Friday, August 26, 2016

Of Science of Morality and Philosophy of Ethics


Much depends on context. Ethics may be imagined to deal with moral principles that a GROUP has formally agreed should govern the behavior of its members. So professions often adopt systems of ethics, such as "legal ethics." Or even an ethics of war, such as the Geneva Convention.

Morality may be imagined to deal with each individual in his own context: How moral was his behavior or desire, in context?

Morality tends to be harder to judge because people change and learn as events unfold. The idea that you should "judge not lest ye be judged" is often espoused, and often confounded. Should it mean judge not at all? But how can that work in any sustainable civilization? Does it mean leave judging souls to God? But what does that mean to people who do not believe in souls? Does it mean judge acts ("by their acts shall ye know them"), but not souls?

My own test of the morality of a person or action: Does he or it conduce to the sustenance of a society that accords decent respect for the freedom and dignity of its individual members?

However, that test may be inappropriate for a society that is indoctrinated against individual rights or that lacks capacity for sustaining a representative republic. Such a society may prefer to judge morality based on observance of detailed strictures handed down through a supposed mouthpiece (ugh!) for God. It could be considered "immoral" to condemn a person such as myself to live in such a society. Likewise, it may be immoral for anti-American collectivists to invade the U.S. for the purpose of flipping its voting demographic to fundamentally change it from a representative republic to one of elitist fascism or mouthpiece diktat.

***************

We don't get measurably final and provable answers to questions that fall under philosophy of morality. But we do try to reconcile communications concerning moral values, and we do pursue the assimilation of such values into civilizing culture.

I do not see how science, by itself, can reasonably be expected to lead us to any "scientifically correct" (or global) system of moral, political, or spiritual vaules. Rather, value-leading tends to be accomplished, if at all, with a process of participatory feedback within a system that often seems to be alive to our (spiritual) concerns.

I much doubt that the idea that an elitist "science of morality" can lead us to assimilate better values and "explanations" concerning the issues that are most important to being human is less faith-based than the idea that participatory gatherings in empathetic respect of an intuited godhead can lead us to much the same.

I may agree that one can (such as by how one defines terms) reasonably imagine that personal philosophy is "distinctly different" from formal philosophy. (One may even imagine that metaphysics is not philosophy.) For example, one may imagine a "distinct division" between concerns about HOW to transpose measurables (technological tinkerings), versus meta-philosophical concerns about WHY certain issues (such as "the best" personal and political choices) should remain beyond empirical proof.

One may write extensively to imagine that science-based empiricism can lead us to a synthesized "science of morality" -- for elitists and globalists to better resolve all concerns about both the HOW and the WHY. But I much doubt that any such a synthesis can be finally and formally achieved (or even better achieved) in any kind of logic that is consistent, coherent, and complete. IOW, analytics can imagine that God can be kicked from the system, but I suspect such imaginings among mortals must forever remain perplexed and somewhat hubristic. I suspect every system of "distinct divisions" is doomed to back-door track backs, that will pop back up as relentlessly as in a pop up game of "Hungry Hungry Hippos."

Science may replace Philosophy with regard to objective technological applications. With regard to important subjective human questions about how a decent civilization ought to be organized, I do not see how Science can replace participatory Philosophy.

Even though I expect A.I. will lead to trans-humans, I doubt Science can ever finally explain the subjective Mind in entirely measurable terms. To my intuition, I suspect "personal subjectivity" (observer effect) is built into the cosmos in a way that defies scientific explanation. And I much doubt science (or analytic logic or philosophy) can ever prove the contrary.

************

I suspect the subject is not easily pigeon holed. However, we have to start somehwhere. And pigeon holes seem to be essential even to begin attempts at grand explanations. Because we are restricted to short space, I thought your short explanation was a pretty good one.

However, at the far out edges, I suspect immeasurable and subjective aspects about the cosmos are inextricably intertwined with the unfolding of its measurable and objective aspects. In shorthand, I think the cosmos is "spiritually living."

For most concerns within our galactic system, a dichotomy between the objective-how and the subjective-why seems to make practical sense.

I don't have a detailed philosophical system of morality. I don't believe God has sent mouthpieces to prescribe our moral behavior in fine detail. But I do have a faith-based, general test, as I mentioned elsewhere. And I don't think any mortal can evade making a leap of faith of some kind. So I think metaphysics remains of import for availing forums for congregants to assimilate moral values and purposes. Even though most of them seem now to have become corrupted (like nearly every other formal institution) by those who prescribe tax laws and by elitist greed bags.

***************

Who picked Hillary? Who was crying for her to run? Americans weren't calling for her. So who slimed her off onto Americans?

Is it not obvious that hedging oligarchs went shopping for a corrupt bag whose resume they could inflate, who could be relied on to sell out to them? Is this not obvious?

What is more worrisome: That some people don't see this, or that most Dems see it but do not care? What sort of Dem would see it and not care? Well, that would be Dems who want not to have to work, but to be paid for voting, whining, blaming "Whitey," and making excuses for their deviant degenerant decrepitude. IOW, the kind of people Dems want to import a lot more of.

**************

So now we have the alt anti-American movement. It is globalism stirred by crony miscreants. It makes ordinary Americans out ot be goats by calling them white privileged and alt right, while it pretends to be for socialistic redistribution of wealth -- but only as a way to dupe masses into serf traps.

Until recently, people understood the American Ideal to relate to a culture of Christian values revolving around individual liberty and responsibility, characterized by emphasis on decent faith, family loyalty, and national fidelity. This was a culture for conserving liberty, open to persons of all colors who are willing to stand up against invasions by depraved collectivistic leeches.

Now, most of our formal institutions of persuasion have been bought and coopted by miscreants bent on people farming. With their broadcast platform, they try to re-brand Conservers of Liberty as "alt right." That is, nationalists bent on restoring white culture to the exclusion of everyone else. They were not satisfied to try to re-brand adherents to the American Ideal as "Uncle Toms." Now they want to rebrand everyone who stands for the American Ideal as being alt right -- which they want to pre-judge and pre-profile as being racist, jingoistic, and intolerant.

In actuality, the alt anti-Americans (Progs, Commies, Reconquistas, Militant Gays, Feminazis and Femimen, Jihadis, Globalist Cronies) are the ones who are most racist, anti-ethnic (anti-caucasion), gender poisonous (against straight white males), jihadistic, murderous, and intolerant (of the First and Second Amendments). They claim to be after Whitey, but they are really intent on murdering the American Ideal. This is Global Maternalism Gone Wild. Munchausen Mothers of Murder, Inc. Warning: You will consent to being made safe (sexually and politically neutered), or you will be eliminated.

The alt anti-Americans are the people who rarely give from their own pockets, but are always willing to vote and conspire to make everyone else kiss their ring and pay "charity." They never tire of showing heart wrenching photos of suffering children and refugees. They don't do this to inspire giving to good and effective charities. But they often do it to inspire giving to their laundry foundations for enriching and empowering themselves. If they think the rest of the world of political basket cases can and should be salvaged, let them inspire giving of time and money among themselves. But STOP presuming to storm control over the central gov apparatus in order to force the world into the criminally "charitable" arms of absolute despotic fascists.

**************



Blackie is incorrigibly conditioned to believe he can never compete without making Whitey a goat, to blame. Metro Whities are conditioned to want to be blamed. And ordinary Americans of all colors will continue to be called Whities and be blamed for this nonsense until they holler: Stop! Grow the hell up! Man up!

Until then, "Whitey's" role will continue to be to pay for the sins of the world -- because so many Multi Cultis, Muslims, and Blackies utterly refuse to pay their own way, and because so many MetroFems and FemiMen grease their way.

How far behind do Asians start, when they come to America, often without even knowing the language, yet very soon thrive? How long will ordinary Americans continue to coddle loser mentalities with this "white privilege" crap? If the goal of Progs is to raise a permanent class of entitlement-minded losers who can be relied on to do little more than vote for a living, they have perfected mining of the mother lode. Every thinking person should be ashamed of Progs and their infantile mentalities and bs warped profs.

In America, if you're not making as much money as you think you should, more likely than not it's because you're spending your time and energy blaming others while failing to man up to the situation. The way to get more of this crap is to reward it.

*************

What kind of system would license low-IQ inbred-nimrods with little experience and much brainwashing to take on themselves the power and responsibility to strike the heads of people of obviously superior intelligence, experience, and capacity for moral reasoning? Answer: A subhuman system for monsters. Guardians of despotic fascism, red in tooth and claw.

Is it reasonable to consider Progs who serve as red guards and apologists for such a system of monsters as behaving as other than monsters themselves? Answer: No, it is not.

Is it reasonable to defer to their "superior political education"? No, it clearly is not.

*****************

Different societies cultivate different values and tendencies, which are bound to lead to variations in local gene pools. There is little reason to suppose the extent of that variation will find precise correlative expression in color of skin.
That said, the most hated, blamed ethnicity in the world today consists of mind-their-own-business Caucasion males. They are relentlessly blamed by racists worldwide for no other "sins" of their fathers than those that are presumed to have moved the world out of primitivism. Racists blame them because they envy their presumed accomplishments, but know not how to compete without looting -- which they "justify" via nonsensical bs -- for which they award doctorates.
I suspect there is a gene set for this worldwide rampant racism, and it is the exact same set as the one for gangsterism secondary to incompetent failure to launch as an individual -- regardless of racial color of skin.
The careful cultivation of this gene set is a big factor in why the rainbow coalition of crybullies, feminaziis, peter-pan-femimen, plantation-recidivists, perpetual welfare addicts, faithless oligarchs, elitist knowitalls, demented jihadis, and very-legally-neat-aclus has coalesced to blob-ulate the world.
To take the census of Progs and see their drowning of the American gene pool demographic is to see why electing Hillary will end the American Experiment as we have known it. Blob-ulation: We see it coming, but we let it roll over us. Progism -- it's much more nefarious than racism. Moreover, Progs tend to make the worst racists.

*******************

I think it's a mix of genetics, epigenetics, nature, nurture, culture, and chaotic pattern reinforcement. A lot of variables to try to manage, with no science-based panacea.
To my intuition, without means for, and openness to, the inspiring, inculcating, and assimilation of good faith and good will, we haven't much of a prayer. What we need, and lack, is socially (and spiritually) learned good faith and good will.
I agree that we currently have little to protect us against being ravaged by the advertising and disinformation skills of faithless elitist plunderers. We used to have Christian values. But hedgers have pretty much divided those, cut them to pieces, banished them from the public square, and in replacement given us "very legally neat" aclu judges -- who never met a crony fad they could not "justify" under the "living Constitution."

*****************

The United States was created as a federal republic in 1788.  Slaves were emancipated in 1863, being 75 years later.  To date, slaves have been emancipated for 153 years -- more than twice the number of years the nation allowed slaves.  Brown v. Board of Education was decided 64 years ago, in 1954, to end "separate but equal."

Blacks are now represented in every profession and business.  The gene pool for Blacks had been shaped by plantation needs for strong backs and weak minds.  That malshaping will take awhile to be overcome.  It can be overcome by allowing competitive abilities to be favored in the environmental marketplace.  It will not be overcome by politically malshaping the environment to favor the reproduction of codependent and incompetent mentalities and subcultures.

Look at Prog policies of Rinos and Dinos on immigration.  They are twisted to favor the importation of collectivist minded illegals, refugees, and cheap technocrats.  They are also twisted to keep reliable ghetto voters in the ghetto projects.  Progs do not want to advance their base gene pool.  They want to keep it barefoot, pregnant, dependent, uninformed, incompetent, and reliably Democrat.  And they want to export that policy to cultivate herd people to continue to take a fall, throughout the globe.

Progs are like Charlie, in On the Waterfront:  Charlie keeps telling them -- "This ain't your night."  So they keep taking dives for the short end money.  Year after year after year.  https://youtu.be/AwlqKiCpQ9Y  Look in the mirror, Charlie educated-elitist-boy:  It was you.

**********************

There is no- thing that the rainbow- dupes of nation-destroying hedgers cannot rationalize to enserf the masses. The rainbow alliance of ACLU neats, militarily proud Gays, BLM fascist Blacks, anarchist OWS, knowitall fembrains, and multi- culti lovers of illegals and jihadis means to bury representative republicanism under elitist division and rule, once and for all.
Their message: You don't know enough to govern your locality, so our gay masters mean to do it for you. This will continue until enough competent people say, Hell no!

*****************

I think our common situation entails a mix of genetics, epigenetics, nature, nurture, culture, and chaotic pattern reinforcement and Reconciliation (Source Feedback).  A lot of variables to try to manage, with no science-based panacea. 

To my intuition, without means for, and openness to, the inspiring,  inculcating, and assimilating of good faith and good will, we haven't much of a prayer.  What we need, and lack, is socially (and spiritually) learned good faith and good will.

I agree that we currently have little to protect us against being ravaged by the advertising and disinformation skills of faithless elitist plunderers.  We used to have Christian values.  But hedgers have pretty much divided those, cut them to pieces, banished them from the public square, and in replacement given us "very legally neat" aclu judges -- who never met a crony fad they could not "justify" under the "living Constitution."


Tuesday, August 23, 2016

Of Donald, Hillary, and Warren

Regarding The Long Term: If Hillary is elected, the republic does not have a long term.

Forcing position: There is no point to forcing Trump to positions that would render him unelectable.

Freedom: Freedom from China means little if it just means selling the republic to international oligarchs.

Class warfare: Morlochs always want Eloi to stop conducting class warfare.

Re Cato Treatment: It's the corruption and incompetence of our very own federal government who you have to blame massive debt, massive deficits, job-killing regulations, cumbersome healthcare, poor education, lawless immigration and an IRS that is effectively a criminal enterprise. Globablist this, nationalist that, it just dilutes the actual problem ....

I AGREE with the first sentence; DISAGREE with the second. It is obvious that Rinos and the Chamber of Commerce want to erase the borders that define the U.S.! -- every bit as much as the Dinos.

Why trade one set of nation killers for another set of nation killers? I have no desire to kill the values set forth under the Declaration of Independence, Constitution, and Bill of Rights. I have no desire to trade rule under national fascists for rule under international fascists.

I don't believe our crony elitist wannabe rulers are virtuous or benign. I don't believe they share my values or those of most of the Americans who have sweated and bled to make the nation. And I don't believe we should be allowing them to import multi-culti whose values are those we fought to resist.

The actual problem: The actual problem is the race to sacrifice the U.S. to a lowest-common-denominator syndicated rule of the worldwide masses by internationally competing corporate gangsters. I think you need to get out of the city and spend more time in rural America.

Warren G. Harding: He urged the reduction of war income taxes, an increase in tariffs on agricultural goods to protect the American farmer, as well as more wide-ranging reforms, such as support for highways, aviation, and radio. He reduced federal spending as a share of GDP. Wages, profits, and productivity all improved.

Technologies and production brought an age of modernization. Harding restricted immigration, except from Northern Europe. His Socialist opponent, Eugene Debs, was in prison.

His subordinates' handlings of Teapot Dome seem similar to Clinton's pay to play "charitable foundation."

So Harding was a product of his time. In some ways, he seems comparable to Trump, in other ways, to Hillary. His appointments were a mixed bag. Some (like Charles Evans Hughes) were good. Most likely, ALL of Hillary's would be like death for the republic.

It seems to me, given our times, that Trump is the man for the job. But to get elected, he has to project caring. That is a trick. He would be pilloried if he used the words "kinder and gentler." So he has to speak in generalities. And, actually, I suspect our general situation would quickly improve, if a sense of can-do responsibility and hope are inspired. Inspiration from a real American would go a long way to restore morning in America. That's a bit more complex than mere accounting.

**************

So now we have the alt anti-American movement.  It is globalism stirred by crony miscreants.  It makes ordinary Americans out ot be goats by calling them white privileged and alt right, while it pretends to be for socialistic redistribution of wealth -- but only as a way to dupe masses into serf traps.

Until recently, people understood the American Ideal to relate to a culture of Christian values revolving around individual liberty and responsibility, characterized by emphasis on decent faith, family loyalty, and national fidelity.  This was a culture for conserving liberty, open to persons of all colors who are willing to stand up against invasions by depraved collectivistic leeches.

Now, most of our formal institutions of persuasion have been bought and coopted by miscreants bent on people farming.  With their broadcast platform, they try to re-brand Conservers of Liberty as "alt right."  That is, nationalists bent on restoring white culture to the exclusion of everyone else.  They were not satisfied to try to re-brand adherents to the American Ideal as "Uncle Toms."  Now they want to rebrand everyone who stands for the American Ideal as being alt right -- which they want to pre-judge and pre-profile as being racist, jingoistic, and intolerant.

In actuality, the alt anti-Americans (Progs, Commies, Reconquistas, Militant Gays, Feminazis and Femimen, Globalist Cronies) are the ones who are most racist, anti-ethnic (anti-caucasion), jihadistic, murderous, and  intolerant (of the First and Second Amendments).  They claim to be after Whitey, but they are really intent on murdering the American Ideal.  This is Global Maternalism Gone Wild.  Munchausen Mothers of Murder, Inc. Warning: You will consent to being made safe, or you will be eliminated.
 

Political Gayness and Soros' Open Society

No gay gene has been identified.  However, fecundity in females may relate to homosexuality having been expressed in the maternal line.  And children adopted into gay marriages may be more open to homoerotic relationships and may be more likely to adopt non-heterosexual identities.

That said, I doubt science can prove what causes or "makes" much of anything.  It can and does show strong correlations -- that can, through feedback with our "participatory will," be manipulated.  I suspect homosexuality is not "caused" by any one thing, but correlates with an interplay among genetics, hormonal activity, and environmental influences (culture). 

Moreover, I suspect becoming a "Proud Gay" correlates politically with becoming an anti-American globalist.  So, do such globalists "have no choice"?  On that account, ought Americans just to give up their borders, so there can "be peace"?  Why is George Soros' Open Society such a big promoter of gay marriage?

Friday, August 19, 2016

One Thing v. No Thing

Of the Trinity:  If there were One Thing, with no potential to be any other thing, then its creative potential would be no more than if there were No Thing.

Muslim brains are choked between One Thing and No Thing. 

If your brain were similarly choked, you also might be full of rage upon encountering other beings that displayed actual and superior reasoning capacity.  Having been warped since infancy to "believe" you had answers, you might find the very existence of independent-minded beings an unpardonable reminder of your inferiority, and thus a raw affront.

Sort of reminds me of perpetually infantilized Progs.  No wonder they make common cause with one another!  At this point, it's not likely we will with reason turn them into allies.

******

Perverted Faith v. No Faith:

Our Neo-Colonialists and Imperialists are trying to dupe people to believe that erasing borders will erase colonialism.  Actually, it will erase republics, and in their stead it will install the NWO of international elitist colonial syndicalism.  Masses of the world:  Give up your republics and Inherit your cheap wages and servitude to monsters!

No "outcome" is desired, other than cauldrons for continuously stirring up and burning off elitist driven divisions and animosities.  That's how you sell arms, undermine republics, arrange kickbacks to buy politicians, and signal to other oligarchs how they can do the same to farm people.  This is Hedge Fund Management 101:  How to play and use the people like crash dummies.

Obama Ilk are the Neo Colonialists (mass people farmers) to replace the Olde Colonialists they pretend to despise!  Our Prez is a strutting phony and a liar!  He doesn't want his Rainbow Coalition to be made equal.  He wants to use it to intimidate, plunder, and rule.  These are the New Goosestepping Fascists, in all their infantilized and Gay Glory.  They won't know where or when to stop until enough people are finally outraged enough to stand athwart and holler,Stop!  Unfortunately, it will probably be bloody to get to that point.  And beyond.


Monday, August 15, 2016

AS IF (Speed of Light)

AS IF

Must each perspective of consciousness rationalize as if chronologies among the presentations of forms are protected, regardless of whether such protection is true?  If not, how could we either know or ratonalize?  If forms are not in themselves real, how can we prove that by assuming what would be the case if they were in themselves real?

If any substance could be perceived to travel faster than the speed of light, would it not necessarily alter the chronological experiences and perceptions of information that we receive, process, interpret, and rationalize, from each perspective?  Out of such dissonance, could we still rationalize common or shared experience or interpretations?  Do we rationalize just enough to hang onto a sense of identity, while otherwise remaining necessarily dissonant with regard to individually creative unfoldings?  Does each newly rationalized explanation suck with it its own train of dissonance?

Perhaps what is real and determinative in itself is not merely the interactions among substantive forms, but must include such reconciling rationalizations among perspectives of consciousness that happen to share a common range of possibilities.  Perhaps we cannot make harmonic sense out of feedback with our senses without a trinitarian flux among consciousness, substance, and information.  Even though we can never measure that trinitarian flux in itself as a whole.

Tuesday, August 9, 2016

ECO-POLITICS

The world unfolds as if something of innate consciousness wanted to entertain a system-simulation of feedback, to test what would assimilate.  Maybe even to test the variety of ways in which intution and empathy would rationalize credit to that something or someone.  Maybe even to participate in guiding the simulation.

***************
Beingness in purposeful feedback is. It does not need what you call your faith to be. It just is. It abides beyond your proof, logic, or faith. You can rationalize that however you like, but you cannot make it not so.

You fight your fight and I'll fight me. -- Doug Keershaw.


****************

Wanted:  Someone to wade through the fires of hell to save the ungrateful, the disrespectful, and the despicable.  Someone willing to change the diapers of 25-55 year old infant socialists that have been trained to deem it hateful to profile or be judgmental against believers in the most truly horrific.  Someone to redeem and show a better way to those who hate the good and love the bad, who would otherwise smile blissfully to bend and be beheaded.

*****************

Idealism too often outruns common sense.  Can you talk in unvarnished facts, or must you engage the patinas of PC?  If not, I understand why Trump turns you off.

HEALTH CARE:  If we had a sensible, assimilated citizenry, I would not be averse to looking at single payer health care.  However, there are two big  problems:  First, Justice Roberts fudged to find authority in the Constitution for such a thing.  Second, we do not have a sensible, assimilated citizenry.  Rather, we have kiddos run amuck who seem to think everyone has a right to invade the nation and claim various kinds of welfare.

MUSLIMS:  Regarding Muslims:  As near as I can determine, most want to follow Shariah.  Many promote second class citizenship and genital mutilation for women.  Many promote death penalties for apostates.  As Muslims tend towards a majority, they begin to ban other churches.  They begin to rape and assault single women they deem to be immodest.

Why do  you suppose Europe is in such turmoil?  Muslims do not assimilate.  Rather, they breed until they can take over the  political system.  They wage jihad by taqiyya and  breeding.  It's the radical branches that are most politically active.  Everyone else follows.  Meanwhile, Libs buy their bs and help them promote it.

ISIS:  You listed some ways you have been told about how ISIS isn't following Islam.  What you fail to mention is that ISIS is predominantly Sunni, so it views Shia as close to infidels.  And vice versa.  They don't view one another as true Muslims, hence no Koranic proscription against killing one another.

Russia and Iran uses the Syrians.  The U.S. supposedly used the Syrian rebels.  Saudi Arabia  and Turkey use ISIS.

TAQIYYA:  Apart from a taqiyya front to the common infidels, there is no real unity among Muslims to condemn what is going on.  Nor is there unity to condemn Palestinian/Hamas bombers against Israel.

Per Wikipedia:

ISIS/Daesh is a Salafi jihadist militant group that follows a fundamentalist, Wahhabi doctrine of Sunni Islam.  (My note: Wahhabism had some of its biggest funders in Saudi Arabia.   Now that ISIS threatens Saudi Arabia, they are suddenly antagonistic.  Before that, not so much.)

ISIL affiliates now control parts of Libya, Nigeria and Afghanistan and operate in other parts of the world, including North Africa and South Asia.

Some "30 percent of the senior figures" in ISIL's military command are former army and police officers from the disbanded Iraqi security forces, drawn to ISIL by the US De-Ba'athification policy and turn towards Islamism by Sunni following the US invasion of Iraq.

In some countries, such as Pakistan, there are significant minorities of the population with favorable or uncertain views.

TURKEY:  Turkey has long been accused by experts, Syrian Kurds, and even U.S. Vice-President Joe Biden of supporting or colluding with ISIL. There is evidence for a degree of collaboration" between the Turkish intelligence services and ISIL.  Saudi Arabia has created a Frankenstein's monster over which it is rapidly losing control.  Turkey is accussed of assisting ISIL, ranging "from military cooperation and weapons transfers to logistical support, financial assistance, and the provision of medical services."

Flash drives seized during the Sayyaf raid revealed links "so clear" and "undeniable" between Turkey and ISIL "that they could end up having profound policy implications for the relationship between us and Ankara".  Turkey is labelled been labelled the "Gateway to Jihad."  Private donors within Qatar, sympathetic to the aims of radical groups such as al-Nusra Frong and ISIL, are believed to be channeling their resources to support these organisations.  The Saudi state had a decade-long sponsorship of Wahhabism around the world.  It appears that the Syrian government has operatives inside ISIL.

WHY NOW:  One may reasonably suspect that many Arabic nations are uniting to oust the Iraqi government that was set up by the U.S., as well as to opportune to oust Christians and their churches from the region.  If so, it would be beyond silly to assume they would decline to resort to deception and taqiyya.  So why, now, after so long, do some seem to unite to castigate ISIS?

Well, for any number of reasons, few having to do with supposed affronts to Islam.  Reason:  To beguile the U.S.  Reason:  Out of worry about Trump.  Reason:  Out of fear of a Frankensteinian Caliphate that may devour its original sponsors.  Reason:  To generate a refugee crisis to overrun Europe and spread Islam.

As to concern  about tenets of Islam being violated -- not so much.  Indeed, persons high up in ISIS have been much more studied in Islam and what it does and does not forbid than any dupe of American Prog Profs.

Per Wikipedia:

JIHAD OPTIONS TO INFIDELS:  Christians living in areas under ISIL control faced four options: converting to Islam, paying a religious levy or jizya, leaving the "caliphate", or death.  "We offer them three choices: Islam; the dhimma contract – involving payment of jizya; if they refuse this they will have nothing but the sword", ISIL said.[475][476] ISIL leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi further noted that Christians who do not agree with those terms must "leave the borders of the Islamic Caliphate" within a specified deadline.

My comment:   I much doubt that this proscription violates anything in the Koran, notwithstanding metrosexual handwringing to the contrary about Islam being a "religion of  peace."   Rather, it appears to belifted straight from the Koran.  See e.g. K 9:029.

For example, what sane person believes respected Islamic scholars forbid armed or violent jihad against, say, Israel?

 IAE, as and if ISIS continues to succeed, more and more Islamists will legitimize it.    As recognized by Ayman S. Ibrahim, the Muslim caliphate and its restoration is a real Muslim commitment, and only needs an agreement among the Muslims in order to reestablish it.  See https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2014/10/is-the-muslim-scholars-open-letter-to-isis-really-enough.

Jihadi groups regularly denounce the Saudi rulers of being  apostates-not true Muslims-mostly for their close relationship with  non-Muslim powers like America; this charge goes all the way back to  Osama bin Laden, who, though radicalized by Saudi education, ended up  denouncing the monarchy for allowing the U.S. military to be stationed  in the Peninsula.

IBRIHIM:  Per Raymond Ibrihim, 8-9-16, at http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/how-muslims-justify-killing-other-muslims-in-islams-name?f=troops:

In short, to Sunni jihadis, non-Sunnis are heretics and thus free  game.  As for fellow Sunnis who get in the way, they can be pronounced  apostates and attacked accordingly.   As for true Sunni Muslims, the  jihadis should try to separate them from the intended infidel target-as happened in Bangladesh and elsewhere-but if they die accidentally, they are martyrs ("and the obligatory jihad should never be abandoned because it creates martyrs").

The argument that jihadi organizations kill fellow Muslims proves  nothing.   Muslims have been slaughtering Muslims on any number of  justifications and rationalizations from the start: So what can the  open non-Muslim-such as the Western infidel-expect?

The arc of Islam's war against Christianity is hardly limited to the Middle East.  It extends well into therest of the world and Sub-Saharan Africa.  See http://www.catholicjournal.us/2014/04/23/war-christians-africa/.

For a list of Koranic passages that justify violence, see http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Themes/jihad_passages.html.

A SMALL SAMPLING:

[2.216] Fighting is enjoined on you

[3.152]...you slew them by His [Allah's] permission [during a Jihad battle]

[4.89] ...take not from among them friends until they fly (their homes) in Allah’s way; but if they turn back [to their homes], then seize them and kill them wherever you find them

K 8:012   ...make firm those who believe. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them.

[8.65] O Prophet! urge the believers to war

K 9:005  ...slay the idolaters wherever you find them...take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush...

K 9:029   Fight those who do not believe in Allah...nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.

K 9:036  ..fight the polytheists (Christians) all together as they fight you all together.

[9.38] ...Go forth in Allah's way [to Jihad]... [9.39] If you do not go forth [to go on Jihad], He will chastise you with a painful chastisement and bring in your place a people other than you [to go on Jihad]...

K 9:073  ..strive hard [Jihad] against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be unyielding to them...

K 24:055  Allah has promised to those of you who believe and do good that He will most certainly make them rulers in the earth [as a reward for going on Jihad (see K 024:053)]...

K 63:004  ..they think every cry to be against them. They are the enemy, therefore beware of them; may Allah destroy them, whence are they turned back? [This verse speaks of internecine Jihad against Muslims deemed infidels or "hypocrites."]

BOTTOM LINE:  Islamic scholars now denouncing ISIS have as much good faith as the Rinos denouncing Trump.  The Islamists just don't want ISIS spoiling their game.  The Rinos don't want Trump getting in the way of their people farming.  To say I am unimpressed would be a yuge understatement.

*************************
*************************

There is good reason to be anti-Islamic.  Islam gives that video much material to work with.  Do you see hordes of modern Christians behaving that way?  Wake up.

******************

Re:  I hate the idea of a country run by a misogynistic, racist, xenophobic, psychopath

Well then, stop carrying water for Elitist Socialists like Bernie and Hillary.

********************

PM Erdogan: "The Term ‘Moderate Islam’ Is Ugly And Offensive; There Is No Moderate Islam; Islam Is Islam."

Erdogan is helping ISIS against the Kurds, and threatening to release hordes of Muslims into the West.  Your defense of him and Islam is juvenile and uninformed.   In 2014, Erdogan threatened to “root out” the social media network after wiretapped recordings were leaked that were deemed damaging to the government’s reputation ahead of local elections. Access to Twitter was then restricted.  See http://www.wnd.com/2016/07/erdogan-tightens-iron-grip-on-power/.

*********************

Your list makes my case.  ISIS sees itself as the caliphate.  It deems the failure to swear allegiance to it as being un-islamic.  If it acquires more power, other Muslims will come more and more to agree.  You are looking for some principle by which to separate jihadis from other Muslims where none exists.  That is delusion.  Convenient for an Elitist Socialist, but delusion nonetheless.

***********************

Tell me:  Are you able to reform  the Koran?  Is Ayaan Hirsi Ali ridiculous?

************************

You are now quibbling about "goes up against them."  Do you not know that Mohammad fought many aggressive battles?  In how many do you suppose he took time to offer options?  See https://death2islamofascism.wordpress.com/2010/02/09/muhammads-massacres-and-sex-slaves/

Why are you trying to exhonerate utter barbarity?  What is wrong with your soul?

*************************

Re: "all religions are written in parables and figures of speech"

No biblical scholar claims to have the original speech of God.   Muslims consider Mohammad to have conveyed God's message through Mohammad's tongue.  It is considered that God made the Qur'an Arabic, but man may make it Persian (or other languages).  The Koran is taken to be quite literal and specific with regard to numerous injunctions of violence.

As to evil that is conflated with godliness, I am not "looking for" a reason to disregard such evil.  I have reason to disregard such evil. 

My reason is this:  For God to be sensibly relevant to humanity, then each human being needs to be amenable of sensible intuition, empathy, and feedback concerning God.  That means the word of God is written in the cosmos, not just in books.  For human beings to assimilate and enjoy sensible civilization, they need to be mindful (intuitive and empathetic) of their relation to God and to one another, as perspectives of God.  This is alternatively expressable as the Great Commandment and the Golden Rule. 

That implicates  respect among human beings for the freedom, dignity, work, investment, and property of each of them.  That means none should be chattel or slaves to be ruled by elitists.  And that means that Elitist Socialists and Islamists who mean to agglomerate rule over every person are "un-good."

*******************

Re:  Cruz's role in TPP

Your blinders are showing again.  TPP is an attack on U.S. sovereignty, to sell it to extra-national, elitist, cronies.  Of course, I get it, that does not bother you.  But it  probably bothered the people who booed Cruz off the stage for  declining to support the only candidate in the race who supports the freedom, dignity, and property of U.S. citizens as individuals, as opposed to the chattel of Elitist Socialists pretending (or duped) to be caring for the little people.

*******************

Bill Maher is an outlier. He, like George Carlin, probably recognizes that political correctness is mainly fascism pretending to have manners.

********************

Many are simply clueless and in the habit of believing the elitists that now profess from every formal institution. There is little reason to marvel that people born under elitist despotism will tend not to question it. It's much easier to just keep taking the blue pill.
.......................

This is your last chance. After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill -- the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill -- you stay in Wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes. -- Morpheus

********************

There are enough atheists to have brought every formal institution of significance under the NWO rule of treasonous cronies. There is no formal institution that they have not profaned, one way or another.

********************

The Prog/LGBT/Atheist/Elitist argument seems to be that some ineffable, immeasurable (spiritual) basis abides for authenticating the values of collectivistic hedonism, but not for authenticating the values of those who preach that each of us who longs for freedom, dignity, and property as an individual should do unto others as we would have them do unto us.
Elitists who want to rule collectives under force of government hate when individuals prefer to rule themselves under love of spirituality. Like pre-Reformation priests, "scientific" elitists don't like for the lower masses to presume to think (and pray) for themselves. So they insult Christians for their spiritual faith, even as they pretend (falsely) not to indulge any faith (elitist based socialism) of their own.
So why do Elitist Socialists (ES) expressly denounce Christians, but not Muslims? Several reasons. For one, many ES are metrosexualized, androgynous cowards who fear the violent reputation of Muslims. For another, Muslims, like ES, tend to be socialists, but they remain apart and unassimilated -- so they seem to be a less significant threat to ES. But there is a main reason. The main reason is that ES want to ally with Muslims to tear down Christianity. Thereafter, they imagine Marxism or Scientific Socialism, if forceful enough, will have the resources to defeat Islam, if needed.
ES laugh at affronts by Islam against civilized Christians, by telling Christians that their religion is "no better." That is indicative of the moral bankruptcy of ES. ES, instead of lording that their God is greater, lord that their (so called) "scientific moraliy" is better. And they are as willing as Muslims to consign the rest of the world to hellfire to prove it.
ES are morally numbed by their mincing worship of elitist-led hedonism. That is why they are so proud ("gay") and willing to groom, profane, and abuse children. The fact that ES are willing to give Muslims license to impose horror on much of the world, even the West, is indicative of how hollow and uncaring ES, apart from their NWO cause, really are. If convenient to their cause, there is nothing of innocence or Christianity that ES, like most collectivized mobs, would hesitate to degrade or burn. In that, they compete for the apex of evil.

*********************

Wanted: Someone to wade through the fires of hell to save the ungrateful, the disrespectful, and the despicable. Someone willing to change the diapers of 25-55 year old infant socialists that have been trained to deem it hateful to profile or be judgmental against believers in the most truly horrific. Someone to redeem and show a better way to those who hate the good and love the bad, who would otherwise smile blissfully to bend and be beheaded.

*********************

The political parties are realigning as adult Americans v. childish and grubering Globalists. Autonomous Human Beings v. Automaton Pleasure Widgets.

*********************

The typical Elitist Socialist's faith is in Pagan Gaia, whose priests are knowitall noseinair whineyboys.  They are quick to bring out the whine of racist, xenophobe, blah blah.  To hear them, they don't hate.  They just want to run everyone's life, and they hate when others prefer not to abide by their silly pc or regulations. I detest childish incompetents presuming they or their lying leaders ought to be running my life. They need to go join a mosque or peddle their nonsense elsewhere.  Preferably beyond Pluto.

Do you have faith in progressively pursuing better governance under programs laid out by educated elites?  If no, then as an atheist, you have no point.  If yes, then that is faith, however demented.  Nothing in empiricism can prove the moral legitimacy of such faith.  No real adult needs to have that explained.

I don't dance and spin.  Atheists do act on faith.  So the lot of them peddle bs.  That is self evident.  It takes a dunce educated beyond the power of his intellect not to see it.

What is self evident does not need to be proven, nor can it be proven  It just is.  That which defines cannot itself be defined.  Rather, it is inextricably interwoven in the cosmos, to be empathetically intuited by all who can remove blinders.  But you have to remove the blinders you have allowed to be forged for yourself.  You either see that, or you don't. Trillions of words could be wasted on it.  If atheists' wastage of words does not constitute its own kind of faith, however, demented, then faith has no meaning.  I can't fix that for you.

The power of dunces is more in their conditioned feelings than in any intelligent reasoning.  I have little time for them.  Once I see a person tends to militant atheistic socialistic fascism, I just don't have the patience to try to "save" them.  Go and save yourself. 

All I ask is that you not oppress or regulate me based on your unintelligible "feelings" about "fairness."  If you lack faith in the innate freedom and dignity of individuals apart from the central appratus of knowitall elitists, go social-justice-warrior-jihad to someone else.  I don't buy what you're selling.  Be gone.

*************

Push come to shove, I doubt you have much of a clue what you are.  Clue:  To try to tolerate everything, including that which does not tolerate yourself,  is to nullify yourself. 

In case you have not noticed, there are millions of people bent on agglomerating power that would not tolerate your position.  Examples:  Knowitall socialists, jihadi Muslims, militant atheists, treacherous oligarchic crony corporatists, phony priests, phony "moral scientists."  If you stand for nothing, you fall for everything.

The test for what I stand for is based on this concern:  What system of checks, balances, and moral forums is needed to establish, defend, and nourish decent civilization that will accord freedom, dignity, opportunity, and  property to individuals, and that will limit such freedom only where needed to preclude individuals from putting the survival of such system in peril?

That test, in specific applications, is not amenable of scientifically detailed prescription.  Rather, it depends on the inspired competency of a liberty-literate people of good will and good faith.  But you say you lack faith, so not much is expected from you.

****************

I tend to identify with people who are not elitist socialists, regardless of how they like to label themselves. Provided they are not elitist fascists or traitors to the representative republic. Of them, it tends to be a minor point to me whether or not they want to admit they take their own leaps of faith. Unless, that is, they are giving aid and comfort to the knowitall militant atheists who do exist and do want to impose their own kind of grinding rule or who do want to invite into our borders those cultures that are bent to destroy us.

Provided their atheism is where they are in their own personal journey, that is one thing. I was once there myself. But when they advocate for the general destruction of religious faith, that is another thing altogether.
In many respects, I appreciate the wit of the Four Horsemen. Where I think they go off the beam is where they (especially Sam Harris) cross over from science to "moral science." I think that is a giant camel nose advance for elitist diktat. But for that, my appreciation of the "Old One" may not be that far removed from theirs.

*************
I respect the right of anyone to believe anything they want and I don't hate them for it.  What I don't respect and what I do hate is when they act on their religion or belief system in ways that undermine the freedom and dignity of others.  If I see their purpose is to undermine the freedom and dignity of others or of the legal system of our country, then I don't want to invite them in.  They can believe what they want, make of their own country what they will, but I do not want them to be undermining the system, documents, and laws that define my country.

You say you support the Constitution.  To a lot of socialists and SJW people, that does not mean much because they tend to find whatever they want to find in the Constitution. 

But if there are principles in the Constitution to which you truly adhere, then ask yourself why.  Is it because those principles are scientifically and empirically proven true in nature?  Is it because you have been indoctrinated so to adhere?  Or is it because you have weighed the concerns and sought in good faith to determine whether, when, and how you should or should not support the Constitution?  If so, how do you come by that process of weighing in good faith, if not in feedback respect for something of the cosmos that speaks to your fundamental intuition and empathy?



Do you understand how hard it is to restore a land of freedom once freedom is lost, either by being conquered or by inviting parasites to come and take it?  A lot of people have bled and sweated to provide your freedom.  What would give you or anyone else the "moral right" to sell it out to a mess of parasites for a mess of pottage, in a way that would harm the progeny of those who bled and sweated for it?

*****************

Liberals come in two flavors:  Corrupt amd incompetent.  As such, they want everyone to be either a people farper or a people farmee.  They hate the very idea of any land where people by and large are competent to do for themselves.  The vey existence of such a land is an affront to their assurances to their captives in lands of socialism, communism, and Islamism. 

Similarly, realms where Christianity flourishes, at least where distinctions are held between voluntary charity and governmental force, are affronts to wannabe people farmers and farmees.  This is why they and their cronies work so hard to infest every institution to try to bring down every independent, representative republic. 

This is why they call you names, like nationalist, thumper, Trumper, phobe, redneck, racist, misogynist, privileged, colonialist, etc.  As to racism, misogyny, special privileges, etc, those tend to abide far more with liberals, progs, radical gays, socialists, fascists, communists, feminazis, femimen, militant atheists, and jihadis than with ordinary Americans.  They should be sent back to their cribs and told:  Bite it!

*******************
You can label IT as you like, but it is what it is, and there is no good reason to believe it is much at all like the way Allah is described. Nor that it has as its purpose to impose perpetual hellfire on the spirits or bodies of all who fail to live up any of the injunctions as set out in the Koran. Nor that it wants women to be second class citizens, infidels to be slaughtered, of girls to be mutilated. Nothing of the cosmos or good sense makes any of that virtuous or sensible.
Edit: Nor can PC make it virtuous, sensible, or even tolerable.

Will someone who thinks it can be done please clarify the differences between moderate Shia and immoderate Shia, and between radical Sunni and non-radical Sunni?
Frankly, the whole idea of a Frankenstein God that gets his rocks off by sending people to hellfire for failing to acknowledge bs stories about him, even though he made them that way in the first place, is disgusting to every mind that is not sick. Yes, I do mean to infer that Proggies are sick in the head.
Apparently, Allah, playing with dollies, deliberately made some so ugly he could jolly himself by burning them forever, over and over. Is he mad because Mrs. God shamed him? What's his problem, anyway? What is there about this obscene "religion" among men who wear dresses that entitles it to the PC protection of fascists who want to pretend to have manners?

For Pagan Elitists, ethics is a cover tale told by idiots. What really matters is making a killing --- and making sure to pay the right people.
The more Elitist Socialists (and SJW's) twist gov to "help" us, the more they injure us. Let charities do charity. Let gov set rules. But let gov stay away from new charities unless the nation is in peril. We need to stop confusing force with charity.

Forget methane trapped in frozen ground. Think about political favors trapped in secretive banks, and elitism trapped in corruption. In politicians, crap floats faster than methane seeps. Hillary's up to her eyeballs in it.

Wanted: Someone to wade through the fires of hell to save the ungrateful, the disrespectful, and the despicable. Someone willing to change the diapers of 25-55 year old infant socialists that have been trained to deem it hateful to profile or be judgmental against believers in the most truly horrific. Someone to redeem and show a better way to those who hate the good and love the bad, who would otherwise smile blissfully to bend and be beheaded.

The political parties are realigning as adult Americans v. childish and grubering Globalists. Autonomous Human Beings v. Automaton Pleasure Widgets.

For what non- circular reason do you deem the Constitution entitled to respect? Do you have one? Do you have faith that there is one?

I respect the right of anyone to believe anything they want and I don't hate them for it. What I don't respect and what I do hate is when they act on their religion or belief system in ways that undermine the freedom and dignity of others. If I see their purpose is to undermine the freedom and dignity of others or of the legal system of our country, then I don't want to invite them in. They can believe what they want, make of their own country what they will, but I do not want them to be undermining the system, documents, and laws that define my country.
You say you support the Constitution. To a lot of socialists and SJW people, that does not mean much because they tend to find whatever they want to find in the Constitution.
But if there are principles in the Constitution to which you truly adhere, then ask yourself why. Is it because those principles are scientifically and empirically proven true in nature? Is it because you have been indoctrinated so to adhere? Or is it because you have weighed the concerns and sought in good faith to determine whether, when, and how you should or should not support the Constitution? If so, how do you come by that process of weighing in good faith, if not in feedback respect for something of the cosmos that speaks to your fundamental intuition and empathy?
Do you understand how hard it is to restore a land of freedom once freedom is lost, either by being conquered or by inviting parasites to come and take it? A lot of people have bled and sweated to provide your freedom. What would give you or anyone else the "moral right" to sell it out to a mess of parasites for a mess of pottage, in a way that would harm the progeny of those who bled and sweated for it?

I tend to identify with people who are not elitist socialists, regardless of how they like to label themselves. Provided they are not elitist fascists or traitors to the representative republic. Of them, it tends to be a minor point to me whether or not they want to admit they take their own leaps of faith. Unless, that is, they are giving aid and comfort to the knowitall militant atheists who do exist and do want to impose their own kind of grinding rule or who do want to invite into our borders those cultures that are bent to destroy us. Provided their atheism is where they are in their own personal journey, that is one thing. I was once there myself. But when they advocate for the general destruction of religious faith, that is another thing altogether.
In many respects, I appreciate the wit of the Four Horsemen. Where I think they go off the beam is where they (especially Sam Harris) cross over from science to "moral science." I think that is a giant camel nose advance for elitist diktat. But for that, my appreciation of the "Old One" may not be that far removed from theirs.

Hubristic Elistist Socialists who want to impose bs regulations against the little people, who just want to be left alone to assimilate their own appreciation of the moral universe, need to be smacked around enough to understand their "help" is not wanted.

The test for what I stand for is based on this concern: What system of checks, balances, and moral forums is needed to establish, defend, and nourish decent civilization that will accord freedom, dignity, opportunity, and property to individuals, and that will limit such freedom only where needed to preclude individuals from putting the survival of such system in peril?
That test, in specific applications, is not amenable of scientifically detailed prescription. Rather, it depends on the inspired competency of a liberty-literate people of good will and good faith. But you say you lack faith, so not much is expected from you.

Do you have faith in progressively pursuing better governance under programs laid out by educated elites? If no, then as an atheist, you have no point. If yes, then that is faith, however demented. Nothing in empiricism can prove the moral legitimacy of such faith. No real adult needs to have that explained.
I don't dance and spin. Atheists do act on faith. So the lot of them peddle bs. That is self evident. It takes a dunce educated beyond the power of his intellect not to see it.
What is self evident does not need to be proven, nor can it be proven. It just is. That which defines cannot itself be defined. Rather, it is inextricably interwoven in the cosmos, to be empathetically intuited by all who can remove blinders. But you have to remove the blinders you have allowed to be forged for yourself. You either see that, or you don't. Trillions of words could be wasted on it. If atheists' wastage of words does not constitute its own kind of faith, however, demented, then faith has no meaning. I can't fix that for you.
The power of dunces is more in their conditioned feelings than in any intelligent reasoning. I have little time for them. Once I see a person tends to militant atheistic socialistic fascism, I just don't have the patience to try to "save" them. Go and save yourself.
All I ask is that you not oppress or regulate me based on your unintelligible "feelings" about "fairness." If you lack faith in the innate freedom and dignity of individuals apart from the central appratus of knowitall elitists, go social-justice-warrior-jihad to someone else. I don't buy what you're selling. Be gone.

Grey eminences are fascist busybodies. They come in flavors of crony corporatists, socialists, communists, and new central idealists. They don't much like trusting the little folk to think or do for themselves. Instead, they want to mold the little people to serve their ideal of a "more perfect state." That is their own kind of religion. As someone who prefers mostly to think and do for himself, I loathe them and the religion they ride in on.

Beingness in purposeful feedback is. It does not need what you call your faith to be. It just is. It abides beyond your proof, logic, or faith. You can rationalize that however you like, but you cannot make it not so.

You fight your fight and I'll fight me. -- Doug Keershaw.

*********************

Trump:  "Those who are guests in our country that are preaching hate will be asked to return home immediately."

With that statement, Trump grabbed the jugular of the main concern of Metro-Femi-Lefties, even though they themselves have been incompetent to state it. 

That statement makes sense under our documents of foundational liberty --- provided Trump means to protect the safety of minorities, Muslims, and Gays, but not to eviscerate the First Amendment to do so. 

It is one thing to express concern for protecting such minorities.  It is another to make them superior.  Thus far, minorities and their metro-hubristic elitists have sought to enact national provisions to guarantee protection of self esteem.  Thus, they have sought to hobble everyone else with regulations against "hate speech," cultural assimilation, and white privilege.  Instead, they have sought to establish special minority privilege and to provide for special reparations and affirmative action.  This program has been their Trojan Horse for destroying and rendering meaningless (fundamentally changing) the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Once elected, Trump ought to advocate for Immigration policies for preseving a liberty-literate citizenry.  Not an anti-liberty electorate of Metro-Femi-Lefties and knowitall Elitist Socialists.  For too long, Lefties have been blind to the main consequence of their anti-First Amendment stance, which is this:  To justify feel-good limitations on freedom of expression and enterprise is to promote elitist authoritarians.  To promote elitist authoritarians is to grease the way for Islamists, Communists, Sociopaths, and People Farmers. 

The more the Cattle People allow themselves to be persuaded to compromise the First Amendment, the more they are reduced to tender veal for the owners of the means of persuasion (media, movies, academia, etc.).    That Femi Lefties tend unwittingly to vounteer for the ovens is indicated by their support for all the measures that have done so much destruction to inner-city families.  Metro-Femi-Lefties might be forgiven for knowing not what they have been doing to America and its innocent progeny.  They cannot be forgiven for caring not what they do.



Economic Shell Game


A shell game that commonly pollutes logics of individual versus group economics relates to slips between wholes and parts. Between those who play within the system and those who play above it. Between those to whom the law applies and those to whom the law does not apply. The twilight zone of international relations among crony corporatists.

Economic trade between societies organized as nations can never be "free," because each trading nation will always seek to advantage its economic controllers by influencing the politics of all other traders.

The U.S.'s economic controllers are not the people, but the people-farming cronies that treat people, politicians, and even governments as commoditities. They are quite amenable of selling out the people, nation, and its resources for corruptly laundered personal profit. The same applies to the despotic gangs that rule foreign nations, especially third world nations.

As a nation, our ordinary citizens are not benefitting, politically, by our trade policies -- regardless of whether one calls those policies free or fair. Rather, as a nation, our troops and workers who bled and sweated to defend our country are put under the thumbs of crony corporatists bent on selling them out. The consequence, worldwide, is a movement to reduce the masses to the lowest common status of desperate serf laborers. In this, those who run our major political parties are united.

The economic wealth that does accrue to ordinary Americans tends to come more from inheriting the work of people killed and replaced by abuse and war than from increases in efficiency brought on by "division of labor." The U.S., from sea to shining sea, has little need of most labor or resources from other parts of the world. To a large extent, what trickles down to ordinary Americans is a consequence of the dollar being the world's reserve currency. Other nations presently have little choice but to work for the dollar -- even though Americans nowadays produce mostly fluff. That, however, will soon leach out, like a back-washing tsunami. By then, most of our cronies will have found their safe harbors and islands.

Cronies, on the other hand, need one another to keep rolling their schemes for laundering political favors -- the consequence of which tends to be to hollow out the jobs and resources of their fellow countrymen -- the ones who actually bled and sweated to build and defend the nation.

"Free trade" tends to be a shell game by which cronies who rule above the game pick the pockets of individuals who play within the game. (They even inspire followers among unionists and homies by promising "free stuff." They own the ghetto people, because they own both major political parties and all significant institutions of political persuasion.)

The ordinary rules simply aren't applied to well connected cronies, and likely never will be. If Americans want to be "free," they will need periodically to overturn the tables of the crony money masters. (Water the tree of liberty.) Otherwise, no representative republic can long survive the cronies that will buy and sell its politicians and their "laws" as if they were little more than the devil's commodities. The biggest threat to the republic is the lack of effective spiritual and formal checks against the influence laundering of faith-breaching cronies.

By itself, no flat tax against crony consumptions can ever be effective to impede their snowballing agglomerations of political influence, that will always tend to the destruction of republics.

******************

Socialists love Big Brother.  However, the Bill of Rights is concerned with the freedom and dignity of individuals within States.  To maximize individual freedom of thought, expression, and enterprise, provided it is not tolerated to destroy the freedom of thought, expression, and enterprise of others.  Islam, like socialism, trades with the devil by destroying freedom in phony trade for safe spaces for the hiveminded. 

There is no freedom among Muslims in Islam to express disbelief.  That will cost you your head.  There is little freedom in socialism to go against the line of the ruling party.  That will get you an ice pick in the head, as Trotsky found out.  There is no honest dealing in the Dem Party, as those who believed in Debbie Wasserman Schultz found out. 

Islam, communism, radical socialism, and militant atheism are all intolerant of non-believers.  For them, "progress" is the spreading of their intolerance.   Those who believe in human freedom and dignity too often and too short sightedly condemn themselves by being so tolerant that they tolerate that which means to destroy them -- whether immediately or by a thousand cuts.  Hive minds lack the freedom that is essential to mend them.  Once sufficiently in power, the hive-borg kills freedom, relentlessly and permanently.  Once enough voters elect to be ruled by despotic elitists who promise they will be benign, they forfeit their dignity and become reduced to subhuman status.  That kind of socialism becomes a big-brother religion for subhumans.

People will work for themselves, their families, their significant others, and to improve their property.  They will not long work for others if they can find ways to bilk the system.  Socialists never learn this.  People who use gov property do not respect such property -- even when socialists try to force such respect by lining up and shooting offenders in order to make examples.  Elites are human beings, not angels.  To give them the kind of unlimited power over others that socialists lean to, unmoderated by religious like faith, is to corrupt them, absolutely. 

If socialists have any "red lines" they would enforce against the degradation of humanity and its children, what are they?  They have none.  Define your red lines and your non-religious science that proves them, that defend the innocence of children.  You have none.  You would replace the love of  parents with the diktat of soulless statists, and then sell children for their body parts.

Whether you believe in Jesus or not, He gave the essence of the spiritual, moral law:  Love God, and do unto others as you would have them do unto you.  That is a basis for human freedom and dignity, property rights, individual enterprise, and freedom of thought.  Jesus did not send Apostles to demand belief in trade for not having your head cut.

Among decent, thinking people in the West, those two laws have taught intuition and empathy to moderate the Mosaic law.  That is why you do not see modern Christians acting like primitive 7th Century islamists.  To pretend modern Christianity is comparable to the depravity of Stalinism and Islamism is uninformed nonsense.

To denigrate all religions is also uninformed nonsense.  You say you believe in socialism.  Is your belief based in insight, intuition, and empathy, or is it based in empirical science?  You do not say socialism is per se proven good by science.  So you recognize it itself is a religion.  Now, if you base it in a spiritual, interpenetrating, perpetual, immeasurable, empathetic, feedback aspect of the cosmos that is beyond empirical proof, then I am partly with you.  The difference is this:  My idea of "good socialism" (civilization) entails maximal respect for human freedom and dignity, which I would not, without overpowering reason, surrender to immediate gratifications or "safe spaces" for hive minds.  I suspect, notwithstanding the abominations of the 20th Century, that socialists suffer from historical illiteracy that renders them excessively vulnerable to phony fallen elitists.

Regarding religious tests:  The First Amendment gives the right to the free exercise of religion.  In Islam, as in the Mafia, there is no free exercise.  Apostasy will get you stoned.

Regarding Article VI, see http://www.nationalreview.com/article/438536/immigration-religious-test-constitution-does-not-ban-vetting-immigrants-religion:

"Of all all the ignorant pronouncements in the 2016 presidential campaign, the dumbest may be that the Constitution forbids a “religious test” in the vetting of immigrants."

"The clause said to be the source of this drivel is found in Article VI.  As you’ll no doubt be shocked to learn, it has utterly nothing to do with immigration. The clause states, “no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States”. On its face, the provision is not only inapplicable to immigrants at large, let alone aliens who would like to be immigrants; it does not even apply to the general public. It is strictly limited to public officials — specifically to their fitness to serve in government positions."

Bottom line:  Because socialists apparently only read drivel, they only spread drivel.  No doubt, however, drivel-spreading, socialistic Progs will find some idiot judge to rule.  And why?  Why, because Prog phonies have utterly corrupted our demographics.