LES #fundie voxday.blogspot.com
If evolution was true I would expect to see abundant non-lethal mutations among all the species of life on Earth today. Shouldn't there be a person somewhere who has tooth enamel on his scalp instead of hair?
If evolution was true I would expect to see abundant non-lethal mutations among all the species of life on Earth today. Shouldn't there be a person somewhere who has tooth enamel on his scalp instead of hair?
Now that we understand that the Left has absolutely no regard for the freedom of thought or the freedom of expression, what reason can be given for why the West should not follow the lead of Africa and the Middle East in criminalizing both homosexuality and atheism? The Left has often lectured us on the moral superiority of those cultures, have they not?
Such actions can be fully justified on traditional grounds, historical grounds, moral grounds, and perhaps most importantly, pragmatic grounds. The reason past laws were relaxed was in the name of secular tolerance, but as has now been amply demonstrated, atheists and homosexuals are not at all willing to be tolerant of those who disagree with them. So why should anyone else be tolerant of them?
In the long term, it doesn't really matter. Either circumstances will force the West to put its house in order, or it will be overrun by those less progressive societies which refuse to tolerate its self-destructive elements.
[From "Freedom of religion"]
If you don't understand why Christianity is totally incompatible with "freedom of religion", you may wish to remind yourself that the United States is presently ruled by foreign invaders who worship Satan and whose religion involves the kidnapping, rape, and sexual abuse of children as well as the occasional sacrifice of people of various ages
Do you really believe that they possess an unalienable, God-given right to do engage in the practice of their religion without any limitations on their actions imposed by the state? Remember, Constitutional rights cannot be limited by law, even if this concept is more honored in the breach than respected by the government
If not, then you should be capable of understanding that there is no right to "freedom of religion" any more than there is a right to "freedom of speech", and that such "freedoms" are falsehoods, invented by men who hated Christendom and sought to bring it down
[Charles] Blow is wrong about one thing: there is no "nation divided against itself", because as I've previously noted, there are not merely two separate nations, there are four. There are the Reds of progressive, secular America, there are the Whites of traditional religious America, there are the Browns of third world America, and there are the Blacks of feral America. They may broadly follow the racial demographics, but the lines are not hard; for example, Charles Blow is a black man who is clearly Red, rather than Black, just as David Brooks is Red, not White.
Given how people have expressed considerable doubt concerning my negative outlook on the continued union of these four Americas, it should be interesting to see how they respond to a black, left-wing New York Times columnist who has, despite our very different perspectives, reached similar conclusions. Note, in particular, that damning admission: "because of dramatic... demographic changes".
The fruits of diversity are bloodshed and war. They always have been. Populations of sufficiently differing time preferences simply cannot live together for long. And the only successful way to keep those fruits from ripening has is a powerful militaristic state willing and able to commit atrocities in order to keep the otherwise warring parties in line. Consider, for example, the difference between segregation as it was practiced in the pre-1960s USA and the way it was practiced in the USSR and China. Or the way it is presently practiced in Africa with the various tribes vying for power in the national government.
It won't surprise me if those who oppose deportations now and are horrified by the WWII Japanese internment live long enought to one day find themselves supporting a Red American government that is engaged in internal deportations of Hispanics to its Aztlan Autonomous Oblast.
If a woman wishes to preserve her right to sexually reject a man at will, she has a perfectly viable means of doing so. Don't get married. It's really not that hard. But, once married, neither husband nor wife has the right to reject the other's marital claims. This does not mean that it is wise for anyone to abuse one's marital rights, as doing so on a regular basis will tend to lead to the legally correct abrogation of those rights. One is always free to respect the other's wishes and refrain from exercising one's rights in the same way that most Americans fail to exercise their right to bear arms most of the time. But failing to exercise one's rights is not the same as failing to possess them.
Men contemplating marriage would be wise to sound out their prospective brides on this issue. If a woman believes in the concept of marital rape, absolutely do not marry her! It would make no sense whatsoever to marry a woman who believes that being married to her grants her husband no more sexual privilege than the next unemployed musician who happens to catch her eye. And if a woman who believes in the existence of marital rape pushes you for marriage, just assure her that while you respect the institution, you believe it is much more important to defend her unqualified right to say no.
That the "marital rape" concept is not only legally oxymoronic, but deeply undesirable for both sexes, is exemplified by its implications for sex that by definition precludes consent. Let's face it, any man or woman who believes in the criminalization of wake-me-up sex is not an individual with whom any decently hedonistic being would want to be saddled for a lifetime.
[On warrior women in fantasy]
Has Phony ever hit a woman? Has he ever seen a woman's head snap back, seen her knees buckle, and stood over her as she lays crumpled on the floor? Has he ever bloodied a woman's nose or blackened a woman's eyes? Has he ever toyed with a woman desperately trying to lay a hand on him before stepping forward and flattening her with a single jab?
I have. It wasn't even amusing because it was so easy. I had a harder time fighting a well-trained eleven year old boy. I wasn't even throwing any combinations or throwing my strikes at more than half-force, and that was still enough to lay them out. If you are a man who hasn't ever hit a woman in the face, or if you are a woman who hasn't ever been beaten up by a man, your opinion on the subject is guaranteed to be irrelevant. The cumulative difference in speed, strength, and mass simply has to be experienced to be believed.
I sincerely encourage anyone who wishes to write about women warriors to visit a full-contact dojo and ask to spar a few rounds with the opposite sex. They will accommodate you and it will be an eye-opening experience.
There is a certain irony in that the more traditionally oriented male - the sort who thinks date rape is a myth - is far more likely to save a woman from another man than the sort who enjoys posturing about how terrible rape is and how he would never rape a woman.
If the definition of rape is stretched so far to include women who have not given consent, then I am absolutely a serial rapist. So, too, is every man I know. And if that makes me a rapist, I shall endeavor to somehow survive with that upon my conscience.
[You're a mean one, Mr. Day, you really are a Beale]
The reason the ideological Right has limited cultural power these days is because the Left, with (((David Brooks))) and his nation in the vanguard, have worked very hard for at least four generations at attempting to eradicate everything from the culture that betrays any sign of Christian influence or Western tradition.
And the reason that they are failing despite their near-complete control of the cultural high ground is because they have literally nothing to offer in its place. All they ever had to offer was reaction, negation, ugliness, filth, and snark. Sure, you can adulterate Christmas, and you can substitute Silver Bells, shopping, Santa, and Seasons Greetings for Silent Night, Hark the Herald Angels Sing, Scrooge, and We Wish You a Merry Christmas, but at the end of the day, either you come up with a substitute or your efforts will eventually prove futile.
What did they come up with in over a century of frantic effort? Festivus, the Hannukah Aardvark, and horrible movies that are bad even by Seth Rogen's standards. Hardly an attractive exchange for even the most godless pagan.
We not only can win this cultural war, we cannot lose it so long as we continue to create things that are good, beautiful, and true, and continue to refuse entrance to the infiltrating wormtongues who are always there with their helpful blandishments and seductive offers to sell your creative soul to Mammon.
So let them turn Elsa of the Crowleyesque anthem into a lesbian. Let them transform Superman into an SJW superhero fighting for global migration, one-world government, and AIPAC. Let them continue to preen and posture and sneer and snark in futility. It will avail them nothing. Like their Father the Devil, they cannot create, they can only corrupt. And that is why the greatness of Tolkien, of Howard, of Lovecraft, and of Wright will continue to be recognized over time despite the Left's best efforts to denigrate and diminish it.
As it happens, the ruination of the United States is the result of the "contributions" of two groups of immigrants, Irish and Jewish.
For those who talk about how immigrants assimilate within a generation or two, it would be wise to note the generational status of the three men chiefly responsible for that ruination, Philip Hart, Emanuel Celler, and Edward Kennedy.
Philip Hart - Third-generation Irish immigrant
Emanuel Celler - Third-generation Jewish immigrant
Edward Kennedy - Fourth-generation Irish immigrant
It is clear that even to the fourth generation, immigrants are prone to maintaining their primary loyalty to their ethnic group, if not their nation of origin, rather than to the nation to which they have nominally grafted themselves. They are guided by the principle of "what is good for the Irish" or "what is good for the Jews" rather than "what is good for the Americans" or even "what is good for the USA".
No immigrant, or child, grandchild, or great-grandchild of immigrants, should have been permitted to vote or hold any office. Had the USA instituted such a policy, it might still be America instead of a multi-ethnic, white-minority idiocracy on the verge of crumbling into violent conflict and ethnic partition, as the ignorant public entertains itself by pretending to believe that Hamilton was either black or Hispanic.
tz: About the medical establishment:
Doctors don't know nearly as much as they think they know. A few examples:
1. I once cut a nerve in my wrist trying to carve a puppet like in the movie Puppet Master 3. This caused part of the palm of my left hand, about the size of a half dollar to go numb. The doctor said it would take 6-8 months for the nerve to regrow, if it ever did. However, I taped a magnet to my wrist, and could feel my entire hand again in 3 weeks. Later, I mailed a magnetic necklace to a friend of mine whose daughter had been in pain for over a year after getting whiplash in a car accident. The pain was gone in a month, after wearing the necklace. Yet doctors insist that the healing power of magnets is 'nonsense'.
2. A surgeon in France who developed reconstructive surgery for victims of female genital mutilation had to first do some autopsies on a lot of female corpses, because he discovered that the diagrams of the internal structure of the female cl****is in all medical textbooks were complete wrong, the structure was drawn much smaller than it actually was. As it turned out, the original illustrations dated back to the 1800's, and the internal structure of that body part was drawn far smaller than it really is, for social reasons, and the error was simply repeated with all new editions of all medical textbooks without anyone questioning it for over 100 years.
3. Western doctors dismissed acupuncture as nonsense or a placebo. Until is was shown that it worked on animals. The ancient Chinese actually developed acupuncture in a fairly scientific (if someone sadistic) manner, by poking slaves with needles at various points on their bodies and observing the results.
4. Such things as the belief in amethyst crystals being effective in helping combat alcoholism are currently dismissed as 'nonsense'. Which to my mind is wrong, without first doing an experiment to prove or disprove the matter. It wouldn't be hard to do such an experiment, get together a group of alcoholics that all want to go on the wagon, give some of them a real amethyst pendant, give some of them a clear quartz pendant, give some a pendant of purple glass, and give some nothing at all. Then in 6 months, see if there is any difference between the groups in how many of them were able to stay on the wagon. And just in case amethyst might only work in large quantities, do another experiment, involving putting large amethyst boulders (and various control objects) under the beds of the alcoholics.
It is readily observable that there is no such thing as a static sexual abnormality. Was Ian Watkins always a pedophile? Was the thrice-married Meredith Baxter Birney always a lesbian? The dynamic sin model explains observable human behavior rather better than most of the scientific alternatives, particularly the static ones. Regardless, whether it is a simple choice or a curable psychological disorder, the idea that homosexuality is always and necessarily a permanently fixed orientation is demonstrably false. Any homosexual who dares to question this, much less dispute it, must be asked why they deny science. And statistics.
UPDATE: This objection on Twitter made me laugh. Critics, it might help to keep in mind you're dealing with a superintelligence before you say something stupid, all right? I'm smarter than you are. Just assume that even if you don't believe it; it may save you some embarrassment. That doesn't mean I'm always right, it just means that you're probably wrong.
Buttercup Dew: "Your logic doesn't follow? I was "bisexual" as a teen, now unambiguously homosexual. You decided conclusion and worked backwards."
To which I responded: "No, my logic is correct. You prove the point. The fact of the delta is what matters, not the direction."
You know, in a monarchy, a black man would have never have ruled you. The tragedy, the calamity was the first election of Hussein. That a majority of white Europeans and their stupid womyn would vote a black man of them.
That is unrighteous.
As hussein is unrighteous, it shows the massive unrighteousness in the American electorate. It is the educational system and the capture of the universities by leftists.
Demographics is destiny.
And Mitt was an "ex-democrat"; another Dole/McCain kinda guy. Stood for nothing. But this all could have been a forgone conclusion had the Republican Party and Mitt's campaign brought up the Natural Born status of Obama. No Republican brought up the Natural Born Status of Obama. If the Republican party can not uphold the law, it doesn't deserve to win. No republican challenged the legal right of Obama to run for the US presidency.
Modern republicanism is the vehicle for Judeo-Masonic-Bolshevism and its drive for globalization. America is a false construct built on lies. America has always been progressive and America is the flagship for the destruction of Europeans.
Good riddance of America. Glad that the repukes have their noses rubbed in the sh#$!
[From “The Devil's own”]
It is not uncommon for people to ask me why I treat atheists, particularly those of the militant or evangelical variety, with such open contempt. The reason is very simple. The only way they can be reached, the only way they can even begin thinking rationally about Christianity instead of thoughtlessly reacting to it, is for their pride to be broken first. Since their pride tends to revolve around their intelligence, it usually requires a higher intelligence to break it and I happen to be reasonably well-equipped in that regard.
It's not knowledge that keeps men like Phil from submitting to the Most High, to the Creator God of the Universe, it is pride in the independent consciousness that they possess as a gift from the very tyrant they refuse to serve. As an arrogant man myself, I recognize that fierce and independent pride when I see it. I even admire it, to a certain extent. But I also know its futility, and worse, its sheer pointlessness.
Does the jar demand the potter admire its beauty? Is the jar foolish enough to be proud of its existence separate from the very mind that conceived it, the very hands that shaped it and brought it into being? Does the jar so lack perception that it fails to grasp it can be unmade as easily as it was made by its maker?
In what, O jar, is your petty pride?
How strange it is that those who refuse to grovel before God so readily bow before other men and genuflect before some of the most foolish ideas of Man ever conceived. And how pointless, when we know that one day every knee will bow, and every tongue will confess, that Jesus Christ is Lord. Serve freely or defy as you see fit, because every path leads to the same destination, submission before the Almighty.
[Emphasis added to give you an idea what Vox considers wacky social justice nonsense]
This isn't Jon's fight. It certainly isn't the comics journalists' fight; they are on the other side. This is a fight for everyone, of the Left and of the Right, who doesn't want to be totally controlled by the social justice warriors. This is for everyone who wants to be able to write what he wants to write, to draw what he wants to draw, and to tell the stories that he wants to tell without facing immediate disemployment and permanent blackballing from the industry.
This is the GamerGate situation on steroids. It is as if all the game developers teamed up with the game journos against the gamers rather than quietly siding with the gamers.
Everyone to the left of me desperately wants to believe that a line will somehow be drawn between them and the evil crimethinkers of the extreme right. But Chuck Dixon, Will Caligan, and Jon Malin all demonstrate that the line will always and continuously move leftward until every individual and organization in the comics industry are forced to converge to the highest abstract standard of social and distributive justice in the utmost degree.
That is the goal. Since 1861, that has always been the goal.
[From "The media discovers 2033"]
Laura Ingraham talked to a historian about the coming breakup of the USA on Fox:
Ingraham: Historian Craig Shirley writes our country is in a vicious toxic relationship with itself. Like any toxic relationship, the only inevitable eventuality is that it will mercifully end with breakup[…]
Shirley: No, I don’t think so, Laura. Look, we had national glue in the past to hold us together as a nation. We had Manifest Destiny, the Great Depression, we had wars and other activities. Covid should have been the national glue holding us together but it wasn’t. In fact, it drove us further apart[…]
Demographics is destiny. The dirt is not magic. The civnats have inverted reality and their basic concept entirely backwards: Mexicans are not people who happen to live inside lines on a map called Mexico, Mexico is where Mexicans live. The breakup of the USA is already inevitable and it has been since 1965. But now the concept is being normalized.
Therefore, it's time to make sure you're on the right side of the borders-to-be.
[From "Neo-Darwinism is dead"]
Some of you will recall that I thoroughly, and in some detail, demonstrated the way in which, according to the present scientific understanding of astrophysics, genetic biology, and mathematics, the modern Neo-Darwinian synthesis of the theory of evolution by (mostly) natural selection is impossible, caught as it is between the Scylla of a fixed amount of time and the Charybdis of the number of fixed mutations required to take place in the evolution between one historical species and a present species
[…]
If we are told that a football team has gained 1,500 yards on the ground while averaging three yards per rushing play, and we know that the maximum number of offensive plays per team per game is 84, then we know, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that the yards reported were not gained in a single 60-minute game. They could not have been. It is impossible
[…]
In like manner, the number of fixed mutations that are presently observed to distinguish two species[…]are considerably - CONSIDERABLY - in excess of the maximum amount of time that could have passed since the speciation process is believed to have begun. There is only one defense against this straightforward mathematical observation, and that is the idea that enough parallel mutations happened very, very quickly to significantly reduce the average time
[…]
Discoveries are methodically reducing the already insufficient time
[…]
There was even more genetic diversity among early humans than previously believed
Why are believers so hostile toward atheists? Is there anything atheists can say about our atheism -- or even just about our lives -- that won't make people look at us with revulsion?
The short answer is no, not really, because the self-styled atheist is usually an intrinsically repellent individual for the very reasons that caused him to primarily identify himself on the peculiar basis of one very specific non-belief. The reason that believers, agnostics, and even other atheists all dislike atheists who identify themselves as atheists is because they don't like annoying, dishonest, and literally self-righteous people with social handicaps who reject every objective moral or ethical code. You don't have to be an asshole to call yourself an atheist, but it quite clearly helps. After all, as the 2008 ARIS study showed, the even vast majority of atheists are not willing to call themselves atheists!
On a final note, let me explain one aspect of this very slowly for the less socially adept atheists. Let us suppose, for the sake of argument, that you are correct and that there is no God. We shall suppose that you are right and I am wrong. Let us also suppose, again for the sake of argument, that I am more beautiful than you are. Now, neither your being more right than I am nor my being more beautiful than you are has to have any affect on how we regard the other living his life. But how would you look at me if I went so far as to define and label who I am as being "not ugly like you"? What would you say if I asked you if there was anything I could say about your relative lack of beauty when compared to me that would not make you look at me with revulsion? And why do you think you can do that sort of thing to believers without suffering the obvious social consequences?
[From "Memorializing a massive mistake"]
Already, nearly one-third of Americans either aren't sure or believe that US involvement in WWII was a mistake[…]WWII was a massive mistake for Americans, a far more catastrophic and costly mistake than Korea, Vietnam and Afghanistan combined
[…]
If every U.S. citizen were to read Stalin's War[…]by Sean McMeekin that relies heavily upon Soviet records that were not available before 1989, that 32 percent figure would rise to at least 98 percent
[…]
President Roosevelt didn't make the right decision[…]Both President Roosevelt and Winston Churchill were very clearly taking orders from someone, presumably someone connected to the small group of Jews who declared war on Germany in 1933[…]both elected leaders were instructed to back Stalin without question
[…]
Stalin not only double-crossed Roosevelt and Churchill, he also eventually betrayed their masters[…]Today's neoclowns now reside in the United States and are still banging the drum for a revenge war with Russia
[…]
Roosevelt summarily rejected Germany's attempt to surrender to the Western Allies in April 1943, despite the fact that Stalin was not only willing to accept an end to the war, but offered Germany a separate peace in two rounds of negotiations held in Stockholm through the spring of 1943[…]Of course Hitler, being an idiot, didn't accept the Soviet offer
[From "The decline and fall of Minneapolis"]
The epicenter of the George Floyd riots were a little less than one mile down Lake Street from my high school. Now Somalis are shooting it out two blocks away from where I first met Spacebunny:
[…]
Minnesota liberals are just about the most literally suicidal people on the planet. And having grown up among them, they deserve exactly what they are getting.
I don't understand the Scandinavian societal death wish, but for all of their once-formidable legacy, they appear to have somehow been transformed into the dodo birds of humanity. Perhaps it is because historically, they were always the invaders and never the invaded.
Saint Breivik, pray for us.
So much for "scientific consensus"
The models were wrong, the predictions were wrong, and now the basic assumptions underlying the hypotheses appear to be wrong too:
The Economist reports on some new cutting-edge climate research published in a peer-reviewed article in Science that challenges some core green doom warnings. In particular, the study suggests that the probable sensitivity of the earth’s climate to increases in the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is far lower than the assumptions traditionally used by the (already discredited) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Not only that, the authors find that the existence of a so-called “fat tail” — the notion that extreme temperature changes in response to increases in atmospheric CO2 are likely — is illusory.
The failure of the global warming "science" needs to be rubbed hard and repeatedly into the noses of all the scientists and science fetishists who claim that science cannot be questioned by non-scientists, or indeed, that their statements bear any more weight than those made by the fat homeless guy living in van DOWN BY THE RIVER!
[From “Home of the Atheidiot”, written in 2007]
This atheidiot clearly doesn't know that "atheist" Sweden had a state Lutheran church until 2000. Even today, only 23 percent of Swedes believe that there is not "any sort of spirit, god, or life force". That's why Sweden is only dying out instead of actively killing itself.
[From "The political answer"]
It's been 100 years since the Emergency Quota Act transformed the USA into the most powerful nation on Earth by limiting immigration and restricting it to compatible nations:
[…]
The Emergency Quota Act restricted the number of immigrants admitted from any country annually to 3% of the number of residents from that same country living in the United States as of the U.S. Census of 1910. This meant that people from northern European countries had a higher quota and were more likely to be admitted to the U.S. than people from eastern Europe, southern Europe, or other, non-European countries[…]
100 years later, it is clear that if the USA is going to survive another decade or two intact - which it almost certainly isn't - a new Emergency Quota Act is required, albeit one that restores the 1910 demographics. Since this is a political solution, and since four years of the Trump administration didn't even manage to seriously slow the invasive flow from around the world, we can safely discount any chance of this proven measure being adopted in any meaningful timeframe
The much more likely alternative is that those demographics are more or less restored in a rump state after a considerable amount of war and ethnic cleansing over the territory of the former empire. Unless, of course, China manages to establish a Chung Kuo-like hegemony over North America, which at this point is probably more likely that the sensible solution
[From “Now, here's a thought”]
The Burmese military deals forthrightly with election fraud in Myanmar:
The leaders of the Southeast Asian country of Myanmar have been arrested by the nation’s military for allegedly committing massive vote fraud during the November 2020 elections. Myanmar’s State Counsellor Aung San Suu Kyi and President Win Myint were both arrested in morning raids on Monday by the nation’s armed forces, after widespread allegations that they had committed election fraud.[…]
It's informative to observe that the Burmese military is more conscientious about its duty to the Burmese constitution than the U.S. military is to its supposed duty to the U.S. constitution. At this point, no one around the world can possibly take the whole "land of the free and home of the brave" act seriously any more. Not when China is observably more serious about punishing official corruption and Myanmar is observably more serious about preventing voter fraud.
I've said for two decades that Italy is less corrupt than the United States, because in the USA, the system isn't corrupted, it's the corruption that is the system.
It appears the Burmese military understands very well who their real enemies are.
Military leaders, who claim the vote was fraudulent, have now declared a year-long state of emergency, transferred all power to Senior General Min Aung Hlaing, appointed Vice President Myint Swe - a former general - as acting president, and closed all banks until further notice.
[[From “From each... to each....”]
"the tax cuts may have helped you," Sen. Clinton said. "We're saying that for America to get back on track, we're probably going to cut that short and not give it to you. We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."
And who was it that was saying that modern Democrats are NOT left-wing? This is the message of Marx, of Lenin, of Hitler, of Mussolini, and every left-wing demagogue since Socrates who would elevate the collective over the individual. It is not possible to subscribe to both human rights and left-wing collectivist ideology. The two are in inherent and fundamental contradiction, which is why decent, well-meaning left-wingers so often find themselves trapped in a maelstrom of cognitive dissonance.
He does not answer when people cry out because of the arrogance of the wicked. Indeed, God does not listen to their empty plea; the Almighty pays no attention to it. How much less, then, will he listen when you say that you do not see him....
- Job 35:12-14
"The true light that gives light to everyone was coming into the world. He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God."
- John 1:9-12
Or, to put it in omniderigent terms, atheists are among the vessels made to be broken.
The combination of ignorance, epistemic incoherence, and ill-founded arrogance that is necessary to label oneself an atheist is as distasteful to the average individual as it is contemptible to the intellectual. When one combines those qualities with the social autism and hate-filled evangelicalism that is all too commonly displayed by atheists, it is a wonder that they are tolerated as much as they are. All evangelicalism is not the same. If someone is attempting to save you from fiery destruction, their intentions toward you are clearly good. If, on the other hand, someone is attempting to kick the crutch upon which you are leaning out from under you, their intentions are clearly evil.
Few, if any, believers are hostile to people who simply don't believe in God on the mere basis of their not sharing the believer's beliefs. Pity is the much more common attitude. But hostility towards anti-religious, untrustworthy individuals with evil intentions is not only explicable, it is entirely justified. ...
The fact is that I neither despise nor pity those who don't believe in God. My opinion about them is similar to what it would be of those who don't believe in gravity because they cannot see it. (See the actual force, not its effects.) Because the effects of rejecting God are both clearly delineated and observable, I simply find it a little strange that some people cannot see those effects and on that basis deny the existence of the causal factor. But that doesn't bother or upset me, it merely causes me to mentally shrug my shoulders and think, "well, good luck with that".
On the other hand, having a very small degree of orange-green color blindness, I can completely understand the bewildered feeling of an individual who simply does not see the big orange letter on the green background to which another individual is pointing, wondering what on Earth he could possibly be seeing.
The atheists with whom I do have a problem, and for whom I regularly demonstrate a great deal of contempt, are the liars, the cheats, the deceivers, and the malicious. If one genuinely believes that religion is a crutch for the weak and psychologically needed, what does it say about those who are so eager to kick that crutch out from under those who clearly need its support? And, as an armchair intellectual, I find their willful ignorance of history, religion, and philosophy to be as astonishing as it is irksome. Intelligent? I don't even consider them to be educated. To claim that religion either causes war or is an important strategic element of war is to be every bit as ignorant as the apocryphal Flat Earth proponents so often cited; the significant difference being that the Religion Causes War Society not only exists but is even willing to expound their ludicrous and historically illiterate arguments in public.
[From “Your daily reminder”]
You can allow an African to marry your posterity. You can load them down with money, titles, precious jewels, and property. You can give them fame, fortune, and family. And they will still not even hesitate to call you racist the moment it suits them to do so:
Meghan Markle today used her bombshell Oprah Winfrey interview to accuse the Royal Family of having 'concerns' about 'how dark' Archie's skin would be before he was born because she is mixed-race and Harry is white.
[…]
Unlike most other peoples, Europeans have always been suckers for sob stories. There is a reason you don't see UNICEF and the WWF advertising in Asian nations. There is a reason it was British pop stars declaring they were the world and trying to raise money for starving Ethiopians in the 80s, and not Russian or Brazilian pop stars. But Europeans are particular suckers for African grifters. I've known two of the latter fairly well, and you would be astonished at how many second chances both of them were given by every single white authority in their lives. I mean, their second chances were measured in the dozens.
[From “Socialist synchronicities”]
Hitler denied the National Socialists were Fascists. Mussolini likewise denied it. Both men insisted that they were socialists. But what did they know?
…
The fact that our society has moved significantly to the Left since FDR does not change the fact that things such as mass public education, social security and progressive taxation are the primary elements of a left-wing ideology. Considering that 40 percent of the American landmass is not privately owned, it should come as no surprise that we find it hard to admit the socialism of the WWII-era monsters, because when we actually examine their ideology and governance, it is far too similar to looking in a mirror.
As monstrous as the Holocaust was, it was not the be all and end all of National Socialism. While Hitler was obsessed with Jews, killing them was obviously not his top priority, considering that he didn't get around to it until he'd been power for almost a decade and gotten a few minor details out of the way first, such as conquering Western Europe.
There’s a new religion growing in our world.
A new Marxist faith.
A new Woke orthodoxy.
A new kind of Luciferian worship that is as old as sin and idolatry itself.
Eight weeks ago I stood in the pulpit of this church and declared that the formal organization called Black Lives Matter was demonic in both origin and nature. That BLM isn’t, as it purports, an organization promoting racial justice – but, rather, is an organization that is actively working to undermine the knowledge and worship of the One True God.
Eight weeks ago I kicked off this sermon series aiming to help us understand the nature of our enemies by calling out this one organization, but BLM does not stand alone against God in this world.
Instead, what we have been seeing over the past six months, and what has become increasingly clear in the two months I’ve been preaching this series, is that this new Globalist religion has many apostles and adherents in the world – many individuals, groups, and organizations that have bowed the knee and are now demanding the same:
[*]Antifa
[*]Hollywood
[*]Disney Corp.
[*]Google/FB/Twitter
[*]the Main Stream Media
along with Governors, Mayors, and other elected officials, at almost every level of government and in both political parties, who have pledged their allegiance to this new Globalist, Marxist, Anti-Christian religion.
And believe me when I call it a religion, because it literally has all the makings.
There are, for instance, blasphemy laws in this new religion.
Just try saying, “All Lives Matter” or “Blue Lives Matter” in public or on social media. Try to link to a video with medical professionals breaking ranks and speaking to the efficacy of Hydroxychloroquine and see how long it stays up. …
[From "Pence cucks... and runs"]
Just in: Vice President Pence says in new statement that he cannot unilaterally subvert the election and grant Trump a second term: “No Vice President in American history has ever asserted such authority.”
I think we can safely assume that while Trump's second term is still in question, Mike Pence will not serve a second term as Vice-President.
The lesson, as always, is this: never trust a conservative. They are practitioners of the art of surrender.
The ball is now squarely in President Trump's court. Is he a man or is he just another big-talking mouse? History, and the fate of the USA, await his decision.
[…]
UPDATE: The Defense Department has just denied a request by DC officials to deploy the National Guard to the US Capitol.
Sounds like an insurrection to me. The President clearly has no choice but to invoke the Insurrection Act.
[…]
UPDATE: Listening to Anderson Cooper’s voice shake as he tries to explain why it was right for blacks and gays to protest but wrong for the DC protestors to take over the Capital building is hysterical. You can hear the fear in the voices of the CNN commentators. They are TERRIFIED that Trump is crossing the Rubicon.
UPDATE: Just a thought. We're told that Pence, Pelosi, and the Congress critters have been removed to a secure location. But we haven't been told that they've been released…
[From “Revisiting the case against science”]
According to Sam Harris and other atheists, humanity is at dire risk of extinction. The causes of those risks, be they anthropogenic global warming or nuclear weapons, can be directly traced to science. It is obviously not religion that poses these deadly dangers; eliminating all religion from the planet would only reduce the total risk of war by approximately 7 percent, and would not reduce the risk of global warming at all. Therefore, if these dangers are to be taken seriously, then it is clear that it is the very concepts of science as body of knowledge and science as method which must be reconsidered and potentially rejected as a lethal threat to humanity, not religion.
A professor of mathematics complains ...
For complex historical reasons, Americans have long privately dismissed scientists and mathematicians as impractical and elitist, even while publicly paying lip service to them. One reason is that an abstract, scientific approach to problems and issues often leads to conclusions that are at odds with religious and cultural beliefs and scientists are sometimes tone-deaf to the social environment in which they state their conclusions. A more politically sensitive approach to problems and issues, on the other hand, often leads to positions that simply don’t jibe with the facts, no matter how delicately phrased....
Dinosaurs cavorting with humans, climate scientists cooking up the global warming “hoax,” the health establishment using vaccines to bring about socialism – it’s hard to imagine mainstream leaders in other advanced economies not laughing at such claims.
I always enjoy the left-liberal arguments which revolve around the idea that because someone, somewhere, might be laughing at an idea, it must not be true. And, of course, given that there is no global warming and climate scientists did cook up one of the most colossal scams in human history, the professor manages to explain more cogently than he imagined why Americans, for all their flaws, still aren't dumb enough to vote for scientists.
The problem isn't so much that "an abstract, scientific approach to problems and issues often leads to conclusions that are at odds with religious and cultural beliefs", it is that ideology hidden under a veneer of an abstract, scientific approach to problems and issues often leads to conclusions that are at odds with readily observable reality.
Americans don't refuse to vote for scientists because they think scientists threaten their beliefs, Americans refuse to vote for them because they conclude, on the basis of considerable evidence, scientists are foolish and stupid.
[From "Gamergating Arizona"]
The Donald and the Arizona Republican Party calls for Team Trump to pour it on the corrupt Maricopa County officials:
The Maricopa Board of Supervisors are pleading to make the phone calls stop. They have had to put more staff on the phones to keep the lines up and operating. Hopefully they figure out soon that an audit is all the voters want. Do that small thing, the phone calls will end quick!
Maricopa Board of Supervisors: 602-506-3415.
Shut up and email because the ride never ends.
[From “The end of the legal option”]
The US Supreme Court has made it official: you steal it, you keep it:
Former president Donald Trump has seen his last remaining chance to reverse the outcome of November’s election slip away, with the Supreme Court refusing to take up his last challenge to Wisconsin’s voting process.
This concludes the judicial portion of the program. The legislative portion ended some time ago. The question is, is there a third act in the cards?
A reminder: please do not EVER ask me for sources. I will not provide them and I will delete your comment requesting them. I am not interested in providing sources on demand, and I do not care in the slightest if you decide to ignore what I say because I will not provide sources to you on demand.
I've been doing this since 2003. And one thing I have observed over the years not one single person who didn't believe the facts I cited and demanded sources in order to confirm that I was relaying the information correctly has ever subsequently changed his position as a result of being provided with an accurate source that states precisely what I said it did.
Furthermore, the instinctive demand for sources is a strong, though not reliable, indicator of gamma. Yes, there is occasionally the rare individual who actually intends to examine the source in order to do his own analysis, but such individuals are usually inclined to simply resort to a search engine rather than ask someone else for a hyperlink to a readily available URL or PDF file.
I don't provide sources for the same reason I don't provide explanations anymore: providing either is merely viewed as an invitation to argue over the source or the explanation. Since I'm not interested in doing that, I'm shutting down the whole process before it starts. This is a blog, not a science journal, what I write are opinions, hypotheses, and logical conclusions, not scientific papers, and I am under no obligation to undergo any peer review process here.
Q was a scam to lure patriots into complacency. Alex Jones was right all along.
Mailvox: Breivik: saint or monster?
First, let me say that I have family members who are a) devout Christians, b) good men, and c) are responsible for killing considerably more people than Anders Breivik. I also have a number of friends whose confirmed kills are in double-digits. Nor am I at all persuaded by the notion that the God who loved David, who slew "his ten thousands", or the Jesus who praised the faith of the Roman centurion, is anywhere nearly as appalled by war as most men would like to believe.
... I tend to regard the Norwegians, and the "Norwegians", killed by Breivik as having been more culpable on average than the average Japanese, Korean, or Chinese infantryman were. ...
Breivik did not target innocents. ... He struck a highly effective blow against the political machine that is still actively engaged in attacking his people and attempting to eradicate them. ...
The fact is that Anders Breivik not only gave up his freedom to strike back at the quislings who are actively seeking to destroy your nation and your people, but he did so alone, and in the full knowledge that he would be hated for it by many of the very people he sought to save.
...
Of course, those who are not religious cannot fathom that kind of love, which is why they simply deem him mad, and a monster, and try to avoid thinking about the future. ... While he did a terrible thing, it is far more terrible that he was put into a position where he felt the need to do it in the first place. Focus your anger, and your disgust, for those who knowingly created the untenable situation.
In any event, my expectation is that if the West, and Norway, survive the ongoing clash of civilizations, Breivik will be considered its first hero. And if it does not, well, then Breivik will be regarded in much the same way that Robert E. Lee, Jefferson Davis, and P.G.T. Beauregard are presently regarded in New Orleans, as an evil monster who was "on the wrong side of humanity."
To Hell with secular society
I no longer have any use for it. None whatsoever. I was raised and indoctrinated in the ideal of the "separation of church and state" ... . But this has finally convinced me that the Muslims have the right idea and secularism merits nothing more than being stamped out, ruthlessly and without remorse:
It is a world-renowned work of literature and one of the foundation stones of the Italian language, but Dante’s Divine Comedy has been condemned as racist, homophobic, anti-Islamist and anti-Semitic. The classic work should be removed from school curricula, according to Gherush 92 ...
Dante’s epic is “offensive and discriminatory” and has no place in a modern classroom, said Valentina Sereni, the group’s president....
Schoolchildren and university students who studied the work lacked "the filters" to appreciate its historical context and were being fed a poisonous diet of anti-Semitism and racism, the group said. It called for the Divine Comedy to be removed from schools and universities or at least have its more offensive sections fully explained.
... The Papal States produced La Commedia Divina, Catholic Italy produced Vivaldi, Anglican England produced Shakespeare, Christian Austria produced Mozart and Haydn. What have two generations of modern secularism produced despite its lofty claims concerning the female liberation and the unchaining of the human spirit? Avatar, Twilight, and The Vagina Monologues.
Camille Paglia was right. "Great art can be made out of love for religion as well as rebellion against it. But a totally secularized society with contempt for religion sinks into materialism and self-absorption and gradually goes slack, without leaving an artistic legacy."
Secular progressives are totalitarians and book-burners every bit as fanatical as religious extremists they decry. They always have been, they just build their cultural walls one stealthy and dishonest brick at a time.
The problem isn't that Africans or Central Americans cannot ever be civilized or that there is a civilization gene, the problem is that like domesticating an animal species, civilizing an entire culture is a process that takes hundreds of years. Consider, for example, how long it took the barbarians of Britain and Germany to go from the naked pagan barbarism described by Julius Caesar to the heights of Christian civilization that produced Mozart and the chamber orchestras. The nations of the West doesn't have that much time, especially when they can no longer serve as a strong and stable models, having invited the enervating peoples into their civilizations. Moreover, in addition to attempting to civilize the barbarians inside their borders rather than outside them, they are trying to do so without the benefit of Christianity, which historically played a powerful role in the civilization of the white European barbarians.
… the retreat of civilization cannot continue forever, as history shows the barbarians will simply expand their dysfunctional and parasitical cultures until they are forcibly stopped and turned back. Every civilization needs its Marius, its Qin Shi Huang, its Charles Martel, or will be overrun and die.
Feudalism and the age of aristocracy grew out of a need for protection. It is now becoming increasingly clear why the age of democracy is over and how the coming aristocracy is going to take shape and come to power.
If, as it is now widely assumed, President Trump's courage failed him, his intrinsic Boomer civic nationalism won out over his genuine patriotism, and he failed to seize the historic opportunity that lay before him, it appears much of the good work he accomplished over the last four years will be rapidly undone.
[...]
It's hard to comprehend that President Trump is willing to allow all of this to happen to the people about whom he obviously cares so much, and to the nation that he loves. He still has 17 minutes left, but at this point, it's hard to blame anyone who believes his courage failed him in the end.
UPDATE: Joe Biden has been officially sworn in by John Roberts. However, Washington DC is still occupied by troops. Focus on the material possibilities, not the superficial ceremonies. In other words, as always, wait 48 hours before reaching any conclusions.
UPDATE: Just a random thought. It's unlikely, but it is going to be extremely amusing if "10 days of darkness" turns out to be a reference to how long Biden is permitted to pretend he is President. I always thought that was more likely than a reference to a communications blackout or show trials.
...
The correct answer concerning the evidence for God is precisely the same as it is for practically everything else in the historical record, which is to say the copious documentary evidence available. We can no more reasonably doubt the existence of God than we can doubt the existence of Alexander the Great, Abraham Lincoln, or any other human being who existed before the invention of audio and video recording and for whom there are physical artifacts that support the documentary evidence.
Can skeptics produce plausible explanations for why so much false documentary evidence of God exists if He does not? Sure. Just as I can plausibly explain that the myth of George Washington was invented in order to provide Americans with founding Romulus-style figure of reverence in order to compensate for their lack of kings and common history. I mean, there were no cherry trees in Virginia. And isn't it ludicrous to take literally the myth of Washington's rjection of the proffered crown when the story is a patently a straightforward imitation of the Roman dictator Cincinnatus.
...
It's one thing to claim that your brain must be talking to itself when you're the only one who hears it. It's another when other people hear it too.
Most modern Christian apologists are incompetent because they approach the discourse as a chance to explicate theology rather than understanding that it is a form of intellectual combat where the goal is to discredit the interlocutor. So, like Hovind, they explicate a little theology that looks like an irrelevant evasion while simultaneously managing to get intellectually discredited by young boys. ...
First things first. Destroy the interlocutor. Answer every question directly, on his terms, and then go after the vulnerabilities they reveal with a flamethrower. Only then, when you are standing upon whatever quivering ashes remain, can you explicate further if you wish.
Unlike the small-a de facto atheist who merely doesn't happen to believe that gods exist, the self-styled atheist is much more accurately described as an anti-religionist in general and anti-Christian in particular. And again, only a socially autistic Capital-A atheist would find it hard to understand why religious people might be hostile towards anti-religious people who actively want to eliminate their holidays, their jobs, and in some cases, even their lives.
Moreover, no one likes a liar and most atheists lie about the source of their atheism. ...
First, while most atheists claim that they gave religion a sincere try, it is patently obvious when they haven't because one can reliably expose an atheist's ignorance of even the most basic Christian doctrine, let alone more obscure religious doctrines, with only two or three simple questions. Second, the age at which most people become atheists indicates that it is almost never an intellectual decision, but an emotional one. (This is why most self-identified atheists are angry, bitter, and immature. The anger, bitterness, and immaturity are usually the cause of the atheism, they are not, as many Christians erroneously suppose, the effects.) ...
Vox: My summary:
* Trump knew Pence was planning the double cross
* He was testing the intensity of his support – would enough show, and would we take it to the Swamp creatures ourselves when called upon? To both he got a resounding yes.
* Disrupting the electoral certification was a bonus. Rudy thought they needed extra time to get help from the state legislatures that were reneging on their elector certifications.
* Pence is another full-on compromised pedo Swamp creature. All he had to do was send the dual slates back to the legislatures. He didn’t have to count squat.
Robert Browning: What did I tell you about the Irish? Mick Pence? They are a treacherous lot, one and all.
George D: I knew this was bound to happen ever since I learned Pence's wife name was Karen.
Crunchy Catchelot: His career will be over - no one will want him.
Pence is going to come out as gay soon and run as a Dem for Senate. Where can I get a bet down on this?
Wait, maybe he's gonna go for "transwoman". Either way, full globohomo switch.
nswhorse: Lin Wood's latest claim about Pence is that he is a literal homopedo. It's certainly plausible, given all we know about ticket takers.
[From “The illogically optimistic atheist”]
I actually agree that a secular person who does right of his own accord is an inherently better person than a believer who does right out of the fear of God. The tragedy of the irrational atheist is that he usually is a genuinely decent individual; it is his own decency that blinds him to the corruption and evil in the hearts of others.
On a societal level, atheism does little harm when it is limited to an abstract-minded elite. But unleashing it on the more carnally minded masses is a recipe for disaster, as both Voltaire and Socrates recognized. What is ironic is that it is actually atheism which is the optimist's fairy tale; Christianity, on the other hand, is a grimly realistic faith which requires the willingness to stare squarely into the abyss and not shirk from what looks back.
Don't get me wrong. I may disagree with them and mock them at times, but I quite like irrational atheists. It's the rational ones who scare me, such as the nihilistic Chinese gentleman who wrote the following words:
Heaven brings forth innumerable things to help man.
Man has nothing with which to recompense Heaven.
Kill. Kill. Kill. Kill. Kill. Kill. Kill.
The reference to Heaven notwithstanding, this is not the composition of a Deist. This is the desperation of a rational man who lacks both faith and Mr. Rasmussen's utilitarian edifice, who sees no reason not to unleash his empty bitterness and fury upon his fellow man.
[From "Did Hitler save Europe?"]
As more evidence concerning the buildup to Operation Barbarossa surfaces, historians are increasingly being forced to confront the case for a very politically incorrect conclusion about World War II
According to Suvorov, if Hitler had not attacked first, the gigantic military power that Stalin had accumulated on the border would have enabled him to reach Berlin without major difficulty and then, in the context of the war, to take control of the continent. Only Hitler’s decision to preempt Stalin’s offensive deprived him of these resources by piercing and disrupting his lines and destroying or seizing about 65% of all his weaponry, some of it still in trains
[…]
Perhaps the most significant fact may be this: the secret protocol of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact gave two-thirds of Poland to the Soviet Union and one-third of it to Germany, despite the fact that Germany was reclaiming a sizable amount of Germany territory that contained German people, while the Soviet action was pure foreign conquest.
Of course, just to stack irony on top of irony, given the horrific state of Western Europe, it's possible that Hitler didn't save Europe by preventing Stalin from overrunning the entire continent, he left it to a worse fate by leaving it under the control of the neo-liberal world order. As awful as communism is for a nation, it's not anywhere nearly as destructive as free imports and free invasion
Mailvox: an insult to Nazis everywhere
Actually, as I have previously written, calling a feminist a "feminazi" is an insult to the German National Socialist Workers Party. Consider the following points:
1. The primary victims of NASDAP ideology were the Jews, a group that the NASDAP intellectuals sincerely believed were secretly dominating the world. Thus, they waged a heroic - albeit insane - twilight struggle in a futile attempt at world revolution to free the German race from what they viewed as its economic oppression. They did so in the awareness that if they failed, their nation would likely be destroyed. They killed approximately six million Jews, most of whom were adults perfectly capable of defending themselves.
2. The primary victims of feminist ideology are unborn children, a group that the feminist leadership sincerely believes handicaps women's ability to obtain college degrees. Thus, they have waged a purely political battle in a futile attempt at ideological revolution to free the female gender from what they viewed as its biological oppression. They did so in the awareness that if they failed, women would be condemned to live hellish lives as wives and mothers. They have killed approximately 50 million children, all of whom were completely unable to defend themselves.
3. The NASDAP leadership directly confronted the militaries of three major world powers, the Soviet Union, Great Britain and the United States of America, in an attempt to establish totalitarian rule.
4. The feminist leadership has attempted to quietly manipulate the American public, using a combination of propaganda, political pressure and constant nagging, in an attempt to establish totalitarian rule.
Any rational human being would harbor more respect for a Nazi than for a feminist. But then, neither Nazism nor feminism is designed to appeal to those handicapped with the ability to think rationally.
As for insulting feminists, I can't think of anything worse to call them than those bloody Belgian bastards....
The Jewish News Syndicate would like everyone to please stop noticing that the US government is increasingly dominated by a small group of foreigners.
[…]
No doubt historians will be puzzled when one day, for absolutely no reason at all, yet another people ruled by a tiny foreign minority rebelled against their foreign rulers and overthrew them despite the best efforts of those rulers to discredit and disqualify the natural objections of their subjects.
After all, if the French rulers of Sicily had only thought to accuse Sicilians who disliked being ruled by foreigners of "anti-frenchitism", then certainly the Sicilian Vespers never would have taken place, right?
Don't be surprised to see more and more Americans aligning themselves with China and Russia against "their own" government. Especially given how that government cannot convincingly hide behind the veil of "democracy" or "the will of the people".
[From “The first to surrender”]
You're not seeing many of their comments thanks to the mods, but the following trolls, shills, and blackpillers are happily posting about how quick they were to give up on President Trump and how they were the first to surrender and embrace the Biden administration. They are not us. None of them will ever be permitted to post here or participate in any of our projects in the future. No doubt we'll be adding more as the day goes on.
[…]
I never want anything to do with any player who gives up and stops playing before the final whistle blows. And I will not permit any such player on my team. If you want to quit, that's fine. If you never want to read this blog again, that's wonderful.
Of course, since they're almost uniformly Gammas, most of them are still trying to comment here. Some are even trying to backtrack and explain that they weren't really blackpilling. No. Just shut up and go away. What part of "no one wants you here" is hard to understand?
Some examples of their attempted contributions to the discourse:
• I guess Vox will just move on an ignore his huge error and failure here. Just as he did when he made an utter fool of himself trying to disprove the theory of evolution to JP Garlepy. Note that Vox merely rehashed creationist pseudoscience and presented it as his own thinking in that session.
[…]
• I beg you, after seventeen years, don't jump off this cliff. You're not a boomer, you don't need to commit intellectual suicide. No one is ever going to listen to you again, except boomers.
[…]
• A bunch of NG drafted in from mainly blue states is not part of some Trump 11th hour storm you clowns. It's over, Trump is a civnat boomer with a gonzo mouth and some comic timing.
Black Lives Matter has been the most useful element in the inevitable transformation of the Republican Party into the American Party since the Rodney King riots in Los Angeles. It's finally beginning to dawn upon US whites what their minority status will actually mean for the nature of the society in which they live.
It won't be too many years before nice liberal suburban whites will be begging the police, the National Guard, and armed local militias to not only open fire on the roving POX mobs that are threatening them in their homes and workplaces, but to go on the offensive and root out their urban strongholds. After all, the whole point of suburbia was to escape the POX and achieve practical segregation by automobile without being accused of racism. Because good schools....
You simply cannot have a neo-European society that is composed of non-Europeans anymore than you can have a Japanese society sans Japanese people. The dirt isn't magic.