Sunday 29 April 2012

Ah!

I'm sorry, I just had to post this excerpt from Melanie Phillips...she writes so eruditely:
... people who are intelligent can have no religious faith; those who are religious are either imbeciles or insane. Not only that, religious people are narrow, dogmatic, intolerant and unpleasant. Those with no religious faith are broad-minded, open, liberal and thoroughly splendid people whom you'd be delighted to meet at a dinner party. Little casts a chill over a fashionable table more than the disclosure that a guest believes in God. 
I have a rather different take on this great division of our age. My view is that while we may be in a post-biblical — and post-moral — age, we have not disposed of belief. Far from it. We have just changed what we believe in. Our society may have junked the Judaeo-Christian foundations of the West for secularism. But this has given rise to a set of other religions. Secular religions. Anti-religion religions.  
These are also based on a set of dogmas. They proselytise. They involve faith. But unlike the Judaeo-Christian thinking they usurp, these secular anti-religions suspend truth and reason. What's more, I would say that it was the Judaic foundations of the West which, far from denying reason, gave the world both reason and science in the first place.
God has been pronounced dead, and in his place have come man-made ideologies — in which people worship not a divine presence but an idea. 
These ideas, which brook no dissent, give rise inescapably to intolerance and indeed to tyranny. Indeed, they are far more tyrannical in their effect than the God of the Hebrew Bible who gets such a bad press for being so authoritarian. In fact, he has a truly terrible time getting his way. His people are always complaining, refusing to do what he tells them, blaming him for everything and always, always arguing with him. But ideologies which represent the will of man bend everything to the governing idea, which cannot be gainsaid. There can be no argument with them.  
Rather than being rational, I suggest these are irrational; not tolerant at all, but deeply illiberal; not open to other ideas, but as dogmatic as any medieval pope. Indeed, these atheistic ideologies are reminiscent not just of religion but of medieval persecutions, witch-hunts and inquisitions.
Let me illustrate all this with an anecdote. After a debate in which he took part some time ago, I pressed Richard Dawkins on his belief that the origin of all matter was most likely to have been an entirely spontaneous event — which meant he therefore surely believed that something could be created out of nothing. Since this ran counter to the scientific principle of verifiable evidence which he tells us should govern all our thinking, this itself seemed to be precisely the kind of irrationality which he scorns. 
In reply, he acknowledged that I had a point but said that the alternative explanation — God — was more incredible. But then he remarked that he was not necessarily averse to the idea that life on Earth had been created by a governing intelligence — provided, however, that such an intelligence had arrived on Earth from another planet. Leaving aside the question of how that extra-terrestrial intelligence had itself been created in the first place, I put it to him that he appeared to be saying that "little green men" provided a more plausible explanation for the origin of life on Earth than God. Strangely, he didn't react to this well at all.
hahaha!
It is atheism, in fact, that is innately hostile to reason. Instead of worshipping God, man worshipped man. To be more precise, man's ideas became the articles of faith. But instead of wrestling with God, man's ideas brook no dissent, no argument. That's because they are not actually ways of making sense of the world, of asking the great questions of why am I here, what is the purpose to my life, how should I behave in ways that give my life meaning. The ideas that man worships are instead ideas he invents to gain power over his fellow human beings. They are ways not of explaining the world but of controlling the world. Therefore they cannot be resisted or argued against. There cannot be any alternative set of propositions. There cannot be any debate. They are a doctrinal belief system of power.
Indeed, atheism has given us through such ideologies a faith which repels reason. Ideologies such as environmentalism, or the belief in the innate harmony of the natural world; scientism, or the belief that everything in the universe has a scientific explanation; moral relativism, or the belief that everyone's value system is equal to everyone else's; multiculturalism, or the belief that no culture can take precedence over any other; egalitarianism, or the belief that everyone is entitled to identical outcomes regardless of their behaviour. These all repel reason because, instead of looking at evidence to reach a conclusion, they start with the governing idea and force the evidence to fit it.
All these ideologies are secular, undermining some aspect of Judaeo-Christian belief or ethics. But here's the strange thing: they all display characteristics not just of Christian religious belief — a body of doctrine, a belief that their story is the sole pathway to virtue, an instinct to evangelise — they also share a feature common to the religious fanaticism of previous centuries (and past and present Islam): millenarianism. 

Logic at work.

The European public debt crisis is a wake-up call to those who believe in running a country on ever more feel-good programs, welfare initiatives, and industry assistance. The crisis of Europe is a crisis of government that has become too big. This is where the massive debt burdens originate—only a small component of government debt is the result of the financial crisis. The financial crisis did not cause Europe’s problems. It only made them apparent.
Well said Oliver Marc Hartwich...I am so tired of well meaning friends who parrot the old: "It was unfettered capitalism that caused the financial meltdown", which is just (in my opinion) unfettered 'green-eco-nazi-speak' or rather if we really ferret away behind the mask of contemporary jargon, it is in reality the new neo-socialist/Gramscian philosophies which have been handed down from the acaneamic academic institutions and uncritically absorbed by the well intentioned but non-reflective molly-coddled, soft handed, generation who actually believe that the Western world's 'success' in vastly superior living standards (irrespective of the excesses in morality) is merely an evolutionary guarantee:
In the 18th century the Enlightenment thinker Condorcet wrote: "No bounds have been fixed to the improvement of the human race. The perfectibility of man is absolutely infinite..." In the 19th century Herbert Spencer, the apostle of Social Darwinism, similarly believed that life would get better all the time. He wrote: "Progress is not an accident but a necessity. Surely must evil and immorality disappear; surely must man become perfect." It was reason that would redeem religious superstition and bring about the kingdom of man on Earth.
What unmitigated Balderdash!
What it actually is in fact, directly attributable to the Judeo-Christian worldview and its concomitant work and administrative ethics and if you remove the former from the equation the latter also disappears and you are then faced with the results that we see happening in the world today.
Its merely logical Mr Spock!

Friday 27 April 2012

Beware!

Dr Robin Zubrin speaks some sense into the environmentalism debate.
Antihumanism is not environmentalism, though it sometimes masquerades as such. Environmentalism, properly conceived, is an effort to apply practical solutions to real environmental problems, such as air and water pollution, for the purpose of making the world a better place for all humans to thrive in. Antihumanism, in contrast, rejects the goal of advancing the cause of mankind. Rather, it uses instances of inadvertent human damage to the environment as points of agitation to promote its fundamental thesis that human beings are pathogens whose activities need to be suppressed in order to protect a fixed ecological order with interests that stand above those of humanity.
The cultural mandate determines that we are to be stewards of this creation and that most definitely does not mean anti-human, therefore let us be careful of the syncretised perspectives that can so easily creep into our worldview.
I am constantly engaging with well intentioned individuals of faith who have been seduced by the 'Green' philosophy into becoming like those warned about in the aforementioned paragraph.
One of the most damaging side effects of this 'will to power' by a group of fanatics is, that real enviromental issues such as pollution, degradation, sustainability etc are abandoned in favour of Utopian dreams and mysanthropic impulses.
Be as wise as the serpent and as gentle as the dove.

Colson translates

So Chuck is dead!
A Christian Sampson if ever there was, has gone to his reward and a significant one it will be I imagine.
As the creator of Prison Fellowship his good works will live on through the renewal and redemption of many, many prisoners and their families for decades to come if not the end of time. For 34 Easters Colson preached redemption to prisoners behind bars.
Through his many published works and his 'Point Break' broadcasts his words will continue to bring enlightenment and redemption to millions of human sufferers.
 A Transformer in our Day
In November of 2009, the Manhattan Declaration was born in the heart of Chuck Colson. This document encouraged Evangelicals, Catholics, and Orthodox Christians to stand for their convictions on the issues of the sanctity of human life, traditional marriage and religious freedom. With nearly 525,000 signatures including well-known religious leaders, this document clearly reminds us what Chuck Colson said in a speech at Harvard Business Schoolin 1991, “A society without a foundation of moral absolutes cannot long survive.”
Chuck Colson trained a new generation of church and lay leaders. He challenged us by warning, “There’s too much of the world in the church and not enough church in the world.” His message through books and orations always inspired Christians to be God’s change agents in this world. His latest book The Sky is not Falling: Living Fearlessly in These Turbulent Times, cautions us not to cower in fear, but boldly restore this culture to Christian principles. (Ginny Dent Bryant)

To those who refuse to acknowledge his change of heart and the amazingly redemptive life choices he made after his fall from the apotheosis of society...he would forgive them and continue on in his life work. I am sure that that heart of forgiveness has been rewarded by now and his future is like none that his critics could ever imagine.

Well done Chuck, but more than my congratulations I suspect those same words from the King of Kings goes a long way towards strengthening your forgiving heart towards those fools who refuse to acknowledge your contribution.

Inconceivable

If there is any truth in this article:
http://www.quadrant.org.au/blogs/doomed-planet/2012/04/wrong-plan-wrong-time

...then Anthony Albanese and the Gillard government ought to be tried in an Australian court of law for treason.

Thursday 26 April 2012

A pinch of salt

This excerpt might give you a glimpse of the dangerous hubris behind our 'scientific overlords' and the rush within the modern world to believing that science and technology are the means to a perfect society:
How is IVF a threat to society? What about the future?
I think I have answered that above. But let me use the words of Dr Robert Edwards, Nobel laureate and laboratory director of the laboratory which “created” the first IVF baby, Louise Brown, in 1978. He stated in a 2003 interview with the London Times marking the 25th anniversary of that birth:
“I wanted to find out exactly who was in charge, whether it was God Himself or whether it was scientists in the laboratory - it was us! The Pope looked totally stupid. You can never ban anything. You can say, ‘hang on a minute’. But never say ‘never’, and never say that this is the worst decision for humankind, otherwise you can look a fool. Now there as many Roman Catholics coming for treatment as Protestants.”
He also said in this very enlightening interview that the IVF process was not designed to make couples happy. “It was a fantastic achievement”, he conceded modestly, “but it was about more than infertility. It was also about issues like stem cells and the ethics of human conception.”
In other words, it was the next step to be taken, the next obstacle to be overcome on the road ahead to the Brave New World which technology will bring us. Now, as this ageing scientist looks to the future, he is all in favour of cloning. With regard to pre-natal sex selection (whereby parents would be allowed to abort babies of unwanted gender) he says, “go ahead and use it. Those parents have to raise those children. Why should a politician tell me what I can and can’t do?”
And Dr Peter Brinsden, Edwards’ successor at the Cambridgeshire clinic he founded, predicts that “in 50 years assisted conception will have almost become the norm. This is because screening techniques will have improved to such an extent that parents can make their children free of even minor defects.”
I doubt if many in the field have seen these quotes, and the article itself is difficult to get (I have it through a secondary source). But after meeting Dr Edwards, which I did a few years ago when the University of Chicago conferred on him one of its highest honours, I can believe all of it. [Dr. Anthony J. Caruso]
Our society places far too much 'faith' in science/technology and the scientists who administer the processes in their 'priestly' white lab-coats. A healthy dose of scepticism towards man's 'progress' as an end in itself might be an insurance against the ever present dangers of syncretism.

Sunday 22 April 2012

Liar, liar world is on fire!

What Thomas Sowell points out about Obama's 'talents' as a liar, the Australian government has been doing as baldly and twice as much:
One of the highly developed talents of President Barack Obama is the ability to say things that are demonstrably false, and make them sound not only plausible but inspiring.
That talent was displayed just this week when he was asked whether he thought the Supreme Court would uphold ObamaCare as constitutional or strike it down as unconstitutional.
He replied: "I'm confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress."
But how unprecedented would it actually be if the Supreme Court declared a law unconstitutional if it was passed by "a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress"?
The Supreme Court has been doing precisely that for 209 years!
Nor is it likely that Barack Obama has never heard of it. He has a degree from the Harvard law school and taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago law school. In what must be one of the most famous Supreme Court cases in history — Marbury v. Madison in 1803 — Chief Justice John Marshall established the principle that the Supreme Court can declare acts of Congress null and void if these acts violate the Constitution.
They have been doing so for more than two centuries. It is the foundation of American constitutional law. There is no way that Barack Obama has never heard of it or really believes it to be "unprecedented" after two centuries of countless precedents.
In short, he is simply lying.
We have entered into a new definition of 'civilzation' or perhaps the collapse thereof. Most likely as the result of the 1960's rebellion against everything that appeared to restrict ones personel 'freedom', and culminating in the post-modern fallacy of truth being a subjective construction.

A lack of truth in education, manners, political life and 'civil' society results in the inevitable, though tragic
consequence of a multiplication of liars...logical and as inevitable as night following day.

Welcome to our brave new world of not knowing what to believe...that is for those without the Good Book!

Saturday 21 April 2012

one plus one equals three

The paradoxical worldview of this most misanthropic of governments:
How, you might think, can you sustain the position that bringing the budget into surplus will lower interest rates; yet running deficits has not resulted in higher interest rates? Easy! All you need do is to hold two contradictory stories as both true. Can’t manage that? Well that certainly rules you out as a budding occupant of an economic ministry in the Gillard government.

Saturday 14 April 2012

Brown, Green, Red, the new rainbow coalition!

A new Green has relaced an old Brown...read about the green dream here:
http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/mirandadevine/index.php/dailytelegraph/comments/a_woodchip_off_the_old_block/

When green meant recycled teabags!

An excerpt from Martin Durkin on what constitutes the real face behind the 'Green' movement. Few can turn a phrase as eruditely...enjoy:
Back in the 1980s, when girls wore shoulder pads and no-one had heard of global warming, people used to think that environmentalism was driven by an innocent concern for nature (dolphins and what have you).  But now it is abundantly clear that there is more to being ‘green’ than composting tea bags and red squirrels.  All the whimsical stuff about flora and fauna is just the polish on the top.  Pay a visit to a green ‘climate camp’ or anti-globalisation rally and you will see, as plain as day, that ‘green’ thinking is a political world-view. In a word, it is anti-capitalism. But it is not the kind of anti-capitalism the Marxists told us to prepare for.  Among the face-painters and unicyclists huddled in the colourful ‘occupy’ tents in the City of London, there are no lantern-jawed industrial workers in boiler suits. There are no pearly kings and queens up from London’s East End.  No.  The effete tent-dwelling Shelly-readers are the self-righteous, work-shy sons and daughters of relatively well-to-do folk. They do not call for higher levels of production, but for lower levels of consumption. They themselves are not short of food or a place to sleep.  They are not unable to feed their families. They are there, not to fight for the little fellow, but to express their loathing of the vulgarity and tackiness of mass production and the ‘consumer society’, and the tawdry, dull world of industry, money, trade, towns, bankers and popular culture.
'Off with their heads', they howled.

Friday 13 April 2012

Beware the barks of snide!

The insidious and unrelenting march through the main stream media by loony left ideologues and the hypocritical sliming of any opposing perspective has reached unprecedented heights in the campaign against Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. News papers of the left can print almost any sort of twaddle, insult, or downright fabrication and be hallowed as the harbinger of truth...whereas a conservative or even mildly centrist opinion is lunged upon like a pack of salivating wolves on a crippled sheep.
The idea that a Murdoch rival could be brought down by something as simple as market forces is too obvious for Panorama, which preferred a more complex explanation: it was part of a ruthless quest for global domination by a sinister megalomaniac who would have given James Bond a run for his money. Aristotelian reasoning gives way to the logic of the Grassy Knoll as Panorama sought the least likely explanation for a mundane corporate dispute. We are entering the world of the conspiracy theory, the home of the cheapest irrefutable argument known to journalism.
Long gone is the 'Aristotlean reasoning' of the 'enlightenment' as have the ethical values of the Ten Commandments disappeared...in their place we see hubris, 'ubermensch' superiority, and a superficial morality consisting of intentions rather than actions. We in Australia are in the unfortunate position of being able to bear witness to a living, breathing illustration of all of these negative, Machiavellian attributes wrapped up in bare-faced mendacity in the form of our Prime Minister...shame on us!

Thursday 12 April 2012

Web masters.

What a tangled web we weave.
Do-gooders, closet totalitarianists, 'This-is-for-your-own-good..ists', and all other bureaucratic wowsers are experts at jumping onto personal tragedies and twisting the heartbreak into some new restriction and/or  legislative straightjacket, Mark Steyn elucidates:

...there have been a small number of bullied teens driven to suicide, and these particular deaths are tragedies for the families involved that blow a great big hole in their lives that can never be repaired. But they are not a cause for wrongheaded public policy. Hard cases make bad law, and hard cases hijacked by social engineers, backed by state bureaucracies and bankrolled by dimwit boardroom patsies make bad law on a catastrophic scale.

Tuesday 10 April 2012

Mainlining!

Bravo Melanie Phillips, as erudite as ever on the overwhelming hypocrisy evidenced by ideologues and assorted morons from the 'loony left', an appellation that unfortunately includes the loony left of Christianity...comprised of an unfortunate amount of the so-called 'mainline' churches...a bit like the 'mainline media'...what is it about mainline...a post-modern pronoun for deceived?!
Those like Oldfield who practise class war believe no achievements should be afforded superior status. To the Oldfields of this world, the great crime committed by Oxford and Cambridge is simply to be excellent.
Instead of elevating standards and thus encouraging aspiration, everything is reduced to the lowest common denominator. And when applied to people, anti-elitism simply means hatred of the better-off, under the rubric of ‘equality’.
This is the sacred dogma of all three political parties, along with the Church of England and the rest of the intellectual establishment (aka the ‘elites’).
With this politics of resentment fanning the flames of public anger against toffs, titans of industry and tax returns, it is hardly a great surprise that some egalitarian exhibitionist chooses to swim towards the blades of the Oxford and Cambridge boats.
Read the full text at: http://melaniephillips.com/boat-race-grudge-guerilla-and-the-new-threat-from-the-net

Sunday 8 April 2012

R.I.P.Labor

Yet Queensland boasts of being the birthplace of the Labor Party, under the Tree of Knowledge at Barcaldine in 1891.
The Tree of Knowledge was poisoned in 2006, by persons unknown, but the Labor Party has been poisoned by well-known figures within the ALP, the power-at-all-costs brigade, the wet-behind-the-ears graduate staffers, the grasping trade union officers who have looted their members’ funds, and it has been hollowed out by the inner urban luvvies who long ago lost touch with ordinary Australians.
Go Abbott!

Wednesday 4 April 2012

Betwixt a slip of the tongue

From the horses (so to speak) mouth:
The Hamas Minister of the Interior and of National Security in Gaza, Fathi Hammad, wants more petrol from Egypt and makes two points that few in the anti-Israeli lobby will want to hear.
First, he wants the help of Arab nations so that Gaza can wage “jihad” against Israel so “Zionists” will be “annihilated”. (From 1:15)
Second, the people of Gaza are not originally from Israel - “Brothers, half the Palestinians are Egyptians and the other half are Saudis.” (From 1:45.)
If you had any doubts about the agenda of Hamas this 'slip' puts the truth into perspective...interestingly the last item illustrates the falsity of the 'Palestinian claim' to nationhood. Palestine always was Israel and the true palestinains have always been the Jews.

Sunday 1 April 2012

the gathering storm

Statistics to consider:
What was the most vilified religion in Scotland in 2010-2011? Not Islam – only 2.1 percent of religious hate crimes were directed against Muslims. Not Judaism – only 2.3 percent were directed against Jews. According to a report by the Scottish government, 95 percent of all religious hate crimes were directed against Christians.
Christians are also the targets of most religious hate crimes in France. A report released last year showed that 84 percent of cases of religious vandalism had targeted Christian sites in 2010 – an increase of 96 percent in two years. Two hundred and fourteen cemeteries were vandalized, along with 272 chapels, 26 war memorials and 10 crosses.
log on and read:  http://www.mercatornet.com/articles/view/europe_battles_hate_crimes_against_christians