Thought Provoking, That Is, A Sign at the Gas Station

At the gas station I noticed a sign that read:

Buying tobacco and alcohol for minors isn’t just wrong, it’s illegal.

Being me, I looked at it logically. Is there anything inherently morally wrong with someone under 18 smoking  or drinking. If so, most of humanity for the greater part of our history have been constantly and consistently immoral. And in many countries still are. Especially in regard to the drinking bit.

Yes, yes. I know it really is nit-picky. It’s just a dumb sign in a mini mart, but the thinking behind it, rampant these days, is important. The sign, in a roundabout way, says the state is the arbiter of morality. Furthermore, that which is illegal is worse than the simply immoral. This is a problem these days. Something being illegal has no bearing on whether or not it is wrong. Certainly we hope the two meet regularly, but moral laws and the laws of man are not one and the same.

Cars are pretty damn dangerous, but we let kids go at 16 in that case. I’ve heard the argument for putting the drinking age under the driving age on a simple basis. Let people get used to, and understand the effects of alcohol, before we put them behind the wheel of a two ton vehicle capable of slamming  through the walls of a house.
See, this is the sort of thinking that happens when you read the classics. And we can’t have that sort of anti-authoritarian extremism, now can we?

Advertisements

Abandoned to the Wolves

I was in various private Christian schools from kindergarten up through the end of my senior year in high school. I’ve been part of a few congregations. The closest thing I ever got to apologetics was a copy of Lee Strobel’s The Case for Christ. It’s, basically, the Christian version of the ‘New Atheist’ books and therefore doesn’t count. Point is, if any Christian should have been intellectually prepared for an atheistic onslaught against my faith, it should have been me…

Read the rest at Path to Patriarchy

A Short Add-On

Two things.

1. Mexico does not allow private ownership of guns. Switzerland all but requires it. An interested party might look into the history of the two places and draw conclusions.

2. Read part 2. I feel I should note: even if private ownership of weapons resulted in the type of citizen on citizen violence the cretins claim should happen, (which it doesn’t, as violent crimes go down in states that stop using the law to prevent individuals from defending themselves) it would not change the view of any logical right thinking person. There are some threats that warrant certain risks. The threat of a government is one.

Liberal Socialism Kills: Part 2

Last post I looked at violence from both sides of the equation. Today we look at an entirely new formula. Government banning guns. It will be both shorter but, I think, make an even better case against the idiocy of disarming the law abiding.

Gun Established:                                        Massacre Happens:                            Casualties(roughly):

Soviet Union 1929                                     1929-1953                                             20 mil

China 1935                                                    1948-1952                                             20 mil

Germany 1938                                             1935-1945                                             13 mil

Cambodia 1956                                           1975-1977                                             1 mil

 

I could name more, but this will suffice. Note, each of the four examples above is a case of democide. Governments annihilating their own populace. I can’t say it any simpler than this. The ability to defend yourself from a random thug barely qualifies as a fringe benefit compared to defense against your own government’s tendencies towards the mass extermination of the people.

Liberal Socialism Kills: Part 1

Although the title is correct in general terms, what brought it to my mind was the Denver theater shooting. I’ll split it into two parts, plus have another post up at Path to Patriarchy to explore a different, albeit related, topic.

My first point will be what I tend to think of as ‘Bully Progression’. The idea that if a bully finds his tactics have high efficacy he is not only unlikely to stop, but will increase his bullying in both frequency and intensity.  To put it simply, if violence is an effective means to some end in middle school, our hypothetical bully won’t magically stop in high school. Now, this is a pivotal point. Not every asshole will become a thug, we would have far too much to consider. Socio-economics, demographics of the city, school and neighborhood, the race of the individual… and so on and so forth. But none of that is the point of this post.

A bully is best served by being shown that his actions have consequences. It could be a talk with a parent or teacher or at the other extreme it might be getting an ass kicking from a potential victim that doesn’t take shit. Either way the child is learning that certain actions have extreme consequences. However, if this particular lesson isn’t learned there is a chance of future thuggery. And at some point it is entirely possible, especially in a country with something like 250 mil privately owned firearms, that this theoretical thug will make the mistake of a accosting an individual willing and capable of resisting with lethal force.

Now then, we have those who suggest making private ownership of firearms illegal to reduce the incidence of violence against the innocent. Laughable, as many items are illegal and yet still attainable with minimal effort. Look at the ‘war on drugs’. Not only are drugs easy to get, money is being sent to drug cartels. Not exactly the sort we want to be making rich.
Why would making guns ownership a crime do any good. The cartels already have weapons, they would just start selling some of them to increase  profits on a new front.

Of course, reading the news after the theater shooting has shown that rather large number of the populace seems to be aware of the fact that restricting guns was one of the problems. They couldn’t shoot back. Even someone who had a gun with them (illegally) would have to consider the cost of saving strangers being potential jail time.

I know, this has been something of a rambling post, but I think that it can be seen that I have demonstrated two particular ways that liberal socialism is responsible for treating instigators of violence with a light hand and disarming potential victims. Next comes a much more important topic.

Sit On Your Ass and Hope God Does the Heavy Lifting

Or, ‘waiting for God’s perfect time’ as it is known among churchians. I was thinking about my last post on ‘going the distance’ in regards to women hitting the wall and the notion of doing nothing made me thing of it’s spiritual equivalent.  I imagine most Christians who stop and think will recognize the affliction instantly. Women get hit with this piece of ‘advice’ more than men, although I know some boys, myself included, have been recipients of this particular brand of stupidity.

It works quite marvellously for the feminist element infecting the church these days. You can convince women that they are special little princesses who only need to wait for our Heavenly Father to send them a perfect man. And since western civilization Churchians have thrown out Ephesians Chapter Five* and embraced frivolous divorce, little mistakes such as marrying the wrong fellow can be ‘fixed.’

“It wasn’t the time God has for you. He isn’t The One God picked out for you.” Oh look. My bile is rising, right in line with the Lord’s perfect time.

Now, the hopelessly optimistic might think that this means a women who wants a divorce should be rebuked. Not for divorce. Don’t be ridiculous. She didn’t feel loved. What monster would want her to stay in that sort of relationship? I meant rebuked because she must not have waited for God to set a man down right in front of her. A man who would accept her curves*, her spunk and wit**, and her lovable friends***. Yeah right. Get your logic out of here. The modern Church is all about acceptance. Unless you’re a dude. In which case stop reading and wife up a lard slut snowflake princess.

Back on topic, you just don’t really see much of churches calling out the sort of behaviour that is rampant among the faithful. God forbid they actually read and follow the guide book He gave us. It might make them feel unhaaapy! And guess what? That sort of attitude is killing churches. This blase attitude is quite literally killing the churches who think following secular culture won’t be so bad. It ain’t just that bad. It’s worse. I was a member of a church that decided the bible didn’t really mean all that stuff about divorce, homogamy and what have you. It won’t last. The only churches that haven’t fallen into the red are the ones that left the organization.

This is the problem. The notion of God’s perfect whatever is part of an illness infecting the church. Altogether it takes away responsibility and then consequence. Fortuitously, a large chunk of the maonsphere is seeking to implement the cure. *spoiler alert* It’s killing feminism and its socialistic siblings. *end spoiler*   Well, no one is feeding us to large predatory mammals yet and the church has weathered worse than this. In the mean time we should get started on a live feed sermon for the red pill takers.

*rolls of fat

**bitch attitude

*** just as bad as her. They can talk for hours and say nothing.

You Can’t Go the Distance

…but  you should still try.

It is a sad fact of reality that we all face a race against the clock. And we all lose. For the most part girls have an SMV that sits at a comfortable high from age 15 until they hit the wall. That being said, facing time is something like a long distance race. Certain actions will impede the ability to go very far. The runner who trains correctly, learns proper pacing, and eats the optimal foods is going to make it farther than the guy who sits on his ass all day. There is a similar effect for women.  Think of a drug addict vs a girl who takes care of herself. A meth user might look like hell in her early twenties while those who focus on maintaining bodies that function at peak efficacy can essentially stave of the wall (albeit temporarily) and lessen the pain of going through it. Don’t go nuts with harsh substances, don’t ride the carousel like your idiot friends, stay away from the ding dongs, and for the love of all that’s decent stop sitting on your fat butt.

It seems like common sense, but it needs to be said. I mean, damn ladies!