When I began this blog, I was a 70 year old man, with a young mind and a body trying to recover from a stroke, and my purpose for this whole blog thing is to provoke thinking, to ridicule reflex reaction, and provide a legacy to my children.
“But when you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you.” – Matthew 6:6
This morning, even very early, the first two new blogs on my WordPress reader were about Paula White’s prayer for Donald Trump, and they were not affirming of what she prayed. I won’t repeat her prayer nor what the bloggers wrote. I don’t know her heart or her sincerity. My own confession about prayer is this: I pray only to Jesus Christ or my Father in heaven. My prayers are not long, nor eloquent, and they are between God and me. I have never been completely comfortable praying in a group, especially when “waiting for my turn.” Why not? Two reasons: Since I am very hard of hearing, I notice how the other people lower their voices to almost a whisper when they offer their prayer, almost as if they too are not comfortable with other people hearing their prayer. That’s a huge problem for me, because most people lower their voice so much I can’t even understand a word, nor can I be sure when they are done.
The second reasonis related: I am rehearsing my prayer, talking to myself all the while instead of communing with my Lord. It’s too much like rehearsing my comeback when arguing with someone. Being acutely aware of my internal dialogue is not conducive of communion. Of course, none of my readers are plagued with this 🙊. When I do pray, since I live alone now, my prayers fall into three categories: prayers that my children will all love God and His holy Word; that God will give His people grace and strengthen their faith in affliction; that He will heal me (of whatever pain or illness I happen to be enduring right now. My prayer presuppositions are: my children are written in his Book of Life; God’s people will suffer afflictions; affliction is for appreciating grace and strengthening faith; God can and will act to heal anything, if it is in His will; God hears prayers.
“Likewise, husbands, live with your wives in an understanding way, showing honor to the woman as the weaker vessel, since they are heirs with you of the grace of life, so that your prayers may not be hindered. Finally, all of you, have unity of mind, sympathy, brotherly love, a tender heart, and a humble mind. Do not repay evil for evil or reviling for reviling, but on the contrary, bless, for to this you were called, that you may obtain a blessing.” 1 Peter 3:7-9.
God hears prayer, but make sure that your mind is right and your conscience is as clear as it can be. The passage from 1 Peter is not only a handy checklist, it is the only Bible passage I am aware of that specifically admonishes husbands to live with their wives with (according to the Amplified Bible) “great gentleness and tact” (“understanding way”), but warns that your prayers will be hindered if you don’t. I still remember a sermon by Tony Evans, which I paraphrase. He said, referring to this passage, “if you are harsh to your wife, and then you pray, your prayers won’t reach God, they will hit the ceiling and bounce back.” That’s my word for today.
A local library recently held one of those drag queen story hours for little kids. The writer who reported it said, “it would have been easy to walk right past without even being aware it was going on”, as it wasn’t seriously marketed, except for one thing. A few people demonstrating outside the library against it grew into a near riot of two sides shouting at each other. This does NOT work people! All that noise accomplished was to pique interest in an event that probably would have been sparsely attended, and to make many of the demonstrators look bad with their “you’re going to Hell” signs.
So many parents of young children, as well as most people ignorant about the lgbtq agenda, don’t understand it’s unceasing efforts to groom and initiate younger and younger children into their lies. Many people think it’s harmless, or cute, or hip to bring their young kids to drag queen events or other indoctrinating activities. Short sighted or naive, many are your neighbors, some are even your friends. Demonstrations virtually always degenerate into shoutfests, and are not effective in changing or educating minds. Shouting epithets and threats, whether through signs, demonstrations or Twitter, might feel good or virtuous, but are anywhere from ineffective to counterproductive. Don’t be stupid.
Research the kind of activities your libraries and schools are promoting. Check lgbtq children’s books out of the library and discuss them with your neighbors and friends. Print out pages from ALA.org publications that promote perversion. Educate yourself, then your neighbors. Here’s a test for you. What is the significance of this: CHICAGO – The American Library Association (ALA) and several library associations in the United States have pledged their commitment to Equity, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI). The statement reads, “Equity, diversity, and inclusion are core values of our associations. We believe that as a profession we must continue to support efforts in building a more equitable, diverse, and inclusive society. As professional organizations, we strive to advance the capacity to identify and remove barriers to equity, diversity, and inclusion relative to all members and patrons with a broad spectrum of best practices, tools, and resources.”
Doesn’t that sound great? But what does it actually mean, what actions and policies result from EDI? Ask your librarian. Record the conversation, if you can do so without inhibiting a truthful response. Ask specifically, “What is EDI? How does inclusion play out? What exactly does that mean in the context of our library? What about equity? Diversity usually means a variety of skin colors, ethnicities or religions, but does this initiative also support diversity of opinion?” We already know how “diversity” plays out in hiring practices, college admissions and EEOC lawsuits. But “equity” means what exactly? The most problematic one is “inclusion” That has become a buzzword for “non-binary” sexuality, “gender science” and transgenderism. Will your librarian even know? Will they be honest?
On the surface, EDI appears to be a push to get more different kinds of people involved in the library field. That’s good, but note that the EDI statement also includes patrons, not just members. See what’s actually on your local library’s website. My local library is pretty conservative, but they do carry one of the LGBTQ titles I mentioned in the previous post. I looked up “story times” but haven’t found any future drag queen story hours; perhaps the controversy generated by the recent one put the library on the hotseat. Spokane, Wa. isn’t L.A. or NYC, afterall. Your community may be even more conservative than Spokane. I hope so, for the sake of your children.
Pride month, ode to the foundational sin, binding and blinding you to your shape-shifting, indefatigable stalker. The rainbow flag flies prominently inside the front door of the Veterans administration hospital. The veterans healthcare website I use showed a pop up link are you lgbtq? This morning I went to Starbucks, and I pay using their app on my phone. I noticed there was a message in my inbox. Oh goody, I finally have enough points for a free drink. No, it was an offer to make a donation to the Born This Way foundation, which Starbucks would match. Never heard of that foundation, but the rainbow flag gave it away. They want you to associate the rainbowwith acceptance of every and any perversion. The rainbow is a sign of God’s covenant, and has been co-opted:
“‘I establish my covenant with you, that never again shall all flesh be cut off by the waters of the flood, and never again shall there be a flood to destroy the earth.’ And God said, ‘This is the sign of the covenant that I make between me and you and every living creature that is with you, for all future generations: I have set my bow in the cloud, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and the earth. When I bring clouds over the earth and the bow is seen in the clouds, I will remember my covenant that is between me and you and every living creature of all flesh. And the waters shall never again become a flood to destroy all flesh’.” Genesis 9:11-15.
Have I always been so hostile to the LGBTQers? No, there was a time when I was sympathetic to their inner conflict. No longer, since it is clear that their agenda is total subjugation to the shape-shifting, never tiring stalker of lust. According to the sexual revolution, love has “no gender, race, or religion”—but does “love” have an age? Well, according to social media site Snapchat—it doesn’t. At least, it didn’t for two days. As part of their “Love Has No Labels” campaign during so-called “Pride Month” (June), Snapchat featured a series of filters, including one that read “love has no age.” This last one was quickly pulled, however. Pedophilia is next on the sexual revolutions to-do list. Your kids are prey.
Snapchat, the California-based photo sharing app, known for it’s ability to make photos supposedly disappear, has unveiled a new line of their popular filters to superimpose over selfies. For Snapchat, the LGBTQ might also include pedophiles. In their campaign for “Love Has No Labels”, one of the options was a “Love Has No Age” filter. While this filter appears to be defunct as of June 3, conservatives on Twitter pointed out the option over the weekend of June 1–2. The filter had the options to say that love had no gender, race, or religion, as part of the mass-marketed Pride Month that infiltrates businesses and social media in June. But age did not seem to fit in the list, unless it was meant to justify pedophilia. If my prediction above, “your kids are prey” sounds like the raving of a right wing bigot, and if drag queen story hours at your local library and sex appearance alteration surgery and puberty blocking drugs administered to children don’t indicate anything is amiss, consider Desmond.
11 year-old ‘drag kid’, Desmond Napoles, performed at a gay bar in New York city where adult men threw money at him. The pre-adolescent boy, dressed in drag to imitate singer Gwen Stefani, pranced around the stage at Brooklyn’s 3 Dollar Bill, an LGBT bar described as “queer owned & operated,” and “Brooklyn’s Premiere Queer Bar & Performance Venue,” reported Life SiteNews. His “parents”, or are they his pimps, looked on approvingly. They’re so glad to let him “be what he is.” At 11, does he know what he is?
But never fear, the American Library Association is on the case, they will make sure YOUR kids know what they are. The ALA official magazine, American Libraries, on their home page featured a drag queen in a hot red dress, faux pearls, garishly painted eyes, and a strawberry blond wig, dancing in seductive manner before a roomful of sponge-like 3-year-olds, the caption promising to bring this show on the road to all of America, including “red-state towns like Juneau, Alaska, and Lincoln, Nebraska.”
A June 2017 article titled “Standing Up for Our Communities” announces: “Librarians are suiting up for battle. Faced with … an awakening of hate groups …, librarians have become more emboldened by their core values of diversity, equity, and inclusion, and are fighting to maintain those values. This is a guide for librarians seeking best practices to serve the LGBTQ+ youth community in these times of uncertainty, and a road map for those who might be new to serving this community.”
World Magazine featured an article about males who were mediocre athletes “identifying” as females, then competing with biological females in track and field. Of course, suddenly, they became champions, winning every event! Never fear, your local library probably carries a book called Transphobia: Deal With It, by J. Wallace Skelton, in the children’s section. It’s a large-picture book that starts with a bang. Certain female students complain to the coach that a trans girl (i.e., biological male child “transitioning” to, or declaring himself, female) on their team has an unfair advantage in competitions. These complainers are schooled in short order. One by one, other unenlightened objections against fellow trans students are set straight. Trans is to be celebrated. There’s probably also Princess Princess Ever After, by Katie O’Neill, about a lesbian knight who rescues the fair maiden from her “toxic masculine” suitor and rides off with her to the happy hereafter. Let’s not forget Star-Crossed, by Barbara Dee, adding a third lover, female, competing with a Romeo for a Juliet. Naturally, “Juliet” chooses the girl.
Lust never tires, it stalks the mind endlessly, whispering desires at the subconscious level, so that what floats up to consciousness is justified by the convoluted manipulations of the cerebral cortex, amplified by the LGBTQ-addled media and craven corporations. LUST ONLY TIRES OF SAMENESS–IT NEEDS AN ENDLESS SUPPLY OF “FRESH MEAT.” That’s why libraries and schools indoctrinate the young. Your kids are on the platter!
I wonder what God thinks about using the rainbow 🌈 this way.
Christopher DeGroot wrote today in Takimag.com, about the private vs. public information, in the context of some recent revelations about MLK, which I choose not to go into here. But his main question remains, “for a ‘public figure’ what information is legitimately a private affair i.e. no one else’s business but the parties involved?” I was about to opine, when I read a thoroughly brilliant op-ed by another Taki writer, Theodore Dalrymple. I now defer to him. You can find his piece here, https://www.takimag.com/article/the-bland-leading-the-bland/, but it is so good I am reproducing it in almost it’s entirety.
“The unexamined life is not worth living,” said Socrates, but users of social media are increasingly discovering that the too-closely examined life is not worth living either; or at least, others try to make it not worth living unless one is possessed of a rhinoceros hide.
Which of us older ones would like our every past deed or utterance exposed to public view, so that people who wish us ill may use one, several, or many of them to destroy us or our careers? Is there anybody alive who does not blush to remember what he once did or said? Now, alas, people are so egotistical that they wish to commit or expose their fleeting thoughts and emotions to the public sphere. Not “I think therefore I am,” but “I am observed therefore I am,” seems to be the premise of modern philosophy.
A young man called Kyle Kashuv had his offer of a place at Harvard withdrawn when unnamed persons informed Harvard that two years earlier he had placed racist remarks on social media. The young man apologized as abjectly as any alleged miscreant at a Soviet show trial or during the Great Cultural Revolution in China, but it did not save him. The decision, apparently, was final.
There were undercurrents to the story. Kashuv was the pupil of a school in Florida at which a massacre took place. Thereafter, Kashuv and another pupil, David Hogg (both of whom were accepted by Harvard, though Hogg’s academic qualifications were considerably below those of Kashuv, and below those normally required by Harvard), campaigned respectively for and against the right to carry a gun. Thus Harvard’s decision to admit Hogg but not Kashuv could be, and of course was, interpreted as little more than an expression of political bias.
The most significant thing about the whole wretched episode is the way in which young people seem to be creating a totalitarian environment in which they denounce one another, as Kashuv was denounced. Thus the social media that were originally going to set opinion free and give voice to everyone will end by stifling expression and creating fear.
Indiscretions such as Kashuv’s can never be effaced, and it surprises me that so many public figures have not yet realized this and post comments that are certain to bring anathema down on them. It appears the world is full of people like Madame Defarge, who knitted the names of aristocrats at the base of the guillotine, contemplating their beheading with sadistic malice.
Denunciation is, of course, a great pleasure. It combines the delights of self-righteousness with those of revenge, sadism, and the contemplation of the discomfort or worse of other people. It requires no courage and is within the capacity of all. In Nazi Germany and Occupied France people wrote denunciations of their neighbors and others by the millions, often for the sheer pleasure of doing so and usually in the hope that they would have serious consequences for the persons denounced. The motives behind the denunciation of Kashuv are unknown—envy, revenge for some minor insult—but they are unlikely to have been glorious. It is not as yet known whether any other college will offer him a place, but it is perfectly conceivable that none will, given the sheeplike conformity that seems to have overtaken our educational institutions.
The day cannot be far off, one imagines, when people will viscerally understand the danger to themselves of saying certain things on social media and will censor themselves automatically. If this continues long enough, certain things will not only become unsayable but unthinkable, for habit eventually is transformed into character. This is the whole point of political correctness: It aims at the most radical of dictatorships, that which requires the enforcement of no police because everyone is incapable of breaking the rules.
In the meantime, the appetite for public expressions of contrition is insatiable. It is not contrition itself that is wanted, but the humiliation inflicted upon those who are forced to express it. The enjoyment is in the spectacle of the squirming of the wrongdoer. This must be so, for it is intrinsically impossible to know whether publicly expressed contrition is genuine, at least where it is or might be productive of advantages for the allegedly contrite. That is why the demand that prisoners express remorse for their crimes before they are granted parole is so wrong. It is, in effect, the demand that they be prepared to tell lies, and rewards talented liars who are most able to act contrite to our satisfaction. I have no access to Kashuv’s inner state and therefore am unable to know whether his apology for his remarks, so vilely, maliciously, and perfidiously passed on to Harvard by someone to whom they were addressed, was genuine or opportunistic. Remorse and repentance are dishes best eaten in private.
The logic of the combination of social media and a taste for burning witches at the stake will reduce us to a strange state of malice and blandness. The ambitious will refrain from saying anything that could offend anyone; the blind will not lead the blind, but the bland will lead the bland. At the same time, any deviation from current orthodoxy will be punished with vengeful vituperation or worse. Moreover, the orthodoxy to be adhered to will change (just as the enemy changed during the two-minute hate sessions in Nineteen Eighty-Four) as a test of the obedience and loyalty of the population. One thing may be predicted with confidence: The politically correct will find new orthodoxies to enforce, new locutions to prescribe or proscribe, to keep decent society in a state of subliminal fear.
From my earlier blog, Hillary Clinton garnered 2,864,974 more popular votes nationally than Donald Trump. In Los Angeles county and New York City metro counties, she, the D candidate, had 3,076,093 more popular votes than Trump, the R candidate. Those two metro areas would have been sufficient to elect H. Clinton to the Presidency. If the NPV ever passes (it need the equivalent of 270 electoral votes, it already has 189), and future Presidents are elected by national popular vote, Los Angeles and New York will carry the day. Do those two cities represent the USA as a whole?
The NPV is a reaction to trump’s victory. Of course, Democrats are behind it. Every state that has voted for it is heavily Democratic: California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington. Delaware has just voted for it this year, Oregon may soon. What short memories. In 1992, democrat Bill Clinton got 43% of the popular vote, but 68% of the electoral vote. While Clinton did get about 6 million more popular votes than George Bush, Ross Perot attracted over 19 million popular votes that probably would have gone to George Bush. Were Perot not in the race, it is evident that Bush would have been President if the NPV had been ratified at the time.
But short memories are the stock in trade of politicians and political parties. When power beckons, who wants to dredge up the lessons of the past, or logic, or facts, or anything that hinders the false promises they make to buy votes? President Trump acts like a flaming AH, a Twitter addict, lots of other unattractive adjectives, but unlike other politicians, he has actually kept most of his promises. Not only, but even his most outrageous criticisms of the dominant media, the Mediated Reality Establishment, have proven to be not only true, but too restrained.
Now the MRE and their Dem allies are leading the drumbeat for the NPV. That paragon of virtue and truth, Elizabeth Pocahontas Warren, says, “every vote should count.” What the heck does that mean? If you voted for someone, and your candidate lost, does that mean your vote didn’t count? Someone wins, someone else loses. Only in Democrat and Mediated Reality la la land does that mean your vote doesn’t count. Every vote should count sure sounds noble, but like practically every other slogan, it is all sound and no substance!
Of course, if you want the kinds of policies Dems are crafting in California and New York, woe unto the country. Here are just a couple of samples: On Monday evening, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo signed the Green Light bill into law, requiring that county clerks issue drivers licenses to illegal immigrants.In Californian logic, public defecation butts up against progressive tolerance, so it is exempt from the law. Yet for a suburbanite to build a patio without a permit, for example, costs one dearly in fines.
If a general were to assemble a coalition of the “woke” of American society–illegal undocumented immigrants, grievance hustlers, tech billionaires, lazy big-media pundits, leftist college profs and bureaucrats, ”the world is ending in 12 years” climate change chicken littles, gun control fanatics, GBTQ+ propagandists, “shout your abortion” feminists–his biggest problem would not be shooting at the enemy, it would be keeping this “coalition of the woke” from shooting each other in endless battles over Who Is More Intersectional Than Thou. The solution appears to be demonizing mutual hate objects or groups.
The “general” in this case might be the Democrat party; the mutual hate objects/groups are white, “cisgender”, mostly male and the women who like them, heterosexual, mostly Christian, American citizens who care about border protection, including immigrants who are here legally. I don’t think even mutual hate objects will prevent the “coalition of the woke” from turning into a circular firing squad though. 1. There really isn’t a coalition, it’s just a bunch of separate constituencies with their own agendas that the 20+ democrat candidates are all trying to appeal to and appease. 2. The caste system rules the intersectionality sweepstakes. Whichever group—individuals don’t count, even if they existed—can accumulate the most oppression points goes to the top, even if they have to reinvent history to score those points. That oppressed prof I mentioned in my last post, Mehta, claims, about Southern Asia: “Consider the subcontinent. For five thousand years we had been one people, ruled undivided from the borders of Persia to China by emperors from Ashoka to Akbar…. Then the British came and ruled us for two hundred years by pitting us against each other so that we couldn’t be pitted against them.” Oh, I see, the British were responsible for the mind-bogglingly elaborate caste system of petty apartheid that is India. 3. These “woke” groups are competing for slices of pies that are finite: votes, clickthroughs and reparations. In their quest, they will, like crabs, keep pulling down whichever gets to the top.
Their common hate objects are tuning out their hysterical rhetoric and growing in contempt for their stupid ideas. Wokeness is built on greed, lies, (attempted) theft, anger and hatred. They are a circular firing squad with no one in the center. Their claims are lies and their threats empty, like this one from immigrant Mehta’s book, This Land Is Our Land: An Immigrant’s Manifesto,“I claim the right to the United States, for myself and my children and my uncles and cousins, by manifest destiny…. It’s our country now.” In your (wet) dreams, asswipe!
“If anyone sins and commits a breach of faith against the Lord by deceiving his neighbor in a matter of deposit or security, or through robbery, or if he has oppressed his neighbor or has found something lost and lied about it, swearing falsely–in any of all the things that people do and sin thereby if he has sinned and has realized his guilt and will restore what he took by robbery or what he got by oppression or the deposit that was committed to him or the lost thing that he found or anything about which he has sworn falsely, he shall restore it in full and shall add a fifth to it, and give it to him to whom it belongs on the day he realizes his guilt.” Leviticus 6:2-5. “…if the wicked restores the pledge, gives back what he has taken by robbery, and walks in the statutes of life, not doing injustice, he shall surely live; he shall not die.” Ezekiel 33:15. “And Zacchaeus stood and said to the Lord, ‘Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor. And if I have defrauded anyone of anything, I restore it fourfold.’ And Jesus said to him, ‘Today salvation has come to this house, since he also is a son of Abraham’.” Luke 19:8.
Those passages are a few Biblical admonitions and examples about restitution, or restoring what has been taken via deception, theft and extortion. A few observations are in order before introducing the perversion of this concept. 1. All of the passages assume, take for granted, that individuals own property. After all, how can something be stolen if it is not owned by someone. There are many other passages that also consider a person’s labor to be in the same category as property, and withholding wages unjustly to be a form of theft. 2. Taking of property by deception, lying (both by commission and omission), extortion or oppression is all treated the same way. 3. The prescription is restoring what was taken, plus a fifth more. A prescription to restore presupposes an authority to enforce it, either the individual’s own conscience or an external authority. The Old Testament passages are commanding restitution, the New Testament is showing voluntary restitution, over and above the OT standard, as an evidence of salvation. 4. The person who actually took is restoring to the person they took from. If the thief has died before restoring, there are other passages that show that his surviving spouse should restore, or if there is no spouse his estate may restore.
This concept is very simple: Person 1 took property or labor from person 2 without proper recompense; person 1 or his or her spouse or his or her estate must restore person 2 (or by direct implication, his spouse or survivors) to wholeness, plus extra. I think the justice of this formula is evident. The concept of reparations as it is suggested or demanded today is NOT restitution, it is theft. Slavery and plundering is obviously theft of an individual’s labor or property, so conditions 1 and 2 of the principle of restitution are there. Those conditions define the crime or the sin. Present day demands for reparations lack conditions 3 and 4, which are the corrections for the crime or sin. The most prominent current example of reparations is slavery and defrauding of Americans of African descent. Ta-Nehisi Coates, I will use his initials TNC for a shorthand, is probably the foremost American proponent for reparations today. I have written previously, in some detail, about his arguments. They are great when defining the crime, much less so when proposing solutions.
Predictably, whenever the demands for justice include dividing the spoils of the supposed “ill gotten gains”—in the case of reparations, the wealth of white Americans living today—the claims will spread, the victims of past injustices will multiply like a bacterium, and the connection between the past injustices and the present potential gravy train will become increasingly tenuous. As if to prove my hypothesis, into the fray leaps Suketu Mehta, NYU journalism professor and author of This Land Is Our Land: An Immigrant’s Manifesto, which argues that immigration is the most effective form of reparations! To underscore my case, with an emphasis on the word tenuous, he tells this story to justify his thesis: ” An Englishman in London asks my grandfather why he is in his country, and my grandfather, who came from a business family, said, because we are the creditors, because you came to my country. You took all my gold and my diamonds. You prevented our industry from growing, so we have come here to collect. We are here because you were there.”
Steve Sailer, over at Takimag, clarifies: He’s (Mehta) been living in the United States of America since his Gujarati diamond-merchant family arrived in Queens in 1977. As he sums up his manifesto: “I claim the right to the United States, for myself and my children and my uncles and cousins, by manifest destiny…. It’s our country now.“
Of course, exactly why Americans merit vengeance for the sins, real and imaginary, of the British Raj isn’t fully explained in This Land Is Our Land. But that’s not the point; the point is that you white people have money, which means you are guilty, and therefore you must pay.” But it isn’t just about wealth. Mehta has a giant chip on his shoulder against whites. He feels humiliated that Europe was once able to colonize India, rather than vice versa: “It is every migrant’s dream to see the tables turned, to see long lines of Americans and Britons in front of the Bangladeshi or Mexican or Nigerian Embassy, begging for a residence visa.“
TNC might eventually start to wonder if the white man’s reparation pie is really big enough to accommodate not just American blacks but also, potentially, every nonwhite grifter on the planet.