Posted on 06/01/2016 8:14:05 AM PDT by Fitzy_888
TRYING TO PLEASE EVERYONE Trying to please everyone is by far the worst disease the West contracted. Today, critiquing any other religion besides Christianity is considered a sin while mocking Christianity is applauded. I argue that anyone who tries to combat anything without using biblical concepts is an idiot no mater how ‘brilliant’ society thinks they are. A Christian will always be attacked no matter what they say. I as a Christian could type any sentence and instant objections will arise. I could even publish a single line article that says: “Mankind does good and evil” and someone will object.
Brilliant-idiots like Richard Dawkins and Peter Singer would object to using the word ‘mankind’ as inadequate since we supposedly progressed to learn more through what they term evolutionary process that we are all human-animals since according to such view we all belong to the animal family.
You will never please people.
To please Dawkins and Singer I would have to change my sentence to say, “The human animal does good and also does evil”.
Do animals do evil? What evil does my German shepherd do? My dog likes to kill rodents that come to our yard. Could my dog have ‘rat phobia’? Do I need to take my dog to Cezar Millan the Dog Whisperer for treatment?
What does Dawkins mean by “human animal”? If we are all animals, should we walk naked and mate in the open as animals do? Peter Singer suggests we even mate with animals.
They even spread strange ideas that Christianity is a danger to everything even including animals. Peter Singer is a Princeton University professor and animal rights pioneer, who is commended by Richard Dawkins and his ilk who focus so much to destroy the story of Creation writing that “Human beings are here seen as special because they alone of all living things were made in the image of God.” Singer writes that Jesus “appears never to have addressed the question of our relations with nonhuman animals” and that this is in contrast to “the teachings of Buddha.”
Singer sees Jesus as anti-animal rights because he cursed a fig tree in “a fit of anger at finding no figs” and also for doing an exorcist and casting the devils “into a herd of pigs.”
He scorns biblical traditions as the reason why “western ethical thinking singled out human life” and therefore it is common western thinking that to “end a human life is to end the life of a being made in the image of God.”
The major environmentalist and population control fanatic, Harvard professor Singer champions infanticide and euthanasia in the name of saving the environment, romanticizes Islam as an environmental remedy: “Muslims clearly understand non-human animals to have souls.” Muhammad, according to Singer, was also a champion of environmentalism, a man who “compared the doing of good or bad deeds to other animals to similar acts done to humans.” On the Qur’ân, Singer writes that “Qur’ân 17:44 notes that nonhuman animals and the rest of nature are in continuous praise of Allah, although humans may not be able to understand this.”
BRILLIANT-IDIOTS ALWAYS PROMOTE EVIL So why do these reprobate brilliant-idiots and Islamists always unite against Christianity unless a devil exists?
To save this environment, Singer advocates that America should contribute more to world poverty: “America is taking far more than our fair share;” and that population growth will ruin the environment. Singer, in all his writing, openly views the Bible as an enemy: “Christianity is our foe. If animal rights is to succeed, we must destroy the Judeo-Christian religious tradition.”
Did you read this? “destroy the Judeo-Christian religious tradition”.
In an article titled Heavy Petting, that is ‘heavy petting’ in ‘having sex with animals’, Singer comments:
“In the Judeo-Christian tradition – less so in the east – we have always seen ourselves as distinct from animals, and imagined that a wide, unbridgeable gulf separates us from them. Humans alone are made in the image of God. Only human beings have an immortal soul.”
In his work A Companion to Ethics it reads: “Christian ethics is intolerant and breathes intolerance.” In his article Heavy Petting, Singer explains:
“Heard anyone chatting at parties lately about how good it is having sex with their dog? Probably not. …The existence of sexual contact between humans and animals, and the potency of the taboo against it, displays the ambivalence of our relationship with animals.”
Singer even supports the infanticide of children who are born ill or who have ill older siblings in need of the infant’s body parts.
An interviewer questioned him: “What about parents conceiving and giving birth to a child specifically to kill him, take his organs, and transplant them into their sick, older children?”
Singer replied: “It’s difficult to warm to parents, who can take such a detached view, [but] they’re not doing something really wrong in itself.”
When Singer was asked if there’s “anything wrong with a society in which children are bred for spare parts on a massive scale?”
Singer replied with “No.”
He also reaffirmed that it would be ethically O.K. to kill 1-year-olds with physical or mental disabilities, although ideally the question of infanticide would be “raised as soon as possible after birth.”
Ironically, Singer’s mother suffered from Alzheimer’s disease and he spent considerable sums on her care even though she wasn’t human by his standards.
But if we take the animal-rights activists view, what then do we do about eating animals? Wouldn’t it be immoral to kill and eat our animal-brethren? They can argue that if it is okay with us to eat animals why not eat human-animals?
If we accept such a premise, this alone would cause a war since many human-animals will defend themselves to prevent from being eaten by other human-animals. Gun stores will boom since both the hunters and the hunted want to prevent getting eaten. I had thought these wanted gun control.
Some indigenous tribes in the Amazon do this already. You might be shocked to find out that humanity took that route on all continents without having brilliant-idiots teach them cannibalism. We have well documented what is behind cannibalism. Modern cannibals like Armin Meiwis or Jeffrey Dahmer and Jihadis and fatwa givers from Al-Azhar University imams disturb us when they allow Muslims to eat their enemies.
Why do they disturb us? It is because we live in a Christian culture whereas cannibalism was an accepted norm in many cultures in ancient times and now thank God to Jews and Christians it is not.
These days, we debate the issue of gay marriage, as if two men mating isn’t enough and now we must even accept mating with animals. Just by that simple edit of my single-line article calling mankind “human-animals” we will eventually have to deal with marriage between human-animals and regular animals. Some of the brilliant-idiots might even argue that this would definitely help us in our population explosion. Would Dawkins and Singer prefer to live in the Amazon naked? No. Even Dawkins loves Christian Vivaldi and Handel’s Messiah and Singer would not execute his mother (he refused to euthanize her) but does not mind you executing yours. In other words, brilliant-idiots are no different than Muslim fatwa givers since they want everyone else to destroy themselves while only they lead as gods.
Who then is qualified to set up moral standards? Definitely not the brilliant-idiots. Science never has all the answers. But then we must ask: which god qualified to set up such standards. After all, we have a swap meet of tyrannical gods from Shivalinga to Allah, so we as a society must choose wisely.
No matter how you look at it, switching to any other God besides the biblical God is tyranny.
THEY ALL WANT TO BECOME
GODS AND PROPHETS SO WE CAN MAKE CHAOS
Even the brilliant-idiot has a trinity: I am God, Prophet and Captain Chaos all in one.
(...)
That’s precisely where science is heading today, as some of the findings of science are being used to undermine all the tenets of that pre-philosophy: Scientists are sawing off the branch on which they’re sitting. In his profound new book The Death of Humanity, Richard Weikart documents how self-appointed spokesmen for “Science” such as “New Atheist” Richard Dawkins — and thousands who follow his lead — reject the idea of objective morality, free will, and the meaningfulness of life. Instead they blithely insist that everything — every single thing — in human nature can be traced to natural selection and blind variation. Religious impulses, altruism, friendship, love, even scientific curiosity, must all be explained away as the purposeless side-effects of mutations.Human consciousness itself is a purely chemical, deterministic process entirely driven by the firing of neurons in the brain — which means that it is impossible to describe knowledge as objective, or any statement as really “true.” The perception that each of us has that a proposition is provable, or an experiment is conclusive, is no guarantee of anything in external reality; instead it is the outcome of subatomic dominoes falling in random patterns. How can science continue if even scientists start to believe this about their minds?
The answer is that it cannot. The death of humanity which Weikart describes will also be the death of science. We are already seeing state attorneys general trying to prosecute scientists who question the political orthodoxy of climate activists, federal regulations overriding the medical judgments of doctors treating “transgender” patients, and a dogmatic refusal on part of many well-educated people to admit that a human embryo is living or human, or that physical sex exists.
A few more decades of such irrationalism will undermine completely the foundations of research and truth-seeking in the sciences, and the West will go into the same despairing stasis that haunted ancient Egypt, India, and China. Ironically, the only hope for science now is a rebirth of faith.
- Abandon God, and Science Will Die
Christianity won’t destroy Islam, but Christ will.
Old fashioned Soviet style Communism could crush Islam if it really wanted to.
True conservatism includes a faith in Christ. Without a faith in Christ, a conservatism is just a libertarian.
Without a faith in Christ, abortion, drugs, prostitution and many other immoral behaviors condoned by libertarians is always looked at as something we should allow. Yet these are the things that bring down a society.
True conservatism leads by example, and the example includes the morals of Christianity.
Worldview is everything. Any religion/belief system which doesn’t include Christian Ethics is incompatible with our Constitution-—since Christianity is the ONLY rational religion in the history of the World (aligned with Natural Law Theory (Science/Logic/Reason).
It is the most Just religion in history of man because it invented Free Will (choice) (individual Natural Rights only from God) and embraced Rule of Law with Higher Law (the most perfect one where ALL Life has unique, rights which no man or government can remove.)
We now have a Vice System (which is unconstitutional and “null and void”)-—thanks to the Progressives/Justice Holmes who destroyed the meaning of the word “Justice”. He literally took Virtue out of the word which is the Queen of Virtue—so he could promote vice/slavery/theft/”welfare”, baby-killing, sodomy (Marxism where there is no differences between male and female (no identity, no uniqueness—all interchangeable cogs in the wheel—useless eaters who can be killed for the “Good” of the State).
We need to control Language/Words again-—the Marxists took over Hollywood/Textbooks to literally flip 2000 years of ethics to Satanism and brainwash children—destroy critical thinking (Reason/Logic and erase the Wisdom of the Ages (Western Civilization/Mind of Tesla/Newton, etc)..
Why? Vice makes slaves only and promoting Vice in “just Law” will collapse culture. (St. Augustine/Socrates/Plato/Aristotle/The Founders, Cicero, etc. etc-—all brilliant “thinkers” in Western Civilization).
Italy: 90% of teens would convert to Islam if Islamic State conquered their country – Survey
Posted on April 20, 2016
https://muslimstatistics.wordpress.com/2016/04/20/italy-90-of-teens-would-convert-to-islam-if-islamic-state-conquered-their-country-survey/
Fairness in an economic context means honest free trade. The market decides what are fair prices and profits based on voluntary decisions and evaluations. There is no excess profit, there is only profit one has earned based on one's productiveness.
Although my posts have included the following quotations from a Black Ohio State Legislator and A.M.E. Bishop invited to address a Centennial Celebration of the Declaration of Independence in 1876, I challenge readers of this thread to visit the Library of Congress web site to read the entire Sermon, as it documents, and invalidates, "progressive" claims of today, as discussed on this thread.
"Progresssive" ideology has brought such nonsense upon us.
Beginning in the late 1900's, those who self-described as "liberals" (more recently, identifying themselves as "progressive") called for "changes" which have been, in fact, regressive, in that they have carried America back to Old World ideas which limit freedom, opportunity, creativity, and plenty--just as they did in 1776.
Should any person who reads this doubt that such was the "progressive" agenda, read the following:
"Withdraw from Christendom the Bible, the Church with its sacraments and ministry, and Christian morality and hopes, and aspirations for time and eternity; repeal all the laws that are founded in the Christian Scriptures; remove the Christian humanities in the form of hospitals and asylums, and reformatories and institutions of mercy utterly unknown to unchristian countries; destroy the literature, the culture, the institutions of learning, the art, the refinement, the place of woman in her home and in society, which owe their origin and power to Christianity; blot out all faith in Divine Providence, love, and righteousness; turn back every believer in Christ to his former state; remove all thought or hope of the forgiveness of sins by a just but gracious God; erase the name of Christ from every register it sanctifies—in a word annihilate all the legitimate and logical effects of Christianity in Christendom—just accomplish in fact what multitudes of gifted and learned minds are wishing and trying to accomplish by their science, philosophy, and criticism, and what multitudes of the common people desire and seek, and not only would all progress toward and unto perfection cease, but not one of the shining lights of infidelity would shine much longer. Yes, the bitterest enemies of this holy and blessed religion, owe their ability to be enemies to its sacred revelations - to the inspiration and sublimity of that faith which reflects its glories on their hostile natures. They live in the strength of that which they would destroy. They are raised to their seats of opportunity and power by the grace of Him they would crucify afresh; and is it to be thought that they are stronger than that which gives them strength? Can it be supposed that a religion which civilizes and subdues, and elevates and blesses will succumb to the enmities it may arouse and quicken in its onward march? Are we to tremble for the ark of God when God is its upholder, and protector, and preserver?” - Dr. Benjaming W. Arnett, St. Paul A.M.E. Church, Urbana, Ohio, Centennial Thanksgiving Sermon, November 1876. Arnett's "Sermon" is available in the "Library of Congress - Historical Collections" - "African-American Pamphlets from the Daniel A. P. Murray Collection," 1820-1920; American Memory, Washington, DC.Finally, in yet another section of that Sermon, Dr. Arnett, a Black Ohio State Legislator and A.M.E. Bishop, warned of a movement then under way among what we would call "academics" which, if successful, would destroy the nation. Below is a relatively small excerpt from that Sermon's conclusion. In it, Rev. Arnett warned about a movement among "liberals" to remove the ideas underlying America's founding documents. See if you recognize those ideas in what you have observed in recent years:
"The Danger to our Country."Now we must not think that we have nothing to do in this great work," Bishop/Legislator Arnett said, "for the men who are at the head of this movement are men of culture and intelligence, and many of them are men of influence. They are led by that thinker and scholar, F. E. Abbott, than whom I know but few men who has a smoother pen, or who is his equal on the battle-field of thought.""Now that our national glory and grandeur is principally derived from the position the fathers took on the great questions of right and wrong, and the career of this nation has been unparalleled in the history of the past, now there are those who are demanding the tearing down the strength of our national fabric. They may not intend to tear it down, but just as sure as they have their way, just that sure will they undermine our superstructure and cause the greatest calamity of the age. What are the demands of this party of men? Just look at it and examine it for yourselves, and see if you are willing that they shall have their way; or will you still assist in keeping the ship of state in the hands of the same crew and run her by the old gospel chart! But ye men who think there is no danger listen to the demands of the Liberals as they choose to call themselves:
"'Organize! Liberals of America! The hour for action has arrived. The cause of freedom calls upon us to combine our strength, our zeal, our efforts. These are The Demands of Liberalism:"'1. We demand that churches and other ecclesiastical property shall no longer be exempt from just taxation.
"'2. We demand that the employment of chaplains in Congress, in State Legislatures, in the navy and militia, and in prisons, asylums, and all other institutions supported by public money, shall be discontinued.
"'3. We demand that all public appropriations for sectarian educational and charitable institutions shall cease.
"'4. We demand that all religious services now sustained by the government shall be abolished; and especially that the use of the Bible in the public schools, whether ostensibly as a text-book or avowedly as a book of religious worship, shall be prohibited.
"'5. We demand that the appointment, by the President of the United States or by the Governors of the various States, of all religious festivals and fasts shall wholly cease.
"'6. We demand that the judicial oath in the courts and in all other departments of the government shall be abolished, and that simple affirmation under the pains and penalties of perjury shall be established in its stead.
"'7. We demand that all laws directly or indirectly enforcing the observance of Sunday as the Sabbath shall be repealed.
"'8. We demand that all laws looking to the enforcement of “Christian” morality shall be abrogated, and that all laws shall be conformed to the requirements of natural morality, equal rights, and impartial liberty.
"'9. We demand that not only in the Constitution of the United States and of the several States, but also in the practical administration of the same, no privilege or advantage shall be conceded to Christianity or any other special religion; that our entire political system shall be founded and administered on a purely secular basis; and that whatever changes shall prove necessary to this end shall be consistently, unflinchingly, and promptly made.'
"'Let us boldly and with high purpose meet the duty of the hour.'
"He acknowledges that this is a religious nation and wants all men to assist him in eliminating the grand old granite principles from the framework of our national union. Will you do it freeman; will we sell the temple reared at the cost of so much precious blood and treasure? These men would have us turn back the hands on the clock of our national progress, and stay the shadow on the dial plate of our christian civilization; they would have us call a retreat to the soldiers in the army of Christ; the banner of the cross they would have us haul down, and reverse the engines of war against sin and crime; the songs of Zion they would turn into discord, and for the harmony and the melody of the sons of God, they would give us general confusion; they would have us chain the forces of virtue and unloose the elements of vice; they would have the nation loose its moorings from the Lord of truth and experience and commit interest, morally, socially; religiously and politically to the unsafe and unreliable human reason; they would discharge God and his crew and run the ship of State by the light of reason, which has always been but a dim taper in the world, and all the foot-prints it has left are marked with the blood of men, women and children. No nation is safe when left alone with reason.
"But we have no notion of giving up the contest without a struggle or a battle. We are aware that there is a great commotion in the world of thought. Religion and science are at arms length contending with all their forces for the mastery. Faith and unbelief are fighting their old battles over again, everything that can be shaken is shaking. The foundations of belief are assaulted by the army of science and men are changing their opinions. New and starting theories are promulgated to the world; old truths are putting on new garbs. Error is dressing in the latest style, wrong is secured by the unholy alliances, changes in men and things, revolution in church and state, Empires are crumbling, Kingdoms tottering; everywhere the change is seen. In the social circle, in the school house, in the pulpit and in the pews. But amid all the changes and revolutions there are some things that are unchangeable, unmovable and enduring. The forces that underline the vital power of Christianity are the same yesterday, to-day, to-morrow and forever more. They are like their God, who is omnipotent, immovable and eternal, and everywhere truth has marched it has left its moccasin tracks.
"The Conclusion of the Whole Matter.We have patiently tried to examine the record of the nations of antiquity and learn the cause of their decay and decline, their fall, why their early death; and why so many implements of destruction around and about their tombs, and everywhere, in the silent streets, mouldering ruins, tottering columns, mouldy and moist rooms, and the united voice from the sepulcher of the dead past is, "sin is a reproach to any people." We see it written on the tombs of the Kings, and engraven on the pages of time, "sin is a reproach to any people." These are the principles of governments, Right and wrong; and the people who are the advocates of Right have bound themselves together and by their united effort they have brought light out of darkness and forced strength out of weakness.
"We as a nation have a grand and glorious future before us. The sun of our nation is just arising above the horizon and is now sending his golden rays of peace from one end of the land to the other. The utmost extremities of the members of the body politic are warm and in motion by the commercial and financial activities of the land. Her face is destined to blush with beauty when peace and justice shall be enthroned. The grand march of progress shall mark her in her onward advancement in moral strength, intellectual brilliancy, and political power. Then we can say that we give to every man, woman and child the benefit of our free institutions, giving all the benefits of our common school and the freedom to worship God under their own vine and fig tree. Then will we see written, on the banner of our free, redeemed and disenthralled country, the sublime words written, not in the blood of men, but in the sun-light of truth, that "Righteousness exalteth a nation." It will fall like the morning dew on the lowly; it will descend like the showers of May on the poor; and like the sun it will shine on the good and bad, dispensing from the hand of plenty the blessings of a government founded on the principle of justice and equality.
"Standing on the threshold of the second century of the nation's life, with the experience of the past lying at our feet, we are saluted by the shout of triumph from the millions who left their homes and business and attended the Great Exposition of the skill and genius of the world, collected at Philadelphia. We were permitted to receive the greetings from the oldest to the youngest nation of the earth. Egypt and the United States clasped hands over the waste of 5,000 years, and lay their treasures at the feet of our civilization. The material, intellectual and mechanical deterioration of the one, and the unprecedented progress of the other, stand in great contrast; in all that makes the nation great,—morally, religiously and socially, the young nation is ahead.
"Following the tracks of righteousness throughout the centuries and along the way of nations, we are prepared to recommend it to all and assert without a shadow of doubt, that "Righteousness exalted a nation"; but on the other hand following the foot-prints of sin amid the ruins of Empires and remains of cities, we will say that "sin is a reproach to any people."
Ethics systems, you must have one.
The only one where there is a logical conclusion toward prosperous freedom is Christianity.
The only conclusion for atheism is chaos; crime and disease.
The only conclusion for Islam is absolute tyranny.
The only thing standing between atheists and muslims are Christians. Nobody is doing a “compare and contrast” between ethics systems. When you do you expose Islam for what it is and why muslims DO NOT pray to the same God, Allah is the polar opposite to Christ’s teachings.
bump
the only way to end Islamic fanatic Violence is to become Just as Crazy as they are! You must be willin g to die for Christ—just as they are willing to die for Allah. This was how the Spanish beat the Moors. this is a Holy War—and they are the worst sorts of wars to fight. Take no prisoners! One side wins, one side loses. Its sad but, unfortunatly true.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.