Pope Excommunicates Christ

Pope Francis Says Arms Manufacturers Can’t Call Themselves Christian | TIME:

I grew up in a very fundamentalist church and have been exposed to others in my life. I decided somewhere along the line that I would never be a member of a church that was too restrictive to allow Christ on the pulpit -- like you must not have a beard or long hair to take the pulpit, you must be married, you must wear a suit and tie, etc. It seems like a very good simple rule -- if your church has somehow gotten too high and mighty for the Lord of all, it seems me a given that you have taken a wrong turn.

So the pope has declared that a person that makes weapons can't be whatever he thinks "Christian" is. Let's quote a few words of Christ.

Luke 22:36 He said to them, But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.

Christ also used a whip to drive money lenders out of the temple as well (a weapon), and when John the Baptist was asked by a soldier how to reach heaven.

Luke 3:14 "What should we do?" asked some soldiers. John replied, "Don't extort money or make false accusations. And be content with your pay."

So one can be a soldier and still be a Christian according to the Bible -- Apparently the pope has not decided to excommunicate soldiers yet, but a weaponless soldier is a dead soldier, so maybe the same thing. It seems we have a clear case of the "Vicar of Christ" being nuts -- The pope is guarded by a lot of armed guards -- whose existence for the benefit of his own person would not be possible except through the efforts of a vocation he now calls non-Christian.

I won't be joining the Catholic church under the pontificate of this pope! I'm actually shocked -- I really didn't think such idiocy would ever come from the mouth of a pontiff. I thought they had controls to shut a pope that had lost it away quietly these days -- but apparently not. Sad thing to see.

'via Blog this'

Voltaire Burning The Confederate Flag

Senate Rejects Flag Desecration Amendment:

I'm fine with SC putting the confederate flag in a museum -- Jeb Bush did that in FL, not that the media gives him any credit for it. It is a state issue, let them take care of it.

There was once an American principle called "Freedom of Speech". The ACLU defended the right of Nazis to march in Skokie. Caustic comics like Lenny Bruce and others were staunchly defended from especially the left, but in general, "free speech" -- definitely including very derogatory, racist, obscene, incendiary, etc speech was considered a cornerstone of America. In general, we agreed with Voltaire : "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."

Liberty was a big thing in that country -- we even had a statue to celebrate it. "Give me liberty or give me death" was a famous quote of that nation.

As you can see from the linked article, as recently as 2006 you could not get an amendment to prevent burning the US Flag through the US Senate. Burning the US Flag was deemed important enough speech that even though clearly incendiary "speech" in more ways than one, it was important that you be allowed to burn the symbol that over a million soldiers have died to preserve over the course of our history.

Then came "hate speech". It can't be defined in advance -- for example just this past weekend, BO said "the N-word", but in his case it isn't defined as "hate speech", so it is OK. He also read from his own book "Dreams From My Father", where his use of the word is much less "presidential".

"Hate Speech" is like "taxes", "sexual harassment", "racism", or a whole host of other concepts now that are weapons used by the dominant party (Democrat) to destroy the opposition when and as desired. It is about POWER, not law.

Since the nation no longer has shared values that ALL parties observe EQUALLY, like "free speech", everything becomes a matter of pure political calculation. So if the confederate flag is considered objectionable, it is an instant wedge issue to be used for political gain with no discussion of freedom of speech.

Next week the same people could turn around an defend burning a US Flag, because the ONLY issue in a nation without rule of law is POLITICS! "Law" is whatever is the "political winner" -- and in fact becomes a malleable weapon -- today one person or politician can use the N-word and be fine, tomorrow another can say "niggardly" and be taken down as an insensitive racist.

The key to survival in a totalitarian nation is "watching the winds of power blow". While Republicans had absolutely no reason to run for cover in SC, it was obvious that the media storm was blowing their direction, so they quickly acted as scared rabbits to see how quickly they could get out of the way to try to minimize their damage.

BO however has catbird power -- he can say the N-word with impunity. No outcry, off the news as fast as it shows up, no storm -- power prerogative. The masses know power and are impressed by it -- the media and TP ability to successfully pin a flag raised by Democrats on Republicans and having the Republicans portrayed as little boys caught with their pants down as they try to deal with the storm is an impressive show that resonates with the common man. The rank and file sheeple don't really know how they are being manipulated, and it is sad to see what BO refers to as the "bitter clingers" jerking about as marionettes in the hands of spastic masters.

Voltaire and the French put too much faith in the common man. Our founders understood that and gave us a written Constitution, rule of law, and made us a Republic, not a "democracy" (mobocracy). Watching the machinations of TP this week shows how easily the vast vast majority of this nation can now be manipulated in our state of totalitarian political power.

'via Blog this'

Democrats Don't Trust BO -- Why Do Republicans?

Senate Hands a Victory to Obama on Trade Pact - The New York Times:



Republicans have a VERY nasty habit of caring more about the actual country than they do politics! They have this weird thought that "right is right" no matter who is in power, and that "doing the right thing", even if it gives power to a president that REGULARLY calls you all manner of names including "racists", because it is "good for the country".



In the past -- when government was limited and we had a Constitution that both sides believes in, one could hold up such ideals as reasonable. Right now though, this is like negotiating with terrorists. Even if you DON'T give BO this authority he is likely to act as if he has it anyway!



BO sees this as personal POWER -- I believe the Republican faith in his goodwill and assurances he will use this for what the Republicans expect is extremely likely to come back to haunt them.



I fail to understand why Boehner and McConnell can't simply say "We are in complete agreement with Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi who don't trust this president with trade authority. We don't trust him either, bipartisanship has been reached!"



'via Blog this'

Gravity and Economics Still Work

Why the Recovery Still Limps Along - WSJ:

News at 11 -- no surprises here, I've covered it before, but the media and BO keep lying about it anyway and unfortunately not everyone is required to read my blog!

The states with the most business friendly climate -- right to work laws, lower taxes, lower minimum wages, etc have looked the best since the recession. People generally move to those states because (thankfully) there are still a good number of people that want to have work!

The deeper the hit was to employment when the recession hit, in general the more rapid the recovery has been post recession. This has been true at the state level, and it has been true of every US recession prior to now -- BO is (as usual) lying about the slowness being due to the depth of the recession. The tepid to non-existent recovery is due to his policies. Remember the easy test of BO lying -- his lips moved.

Throw a ball in the air, it still comes down. Force business to be less competitive (closed shops, higher minimum wages), make it more expensive to do business -- higher taxes, more regulations, and business goes down.

Same old same old -- no reason at all to have BO and the media version of 3 card monte confuse you. Be especially watchful as they change the whole game by modification of GDP reporting as of July.

Now faking the numbers -- THAT is a policy that I have faith in BO to execute on!

'via Blog this'

The Myth of Republican Racism

The Myth of Republican Racism | National Review Online:



I've covered most all this in this blog at some time or another, but the linked article is a very good and concise summary and worth the read.



'via Blog this'

Democrat Media Confederacy

GOP Candidates Get 3rd Degree Over Confederate Flag, But Check Out Billary’s History With It:

To look at the news one would really think that the Democrat States of of the North, led by Democrat Abraham Lincoln defeated the Republican States of the South, led by Republican Jefferson Davis, in the Civil War, followed by an unbroken racist Republican rule of the south through Jim Crow until now.

Only it isn't the case -- in fact, it was DEMOCRATS that put all those confederate flags all over -- AND!!, as recently as Clinton - Gore running for office were PROUD to use confederate flags as part of their campaign!

Billy C even signed legislation stating that the star above the A on the Arkansas flag "commemorates the confederate states of America" as is copied in the attached article.

Yet again we see the MSM showing it's true nature as a propaganda arm of the Democrat party. Thousands of young black men shoot each other every year and the MSM nor Democrats care not one whit -- because they don't see the issue as a political winner for them.

Crazy white guy shoots blacks and has a confederate flag somewhere? To hell with history, to hell with any semblance of reality reporting "Confederate = Republican = Racist ---> **GO**!!!"

So they run out and treat the whole confederate flag issue as a "Republican problem" -- which, to the extent that Republicans are left with the task of cleaning it up, it is -- even Jeb Bush (who I DO NOT support), who removed the offending flag to a museum in FL gets tagged as somehow "treading carefully" on this supposed "Republican issue".

This is propaganda pure and simple -- this is how the masses become convinced of things that are just not true, but they are so widely believed that great crowds can be gathered to chant "Sig Heil" or whatever the chant of the day is with great passion, but no grounding in reality.

'via Blog this'

Even Those Only Worth $100M Can Play

http://feeds.washingtonpost.com/c/34656/f/636635/s/47369371/sc/7/l/0M0Swashingtonpost0N0Cpolitics0Cdemocracy0Enot0Ejust0Efor0Ebillionaires0Ehillary0Eclinton0Etells0Ecrowd0Ein0Eny0C20A150C0A60C130C346e33180E11fb0E11e50Ea0Afe0Edccfea4653ee0Istory0Bhtml0Dwprss0Frss0Inational/story01.htm

“Prosperity can’t be just for CEOs and hedge-fund managers,” Clinton said in an address on Roosevelt Island, with Wall Street visible over her shoulder. “Democracy can’t be just for billionaires and corporations. Prosperity and democracy are part of your basic bargain, too. You brought our country back. Now it’s time — your time — to secure the gains and move ahead.”

What a lovely article. When you have a "D" next to your name, chutzpah is really really cheap -- in fact, nary a word on how poor little Hillary, "flat broke" when her and her husband left the WH in 2001 managed to get there without being "billionaires", nor how they managed to spend 10's of millions since and amass a net worth of about $100M -- certainly lots of both prosperity and power.

Apparently she MEANT to say "Prosperity can't just be for lying, cheating and corrupt political bystanders like me, CEOs, and hedge-fund managers"  -- but then, if a Clinton said something honest, they wouldn't be a Clinton -- would they?

"Take your country back" -- from who? BO has been in the WH over six long years now, and if it wasn't for adjusting the way we report GDP we would likely officially be in a recession after that 2nd quarter GDP report.  Take your country back from Democrats? Darned good idea, but I doubt that was what she had in mind.

It appears that men can "identify" as women, whites can "identify" as black, and people worth $100M can "identify" as populists.

Oh ... and if we don't like our shrinking economy or our cooling temps? Just change the way we figure the numbers!

Just believe what the media tells you ...  I need to learn to say Baaah rather than BAH!

I Identify as Grandpa

We are born tiny and vulnerable like our new little granddaughter that I held for the first time last Monday on our 30th Anniversary. We are still the children of two parents, a man and a woman, and no matter what horrors science may imagine, the product of many miraculous processes that those of us with faith believe to be wrought by a benevolent God with a purpose in all, especially for us -- because it is a rare human that actually believes they are are not a unique special creation with a purpose.

For my granddaughter, that is true to infinity and beyond!

Our ancestry reaches back through generations of specific grandparents, great grandparents, and onward. If we just take the time since Christ, we have a bit over 2000 years divided by 20 (the usual "generation" number) -- so 100 x 2 for both ancestors. Each of our whole individual ancestry since Christ could sit in a typical church sanctuary or large college lecture hall.

That is reality as we know it -- we are products of an imperfectly known biology that includes DNA mixing over generations according to some rules of dominant and recessive along with random inputs over time -- and a lot of "unknown magic" or divine direction. We don't "identify as" what is in those genes, we ARE what was in them. It is called being. Some of us also believe that a unique and eternal spirit indwells this earthy body -- for some, "it's just stuff".

Only really being a grandparent gives the meaning to the blessing of Psalm 128:6 "May you live to see your children's children". With age also comes perspective.

One of the surprises of my life was how emotional it was to first hold our newborn children -- tears of joy came on suddenly and surprisingly. I didn't expect it -- possibly partially because the previous generations of males had largely been complete restricted from delivery rooms. Mine was the generation that it became MANDATORY. While I very much enjoyed the experience, it was one of those things that shaped me on "progress".

For having children, we "progressed" from no male that wasn't a doctor being allowed in the delivery room, to it being totally mandatory for the father to be there -- weak stomach, worried about blood, not going to deal well with your wife in pain? FORGET IT! ... you WILL be there! I grew up in a fundamentalist church -- there is absolutely no question that the "fundamentalist impulse", where if an idea is "good", it must be mandatory and if it is "bad" it must be prohibited, is totally active in all humans all the time.

Having a grandchild has convinced me yet again that whether it is divine or just "natural", it is no accident that we are strongly wired to emotionally react to being a parent/grandparent at levels that we are likely farther from really understanding psychologically and socially than we are from understanding "what is life?" biologically. The problem of our human conceit to believe that; "society/culture is "built by man", so therefore we understand it" is covered well in "The Fatal Conceit". Short answer -- a fish describing "wet" has some of the problem.

So our culture has been killing marriage, the stable family, having children and families staying together so the birth grandparents know the birth offspring for so long that we have lost touch with what is really "divinely/naturally the way of life".  In or efforts to "make it better" have we again managed to obscure one of the greatest joys of life, much more available to most than other "peak experiences"?

We have celebrated the single parent, the blended family, etc so much for so long that we have somewhat  lost sight of what is the true / good / best / normal / spiritual  that life can offer. It as if seeing a video of mountains or the ocean became the standard of REALLY seeing them because "not EVERYONE gets to REALLY see the mountains or the ocean, so it ISN'T FAIR to celebrate actually seeing them!".

Only it **IS FAIR**! In fact, denying the joy of real mountains, oceans, sunsets, redwoods, glaciers, etc, etc doesn't make it better for those that are unable to experience them first hand, it makes it WORSE for all! None of us can experience everything possible first hand -- nor would we want to -- say skydiving, free climbing, handling poisonous  snakes, swimming with sharks, etc. When we see the "downside" in something, we are rather happy to have "The Crocodile Hunter" tell us all about it, but ALL of our experience is limited, not just the stuff we are scared of.

One only has to be a grandparent for a little bit and "the club" opens up -- it is one of those "circles of life". You have to "know to know". All the feelings and stories come tumbling out of the other grandparents because "now it is OK to share" -- otherwise it would have  been "bragging". It is as if mountains were kept nearly secret because discussing how cool they are would be somehow wrong.

We deal with all manner of limitations -- some of us can't have kids, for some of us, life doesn't work out so it can happen. Some of us are in wheelchairs, some of us are blind, some of us just have next to no athletic ability (me), YET, for some reason we are all very willing to celebrate Curry, James, Rodgers, etc. Their experience INCREASES our experience -- as it should.

Certainly, we should ALSO celebrate whatever adjustments can be made -- wheel chair Olympics, eyeglasses, adoption, blended families, etc, but we ought never make color blindness "normal". That doesn't make anyone's life better, but rather diminishes us all. Seek the purest and best blessings and celebrate them -- and always be thankful for even the paintings of mountains as well.

May you see real mountains, real oceans, and may you live to see your children's children!

'via Blog this'

The Virtuous Cycle of Poverty For The Party

Suburbs and the New American Poverty - The Atlantic:

I learned something new while doing a little research on projections for future traffic on the outskirts of the city of Rochester. American suburbs are becoming much poorer!

This really isn't hard to understand with some thought -- "poverty" has become a lot less "poor" from a material standpoint as this article points out . To be poor in America today often includes materially a car, owning your own home, air conditioning. cable or satellite tv, a DVR, the internet, etc. It stands to reason that it would also begin to include that former symbol of "middle class", living in the suburbs!

As I've pointed out before, we declared "war" on poverty which was in rapid decline in the early 60's and have since stopped that decline, and through $22T in subsidy, managed to it back on the increase! Who says that government doesn't work! It is all about perspective.

Most of the poor vote for The Party (TP -- Democrat), so the most important thing that our TP controlled government wants is MORE VOTES! "Poverty" -- which today could really be called "policies for the destruction of the two parent family" creates a virtuous cycle for TP. The more poor there are, the more TP votes there are. The policies which TP puts in place tend to reduce the work ethic across the country by penalizing the productive and subsidizing the non-productive. WIN WIN!

As people are less and less well off, the number of TP voters rises! Exporting this phenomenon to the suburbs is clearly right in line with the TP prime directive ( MORE VOTES!). Besides, due to the same policies, more people in the suburbs are sliding into poverty -- sauce for the goose! Soon whole new cadres of formerly "inner city" poverty pimps will need to be added in the suburbs to manage this new set of vote slaves. Hello "Community Organizer" ?!

Sure, there is a little "collateral damage" -- drugs, despair, violence, etc, but if you want total equality (nobody has anything), then clearly this is the right policy!

This also works in government itself -- government workers all vote TP, so adding more government adds more government workers that increases the number of TP voters, so a huge win for TP!

It really isn't hard at all to understand what is happening with just a little thought and focus! Heil TP!

'via Blog this'

President of Spokane NAACP Transracial

'Black' NAACP leader outed as white woman: "
"
This article makes an interesting read in the vein of the modern "liberal" -- "you are who you say you are" and "the truth is what you conceive it to be".

Apparently both of this woman's biological parents are white. She has courageously self-identified as black for quite a while now and has made enough appearance changes so that she appeared black to others. No doubt she was always black inside, and now she is a whole person.

She has been the victim of all sorts of racial threats and intimidation over the years, as well as some bizarre postal accidents -- such as a package being delivered without a postmark!

These things are all easily explainable.

Dolezal told officers that most of these types of incidents were caused by people affiliated with right wing groups in our area.

Damn those "right wing groups" -- they are some shifty suckahs!

I have to admit that I am SHOCKED by Atlanta media and their headline. This seems even worse than calling "Caitlyn" Jenner "Bruce", does it not? If she feels black, she is BLACK! Right?

'via Blog this'

Rubio's Boat vs.John Kerry's Boat

Marco Rubio's Boat vs. John Kerry's Boat | Ricochet:



No doubt there will be HUNDREDS of articles like the recent NYTs attack on Rubio. It is so ridiculously easy to compare these attacks with the complete softball treatment of BO, Hilly, Kerry, or anyone else  of the D persuasion that happens to run, that it hardly bears doing a search



If you want a little funny comparison the Kerry boat vs the Rubio boat is cute ... I liked the one comment I saw:  "Core Clinton donors use boats bigger than Rubio’s just to transport underage girls from the dock to the main yacht."



For those that think the Clinton comment is a "joke", sadly, it isn't. ...


'via Blog this'

Dayton Wins, Nobody Happy

http://www.minnpost.com/politics-policy/2015/06/what-mark-dayton-getting-out-special-session

http://www.startribune.com/budget-deal-at-the-capitol-yes-but/306777401/

I've included links to a couple of versions of how the Medicated Governor (Dayton) has come out in the special session for those that want to read up. In short, he didn't get much -- like for example, he didn't the money for his early childhood education that he said caused the veto. From my perspective, he ought to have gotten NOTHING -- as one of the articles said, he didn't have a strong position going in and made it weaker by stating that he would avoid a shutdown.

I especially liked this Dayton quote from the second one. "The sign of a true compromise is that no one is happy with it."  -- one might call that the essence of non-totalitarian government. At least in totalitarian government, the folks in charge are happy -- and usually they force everyone else to SAY they are happy, lest they or their families end up incarcerated or dead! 

Small wonder that God gave us Capitalism -- the free exchange of goods and services in which the decision to make the transaction is freely made so BOTH parties believe that they are better off than they were without the transaction. The "seller" got a profit that they were willing to take and the "buyer" got the good or service at a rate that they were willing to pay. The absolute inverse of Dayton's world -- "no deal unless EVERYONE is happy" vs "no deal unless NOBODY is happy".  Is it REALLY that hard to choose between the two? 

Sadly, it is, because all sides go into politics like people go into Social Security -- believing unsoundly that "everyone will get out more than they put in".  As Reagan put it:
“It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so.” Our founders understood that government was OVERHEAD, like insurance -- so you wanted to carry the MINIMUM of it that you could handle, lest it consume you. Neither party is even close to that understanding today -- something like 80% of our population are really "liberals" by action. 

It is remarkable how well the left leaning MN press can hold their tongues. A governor known to be mentally ill but medicated, a multiple time lapsed alcoholic who is at present often barely coherent vetoed a BI-PARTISAN budget over a pet project on early childhood education. risking a government shutdown. Were Dayton a Republican (it could NEVER happen with his baggage), the outcry would reach levels of apocalyptic insanity as it did when Pawlenty vetoed a budget with actual reason -- 

Very few harsh words are heard from his compliant friends in the press -- I understand that the Republicans kept near silence because that same press was just waiting on a hair trigger for **ANY** even tiny soudbite that they could use to "blame it all on the Republicans", but it still amazes. 

Without a TINY bit of actual free thinking in the press, we are treated to the sort of ridiculous Kabuki that this Dayton veto has resulted in. When a state is as far left as MN, sane people very nearly need to be drugged in order to believe what passes for sanity in this Woebegone Asylum!

Seinfeld and "Progressive" Preppy Comedy

An Open Letter to Jerry Seinfeld from a 'Politically Correct' College Student | Anthony Berteaux:

This little column is an exercise in smug.

We need to talk about the role that provocative comedy holds today in a progressive world.

See, on college campuses, and largely in the western nations, "progressives" have won -- which means it is now all about power and violence rather than rule of law and freedom of speech.

Mr Anthony Berteaux (column author) is sitting in what he sees as the catbirds seat, and he is pretty damned smug about it. He is certain that he has the power -- and is happy to lord it over in this case, Jerry Seinfeld.

But, he or course doesn't have the power. He no doubt would not want to see a comedian make fun of Muslims on his campus -- that could result in bombings, beheadings and all sorts of violence. Nope, Muslims are off limits --  he just fails to mention them because he is forgetful and wants to be smug.

He makes it plain later with a crass quote -- but he doesn't do a list:

Offend the right fucking people. 

But I will ... Christians, Conservatives, Republicans  would be a good start. Darned near all those people are non-violent, law abiding (because they have something to lose) and they are definitely the right people to offend -- from Mr Preppy's POV.

In the right context, white males are good too -- all be it not in a Biker Bar no doubt, nor likely even in the right kind of a mostly blue collar sports bar -- there Mr Preppy would find his overdog courage tinkling down his leg if he thought of anything "offensive" to say. Power isn't always portable, rule of law, more so -- but we gave that up. It is great to "offend the right people" when you have the power.

In a free society with freedom of speech, all speech -- ESPECIALLY unpopular speech is protected, and the mark of a free people is to understand that words are only words ESPECIALLY in comedy. Being offended was considered immature and shameful among free men. Mr Preppy is clearly not one of those.

But we don't live in that kind of society anymore, so now people need to either be willing to do violence to protect against speech they don't like -- like Muslims, or most likely Bikers at least on their turf. The rest of us have to worry about the State putting us away if we don't talk nice -- because not many of us would worry about Mr Preppy without a few jack booted thugs to back him up.

Thus, we have "progressed" (regressed) back to the medieval times when what you were free to say was determined by the mood of the King -- no freedom of speech. Only today, rather than Royalty -- with all the commensurate responsibilities they bore along with their power, we have Mr Preppy - snotty, crass, juvenile and smug. Very smug.

And that is what is called "progress".

'via Blog this'

Transgenderism, Homosexuality, Science

Transgenderism: A Pathogenic Meme | Public Discourse:

The linked article is a rather scholarly takedown of the idea of "transgenderism". As anyone with an ounce of common sense knows, the problem is psychological, not physical. "Startlingly", the same thing is true of homosexuality ... people are not born "gay", they for one reason or another go down that path -- and often "come back" to normal heterosexuality as they age. "News at 11".

If "transgenderism" was a horrible burden causing severe mental issues genetically passed on, it would have worked it's way out of the gene pool long ago along with other certainly non-adaptive things like homosexuality.  A generation that forgets the absolute bedrock fact of life that the future belongs to those that are born, unsurprisingly has a very poor grasp on how characteristics breed over hundreds of thousands and millions of years. Don't want to have sex with the opposite sex? Your genes were a bad experiment.  Can't figure out what your sex is? Genetically, it isn't a very long goodbye.

But we won't be seeing any of this published or talked about extensively. While both of the PHDs behind these studies have extensive credentials -- the transgender one being former distinguished professor of Psychiatry and then head of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkins, this is not information our ruling elites want to have people aware of. It just doesn't fit their narrative.

As the Johns Hopkins PHD says "gird your loins if you would confront this matter. Hell hath no fury like vested interest masquerading as a moral principle". Or a vested interest masquerading as "science" for that matter (see "Global Warming"). So it won't be confronted -- it will be propagandized.

In yet another example of "lives that don't matter" -- along with the 6 thousand or so young black men who kill each other each year while nobody cares, we get thousands of gender and orientation confused youth presented as sacrifices to a "moral cause" vs being treated by a caring psychological community that might look to help them adjust to the reality of the world rather than to treat them as the vested interest of the day desires. Not going to happen.

So the modern left wing pseudo sexual circus continues to parade through society as if it were real. Like the majority of what passes as "news / fact / science" today, it is none of the above -- it is fiction, designed to make masses so compliant that they will credulously fall for literally ANYTHING! In some ways, the more bizarre, obscene, unnatural and irrational the better.

When believing bold faced obvious lies has become so natural that nothing causes suspicion to rise in the masses of the sheep, then the nation is absolutely ripe for the easiest of picking.

'via Blog this'

Marriage No Longer Exists

When Bisexual People Get Left Out of Marriage | Advocate.com:

Occasionally someone will bring up the "Why do you care about marriage equality -- it doesn't affect you"?

In order to have an intelligible shared reality, we need to agree on the meaning of words. We no longer have an agreed definition of marriage.

Every claim to "marriage equality" is labeled "GLBT" ... Gay, Lesbian, Bi-Sexual and Transgender.

As the article claims, that is **WAY** too restrictive. Facebook now has 58 (and rising) gender options. 

The article definitely says -- as do most of the new "laws" on the books on "marriage equality" that the B and the T are included in this brave to world of "marriage".

So what IS a bi-sexual "marriage"??? Three people? Four people? More? The article carefully avoids defining it, though makes it clear that "gay" or "same sex" are definitely NOT the right terms!How about if you take the 58 types of "gender" that FB has and try to arrive at what a "marriage" between any ??? 2? 5? ?? do numbers matter?

It very much appears that we "needed to pass these marriage laws so we will know what is in them" --- which means that we no longer know what the word marriage means. So yes, destroying the definition of what was formerly one of the most basic relationships in human society matters very much to me.

If it doesn't matter to you, then words having meaning doesn't matter -- which used to be one of the signs of insanity, but in an insane world, is now accepted without thought.How can you possibly "disagree"? What does "disagree" mean? It means precisely what the dominant party (THE Party) says it means -- no more, no less.

Welcome to 1984.
'via Blog this'