Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, Basics, cultural marxism, disaster, error, fightback, General Catholic, horror, manhood, paganism, Revolution, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, unadulterated evil.
Some interesting considerations below, where a self-described long-time progressive admits to being shocked, flustered, terrified, and offended at the presence of an obvious male in the women’s public restroom at Disneyland in Southern California. There are a whole lot of revelations below – paralyzing fear of being called out as politically incorrect and thus having one’s credibility destroyed in the secular pagan milieu, an incoherent feeling of being violated but an inability to do anything about it, and a demand that someone must fix the situation that goes along with a steadfast refusal to take personal action to help bring that fix about.
In short, it’s a pretty good summation of where we are as a culture, with the demands of the leftist extremists becoming more and more irrational, more and more invasive every day, and yet a sense that we are somehow powerless to stop this advance. But all it takes is will, the will to act, the will to be slimed by leftist activists on Twitter and other social media and not giving a damned what they say. That is, of course, easy to say, when one recognizes that even one’s professional standing and job could be permanently ruined by one act of moral bravery. Nevertheless, we eventually must fight, as the cost of delay will be much greater penalties in future if we don’t act now:
I was off to the side waiting with the two boys, when I noticed a man walk into the restroom…He took a few more steps, at which point he would’ve definitely noticed all the women lined up and still kept walking. My next thought was, “Maybe he’s looking for his wife…or child and they’ve been in here a while.” But he didn’t call out any names or look around. He just stood off to the side and leaned up against the wall. At this point I’m like, “…Am I the only one seeing this?” I surveyed the room and saw roughly 12 women, children in tow…staring at him with the exact same look on their faces. Everyone was visibly uncomfortable. We were all trading looks and motioning our eyes over to him…like “what is he doing in here?” Yet every single one of us was silent. And this is the reason I wrote this blog.
We had been culturally bullied into silenced. Women were mid-changing their baby’s diapers on the changing tables and I could see them shifting to block his view. But they remained silent. I stayed silent. We all did. Every woman who exited a stall and immediately zeroed right in on him…said nothing. And why? B/c I…and I’m sure all the others were scared of that “what if”. What if I say something and he says he “identifies as a woman” and then I come off as the intolerant ass… at the happiest place on earth? So we all stood there, shifting in our uncomfortableness…trading looks. I saw two women leave the line with their children. Still nothing was said. An older lady said to me outloud, “What is he doing in here?” I’m ashamed to admit I silently shrugged and mouthed, “I don’t know.” She immediately walked out…from a bathroom she had every right to use without fear.
And let me be clear, my problem wasn’t JUST that there was a man in the restroom. Its that he wasn’t even peeing, washing his hands or doing anything else that you’d do in a restroom. He was just standing off to the side looking smug…untouchable… doing absolutely nothing. He had to of noticed that every woman in the long line was staring at him. He didn’t care. He then did a lap around the restroom walking by all the stalls. You know, the stalls that have 1 inch gaps by all the doors hinges so you can most definitely see everyone…
So yes… there were women and small children using the restroom and this man was walking around knowing no one would say anything. So here I am…writing this blog, because honestly I need answers. We can’t leave this situation ambiguous any more. The gender debate needs to be addressed… and quickly. There have to be guidelines. It can’t just be a feeling… this notion that we’re shamed into silence b/c we might offend someone, has gone too far.
There was a man who felt entitled to be in the woman restroom, because he knew no one would say anything. There were 20-25 people by the time I left, who were scared and uncomfortable by his ominous presence. And the only thing stopping us, was our fear of political correctness and that the media has told us we don’t know what gender is anymore. I never want to be in the position again. I’m not asking for permission to tell transgender people to get out my bathroom. I need to know it’s ok to tell a man, who looks like a man, to get…out. Gender just can’t be a feeling. There has to be science to it. DNA, genitals, amount of Sephora make up on your face, pick your poison, but as a very progressive woman…I’m sorry it can’t just be a feeling when there’s but a mere suggestion of a door with a peep hole separating your eyes from my…or my children’s genitals.
All of which, fine. I feel your pain. There is even a certain sense of I told you so.
But the title of the post was actually a tongue in cheek joke – progressives like this will never reach their limit. They (or the vast majority, anyway) are the problem. They always kowtow to whatever the more radical fringes of the Left demands of them. And they will submit this time, and channel their impotent rage onto more culturally approved targets, like Donald Trump, white males, and conservatives, generally. Somehow this will all wind up being our fault.
Of course, there are exceptions. Sometimes it is moments like those above that start a person traveling on the path from former progressive to solid conservative.
Most importantly, the “lesson” I’m trying to convey is that if we want this to stop, it’s going to be up to us and like-minded individuals to start calling these jackholes out when they try to invade the private space of the opposite sex. Don’t let them get away with it, but know you will probably wind up being the one being blamed and even victimized if you do call them to account for their perversion and effrontery. But if we want this culture, rapidly descending into a literal hell, to change, we’re going to have to be willing to suffer for it. Pay me now or pay me later, the price will only go up if we delay, when we are finally to pushed to such extremes that we have no choice but to fight back and where far weightier things – the ability to have Mass said publicly, the ability to raise your kids in the Faith – are at stake.
Of course this is just one of a thousand and more areas where pushback is needed. That’s part of the Left’s strategy, using full time paid activists they advance on a hundred fronts simultaneously, finally wearing out the outmanned and out-funded opposition. We all have to pick our battles. But maybe if you are confronted with a bearded dude in a women’s bathroom, don’t just silently fume, but wack him over the head with your purse (which should always have a nice, heavy breviary in it). Or at least scream and shout and tell him what a sicko perverted freak he is.
Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, disaster, error, foolishness, non squitur, persecution, Revolution, scandals, secularism, Society, unadulterated evil.
So, all whites are irredeemably racist. Sounds racist to me:
Somehow the anti-racism movement of the 50s and 60s has transmogrified into a racial supremacist movement in its own right, directed against the “deplorables.” Basically this is an attempt to punish whitey for voting the “wrong” way.
The increasing dominance of the democrat party by the hard left has pushed theminto being repugnant to increasing numbers of Americans. Their electoral hopes outside their coastal enclaves increasingly depends on unfettered Hispanic immigration. That, and massive fraud. Outside urban voters and their small but hard core of progressive activists, the democrat agenda has become increasingly toxic to most Americans. They are now more or less attempting to bully and threaten into voting D. The message is clear: the best, perhaps only way for whites to “prove” they are not racist is by shutting up, paying ever increasing taxes to mollify the democrat base, and voting D.
Over 20 years ago, a corporate diversity officer for a Fortune 100 company laid it all out plain as day. The point of all the mandatory diversity indoctrination was to fundamentally remake America into a multicultural (read: leftist) utopia by discriminating against whites. Even if white males were more qualified or had better records, the preference would be towards “minorities.” There was also a heavy revenge element involved. The perception was that white males had kept others down for centuries and now it was their turn to suffer. I do not exaggerate, the diversity officerette stated all this and more straight up and plain as day. You could either shut up, get with their program, or expect a short and unsuccessful career. That company is a major federal contractor. Don’t think that incidental.
And that was 1994.. They’ve only become more radicalized and unhinged since.
Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Abortion, contraception, cultural marxism, disaster, General Catholic, horror, It's all about the $$$, paganism, scandals, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, unadulterated evil.
As if you need to guess. Planned Murderhood, which exists for no other reason than to be not only the leading baby murderer in the country but also the primary advocate for keeping abortion legal, turned down Trump’s offer to fully fund them at their desired level if they would only stop killing babies. So much for abortion only being “3% of their business,” it is the one non-negotiable activity they perform, their most “sacred” satanic sacrament they adhere to:
Half a billion dollars in federal funding isn’t enough to keep Planned Parenthood from what it does best — abortions. This week, Planned Parenthood proved once again that, for all their talk of “women’s health,” their business IS abortion.
On Monday, The New York Times reported that the Trump administration made an informal proposal to the nation’s largest abortion provider: You can keep your federal funding if you stop taking the lives of unborn children.
PP refused, as abortion services are simply “nonnegotiable.”
“Let’s be clear: Federal funds already do not pay for abortions,” Dawn Laguens, the executive vice president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, said. “Offering money to Planned Parenthood to abandon our patients and our values is not a deal that we will ever accept. Providing critical health care services for millions of American women is nonnegotiable.”
That’s at least the talking point. But money is fungible (as anyone who has ever handled currency ought to understand).
GOP officials, of course, promised relentlessly on the campaign trail that they’ll get taxpayer dollars out from under the abortion giant. It was an issue that found new life in 2015 after undercover videos from the Center for Medical Progress purported to show PP involved in a large-scale fetal tissue racket.
This all begs the question: If Planned Parenthood was really concerned about vital low-cost health services for women, and really thought the organization would not be able to adequately service patients without an enormous taxpayer kickback, why would it put said handouts on the chopping block for something it says is such a negligible part of its entire existence?
Because it’s all a crock……..
…….Given what the public now knows about the kind of operation that Planned Parenthood is running all over the country, and the Republican promises made to voters in the 2016 election cycle, there’s absolutely no reason that they should continue receiving a red cent of public money.
That is, if the courts will allow it. Texas’ attempt to defund Planned Murderhood was rejected by a West Texas Bush ’41 appointed federal district court judge. Texas plans to appeal, but the odds are the courts will reject Texas’ arguments that Planned Barrenhood’s non-abortion services are neither vital nor irreplaceable in the vast majority of the state. Which, of course, is a lie, but whatever it takes to keep the evil leftist sacrament of abortion viable.
This Planned Barrenhood de-funding will be another major test of both Trump and the Republican Congress. In Trump I think it safe to say his commitment to social conservatism remains mostly unproven, and in Congress decades of evidence reveal their social conservative principles to be almost entirely campaign prevarications. So I don’t expect Banned Parenthood to be defunded, but I hope and pray I will be proven wrong.
Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, asshatery, disaster, episcopate, Francis, General Catholic, horror, paganism, Revolution, scandals, self-serving, sexual depravity, the enemy, the struggle for the Church, unadulterated evil.
And, beyond that, features himself in what is an obviously perverse and blasphemous work of “art.” Paglia is one of several well known extreme modernist bishops from the Italian episcopate that have experienced a rapid rise during Francis’ pontificate. Particularly shocking is the fact that this same archbishop who seems to tip his hand quite obviously regarding his own proclivities and, quite probably, extracurricular activities, has been made the president of the John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and the Family and the head of the Pontifical Academy for Life. These appointments are part of a clear trend under the current Bishop of Rome to grant cover and partronage to the sodomite underworld prevalent in the clery, as Francis’ recent rollbacks of penalties put into place for priest sex abuse have helped underscore.
Many wondered how Francis would deal with this lavendar mafia. Little did they know the several-hundred page dossier on pervert priests compiled under Benedict would be used by Francis as recommendations for promotions and advancement. Of course, given the tight correlation between sodomy and hatred for the constant belief and practice of the Faith, it is probable that much of Francis’ most fervent support within the episcopate comes from those lost in this reprobate lifestyle. In spite of the fact that this archbishop and his painting were very controversial within Italy, Francis has still seen fit to give him two plum and highly influential assignments, both centering on what appears to all the world to be an attempt to undermine and ultimately destroy the moral edifice of the Faith:
The archbishop now at the helm of the Pontifical Academy for Life paid a homosexual artist to paint a blasphemous homoerotic mural in his cathedral church in 2007. The mural includes an image of the archbishop himself.
The archbishop, Vincenzo Paglia, was also recently appointed by Pope Francis as president of the Pontifical Pope John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family.
The massive mural still covers the opposite side of the facade of the cathedral church of the Diocese of Terni-Narni-Amelia. It depicts Jesus carrying nets to heaven filled with naked and semi-nude homosexuals, transsexuals, prostitutes, and drug dealers, jumbled together in erotic interactions.
Included in one of the nets is Paglia, the then diocesan bishop. The image of the Savior is painted with the face of a local male hairdresser, and his private parts can be seen through his translucent garb.According to the artist, a homosexual Argentinean named Ricardo Cinalli who is known for his paintings of male bodies, Bishop Paglia selected him out of a list of ten internationally-known artists specifically for the task of painting the inner wall of the facade. Bishop Paglia, along with one Fr. Fabio Leonardis, oversaw every detail of Cinalli’s work, according to Cinalli, who approvingly notes that Paglia never asked him if he believed in the Christian doctrine of salvation.
“Working with him was humanly and professionally fantastic,” Cinalli told the Italian newspaper La Repubblica in March of last year. “Never, in four months, during which we saw each other almost three times each week, did Paglia ever ask me if I believed in salvation. He never placed me in an uncomfortable position.” [Of course not! We wouldn’t want to disrupt all that pleasant “accompaniment” and “welcoming” with any talk of such a minor and trivial subject as the state of one’s eternal soul!]
“There was no detail that was done freely, at random,” added Cinalli. “Everything was analyzed. Everything was discussed. They never allowed me to work on my own.” [Ergo, Paglia endorsed every portion of the monstrosity, which you can view below]
Cinalli admits to La Repubblica that the naked people in the nets are meant to be “erotic,” although Bishop Paglia drew the line when Cinalli proposed to show people actually copulating.“In this case, there was not – in this sense – a sexual intention, but erotic, yes,” said Cinalli. “I think that the erotic aspect is the most notable among the people inside the nets.” He later added, “The one thing that they didn’t permit me to insert was the copulation of two people within this net where everything is permitted.” [In a sane Church, this artist would never have been considered. This is the reduction of the Church to mere platform for the advancing of worldly left-wing ideals and, more importantly, the personal vanity of an unworthy prelate.]
The reason he wasn’t allowed to be so explicit, says Cinalli, is that his painting had already done enough to demonstrate the notion that man has “freedom” in this life and even in the next, apparently to engage in whatever sexual behavior he deems appropriate. “The bishop and Fr. Leonardis . . . told me that they didn’t think it was necessary to arrive at that extreme to demonstrate the freedom that man, in reality, has in this world and in the next.” [Orwellian. Slavery is freedom. God condones sodomy, prostitution, and drug use in “heaven.” Please. All this does is reveal to total immorality of Paglia, the priests involved, and the artist. It says nothing to anyone about God, sin, redemption, the human condition, etc.]
The article then goes on to note how Paglia has moved to undermine the Doctrine of the Faith on numerous occasions since his pontifical appointments, including this:
In July of 2016, still under the direction of Paglia, the Pontifical Council for the Family issued a new sex-ed program that includes lascivious and pornographic images so disturbing that one psychologist suggested that the archbishop be evaluated by a review board in accordance with norms of the Dallas Charter, which are meant to protect children from sexual abuse.
The images in question, which, quite frankly, are of an amateur level of quality and boringly progressive in their message. I wish these geriatric progressive perverts would understand just how tired and predictable their attempts at shocking have become (beware these images contain nudity and are, as stated above, obviously intended to be erotic:
Paglia circled. The image is obviously intended to leave vague whether it be Christ or some male love uplifting the bishop
Yes there are drug dealers and prostitutes and people obviously getting it on if out and out penetration is not show. SOOOO appropriate for a church and children. Consider how diligent a man who has no problem bombarding children with homo-erotic art every day in what should be the sanctuary of the Lord is going to be about protecting children’s innocence generally, or from predatory priests in particular.
And yet Francis has seen fit to install this man over pontifical departments dedicated to upholding the family and the sanctity of life.
Outrage doesn’t begin to describe it.
Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, asshatery, cultural marxism, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, persecution, Revolution, self-serving, sickness, Society, unadulterated evil.
The sickeningly lost far left “ethicist” Dr. Peter Singer is at it again, opining that intellectually disabled children are less “valuable” than animals. This kind of wholly perverse, reprobate sense is where the inevitable logic of the leftist-materialist conception of the world will drive someone – to the brink of insanity and right over it.
In his apologetics for infanticide, Princeton bioethicist Peter Singer has used a baby with Down syndrome as an example of a killable infant based on utilitarian measurements. (He actually supports infanticide because babies–whether disabled or not–are, in his view, not “persons.”)
To Singer, moral value primary comes from intellectual capacities, and that means that developmentally and cognitively disabled human beings (also, the unborn and infants) have less value than other human beings, and indeed, a lower worth than some animals. [Since he bases his view of a right to life on such arbitrary standards, when super-brilliant AI machines get developed by stupid technologists who create what they cannot control, and they develop capacities infinitely above human intelligence, Singer will have no complaint when they decide to kill all of us off? What is the floor of intelligence that allows one to have a right to life? Who gets to decide this? Deranged imbeciles like Singer? What is different between Nazi’s deciding all Jews (and Catholics and Gypsies and others) had to die based on their own arbitrary definitions on who gets to live, and Singer’s? I suppose we can thank God that Singer is not, yet, empowered to make such decisions.]
Were society to ever adopt Singer’s bigoted anti-human exceptionalism views, it would mark the end of universal human rights, opening the door to tyrannical pogroms against the most weak and vulnerable–you know, the kind of people that the Singers of the world deem resource wasters. [Materialists almost always posit life as a zero sum game – if someone is better off, that means someone else must of necessity be worse off. In a sick sort of way, they demand the deaths of others so they can have it better.]
It would also break the spine of unconditional love, as our children would have to earn their place by possessing requisite capacities.
Take the recent statements by Singer, published in the Journal of Practical Ethics in which he explains why he would adopt a child with Down syndrome out (my emphasis).
He then expresses a profound bigotry against people with cognitive and developmental disabilities:.
For me, the knowledge that my [hypothetical Down] child would not be likely to develop into a person whom I could treat as an equal, in every sense of the word, who would never be able to have children of his or her own, who I could not expect to grow up to be a fully independent adult, and with whom I could expect to have conversations about only a limited range of topics would greatly reduce my joy in raising my child and watching him or her develop. [You are an idiot. Thank God He never gave you such a child. The parents of Down Syndrome children I know often regard them as the easiest child to love, as they have no guile, they are as simple, kind, and genuine as one can be. And yet, very soon, in many countries Down Syndrome people will cease to exist. No “downie” has been born in Iceland, for instance, in nearly a decade. All have been killed via elective abortion.]
“Disability” is a very broad term, and I would not say that, in general, “a life with disability” is of less value than one without disability. Much will depend on the nature of the disability. [What if we have a vote, and decide old age is a disability, consumes a disproportionate amount of medical resources for “little” return, and kill everyone over age 70? How would he feel about that? Age brings with it inevitable disabilities. Singer, BTW, turns 71 this year.]
But let’s turn the question around, and ask why someone would deny that the life of a profoundly intellectually disabled human being is of less value than the life of a normal human being.
Most people think that the life of a dog or a pig is of less value than the life of a normal human being. On what basis, then, could they hold that the life of a profoundly intellectually disabled human being with intellectual capacities inferior to those of a dog or a pig is of equal value to the life of a normal human being? [Because we’re not pathologically mendacious God-denying amoral monsters like you! Humans are special, humans are even sacred, in a sense, because they are created in the image and likeness of God. Denying that leads one open to such gross evils in thinking as Singer routinely demonstrates. I would also ask, hypothetically, how do you “prove” that a dog or a pig or a fruit fly has greater intellectual capacity to a human? All but the most profoundly disabled people – and note how he mixes, probably deliberately, the notion that someone with Down’s is inevitably profoundly disabled, which is not always the case – can speak, something no dog or pig has ever done.]
This sounds like speciesism to me, and as I said earlier, I have yet to see a plausible defence of speciesism. After looking for more than forty years, I doubt that there is one. [I just gave you one, the difference is, we humans have infinite worth, in all of our individual forms of being, because God gave us that worth by creating us in His image. The extremely ugly, utilitarian world you posit, Singer, is a direct result of your rejection of God. I take it Singer has never read Solzhenitsyn, and if he has, he didn’t understand it at all.]
I would also add, this is the kind of inanity that an intellectual comes up with in trying to justify abortion on demand. That is the specter looming over everything Singer says, the unacknowledged “god” of his moral universe whose awful appetite he must seek to rationalize away.
Speaking of insanity, ever read the history of the various factions of the Japanese far left during the late 60s and early 70s? In addition to helping found the PLO and stage some of their most horrific early terror attacks, in 1972 they purged half their own membership by murdering them in miserable ways. They then took a hostage and staged a week long standoff with the Japanese police. They were finally arrested after killing two cops and an innocent bystander.
No, not everyone who falls into liberalism will eventually become a hard leftist and even murderously unsane, but the logic of the belief system always tends in that direction. The fact that abortion is the most sacred policy position/religious doctrine of the ideological left is bloody testimony to that fact.
Posted by Tantumblogo in disaster, Ecumenism, episcopate, error, foolishness, Francis, General Catholic, Holy suffering, horror, persecution, sadness, scandals, sickness, Society, the enemy, unadulterated evil.
I’d say that’s about right. The article below details recent muslim atrocities against Christians around the world, focusing on the near total destruction of the ancient Christian communities of Assyria, which were all but obliterated by the invasion of ISIS into this region in 2014. Now that ISIS is being forced out of Assyria in a very half-hearted, desultory manner, some Christians are returning to relate the horrors they experienced at the hands of this terror group, which the US originally helped back and arm when it was thought, among our unqualified, really dumb “elites,” that ‘anybody but Assad’ was an appropriate policy for Syria and the Mideast:
Reports of Christian life under the Islamic State (ISIS) continued throughout November. Many of these came from the ancient Christian towns surrounding Mosul, such as Batnaya and Qaraqosh, conquered by ISIS in August, 2014, and liberated in late October, 2016.
One Christian man, Esam, from Qaraqosh, related what ISIS did after his sister’s husband refused to convert to Islam: “He was crucified and tortured in front of his wife and children, who were forced to watch. They [ISIS] told him that if he loved Jesus that much, he would die like Jesus.” The Islamic militants tortured his brother-in-law from 6 in the evening until 11: “[T]hey cut his stomach open and shot him before leaving him hanging, crucified.” Two other members of Esam’s family, a Christian couple, were abducted and separated by ISIS. To this day, the husband does not know where his wife is; he only knows that she was turned into a concubine, a sex-slave…….
………Another handful of Christians told how they “were threatened, forced to spit on a crucifix or convert to Islam,” but they “miraculously survived more than two years under Islamic State group rule.”……
……..Before being driven out of these now-liberated Christian towns around Mosul, ISIS plantedexplosive devices in teddy bears and toys that would be detonated when children picked them up, “killing unsuspecting families.”
Those who survived ISIS, accused former U.S. President Barack Hussein Obama of doing nothing when Iraq’s largest Christian city, Qaraqosh, fell to the Islamic terrorists more than two years ago, when its Christian population was over 50,000. One man said, “Obama has never helped the Christians. In fact, he despises them. In the last 26 months, he has shown he despises all of them. But we have hope in the new president, Trump.” A Catholic priest said: “The US government led by President Obama could have protected us – or at least helped us to protect ourselves. But unfortunately Obama abandoned us.” A young girl wearing a cross added: “We hope this new guy called Trump will help us more than Obama did.” [I would add, given the scale of the tragedy, Francis and the Church at large have been far too silent on the horrific persecutions Christians and Catholics in particular are suffering around the world]
Hey, muslims take care of their own. I know with complete certitude that Obama is no Christian, and I believe the evidence that he is either a practicing muslim or overwhelmingly sympathetic to them is overwhelming.
The article goes on to list an amazing list of atrocities perpetrated by muslims against Christians, which all occurred in one month, November 2016. There are over 20 separate attacks listed, and this list is most likely quite partial.
If one didn’t know better, you’d almost think there’s a religiously motivated war going on, but thank goodness, we know that’s not the case. Francis has told us so, even going so far as to claim that there is no such thing as “muslim terror.”
Francis will probably be dead and buried before the folly of his interreligious fantasizing really becomes apparent, with large sections of Europe being overrun by the forces of islam. Whether Rome will be one of those remains to be seen, but given the large and increasingly radical “refugee” populace there, the Church’s ancient home may eventually become untenable. That seems unthinkable, but given the trends abroad in the world, the unthinkable is becoming increasingly likely.
Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, disaster, Ecumenism, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, Immigration, It's all about the $$$, persecution, rank stupidity, scandals, sickness, Society, unadulterated evil.
As you can guess, the reaction to the proclamation of these particular abhorrent beliefs has been just a little bit different from what was directed at Milo, because a prof is a member of the great left-wing machine and leftists always take care of their own. h/t to reader skeinster who sent this along (I know reports of this have been around for a while but they were fairly scattered so it’s likely many have not seen this):
Two weeks ago today, a professor from Georgetown University publicly rose to the defense of slavery and rape, and not a single major media outlet—with the exception of a blogger on the Washington Post website and a brief posting on foxnews.com—has said a word about it. The absence of outrage is not hard to figure out: Jonathan Brown’s defense was limited to Islam. [yet another sign that islam is the de facto state religion of this country]
Brown, a convert to Islam, holds an endowed chair in Islamic studies at Georgetown. The Jesuit-run institution has a wealthy benefactor in Saudi Arabia, a nation which bans Christianity. How sweet.
What did Georgetown get from this arrangement? Money, and a lot of it. Twelve years ago, Saudi Arabia wrote a check to the Jesuit-run institution for $20 million; it went to support the school’s Center for Muslim Christian Understanding, run by Brown. And what did Saudi Arabia get from this peculiar “understanding”? Legitimacy. [And much more than that. They got the silence of a Catholic university on the evils of islam. They got influence at a body that in turns greatly influence mainstream Catholic thought. They got influence on American and Catholic thought leaders for years to come. They got more and more acceptance of the idea that islam is deserving of special rights and privileges]
The fruit from this decayed tree is now apparent. Georgetown now employs a tenured professor who defends slavery and rape, provided the slavemasters and rapists are Muslims. This is apparently Georgetown’s idea of diversity. It also shows how phony the school is. Why all the handwringing about Georgetown’s ownership of American slaves in the 19th century when it employs defenders of slavery today?
Brown’s position was not made in the heat of debate. If anything, his comments were well prepared: they were delivered at the Islamic Institute for Islamic Thought. After being criticized by some, he tried to walk it back, offering a lame Tweet that meant nothing.
“As a category, as a conceptual category that exists throughout states and trans-historically,” Brown said clumsily, “there’s no such thing as slavery.” It gets better. “I don’t think you can talk about slavery in Islam until you realize that there is no such thing as slavery.” [Naturally. If you can’t defend your religion’s behavior on a subject, pretend the subject doesn’t exist. Also, taqqiyah.]
It is not certain what Brown would say to slaves in Mauritania and Somalia today—they are owned by their Muslim masters. Would he tell them to stop promoting fake news?……..
Brown is also incompetent. If slavery doesn’t exist in Muslim-run nations, why the need to justify it? “Slavery cannot just be treated as a moral evil in and of itself,” he opined. He really means it. “I don’t think it’s morally evil to own somebody because we own lots of people all around us.” [This guy is really screwed up. Go figure for a western convert to islam]
(Who he owns he did not say, but perhaps the Southern Poverty Law Center will look into it. Maybe I’ll convert to Islam and see if I can buy him. I’ll use my credit card—Mastercard for the Master.)
When someone in the audience challenged Brown, he became indignant, as well as inconsistent. “The fact that there was slavery is wrong [thus did he contradict his remark that there was no such thing in Islam]. Okay. If you’re a Muslim, the prophet of God…had slaves. He had slaves. There’s no denying that. Are you more morally mature than the prophet of God? No, you are not.” [HE’S DEMANDING STUDENTS ACCEPT THE DICTATES OF ISLAM, A FALSE SATANIC RELIGION, ON A CATHOLIC CAMPUS!!! This is an appeal to authority based on his view that Mohammad – if he existed – is supposedly “god’s” prophet. Does Brown know that, unlike Christ, Mohammad worked no miracles, did no great good deeds witnessed by tens of thousands, in short gave absolutely zero evidence of any supernatural connection or powers short of a book he wrote, alone, under supposed guidance from Gabriel? Does Brown admit of the satanic verses where the Koran (at least, a version where these bits are not expunged) admits that satan fooled Mohammad? Did satan ever trick Christ into teaching error?]
One would hope that all of us are more morally mature than Muhammad. After all, he was not only a slavemaster and an advocate of violence, he consummated his marriage with his bride Aisha when she was nine years old. That’s what we call rape.
Speaking of which, Brown went on to say that non-consensual sex—it’s called rape—is okay with him, at least if the offenders are adherents to Islam. He took aim at the Western notion of “consent,” maintaining that “It’s very hard to have this discussion because we think of, let’s say in the modern United States, the sine qua non of morally correct sex is consent.”
Continuing his defense of rape, Brown criticized Americans for making a big deal about individual rights. “We fetishize the idea of autonomy to the extent that we forget, again who’s really free? Are we really autonomous people?” In other words, since none of us is really autonomous, the difference between us and a rape victim is more contrived than real. [And you can tell from this exactly how far into islam this guy has gone, and it’s pretty damned deep. This is exactly why islamic societies are so backwards, hidebound, superstitious, and casually disdainful of human life. They place no value on the self as a unique soul created in the image and likeness of God – or to the extent they do, they have horribly perverted this understanding precisely in order to justify Mohammad’s abhorrent, amoral behavior.]
Brown and Georgetown would be on the front page of every newspaper in the nation if he had justified Christians enslaving and raping Muslims.
Dang straight. Good piece by Deal Hudson.
This is what the Left has in store for you folks. Get rid of Christianity, create a failed totalitarian leftist state, then submit to the almighty allah.
Brown does a fine job of revealing the demonic immorality at the heart of islam, as well as islam’s inability to logically, rationally defend itself. The appeals to authority start within moments. And I would say Christianity’s long struggle to extirpate slavery from Western civilization sufficiently establishes its inherent moral superiority.
Only a muslim extremist would claim differently. Good to know just what $20 million in dirty Saudi oil money will buy.
Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, disaster, error, family, foolishness, General Catholic, It's all about the $$$, paganism, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, unadulterated evil.
Aside from a bit of football, mostly college, we never watch TV. Even watching football on a Saturday afternoon is problematic, at least, because of the commercials. We generally turn the channel or turn it off.
So the likelihood that we would stumble on this atrocious new program from Fox called “The Mick” is low, but I’ve got to say I think I saw ads for it during a bowl game. It looked terrible, and it seems it is. It inspires me to want to get rid of the TV someone gave us a couple of years ago. Here are the problems with this new program, to air during the “family hours” of prime time:
And what exactly is “The Mick”?
It’s a “comedy” series featuring “Micky”, an irresponsible, foul-mouthed, cigarette-smoking alcoholic, pill popping woman who assumes guardianship of her spoiled niece and nephews.
It features unprotected teen sex, a child consuming quantities of birth control pills. Strong language (“b*tch,” “a$$,”) and crude sexual references are frequent, with kicking, screaming, and slapping.
And it’s airing right now in the “family hour”, when programming is supposed to be appropriate for any age.
But is this program “appropriate”? Just listen to this:
- Kids get slapped in the face repeatedly.
- There is underage drinking, foul language, and drug use.”
- Along with an incredible array of inappropriate sexual banter, and nasty talk.
And it gets even worse. Mick lets her teenage niece have boys in her room, and smiles with approval when she hears banging coming from upstairs.
So is Mick a “cool aunt?”
Or is this twisted and warped entertainment – using kids to promote contraception, homosexuality, and transgenderism?
More from this site where you can sign a petition opposing the airing of this program:
Lindsay Kornick with the Media Research Center’s NewsBusters writes: “There is nothing decent about The Mick. Not the topic, not the characters, and most definitely not the humor.”
Little Boy in Dress Says It ‘Breezes on My V*****’ in Twisted Trailer for ‘The Mick’
Fox Comedy Features 6YO ‘Trans’ Boy Wearing Bondage Gag
I don’t know how effective this kind of opposition is. You’re probably better off telling Fox that, thanks to them, you’ve decided to cancel your cable/satellite/broadband subscription and won’t be viewing ANY programming, least of all theirs.
We always hear what a fallacy the slippery slope argument is, and, logically speaking, it can be, but this all started with short skirts and innuendo in the 60s, fell into more bawdy and controversial humor in the 70s, then descended into outright nudity, profanity, and immorality in the 80s and 90s. Television programming is enormously powerful and has probably played THE key role in the advance of the sodomite and other perverse agendas – indeed, as the orchestrators of those agendas deliberately planned that to be. The infamous book laying out the “gay agenda” in the late 80s – After the Ball – spoke of using TV and the movies to first normalize sodomy, and then so glorify it as to be in many senses viewed as superior to morally upright use of the marital faculties. And so here we are today, with transgender 6 year olds wearing ball gags, for pity’s sake. What a travesty. All along, people have been pooh-poohed who warned that the steady decline in morality in broadcast media would lead to exactly what we see today, and we were all lectured by our cultural betters what fools such nattering nabobs of negativity were.
Couple this post with the previous one for a course of appropriate action, perhaps.
Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Abortion, asshatery, Basics, disaster, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, paganism, persecution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, unadulterated evil.
Because they’re all about visualizing whirled peas. Yes, please do continue to manifestly demonstrate that all your high-minded rhetoric of the past has been naught but pleasant sounding claptrap to advance your noxious agenda and never-satiated quest for power.
A Purdue University staffer was in an online exchange with a local pro-lifer, and called for her to be violently raped because she holds is such an adherent of badthink. Doubleplusungood, Outer Party Member 8954324!! Off to the Miniluv for you!
This kind of completely unhinged rant, this reduction of fellow human beings to below the level of garbage, has become an epidemic of late. Overwhelmingly, the extremists are on the far left side of the political spectrum. People are becoming more and more brazen in their willingness to demonstrate the utter contempt with which they view many others, simply for holding differing views. Far too many have been so inculcated into an ideological bubble that neither seeks nor allows any dissent that when confronted with a radically point of view – even one abundantly supported by massive evidence, such as the ongoing practical genocide against black babies on the part of the abortion industry – they react with unmitigated hatred and hostility.
Ace is calling for a national, dispassionate divorce. More and more, that seems a far happier outcome than what increasingly appears to be in the offing, rampant violence in the streets with numerous uninvolved/innocent individuals being caught up in the nightmare:
A Purdue University staff member is being investigated after he allegedly threatened to rape pro-life women during an online debate about the campus pro-life club’s recent campaign.
The Purdue Students for Life group has been facing a heavy backlash this week after its members put up posters around campus that focused on how the abortion industry targets black women and their unborn babies for abortions. In coordination with Black History Month, the campaign posters read “Hands Up, Don’t Abort” and “Black Children are an Endangered Race” and included the hashtag #BlackLivesMatter. [That is pretty hardcore and in your face, but the facts eminently support the claim. Nearly half of all black babies conceived are murdered in the womb. In some locales like NYC the number is closer to 2/3. That is very nearly genocide, and something of which the vast majority of the population, especially millennials carefully propagandized within the education industrial complex, are wholly unaware. But what is being called for here is the END of the slaughter of blacks. It is somehow racist to desire more black babies to live? Does everything seem totally upside down?]
On Monday, a small group of pro-abortion students and faculty held a sit-in protest during the pro-life club’s meeting and demanded an apology, LifeNews reported.
Then on Wednesday, the team at Students for Life reported the discovery of a violent threat against pro-lifers by Purdue staff member Jamie Newman. Newman reportedly called for the rape of pro-life women in an online comment on Live Action News.
According to Students for Life, Newman used his Disqus account “jamiegnewman” to post the following comment:
Oh, I’m sorry. So, let me make my intentions quite explicit: I did in fact offer to rape Tom’s wife/daughter/great grandmother. Free of charge, even. I’m generous that way.
Here’s the number for the West Lafayette Police Department: 765-775-5500. Here’s the number for the local FBI office: 765-435-5619. Drop that dime! I could strike at any minute
*giggles* (like a girl) [Oh, so brave. Such an online strong man. See the photo of this brawny alpha male below.]
……..Newman also allegedly posted two comments on Feb. 4, according to screen shots by Students for Life:
You folks are vile, racist idiots, who richly deserve all the opprobrium that will be heaped on you as a result of this unbelievably thoughtless, stupid escapade. That you are seemingly incapable of appreciating the moral, legal, and social differ[ences]…
“And that you should have pulled this stunt at the beginning of Black History Month suggests you are are either epically cluless or profoundly malicious. So which is is – embarrassingly dumb or simply evil?
Across the country, and I believe Purdue has been a part of this, young men have been booted off campus through kangaroo courts that find them guilty of “rape” upon nothing more than an accusation from an aggrieved and frequently unhinged woman, frequently months if not years after the alleged act. This persecution of males was instigated through threatening communiques from the Obama Administration’s Department of Justice, which threatened to pull federal funding from colleges that did not implement an extremely aggressive persecution of males anti-rape policy.
So, has Purdue applied this same kind of draconian policy to this leftist staffer? I mean, here we have an actual threat of rape. If this were a male student having made this threat, he would be gone. There would be no “due process” or “investigation,” both of which are entirely lacking for most young men unjustly booted off campus for “hooking up” with the wrong unsettled woman.
See how they respond:
The university said it is investigating Newman and his alleged threats of sexual assault against pro-lifers. Local news station WLFI reports police also are investigating.
Purdue Assistant Vice President for Strategic Communications Julie Rosa told Campus Reform: “Obviously, a threat of rape is outside the bounds of any definition of protected speech. Due process requires that, before taking any action, we verify the alleged facts and give this staff member the chance to explain himself if he can. Needless to say, the statements, as alleged, are reprehensible and unacceptable in the eyes of the entire Purdue community.”
Hundreds of young men were given no chance to explain themselves, were provided with no counsel, and could not even cross-examine or challenge their user’s claims. Contradictory evidence supplied by the accused is often thrown out.
But we all know that we live in a two-class society, where members of one of the left’s approved classes – and especially its (at present – this will change) darlings, the academia – get special rights and privileges, while the rest of us get the full measure of the law and whatever extrajudicial punishment the societal elites (almost all of them within the left-wing spectrum) feel moved to dole out. This can include total social ostracization, the ruining of careers, if not actual criminal prosecution and jail time. All for holding wrongthink.
People will not stand for being treated as inferior, second class citizens. And the other side has, over decades, painted itself into an intellectual and emotional corner where it cannot see those outside their narrow ideological worldview as anything but. That’s why I keep alluding to this not ending well. I pray to God I’m wrong.
The awesomely hulky and overbearingly masculine Mr. Newman:
In my experience, the wimpier, more ineffectual, and more effeminate a person knows he is, the more prone to online threats they are. But we’ve seen an epidemic of violence emanating from exactly these sorts, when they are in comfortably large groups confronted with single individuals or much smaller groups. When confronted with strength – there were specific occasions of this at Berkeley – they suddenly become much more accommodating and reasonable.
Classic cowards and bullies. How crass and boorish our culture has become. There was a time, within living memory, when making threats like the ones this poor lost soul made would have gotten one permanently banned from polite society, certainly a university setting where one has some charge over young people and especially young ladies. Not anymore. Not only will this guy likely not lose his job, he’ll probably receive many plaudits and kudos from his colleagues.
And that’s why all but a select few colleges will not see my money or my kids.