Showing posts with label Sexual politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sexual politics. Show all posts

Thursday, October 18, 2018

Aerosmith - again?

The awful "hair band" called "Aerosmith" is back in the news again.  We remembered how Mr. Tyler did awful National Anthems at major events that caught those of us who sing.

But this time, one of their songs is in the news.

In Los Angeles, at the StubHub Center complex, the women's track cycling UCI World Masters Championship has drawn the ire of many as a college professor -- a man who claims to be a woman -- won the Women's 35-39 group.  

This time, that awful song from Aerosmith, "Dude (Looks Like a Lady)," rings true.  The winner was a "Dude (looks like a lady)," and the real ladies lost.  This is Obergefell's "right to dignity" at its worst again.  Remember Dale Saran's warning in Jonsson v. CrossFit, which the Dude (Looks Like a Lady) won primarily because of Obergefell and the Exxon Mobil Payback.

"The fundamental, ineluctable fact is that a male competitor who has a sex reassignment procedure still has a genetic makeup that confers a physical and physiological advantage over women."

What gives?  Avery Brundage and Dale Saran were right.  How come a few judges reminiscent of that book in the Bible where they do what feels right in their heart have rights nobody else has?

Friday, November 17, 2017

Wish I'd Written That: Al Franken Edition

"I
don't like the guy at all, and that’s not based on politics but an experience with his extraordinary personal jerkiness. I don’t agree all the time with our other senator, but I like her, because she’s a decent person. Franken is an arrogant toad. I am amused that his sonorous pomposity has been pierced by the boob-grabbing photograph of something he thought was funny, because it cuts right to the heart of his self-conception.

"He’s probably always thought he was a comic genius. He’s second-rate. If that. No one searches Netflix for “Al Franken comedy.” No one who watched SNL ever thought “oh wonderful! It’s Al Franken,” and no one ever said SNL was can’t-miss-TV this week because Al Franken was back.

"I don’t think he should have to resign his Senate seat. That seems a bit much, but I didn’t make the rules. Did he say he doesn’t remember doing what he did? Because if I wrote a script so I could kiss a Playboy model, I think I’d remember.

"Quite a bonfire, isn’t it. You might say a wienie roast."

- From today's Lileks

I couldn't have put this any better myself. To be fair, though, his apology was a model of contrition, the kind that every crisis management team should have on file to give to their clients.

Hopefully, he actually meant it. And that's not meant as a reflection on him, as much as it is the general cynicism in which we find ourselves nowadays. You'd like to think that these people really are sincere when they make apologies like this - or at least that they meant it at the time they said it, if nothing else - but unfortunately, we have too much evidence pointing elsewhere to be able to do so.

As to whether or not Franken should resign - yeah, he probably should. In a perfect world, or a lab experiment marked "U.S. Senate," probably not. A formal censure, even a reprimand, would probably suffice. But I'm not sure that kind of thing does any good anymore; we don't value integrity as we once did, or even pay it lip service. Something like a censure would amount to little more than a slap on the wrist; there wouldn't really be any stigma to it. In the age of lifetime politicians, the loss of their office is probably the only thing they really understand.

It's a chicken-and-egg thing. Is the problem how to punish a guy like Al Franken, or is it how a guy like Al Franken got into the U.S. Senate in the first place?

Tuesday, February 14, 2017

Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander: incident at the Renée Fleming recital

The recent recital at the Peace Center in Greenville featuring Renée Fleming that I attended (also scratched her name from the "best singer I've yet to see" list since I have now seen her;  that honour goes to Анна Нетребко) also caused a microaggression by the Left after I entered my seat that cost only one Andrew Jackson (a twenty dollar ticket is still better than a sixty dollar ticket that's 150 feet away for a mega-pop star).  In time, you must show the Left a taste of their own medicine.  As I introduced myself to a few people around our seating area before the event, the young woman next to me introduced a second woman as "my wife".

That was an automatic red light district.  That is not possible -- a woman cannot take a wife (only a man can).  Citing Sections 20-1-10 ("No woman shall marry . . . another woman.") and 20-1-15 ("A marriage between two persons of the same sex is null and void ab initio."), I knew this wasn't real.  This was offensive to anyone, especially the seventy-eight percent in this state that made their vote heard in 2006.  To take from Leviticus 18:22, "(A man) shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."  In this case, a woman shall not like with womankind, as with mankind.  As Romans 1:27 noted, these two women left the natural use of the man, burned in their lust one towards another, and women with women working that was unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

Thankfully someone had a seat in another section that his daughter was to use but she had been given a ticket to move up to the best sections, and I took that seat in a lower section.  I was pleased that I took the seat, since these people need to learn they are offending The Seventy-Eight Percent with their actions.  Why is it these crybabies get to dictate their mandate to everyone else?

Monday, October 17, 2016

Postscript to Throwback Thursday

Postscript on last week's Throwback Thursday:

CrossFit sent a letter to the man who wanted to participate as a woman following the lawsuit, specifically pointing out the truth.  Here are highlights of CrossFit's letter, with proper (and correct) notes in parentheses:

We have not prohibited (the plaintiff) from participating in the CrossFit Games. We have simply ruled that based upon (this man) being born as a male, (he) will need to compete in the Men's Division. Competing in a sport is very different from the conclusory statement in the first paragraph of your letter, that "[t]hus, by all accounts, both physically and legally, (this male) is a female." This is simply wrong as a matter of human biology and if you can’t see that, there really isn’t much to talk about.

(This man) was born, genetically – as a matter of fact – with an X and a Y chromosome and all of the anatomy of a male of the human race. Today, notwithstanding any hormone therapy or surgeries, (this man) still has an X and Y chromosome. Thus, you’re statement is categorically, empirically, false.  (Editor's note - A woman has only two X chromosomes, and no Y chromosomes.)

The principle intent of the CrossFit Games is to determine the fittest man and woman on Earth. What we’re really talking about here is a matter of definition; of what it means to  be "female" for purposes of the CrossFit Games. We all have nothing but respect and support for (this man's) decision and how (he) sees (him)self. I also understand that in your client-centric world, your concern is entirely for what your client wants, however, we have an obligation to protect the "rights" of all competitors and the competition itself. We are scrupulous about ensuring a level playing field for the athletes. This is not "discrimination" any more than our decision to set Regional boundaries and age limits for the Masters division.

The fundamental, ineluctable fact is that a male competitor who (claims to have) a sex reassignment procedure still has a genetic makeup that confers a physical and physiological advantage over women. That (the competitor) may have felt (himself) emotionally, and very conscientiously, to be a woman in (his) heart, and that she ultimately underwent the legal and other surgical procedures to carry that out, cannot change that reality. Further, the timing of her sex reassignment surgery (and any subsequent hormone therapy) does not change this discussion.

Finally, your comparison to the plight of African-American baseball players fails both in the physical reality and on its own terms in the particulars.  We’ll ignore the rather unsubtle offense, as well as your off-handed comment about the exclusion of (this man) being due to "ignorance and difficulty." Our decision has nothing to do with "ignorance" or being bigots – it has to do with a very real understanding of the human genome, of fundamental biology, that you are either intentionally ignoring or missed in high school.  (NOTE:  In the letter, CrossFit notes MLB threatened two teams for attempting to boycott the Dodgers as not wanting to play against Jackie Robinson.)

------------------

The name-calling used by the sexual perversion lobby has always been used to go after anyone opposed to their agenda.  I ask if I, who registers in South Carolina and has been associated with a "box" in the midlands, can represent Nevada in the competition.  Can a 21-year old compete in an over-40 division?

The full letter can be found here.

Thursday, October 13, 2016

Throwback Thursday: They're at it again

The "sexual freedom" fighters of the sexual deviancy lobby believe they have it won, and are using the common leftist propaganda terms to advance their cause.  Now this disturbing piece of news came across my wires this week.

A man who claims to be a "woman" after "gender reassignment surgery" has now sued CrossFit and The CrossFit Games for $2.5 million and the right for this natural male to compete in the events held at the StubHub Center, in the women's category.

A women read this news and had this to say about the absurd lawsuit"

Would I want to go into a women's locker room with a woman who has a (male sexual organ)? No. That would be out of line. (H)e chose to change h(is) body, CrossFit is trying to be respectful. I'm sorry, my personal opinion here is if you want to make a change in your life you gotta accept the consequences. Don't blame CrossFit for your decisions.

The disturbing point about this lawsuit was following domination by the Soviet-era Press Sisters in Athletics events at the 1960 and 1964 Olympics, the IAAF imposed gender verification tests for the 1966 European Championships after concerns by national officials some East Bloc women participating in events were actually men.  This issue began as early as the 1930's, when US Olympic Committee president Avery Brundage asked for tests after suspicious performances in 1932 and 1936.  The Atlanta Olympics was the last time such tests were mandated, though the IAAF can (and has) request one if suspicion arises (and there has been in 2006). After Atlanta, there has been a push by the sexual deviancy lobby to outlaws the sex tests, which happened in time for the next IAAF European Championships.

The organisation that conducts the CrossFit Games is based in Carson, California, and the this questionable athlete is using the legal system and Attorney General Kamala Harris, whose strategy brought down voter-approved Proposition 8, to apply the state's nondiscrimination laws to force this competitor into the CrossFit Games as a woman.  If the courts treat this man the same way as the sexual deviants have favourable judges to play favourites to claim "you can't put a check on us" by overturning state constitutional amendments, we clearly have a judiciary that, in the words of the Heritage Foundation, is "playing favourites".  It would make no sense for a man to be competing in a women's competition.

[Editor's note: it was true then, it's truer now.]

Originally published March 25, 2014

Tuesday, September 6, 2016

Phyllis Schlafly, R.I.P.

The first time I ever heard of Phyllis Schlafly, I was in high school and she was fighting against the Equal Rights Amendment. I didn't really understand the moral dimensions of it back then - it was more the political struggle that interested me. And I didn't have the advanced understanding of just what "equal rights" meant either, but I knew ERA wasn't passing the smell test for me. Almost alone at the time, she spoke out courageously against it, she fought it tooth and nail, and she won. I admired her greatly for it.

The last time I heard about Phyllis Schlafly, she was embroiled in a battle with the organization she'd founded, and was stumping for Donald Trump. I don't think Trump would have been her first choice, but as was the case with ERA, she took a look around, saw the society in which she lived crumbling around her, and decided that something needed to be done. In this case, it was a battle she was not able to fight personally, so I think she looked around and saw that there was at least one person out there who was willing to stand up to the tidal wave. I admired her greatly for it.

It was reminiscent of her struggle against ERA - at the time, the amendment had steamrolled through state after state, and its approval seemed a foregone conclusion. Nobody was really opposing it, and it you believed the words coming from its supporters, there was no reason on earth why any rational human being would. And then when Schlafly, in the best tradition of American conservatism, stood athwart history and yelled Stop. She rallied thousands and eventually millions to her cause, and ERA was stopped - even after it received an unprecedented time extension. Whatever misgivings she may have had about Trump (and I don't have any inside information that she had any), she saw in him someone similarly willing to yell Stop at those who sought to take over the country and its culture.

History will ultimately tell us - in about three months - how successful Trump will be in his efforts. We need not wonder about the efforts of Phyllis Schlafly, though. Far, far more than the feminist icons whom the media trumpeted, she represented the "silent majority" of women and influenced the American political scene. Comparing her to, say, Gloria Steinem is like comparing a giant and a pygmy. And yet if you were to depend on the media and our schools for your education, you might figure Schlafly was little more than a gadfly with a meager following, nothing like the giants of radical feminism.

Well, I suspect she was used to that, as all conservatives are. She understood that ultimately victory would be decided not in this world, but in the next, and that here the best she could do was to pray and fight for what her faith and her political instincts told her was right. She died at the age of 92, a good and faithful servant with a life well lived

Thursday, June 30, 2016

Are we down to just one freedom, invented by a few cities?

Albert Mohler calls it "religious liberty versus erotic liberty".  John Stonestreet references it as religious freedom versus sexual freedom in the late Charles Colson's BreakPointcommentary that he is the lead commentator today (BreakPoint has been the subject of religious radio's decline as it tilted towards a new entertainment-based format that refuses to inform evangelicals that was noted in 2006.)

Those two commentaries have sadly reared their ugly heads in a series of Supreme Court cases where the court has ruled "sexual freedom is the first (or only) freedom" that I can call part of the Obergefell movement's ulterior motive to ensure that religious freedom is replaced by the Left's call of sexual freedom, and that sexual freedom becomes the only freedom.

For the urbane courts decided, especially since the Bork rejection, to turn its back on the people and favour just those few cities and crybaby losers as a form of "social justice" to the form that Clarence Thomas referenced through the heavy court packing (40% of the court's judiciary from this Administration), “The Court has simultaneously transformed judicially created rights like the right to abortion into preferred constitutional rights, while disfavoring many of the rights actually enumerated in the Constitution.”  It's not just abortion but all of erotic liberty from marriage to adoption and all forms of lewd behaviour.

Look at the sexual freedom movement's line of wins.  From erasing marriage laws to erasing abortion restrictions, mandating businesses support erotic liberty's mandates, erasing male/female standards in restrooms, and all types of common sense being erased, this forced Dr. Mohler in a commentary to notice the line of left-wing victories from a Biden (1), Clinton (2), and Obama (2) left-wing majority in courts.  Now we have states attempting to force out colleges with a Christian worldview by mandating the only worldview that can be pushed is the liberal worldview of no moral standards and erotic liberty endorsement.  See the rampant parades of the sexual perversion movement, appropriately named "pride" because they are, as mentioned here in the past, throwing Christians to the lions.

In the thoughts of my fifth-grade history book, Old World History and Geography from A Beka, we have become classic Hindu India's caste system.  All of the Left's leadership are now the warrior caste, while Christians are now entirely sent off into the untouchable caste.  Those liberal denominations are in the middle, and we are seeing how the denominations that are in Protestant liberalism have seen steep declines to the point conservative factions have broken away similar to Brexit (see the Episcopal, Presbyterian PCUSA for examples).

In correlation to Brexit, I see a pattern in the UK that applies to the United States also.  The elites are losing at each turn of the ballot box.  The entire sexual freedom movement's victories have come by elites.   In essence, we are now coming to a dangerous part of our nation where the law is the feelings of a few elites on the bench, and the people are now being suppressed, similar to what the Colonists understood that led 240 years ago to the most important document in this country's history.  We are eerily seeing, thanks to the advancement of the sexual freedom movement, the late, great Lawrence Berra's phrase, "It's Like Déjà Vu All Over Again," come back.  Our laws passed are being erased by elites in the left-wing judiciary.  Didn't we fight England over the king erasing our laws and replacing them with his wants?

Friday, April 29, 2016

Flashback Friday: Throwing Christians to the lions

In the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, the word “pride” is defined as “a company of lions.” The mascot for the minor league hockey team in Florence that played in the East Coast league from 1997-2005, the Pee Dee Pride (“Pee Dee” is the name of the region in South Carolina that encompasses Florence), was a mountain lion.

Sexual deviancy groups and festivals will often use the word “pride” in their names. This is no accident; these organisations' activism targets Christians. They are the lions who devour Christians. They want to ban Christians from running foster care or adoption ministries at their churches because of their worldview (as we've seen in many states), they want to put Christians at the back of the foster care or adoption line while advancing sexual deviants to the front, and they have passed laws similar to those in other countries where ministers can be prosecuted for speech that violates the “civil rights” of sexual deviants. They want to drop Christians to a caste system where they and their followers are the emboldened class, while Christians are treated as the untouchables.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Commissioner Chai Feldblum has made it clear “sexual freedom” triumphs over religious freedom. In the new Utopia of this Administration, the three fundamental freedoms of Speech, Press, and Religion are wiped out by new government controls, and the only freedom that the nation will offer is Sexual Freedom.

At Eastman Kodak (a company that later was driven to bankruptcy, no less by the sexual deviancy movement), Rolf Szabo was fired for sticking up for Biblical Christianity at his office in Rochester, New York. Allstate fired Matt Barber for writing a column based on Biblical truth that the lions declared was offensive, and he is now the director of a major pro-family organisation. Other companies have fired employees for posting Bible verses. Now, with many countries have laws similar to the Shepard-Byrd Hate Crimes Act, ministers have been prosecuted for preaching the Bible, especially since activists have declared it hate speech, specifically targeting Leviticus Eighteen and Romans One.

With the arrogance of judges trying to impose same-sex “marriage,” implementation from humanist judges with an assist from the Autogol Strategy, or urban metropolis-run state legislatures (something the Founding Fathers warned would be a hazard and led to the Great Compromise, overturned at the state level in Reynolds v. Sims 50 years ago, thus leading to state legislatures being controlled by urban metropolises where one area may have ten seats in the upper chamber while some rural counties have no representation, something the Founding Fathers knew would be hazardous – can you imagine California having 12 Senators while South Carolina would be represented by one North Carolina Senator representing Buncombe County (a notorious liberal hotbed where they bought the NASCAR race track that is the site of the only win by a woman on a NASCAR Touring Series race -- 1988 by Shawna Robinson in the 4-cylinder Dash, or Baby Grand National, formula that was sanctioned from 1975-2003, who is battling breast cancer as of this writing -- and turned it into what Hall of Fame member Jack Ingram calls a drug park), and one Georgia Senator representing DeKalb or Fulton County), with the majority now from judicial activists who have taken their feelings to be priority over facts, they have made it clear they want Christians to be thrown to the lions.

It is no coincidence that sexual deviancy activists are called “pride” for a reason. They are the lions and they will throw Christians into their den to become their food. The persecution is the goal to wipe out Christianity and impose by courts, schools, and popular culture a new state religion of humanism. Look at the prosecution of Chick-Fil-A, Hobby Lobby, and now the Benham Brothers for their support of the Bible. While the First Amendment only bans Congress from imposing a state religion, it doesn't ban state legislatures, Hollywood, popular culture, or the courts from doing so. The pride is intending to use courts to overturn everything and impose a new belief system they dictate.

The judges running amok continue this danger. At this rate, are we becoming the New Humanist Nation with Christians being thrown to the lions, swallowed by the lions, as the activist groups want us to be consumed by them, henceforth their name?

Originally published May 22, 2014

Monday, April 25, 2016

Erotic liberty payback

In 2014, shareholders at a major corporation voted overwhelmingly (81%) against New York's retirement system when they attempted to impose erotic liberty friendly policies at the corporation in question.  Shortly after the convincing win, the President imposed an erotic liberty mandate for all businesses with contracts.  Evidence came that the executive order imposing an SOGI policy ("ENDA") on corporations was a byproduct of payback for that major company's refusal to support the agenda.

When a dictator imposes his agenda on erotic liberty and forces corporations to impose it or be barred from business contracts at any level, we have clear evidence of a dictatorship.  Religious liberty would be endorsed by corporations as well as people if it was not for the bullies such as those in Seattle, San Francisco, New York, and Washington, and of course, The White House.

Wednesday, September 30, 2015

The line has been crossed: Big Four's X-rated programming draws ire of Actors Union

Television's Big Four have crossed the line.

Until the late 1980's, television was set with the Big Three networks.  Now it's the Big Four services of HBO, Showtime, Netflix, and Amazon Prime in control of television, content, and standards, with the Emmys favouring the TV-MA (X rated) shows on the Big Four they watch, winning the major awards annually. With no accountability required to viewers or advertisers, the shock value of television, which is part of art's turn to shock value, has become the standard.

If crossing the line wasn't bad enough with language, now the standards have crept into advancing all forms of sexual immorality, with Amazon Prime's winning shows promoting such actions, and HBO denouncing President Reagan for not helping with a cause celebre of the Left.  We have now seen that line truly crossed with a report on the filming of HBO's Westworld has drawn the ire of the SAG-AFTRA.  According to the report, background actors ("extras") for the HBO show are required to sign what the Hollywood Reporter calls "a nudity and sex consent form that reads like the Kama Sutra and that has SAG-AFTRA officials worried".

Now that the Hollywood elites have changed from network television to the Big Four Services, there are no standards.  And the result is such garbage being called "art".  Would this have been permitted 30 years ago?

Monday, January 26, 2015

Standards? We don't need standards! We make them

The ruling elites have shown their hatred of the nation, and their attitude is clearly aimed at an "I want what I want," and "we don't care what the Constitution says, we go by what we want" has an ugly taste of the evil judges (worse than those in the Book of Judges), considering what Albert Mohler calls the rise of "erotic liberty" triumphing over "religious liberty.  See how judges have overrun Constitutions in the majority of 30 states that voted to write marriage is only between one male and one female, and no other unions can be recognised, because of egos.  When supermajorities of 60%, 70%, and 78% are overrun by judges reminiscent of that book in question, the sexual freedom fighters are showing their egos.

The elites in Atlanta have shown their colours.  The mayor of the city, who has blood on his hands from the loss of hockey to Winnipeg and baseball to Vinings (2017), and potentially losing the NBA to an unknown city likely in the Cascadia area, has sided with the tiny minority of perverted behaviour by firing the head of the city's fire department, Kelvin Cochran, because he posted a Biblical worldview.  He clearly meant that "sexual freedom" triumphs as a protected right, and those who oppose the worldview must be fired.  With the numerous "nondiscrimination" clauses including "sexual orientation," and the push by numerous crybabies to advance the sexual deviancy agenda.  Mr. Mohler's words regarding the rise of "erotic liberty" must be seriously considered considering the absurd push of "civil rights".

Erotic liberty is new on the scene, but it is central to the moral project of modernity — a project that asserts erotic liberty, which the (Founding Fathers) never imagined, as an even more fundamental liberty than freedom of religion. The logic of erotic liberty has worked its way from law schools and academia into popular culture, entertainment, public policy, and Supreme Court decisions.
In one classic example, Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy famously wrote  of human dignity in terms of one’s “concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life” — and he has explicitly tied that to erotic liberty in a series of decisions and opinions.

What the erotic liberty folk demand is their behaviour to be called a "civil right".  They want to call marriage a civil right that cannot be restricted to one man and one woman only -- they want any two, even three, or more.  Now take their "civil right" logic to the workplace, where employees must pass a drug test at a World Anti-Doping Agency approved laboratory, and cannot test positive for drugs listed in the WADA Anti-Doping Code.  One person fails the test, and is fired, but goes to the pro-Bolshevik ACLU and sues the employer, saying he has a "civil right" to work there and they cannot discriminate against him because of a failed drug test.

So, if an employee of a company is fired for failing a drug test at a WADA-approved laboratory, required at work, can he cry out he has civil rights, and they cannot fire him for failing a WADA drug test, when passing the test is required to work there?  That is the same logic of homosexual activists demanding marriage is a "civil right" and that "they cannot be defined by the Bible," in addition to demanding the protection of their behaviour.  In essence, the relativism lobby claim it is their "civil right" to use illegal drugs, and illicit drug use is a behaviour that must be protected, similar to sexual deviancy.

I'm being serious.  That is their logic.  You cannot punish for behaviour.

And that's only Part One of the "We don't need standards" crowd's behaviour.

The second part of this "we don't need standards" folk come from the Hollywood Foreign Press Association.  As Dr. Mohler noted, popular culture is pushing the deviancy agenda, and in television, control is clearly in the cultural Left, where most shows winning major awards come from ultra-premium pay television or non-commercial streaming services, where decency standards are not required, and the alleged "quality" is based on advancing the "no decency, it's what I want, and nothing else matters" attitude.  At the Foreign Press Association's Golden Globe Awards, it was clear the winning television shows were HBO and Amazon Prime.  Showtime and Netflix are also part of the game at the Emmys, while broadcast networks, which are under stricter standards of decency to avoid offending advertisers and authorities, while appealing to a mass audience, have become second-class carriers where the "critics," who are just as much Hollywood elites, ignore them because of standards that must be met.

Seriously, when "critics" vote for shows that few people watch because they do not want to pay for premium television, they are advancing the idea that television for elites, which most people do not watch, is the only television that is worth watching, with better "quality" that is not quality but additional material not suitable for most viewers of the Heartland.  But, as we have learned, the heartland and their values do not matter to these ruling elites that demand what they want is all that is suitable.  The Golden Globe ceremony celebrated the elitism of modern television, and it was the equivalent of calling out a Dies Irae (yes, I love the Verdi though I've sung the Mozart twice).  Another push for sexual deviancy normalisation, considering what we have learned in studying God's Word years ago, inappropriate, but it was widely celebrated at the show.  At the ceremony, the best comedy award went to a streaming service programme that advanced the sexual deviancy agenda, and the people thanked the activists, along with a kid who was taught the wrong things and killed himself, trying to become a "martyr" for the cause.  Another award went to a Reagan-bashing drama that advanced the same agenda.  These events seem to be propaganda for the leftist causes that cannot win save for elites who want to bash anyone who opposes them into a new prison.

Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI warned, "We are building a dictatorship of relativism that does not recognize anything as definitive and whose ultimate goal consists solely of one's own ego and desires. "  He also noted, "In recent years I find myself noting how the more relativism becomes the generally accepted way of thinking, the more it tends toward intolerance, thereby becoming a new dogmatism. Political correctness, whose constant pressures you have illuminated, seeks to establish the domain of a single way of thinking and speaking. Its relativism creates the illusion that it has reached greater heights than the loftiest philosophical achievements of the past. It prescribes itself as the only way to think and speak – if, that is, one wishes to stay in fashion. Being faithful to traditional values and to the knowledge that upholds them is labelled intolerance, and relativism becomes the required norm. I think it is vital that we oppose this imposition of a new pseudo-enlightenment, which threatens freedom of thought as well as freedom of religion."

The Golden Globe ceremony, and the logic of sexual deviancy activists, especially in overturning constitutions and the Atlanta situation, show that regardless of Catholic or Protestant, Mr. Ratzinger or Mr. Mohler, both are warning against relativism that is taught in schools, popular culture media, and the elite media critics rewarding the propaganda with awards.

WORKS CITED

Albert Mohler, "Religious Liberty vs Erotic Liberty:  Religious Liberty Is Losing," 12 January 2015.

L. Brent Bozell III.  "The Golden Globes of Propaganda," 16 January 2015.

Joseph Ratzinger and Marcello Pera, Without Roots:  The West, Relativism, Christianity, Islam.  New York:  Perseus Books, 2007.

Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, "Mass," 18 April 2005.

Thursday, May 22, 2014

Throwing Christians to the lions

In the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, the word “pride” is defined as “a company of lions.” The mascot for the minor league hockey team in Florence that played in the East Coast league from 1997-2005, the Pee Dee Pride (“Pee Dee” is the name of the region in South Carolina that encompasses Florence), was a mountain lion.

Sexual deviancy groups and festivals will often use the word “pride” in their names. This is no accident; these organisations' activism targets Christians. They are the lions who devour Christians. They want to ban Christians from running foster care or adoption ministries at their churches because of their worldview (as we've seen in many states), they want to put Christians at the back of the foster care or adoption line while advancing sexual deviants to the front, and they have passed laws similar to those in other countries where ministers can be prosecuted for speech that violates the “civil rights” of sexual deviants. They want to drop Christians to a caste system where they and their followers are the emboldened class, while Christians are treated as the untouchables.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Commissioner Chai Feldblum has made it clear “sexual freedom” triumphs over religious freedom. In the new Utopia of this Administration, the three fundamental freedoms of Speech, Press, and Religion are wiped out by new government controls, and the only freedom that the nation will offer is Sexual Freedom.

At Eastman Kodak (a company that later was driven to bankruptcy, no less by the sexual deviancy movement), Rolf Szabo was fired for sticking up for Biblical Christianity at his office in Rochester, New York. Allstate fired Matt Barber for writing a column based on Biblical truth that the lions declared was offensive, and he is now the director of a major pro-family organisation. Other companies have fired employees for posting Bible verses. Now, with many countries have laws similar to the Shepard-Byrd Hate Crimes Act, ministers have been prosecuted for preaching the Bible, especially since activists have declared it hate speech, specifically targeting Leviticus Eighteen and Romans One.

With the arrogance of judges trying to impose same-sex “marriage,” implementation from humanist judges with an assist from the Autogol Strategy, or urban metropolis-run state legislatures (something the Founding Fathers warned would be a hazard and led to the Great Compromise, overturned at the state level in Reynolds v. Sims 50 years ago, thus leading to state legislatures being controlled by urban metropolises where one area may have ten seats in the upper chamber while some rural counties have no representation, something the Founding Fathers knew would be hazardous – can you imagine California having 12 Senators while South Carolina would be represented by one North Carolina Senator representing Buncombe County (a notorious liberal hotbed where they bought the NASCAR race track that is the site of the only win by a woman on a NASCAR Touring Series race -- 1988 by Shawna Robinson in the 4-cylinder Dash, or Baby Grand National, formula that was sanctioned from 1975-2003, who is battling breast cancer as of this writing -- and turned it into what Hall of Fame member Jack Ingram calls a drug park), and one Georgia Senator representing DeKalb or Fulton County), with the majority now from judicial activists who have taken their feelings to be priority over facts, they have made it clear they want Christians to be thrown to the lions.

It is no coincidence that sexual deviancy activists are called “pride” for a reason. They are the lions and they will throw Christians into their den to become their food. The persecution is the goal to wipe out Christianity and impose by courts, schools, and popular culture a new state religion of humanism. Look at the prosecution of Chick-Fil-A, Hobby Lobby, and now the Benham Brothers for their support of the Bible. While the First Amendment only bans Congress from imposing a state religion, it doesn't ban state legislatures, Hollywood, popular culture, or the courts from doing so. The pride is intending to use courts to overturn everything and impose a new belief system they dictate.

The judges running amok continue this danger. At this rate, are we becoming the New Humanist Nation with Christians being thrown to the lions, swallowed by the lions, as the activist groups want us to be consumed by them, henceforth their name?

Tuesday, March 25, 2014

They're at it again

The "sexual freedom" fighters of the sexual deviancy lobby believe they have it won, and are using the common leftist propaganda terms to advance their cause.  Now this disturbing piece of news came across my wires this week.

A man who claims to be a "woman" after "gender reassignment surgery" has now sued CrossFit and The CrossFit Games for $2.5 million and the right for this natural male to compete in the events held at the StubHub Center, in the women's category.

A women read this news and had this to say about the absurd lawsuit"
Would I want to go into a women's locker room with a woman who has a (male sexual organ)? No. That would be out of line. (H)e chose to change h(is) body, CrossFit is trying to be respectful. I'm sorry, my personal opinion here is if you want to make a change in your life you gotta accept the consequences. Don't blame CrossFit for your decisions.

The disturbing point about this lawsuit was following domination by the Soviet-era Press Sisters in Athletics events at the 1960 and 1964 Olympics, the IAAF imposed gender verification tests for the 1966 European Championships after concerns by national officials some East Bloc women participating in events were actually men.  This issue began as early as the 1930's, when US Olympic Committee president Avery Brundage asked for tests after suspicious performances in 1932 and 1936.  The Atlanta Olympics was the last time such tests were mandated, though the IAAF can (and has) request one if suspicion arises (and there has been in 2006). After Atlanta, there has been a push by the sexual deviancy lobby to outlaws the sex tests, which happened in time for the next IAAF European Championships.

The organisation that conducts the CrossFit Games is based in Carson, California, and the this questionable athlete is using the legal system and Attorney General Kamala Harris, whose strategy brought down voter-approved Proposition 8, to apply the state's nondiscrimination laws to force this competitor into the CrossFit Games as a woman.  If the courts treat this man the same way as the sexual deviants have favourable judges to play favourites to claim "you can't put a check on us" by overturning state constitutional amendments, we clearly have a judiciary that, in the words of the Heritage Foundation, is "playing favourites".  It would make no sense for a man to be competing in a women's competition.   
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...