinds of questions in a world where nothing is any longer set in concrete?

Professor Seidman continues, “Nor should we have a debate about, for instance, how long the president's term should last or whether Congress should consist of two houses. Some matters are better left settled, even if not in exactly the way we favor.” Once more, who is to say?

If there is no Constitution, by what authority does one impose the perspective that such things are hereby settled? You can no longer point to an article, section, or clause of the Constitution and say, “Look. It says so right there.”

Professor Seidman's gentlemanly view of society might be barely functional in a world where most of the population adhere roughly to a similar set of values. However, such a Western world in general and an America in particular sadly no longer exists.

There is now within our midst sizable Islamic populations that not only demand their right to practice their barbarous customs but also demand that the rest of us surrender to them as well or face overwhelming violence. And this is not the only movement seeking to remake America and to eliminate what little remains of that distinct way of life and cultural perspective.

For instance, no longer is it enough to allow those that derive their deepest carnal pleasures in ways most would be shocked by or not find so appealing to so do so off on their own. Now, under threat of financial ruination, we are forced to render compelled approval in ways that violate our own convictions and sensibilities.

According to assorted accounts, Christian bakers have been forced to provide cakes for gay weddings when there were no doubt numerous others willing to provide such culinary services. Elsewhere, young girls have been forced to look on in horror in the locker or restroom as the person undressing there before them turns out that at the most basic level is still a man no matter how vehemently they attempt to deny nature's manifest construction.

Given that Professor Seidman is a professor of Constitutional Law, one would think that in calling for the elimination of the U.S. Constitution that he was essentially derailing his own gravy train as Georgetown University professors probably pull in a hefty salary and are esteemed as part of the nation's intellectual elite.

But even if scholarship in traditional constitutional studies were to become an extinct discipline, those such as Professor Seidman convined they are so much better than the rest of us will still think it will be their place to tell the rest of us what to do. However, it will simply no longer be from the standpoint of a traditional understanding of morality. This is evidenced by the “New Social Contract” called for by Evangelical Christian Progressive Jim Wallis.

In classical democratic theory, in a social contract both parties agree to fulfill a delineated number of obligations in order to receive a desired benefit. This is done from a perspective of self-interest as much or maybe even more so than to meet the desires or needs of the other party.

For example, no matter how much they claim otherwise and might even pitch in during a time of crisis, the generic big box retailer or even the so-called “mom and pop” shop down the street really don't care one way or the other whether your nutritional needs are being met. What they really care about and might even be willing to go out of their way to see that your dietary inclinations are satisfied fot is if you are willing to relent to the agreed upon price for the desired commodity.

Something similar could be said of the individuals and institutions involved in the so-called social contract. Under that theory, if parties feel that the terms are not being met, individuals are free to look elsewhere for the purposes of finding their fulfillment. For example, in a constitutional republic, individuals are free to change church affiliations or their religion entirely. In terms of government, citizens are theoretically free to either change their leaders through periodic elections or the parameters of governing structures through the amendment process.

Such is not necessarily the case regarding the idea of a covenant. For unlike the idea of a contract, the notion of a covenant often does not possess the same degree of personal self-interest. Covenant carries with it the idea of being imposed upon the individual from without by a greater power irrespective of the desire of the individual or that the individual is expected to fulfill certain obligations without expectations of benefit in return.

For example, a number of such covenants are detailed in the pages of the Bible. Foremost among these ranks the covenants between God and the Nation of Israel as promised to the Patriarch Abraham. Although he and his descendants were blessed as a result especially when by living in accordance with these stipulations, it was God that sought this people ought and laid out the terms with little room for negotiation.

But probably the kind of covenant most are most familiar with is none other than marriage. Though marriage is usually entered into voluntarily by the involved parties, in a context that honors the institution properly, it can only be exited under the strictest of conditions that would leave the party initially guilty of violating the binding terms profoundly sanctioned often to the verge of ruination. The notion of contract provides for a way out even if there is a penalty for invoking this particular provision.

In January 2013, planetary elites met at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. One of the sessions convened was titled “The Moral Economy: From Social Contract To Social Covenant”. The purpose of the undertaking was to establish a framework that would foster “(1) the dignity of the human person, (2) the importance of the common good, which transcends individual interests, and (3) the need for stewardship of the planet and prosperity.”

What's so wrong with any of that, one might easily ask? After all, each of these things sounds noble almost to the point of being inspirational. The problem arises in regards as to how these are defined and who does the defining.

For example, one of the issues harped about the most by a variety of leftists ranging from the filthy slobs of the Occupy Movement all the way to Pope Francis is the need for income redistribution. So what if the technocrats overseeing the implementation of the social covenant decide to tackle that particular economic perplexity?

Most people are disturbed by the idea of their fellow man languishing in the deprivations of overwhelming poverty. But what if the overlords of the New Social Covenant decide that the way to address that is not by sustained acts of ongoing charity but rather through the forced confiscation of what you have earned with the seized resources supposedly directed towards those that really did not earn it but in reality much of it squandered by those administering such an unprecedented global effort. After all, the Pope has all that art work to upkeep there in the Vatican and assorted U.N. Functionaries like nothing better than to gather at posh resorts in the Swiss Alps or the French seaside to denounce reliance of the middle class upon automobiles while these elites fritter from conference to conference around the globe in private jets.

Those unable to expand their imaginations beyond the relatively comfortable reality that we at the moment are blessed to enjoy counter that should some sort of global authority move to seize what we have (beyond of course the increasingly exorbitant tax rates) concerned citizens can use their freedoms of speech and assembly to petition for the redress of their grievances and to raise overall awareness about policies that have expanded beyond the bounds of propriety. But does one need to be reminded that one of the very first liberties and freedoms curtailed by the social engineers of the technocratic elite is the very freedom of expression that was part of the Constitution that was abandoned earlier in this exposition as part of the reactionary past that was hindering the further development of the human species and society?

In this pending new world order, the law will not be the only social institution manipulating and conditioning the inmates of the planetary panopticon from exercising what at one time were categorized as individual rights. For religion in general and what passes for Christianity in particular will be invoked in pursuit of this agenda.

The foundation of this perspective can be discerned in an editorial published in the July/August 2014 issue of Christianity Today titled, “It's about the common good, not just the individual good.” According to the piece, the basis of America is not the individual or even the family as the union of two distinct individuals and the children that might result from such couplings but rather the COMMUNITY.

But if it is the larger group that is imbued with those restrictions upon concentrations of authority known as rights, what will protect the individual when the individual is viewed as nothing more than a malfunctioning cog in the machine or diseased cell in the larger social organism that must be eliminated or his flourishing curtailed over justifications no greater than the COMMUNITY has declared thusly? The Christianity Today article, in particular, briefly examines the implications of this in regards to children. Unfortunately, however, this analysis is disturbingly superficial and shortsighted.

The Christianity Today article quotes favorably of a Robert Putnam (the same sociologist that categorizes you as some sort of deviant if you bowl by yourself) at Georgetown University, “Kids from working-class homes used to be 'our kids' he said, Now they are other people's kids, and we expect other people to solve their problems. But young people are our future. Their problems are ours.”

The Christianity Today editorial realized that the remarks were speaking to the matter of inequality. In other words, the increasingly leftist Evangelical mouthpiece apparently has little problem in attempting to shame and manipulate you into forking over increasing percentages of what you have earned and saved. “What, you don't support the progressive income and inheritance taxes? Why do you hate children and refuse to do your part to usher in the revolutionary utopia?”

One would hope that the current editors of that particular publication would retain enough of its founders' intellectual heritage to realize that there exists more to life than merely the physical building blocks. As the such, the phrase “our kids” when spoken in reference to any youngsters other than those you might share with your respective spouse or have adopted as one's own ought to send chills down the spine of any reflective discerning individual.

For if children are to be seen as “our children” in terms of being the children of a respective COMMUNITY apart from a few basic needs such as minimal food, shelter, and maybe healthcare, what is to prevent governing authorities from intervening to dictate what you can and cannot teach in terms of religious doctrine and morality? For example, do you believe that belief in Jesus Christ as the only Begotten Son of God and member of the Trinity is the one true faith?

Well, in the New World Order where the good and preferences of the group come before those of the individual, such an outdated understanding of the ultimate cannot be allowed even if you are an otherwise peaceful individual with no intentions of harming anyone in a traditional sense of that concept. For the assumption that a source of authority exists outside the uniformity of the group consensus is the seed from which all conflict generates forth.

The First Amendment is not the only one of the derided and denigrated constitutional liberties endangered by those out to impose the fundamental transformation of America advocated by President Obama and embraced by certain radicals in the name of errant theology. For if the First Amendment is the constitutional provision upon which our foundational liberties rest, then the Second Amendment is the constitutional provision that attempts to make sure that the robust liberties elaborated in the First Amendment continue to endure. For despite what even the National Rifle Association has been intimidated into repeating, the Second Amendment is about far more that guaranteeing the right to hunt and participate in shooting sports.

Rather, the primary purpose of the Second Amendment is to recognize and enshrine the idea that each citizen has a role to play in protecting life, liberty, and property against threats to these precious commodities originating from both within and without the borders of the United States. And yes, as the very last resort after all other alternatives have been exhausted, that may mean solemnly with deliberation and reluctance taking up arms against whatever form the threat may take on the most regrettable of occasions.

But even more importantly, it is the Second rather than the First Amendment that actually serves as a barometer of the health of liberty and freedom throughout this land. For without a government and civil society that respects the right to keep and bear arms arms as described in the Second Amendment, the seemingly loftier protections of conviction and expression will not endure much longer. That is because a country or regime that refused to acknowledge the right to protect oneself will eventually not tolerate the right to think for oneself or in a manner not as directed by those holding power.

Even those claiming to view God as the highest authority cannot resist the temptation of the continuing centralization of power. This is evidenced in two 2013 issues of the Christian Century.

The editorial titled “Terror and Guns” examined the issue by comparing the three that lost their lives in the Boston Marathon Bombing to three that lost their lives that same day in acts of gun violence elsewhere across the nation. From that the editorial made the claim that 30,000 Americans are killed by guns each year compared to the seventeen Americans that lost their lives to acts of terrorism in 2012.

If such statistics are trustworthy, that certainly causes one to pause. But instead of making the case that the extensive national security and surveillance apparatus that these sorts of left-leaning publications condemn when applied to subversives of assorted revolutionary or radical perspectives be abolished, it is insinuated that a similarly heavy hand should be applied to the matter of gun crimes and even firearms ownership. The Christian Century writes, “Terrorist threats demand vigilance, and the government has responded by creating an extensive security and intelligence capability...Why can't the nation display the same kind of resolve when it comes to keeping guns out of the hands of the wrong people?”

As evidence of this lamentation, editors of Christian Century write, “In the case of the Senate gun control bill, a majority of senators voted to strengthen background checks in people purchasing guns, but the 54-46 vote did not attain the 60 votes required in the Senate. Something is wrong with a process by which a minority can derail legislation that is supported by 90% of Americans.”

Apparently the editors could not leave their analysis at that. These propagandists continued, “Many of the votes against background checks were cast by senators from small or sparsely populated states. Based on population the vote of a senator from Wyoming has 66 times more value than that of a senator from California. This kind of disparity in political power is not what the Founding Fathers had in mind.”

From that editorial, one would initially assume in terms of the issue emphasized on the surface that the concern would be a vast comprehensive national surveillance system that would determine who would be denied access to firearms. However, just as insidious is an underlying contempt for the structures of the Republic as envisioned by the framers of the Constitution.

For the United States of America does not consist solely of “We the people” merely as a singular mass or collective of individuals. Just as intrinsic to the understanding of this particular nation is “We the people” construed as fifty distinct jurisdictional entities known as states. From that particular vantage point, each of these is to be viewed as equal to the others in terms of the voice granted in the second body of the national legislature in determining the direction in terms of law and policy that will guide the nation as a comprehensive totality.

From the statement in the Christian Century commentary complaining that the political weight of a Wyoming senator is skewered in that jurisdiction's favor over that of California with its vastly larger population, the logic would conclude that right and wrong are determined by nothing more than majority opinion. So if we are to apply that principle in regards to the regulation of firearms, the shouldn't the good liberals at propaganda outfits such as the Christian Century allow the principle to be applied to other cultural issues nearly as contentious as those surrounding the Second Amendment?

For example, if most Americans were asked what they really believed without fear of retaliation on the part of the Thought Police, most would probably admit that they are not all that hip to the idea of gay marriage and certainly not open to the idea of transgenders especially men claiming that they are women as evidenced by their external endowments legally allowed to go into a public restroom where they can in close proximity to actual women and vulnerable children engage in some of life's most personal biological function as well as possibly seek these individuals out as victims to satisfy the most base of carnal impulses.

If a few senators can disrupt the will of the people in regards to one area of life, why should a few jurists not even as directly accountable to the electorate as these disputed legislators be allowed to impose a perspective at even greater odds with decency and common sense. For is not the chanted slogan of the ethical Thunder Dome in which the nearly constant social conflict takes place that there are no absolutes?

As interesting is how the appeal to traditional moral authority is only valid when it can be buttressed to support the preferred sensibilities of the prevailing elites. This was quite evident in a second Christian Century editorial published about a similar topic on 2/6/13 titled “Of Guns and Neighbors.”

The thesis of that broadside contends that individual rights are curtailed by the good of one's neighbor in Christian understanding. The editorial states, “In the biblical perspective, social issues are always framed primarily as questions of obligation, not of individual rights: not 'What do I get to do?' but 'What do we owe to God and neighbor?'.”

The editorial demonstrates how this reasoning is applied to the firearms debate by quoting Deuteronomy 22:8. The text reads, “When you build a new home, you shall make a parapet for your roof; otherwise you might have bloodguilt on your house , if anyone should fall from it.”

So what other nuggets of jurisprudence derived from the Book of Deuteronomy interpreted through the prism of the principle that “social issues are always framed primarily as questions of obligation, not of individual rights...” is the Christian Century editorial board going to come out in favor of? No doubt this propaganda rag of mainline Protestantism of the Episcopal and Presbyterian Church, USA variety has come out in full blown support of gay marriage.

Without question, it cannot be denied that the Old Testament legal books such as Deuteronomy explicitly opposed the homosexual lifestyle and by extension the agenda advocated by those most enthusiastically mired in these particular behaviors. Given the ethical standard called for by the Christian Century, is the publication now required to withdraw any support it might have articulated in favor of gay marriage? The editorial titled “Of Guns and Neighbors” just said ethics and morality are not determined by what we get out of something but rather upon what we owe our neighbor and, even more importantly, God.

As such, if it can be deduced from these texts that God does not endorse unrestricted access to firearms (something that is not clearly spelled out in the texts), shouldn't we at least admit that the only relationship with physical pleasure being one of the foundational cornerstones that God looks favorably upon without condemnation or criticism is monogamous heterosexual marriage? Those claiming otherwise have ignored the explicit directives of the Biblical text to such an extent that we might as well toss it aside entirely in regards to other issues regarding assorted ideologues desire to render behavioral, legislative, or policy pronouncements.

It is often assumed in Christian circles that the greatest threat to human liberty are often those that categorize themselves as atheist or agnostic in that their hostility towards God is outward and explicit. However, as has been emphasized in this analysis particularly in regards to the movement to either eliminate or comprehensively alter the understanding of America's most basic constitutional liberties, there are a number of voices claiming to be religious in nature utilizing the beliefs and principles derived from such for the purposes of manipulating those open to the perspectives of this particular social sphere into surrendering the sorts of protections not easily recoverable once they have been surrendered.

By Frederick Meekins