Global Warming: Losing their religion?

In a stunning blow to those who say the science is done and everyone agrees that Man Made Global Warming stands to wipe us out unless we vote for Democrats and surrender our freedoms and lifestyles to super-smart scientists who should be running our lives, we have professor Harold Lewis,

"Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara, former Chairman; Former member Defense Science Board, chmn of Technology panel; Chairman DSB study on Nuclear Winter; Former member Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Former member, President’s Nuclear Safety Oversight Committee; Chairman APS study on Nuclear Reactor Safety Chairman Risk Assessment Review Group; Co-founder and former Chairman of JASON; Former member USAF Scientific Advisory Board"

resigning while calling MMGW the biggest crock to hit humanity since the crock pot. No doubt a little thing like this won't stop the Religion of MMGW. There's just too much power and wealth to be had by now.

It's evil because they were people, not because they were gay

Glenn Beck speaks out against the gays men who were brutally tortured and killed by a gang, and receives his just reward. Fact is, the media is adding this to its weeks long exploitation of suicides and violence to advocate an end to freedom for nonconformists. CNN and others have been trying to say it's time to end the right to speak out against homosexuality, supported by several gay rights advocates who have assured the viewing audience that being a Nazi and disagreeing with homosexuality are one and the same. Certainly, due to bullying, it's time to end the right to disagree with homosexuals in our schools. Why not take the leap and make it a hate crime altogether?

Fact is, this is why hate crimes make some people more important than others. What happened was evil, and it was horrible, and it was indefensible, and the gang members should have the book thrown at them. But because the victims were people, not because they were gay. Gangs commit horrible violence against others all the time. Racial violence between Hispanics and Blacks is over the top (though since it doesn't fit the Liberal 'all evil is White based' motif, the MSM hasn't quite known what to do about it). But this is getting coverage because it's helping the Leftist propaganda machines push for values based liberties; you have liberties if you embrace the correct (liberal) values.

Of course it's gut wrenching that the MSM and others would exploit the deaths of these suicides, murder victims, and others just to advance an agenda. But it's not surprising. What is surprising is that so many who are not on the Left are so desperate to be seen as not beig evil, they buy into the false premise. It won't work. Read the comments on the Huffpost page. There is becoming only one way not to be evil, and that is to embrace and conform to the dogmas of the secular left. Period.

Eliminating the Christian Church from the American State: A Leftist Fantasy

While CNN continues its crusade to regulate free speech, or at least speech that dares to question liberal dogmas such as homosexual normality, MSNBC continues the leftist push to rewrite history to conform to the secular dream. I saw the commercial myself, and quickly noted the phrase 'we hold these truths to be self evidence, that men and women are equal.' I couldn't help but think of this:



All of this reflects the secular Left's mindset. Meanwhile Christians are being criticized for being self defeating for suing a school that took their kids to learn about the glories of Islam. Debate can happen about the tactics, but it exposes the glaring truth of the Left: That the secular left abhors the Christian West, and is seeking to eliminate it from society. Buddhism, the Dali Lama, Islam, Eastern Mysticism, you name it - our schools can listen, learn, glorify. But the First Amendment clearly says there is to be a separation of the Christan Church and the State; at least a separation of the Christian Church that doesn't conform to Barry Lynn's beliefs.

All of this SHOULD be a wake up call for people who actually care about freedom, democracy, liberty, religious rights, and other similar liberal trademarks. Knowing, of course, that such loss of freedom usually comes around and consumes the ones initially supporting it. But most Americans, trying to stay employed or at least afford the next Apple IPod, probably aren't paying attention. And of course those on the Left who yearn for the establishment of the United Secular States of America (The USSA), aren't talking, imagining that it will only be those rascally right wing Christian types who will get their just deserts. Whether we stop it in time or not has yet to be seen. But expect to see the rise of a good old fashioned leftest authoritarian state sometime in the future if things continue on their current trajectory.

Cars for Piss Christ?

If I threaten to smear dung on a picture of the Virgin Mary, or encase a crucifix in urine, will someone offer me a car? Or do more Christians have to actually become the brutal and heartless theocrats people like Harris and Andrew Sullivan say they are? Maybe then we can start getting some loot for attacking the Christian Faith. Until then, it looks like it will have to be Korans and portraits of Mohamed if you want to bring Western Civilization to its knees in stark raving terror, and as a result rate a new car for your potential restraint.

The Death of Colonel Reb

So Ole Miss has changed its mascot. Why? Ask Rick Iott. Because we live in a society that is no different than society was 50 years ago. Back when gray haired guys smoking cigars railed against those Beatles and their long hair. Societies have taboos and moral standards and they expect everyone to conform. That's just the way of it. Any talk of 'diversity', 'tolerance', 'respect for differing opinions' is at best ignorance of reality, at worst an outright lie meant to ramrod a new, latest set of absolute morals and values that demand absolute obedience. Never mind that, when I was growing up, rewriting the past and eliminating markers that reminded people of the past was what the Soviet Union did. That's what communism did, we were told. It changed history and didn't allow people to learn about what really happened. Of course we're told we did the same thing in the United States. Maybe we did. Given that suppressing of history we don't want acknowledged is the latest, hippest thing, I would be willing to believe it.

Bill O'Reilly on The View

And we wonder why our kids are messed up. I've seen more mature exchanges on a kindergarten playground. O'Reilly who clearly doesn't understand all of the topics on which he likes to opine, and the View, a show dedicated to making Glenn Beck look like a Rhodes Scholar, can only lead to this:

Given that this is the example our wonderful adult set for dialogue and discussion, personally I'm amazed at the resiliency and maturity of our younger generations. Hopefully they can survive the world we've left them and actually make something of their time upon this world.

The Devil and Rich Iott

Or, if the media coverage is to be believed, we could say the Devil is Rich Iott. Despite claims to the contrary, Rich Iott is not one of the darlings of the Tea Party. Though he's from my own state, I hadn't heard of him before the story broke. I first heard about it Sunday morning as I was doing some work in the living room. I had the TV on, and suddenly heard someone say '...and the Republicans have a candidate who dresses like Nazis.'

Since I both study and teach history in different capacities, I knew immediately what it was about. Obviously an historical reeanactor. Though I never was one myself, I've known them and visited them for many, many years. I'm involved enough in various historical hobbies to understand their basic designs. Of course there could be all types, as with any group. You could have nuts, bad apples, whatever. But without any other input, I knew what it was about.

I went to some liberal blogs that night, and it was already making the rounds. Republican Dresses Like Nazis! Of course the initial story from the Atlantic was of the same tenor; it's purpose was to attack and build stereotypes, not to inform. By Monday it was everywhere. Republicans were abandoning him. Blogs were pouncing. By Tuesday his campaign was being attacked by graffiti in swastika form, and the hobby of reenacting was being called into question, cast with suspicious eyes, and described as 'people who get into their rusty pickup trucks' to drive around the country play acting.

All of this, of course, without anyone actually KNOWING anything about the subject. What of the group? Is it a Nazi group? Does it support Nazi ideals? It says it doesn't. What of Iott? He says this was but one historical reenactment group, he rejects the Nazis as evil, and hadn't been with that group for some time. Later pictures and testimonials appeared to support that account.

Yet the outrage, the condemnation, the contempt was there. The entire hobby, virtually ignored up until last Friday since who knows when, was suddenly cast aside as for losers at best, for people with severe moral deficiencies if not out right racism and evil at worst. Iott? He is toast. Done. Gone. The most charitable thing I found was a commentator who said 'obviously he didn't plan on running for politics when he did it!'

But why? Because, as a society we have gotten nowhere over the last many generations, if not many centuries, and we've gotten there fast. This may well have been someone being attacked for listening to colored rock music in the 50s. Or not knowing the Beatles' names in the late 60s. Or being associated with Dungeons and Dragons in the 1980s. Or basically anything that doesn't conform to the latest set of norms and values to which society demands conformity.

That's right, conformity. For all the talk, all the strutting like peacocks under the banner of diversity, all the talk about opening our minds and respecting differences, there ends up being no such thing. Most of the condemnations leveled at this were by people who started by saying 'I don't know anything about reenacting.' Some clever people, even on Catholic blogs, asked me 'how do I know he ISN'T a racist? Huh?' Well, because I assume innocence until proven guilty, and since I understand the sub-culture of historical reenacting, I can understand what was going on. Sure, maybe they weren't the best group, or were lacking in accuracy or a sophisticated balance of history from the POV of the Nazis versus the needed condemnation of the Nazis. But that's about all we could say with what little was known.

But that's not what we said. That was by no means what we said. Condemnation, contempt, accusation, verdict, punishment - all of these were the talk of the day. He was called a moral idiot at best, a Nazi racist at worst. No amount of reasoning with people was accepted. What few tried to suggest we may be leaping to conclusions were almost as quickly called into question for their agendas or possible prejudices.

And the funniest thing? Besides, of course, being in a society that is supposed to be based on diversity, tolerance, and open mindedness? That many of those quickest to accuse and condemn are the ones who scream loudest when our Society condemns their pet interests. When some fundamentalist links Harry Potter to witchcraft, or when the MSM floats Pope Benedict's membership in the Hitler Youth without delving into the details, many of these folks were the first and loudest to cry foul. And they should have cried foul. But now, many were grabbing rope and lumber and preparing for their own lynching.

The reason? Many different reasons in all likelihood. Some because they have axes to grind or agendas to push. Either blasting American politics, washing hands of both parties, or being partisan to one (in this case, the Democrats), made jumping to condemnation a sure thing. Others had personal reasons, feeling that such a hobby so close to the events is beneath contempt, too offensive, to insensitive. That might be more credible if it weren't for the fact that insensitivity and offensiveness is fast becoming the main foundation on which to build socially acceptable censorship. Or it may be because people are as people always have been, and despite our assurances that we've grown and learned and progressed, the fact is we, and the society we are building, have done no such thing. We are the same as we always have been. Fearing, loathing, or having contempt for things we neither like or understand at best, gladly attacking, even destroying those who stand in the way of our agendas at worst.

In either case, it's clear that there is irony involved. For the crime of Iott was failing to walk that narrow line in dealing with Nazi history. Few can deal with this subject without criticism and condemnation. If you do anything with Nazi history beyond simple condemnation, you do so at your own risk. And yet we insist we learn about that period of time so as not to repeat it. And yet, knowing that many were willing to attack and accuse someone without evidence or even a desire of evidence, simply because he was different or inconvenient next to our agendas, one must ask just who it is that really wasn't learning from history after all.

Halloween Fun!

Our annual 'Ghost Hunt', Part I. Just going through local cemeteries and looking at the head stones, admiring the foliage, getting creeped out by the crumbled ruins of long used mausoleums. It's a tradition, and this year we added honorable son #4!

Computer from Hell

Posting has been light owing to a propensity for shutting down the Internet on my computer's part. Hopefully it will be back to reliable soon.

I'm a Bigot!

You're a Bigot! We're a Bigot! Wouldn't you like to be a bigot, too? It's easy if you try. Apparently you avoid embracing the dogmas of homosexual acceptance. Speak out in any way that isn't worshipful, and you're a homophobic bigot. All of this around Carl Paladino's remarks that homosexuality may not be the superior lifestyle it's portrayed as in our modern propaganda outlets. Since several MSM newscasts have labeled what he said as 'homophobic', I'm assuming that's all it takes: be liberal, or be a bigot. Given the recent CNN agenda circus around bullying and homophobia, given the attempts to tie gay suicides with anyone who fails to conform to the gay agenda, and since it's pretty clear that at least some (ahem, Barry Lynn) wouldn't mind this being the litmus test for those who do and don't have stars on their bellies, I'm beginning to think there's only one way out of bigotry, and that's obedience to the Liberal Gospel.

To Protestants and other non-Catholics: All Catholics do not equal Church teaching

This is important to remember. The National Catholic Reporter is Catholic. Says so right in its title. So a Protestant might be forgiven for stumbling across its website, and saying 'wow, the Catholic Church is really liberal.' Well, the National Catholic Reporter is at least to the left. Others aren't. Some are really, really to the right. Some chafe over the whole Vatican II thing. Some embrace a strange brew of Catholic fundamentalism, a sort of Qumran Catholicism that says they and those in their circles are True Catholics (TM), and everyone else is outside the grace of the Church and can burn for their troubles. Others are anywhere in between these approaches. The fact is, the Catholic Church has official dogmas that say this is true and undeniable for the believer, and that is false. On top of that, it has official positions it stakes out on various issues. These may not be dogmas, but we are called to follow them just like Protestants are assumed to follow their denomination's teaching, or Americans are expected to follow the speed limit even if it's not in the Constitution. And of course, you have opinions and lots of wiggle room for interpreting some of the teachings of the Church - and that is where the Catholic blogs come from.

The point is, there is not one, big Church with the Pope telling everyone what to think about everything. It says certain things are non-negotiable, others are not dogmas, but the Church is teaching this and we are expected to listen, but often with enough room to discuss the finer details. So if you find yourself surfing the web to learn about Catholicism, go to the source. Go to the writings of the Church, the Papal encyclicals, the Catechism, things like that. Blogs and websites and Catholic ministries are fine and dandy and can help you get a jump start. But be careful not to confuse someone who really argues well or has a witty style with what the Church actually teaches. They may be right. But go to the source as well. That is where the Catholic Faith is. Just a little lesson from someone who had to learn it on his own journey into the Catholic Faith.

America's last days

Mark Shea makes a great point about the story of the college girl wrestling with the results of her viral video. Turns out that the main point to notice is that no one is particularly shocked at the fact that she not only had sex with multiple fellows, or even that she boasted of it and developed a multi-media presentation to substantiate her prowess. Apparently the only problem the MSM and other authorities is having revolves around letting it go viral over the Internet. I would say Mark's right. That says about as much as we probably care to say. It may say more. What we won't endure for our libidos.

Young people are immature and whites must still be racist because of their skin color

The article is actually about the new problem of viral Internet videos messing with young people's lives. And of course the experts have concluded after extensive reflection and research that it may be because young people are still immature. But that's not what caught my attention. I'll tackle that issue some other time. What caught me was this:

"Duke graduate Karen Owen compiled a list of 13 young men she slept with -- most from the lacrosse team, which is still tainted by a 2006 scandal that saw a stripper falsely accuse team members of raping her -- and created a bar graph ranking their sexual prowess (or lack thereof). She detailed sex in the university library during finals week, sex in cars and sex while drunk."

Could someone tell me why they are still tainted? I thought in our country if someone accuses you of something, and it turns out to be a false accusation, you are innocent. Why would this story say they are tainted? Could it be because the MSM and 'intellectuals' in our universities ran to the microphones in 2006 to assure us that all white American men are racists, rapists, and violent Neanderthals; that it is in their genes and to be expected? Could it be that they invoked the 'you can tell a racist by the color of his skin' racism that is all the rage among our modern elites, media celebs, and pundits? Makes me wonder. Just askin'.

Homosexuality: Another reason to question the indoctrination

So it turns out that, according to the CDC, almost 1 in 5 gay and bisexual men in American cities have HIV. That's HIV, the thing that can lead to AIDS. That's AIDS, the pandemic disease that has killed tens of millions that has no cure. Despite all of the Hollywood Ozzie and Harriet treatment of homosexuality, the fact remains it is a very dangerous and risky lifestyle, akin to chain smoking (approx. 17% chance of dying from lung cancer if you spend a lifetime smoking). This, of curse, doesn't take into account other infections and problems with male homosexuality. You would think we would rather question the modern narrative about the gay lifestyle than continue to stand by and say 'that's a shame, maybe more education will cover it.'

I also wonder how this stacks with the recent news story that younger people use condoms more than adults. It doesn't appear to cross over into the gay community, if this study is worth anything.

Speaking of studies, I just heard that the CDC recommends people who insist on eating fast food ten times a day should at least get their blood checked once in a while. They don't have to change, since that's who they are. Just get blood checks and hope for the best. Why not? That's how they treat the news about homosexuals, HIV and prevention.

The Feast of St. John Lennon

John Lennon would have been 70. Being the patron saint of the Boomer generation, and the MSM still heavily influenced by that age group, soon we will be treated to all things Lennon. It will, of course, be propaganda. The same type of myth making and legend cooking that the Church has been accused of in dealing with its saints. That may be true of the Church. It certainly is true of St. Lennon. But if so, it must speak of a universal human tendency to lift people up as heroes; lift them up as something beyond mere hero.

Lennon basically was an angry, mixed up person with serious issues who nonetheless hit it big time. Why? Who knows. But he did, and he brought those issues with him wherever he went, becoming a symbol for the generation lost in space, and remaining so to this day. And he comes with all the worship and adoration given to any saint of any religion. Perhaps it is fitting, since Lennon the good and bad exemplified so much of what the generation that adored him turned out to be. After all, what can you say about a saint who composes a hymn for an era that asks if we can imagine no possessions - while singing it from his own 7.5 million dollar palatial estate? Except that perhaps he is a fitting demigod for the Boomers after all.

The Church of Body Modification?

That's a new one. To each his or her own. I would rather people believe in something than nothing. At least that's a step toward believing in the One God who actually created us, bodies unmodified and all.

A public school apparently doesn't see things that way. The ACLU runs to the rescue of course. Because we always expect the ACLU to bail out religious folks when their religious expression in schools is being compromised. Just wondering, but has the ACLU jumped on board to help Christians when their crosses, crucifixes, and other statements of faith have been forbidden in public schools? Not saying they haven't, just curious if anyone remembers a case or two where that happened.

For you seasonal purists out there

Who aren't quite able to get into the mood of the macabre via The Simpsons, here's the late, great Vincent Price performing The Raven. Was a time when such cross-generational cultural tidbits would be appreciated by old and young alike. And you don't get better than Mr. Price's ability to evoke the shadowy undertones of the poem. Enjoy.

Back when The Simpsons was still cool

They pop off this fabulous performance of Poe's The Raven. One of the greatest poems of all time retold with a Homer Simpson/James Earl Jones duet.

Note: It is flipped, so the mirror image of the actual broadcast. Notice the book titles toward the end.

Gay Rights groups exploiting recent suicides to advance an agenda?

That's what you might think if you read Bill Donohue's reaction to Larry King's show on some recent suicides. I admit that the Catholic League is like the out of control uncle at a reunion, often saying things that can be as offensive as the offensive things they are condemning. Here is no exception. In the end, young people are dying. They are committing suicide and we need to ask ourselves why. That doesn't mean slighting the reasons they give.

But in his defense, there does seem, once again, to be a leap forward by the Gay Rights Movement to exploit these deaths to push an agenda. An agenda that, like many of its European counterparts, is increasingly intolerant of the right to dissent. So even in cases where the homosexual factor seems shaky at best, it is becoming the only factor worth discussing. This is, of course, a hallmark of the homosexual rights mentality - that there is sexuality, and then there is everything else.

Naturally CNN is at the forefront of this, pushing over and over and over again ad nauseam against bullying, advancing gay rights, and condemning traditional morality, including the not too subtle concerns over people having the right to disagree with the homosexually active life. But Donohue should be careful not to sound every bit as callous and cold in dealing with the tragic deaths of these young people.

I admit that there are a lot of questions here. Was homosexuality the only issue? What about others who are bullied. Being overweight is still a major cause of bullying, are those kids committing suicide at the same rate? What about them? What about others? Are others also committing suicide and we're just not hearing about them? Should Gay Rights advocates advance contempt for religion when religious kids can be bullied as well (my sons are proof of that)? Are we sure we have the facts straight? And why are kids no older than twelve or thirteen committing suicide after saying they were gay for years? For years? How early are we instilling this sexual ideal? At twelve, I was just getting over the fact that girls had cuties. How are these kids at such a young age spending years struggling with such an issue without it coming from somewhere else? Should they be told that every thought, urge, notion makes them a certain way? Are they confusing natural curiosity a child might have about his or her body or that of classmate with some notion of a genetically predetermined identity because of poor catechises on the part of sexual education at such a young age? What about the not-so-subtle suggestions by some that speaking out against homosexuality itself should be seen as bullying (and by implication, not allowed) in our schools?

Much to think about, but never to eclipse the fact that young people are dying. That should really be our main concern, with agendas and counter-agendas taking a back seat, if that's possible in our day and age.

A Comment on comments

A reader has pointed out that there are occasional difficulties with the comments. Apparently if you try to put in a comment, it freezes. You can go back and try again and it works, or just post anonymous. But if you use the default blogger account, that apparently can cause problems.

Trouble is, I'm about as tech savvy as an aardvark. I can't really help with that. I'll look to see if there is a help feature that addresses the problem. It doesn't seem to bother me, since I'm doing things from an editing feature. My guess is, post anyway you can. If you want to do what one person has done, and just use anonymous and sign a name, that's good. Anonymous works, too, as long as there aren't too many comments. But if everyone stays Anonymous, it could get difficult to retrace your comments, and impossible for anyone else to keep track of (right now, the blog is young, a couple months old, so no problem - hopefully some day there will be more folks and more comments and that would be a huge problem!).

I guess it doesn't happen all the time, but has happened. I know the blog has frozen up on me a couple times in general. So just do what you can, comment, comment, comment. Whatever works is fine with me. I'm pretty easy as long as folks keep it nice and don't do the usual bad things (vulgarity for vulgarity sake, personal attacks, threats, etc.).

Happy reading everyone, and welcome to all the readers I see from other parts of the world! Feel free to throw your two cents in. I love hearing from folks from other cultures.