A Manifestly Ill-founded Case
In the UK, the government has decided it has the divine authority to declare and define and proscribe the Christian faith. Its argument runs something like this:
The official statements of the churches define the Christian faith to be "x".
Adherents of the faith are practising "x" and "y".
"Y" is not defined or confessed in the official statements.
Therefore "y" is not part of the Christian faith.
One wonders what has happened to the principles of liberty of conscience and freedom of religion in this UK government position.
The occasion is a court case being brought at the European Court of Human Rights by Christians against the UK government because it has refused to allow its employees to wear or display a cross whilst at work. This from The Telegraph:
Monday, 19 March 2012
Saturday, 17 March 2012
Obama's Idolatry
Consistently Anti-Christian
President Obama has been accused of anti-Christian cant. It is a charge he defends. Clearly he has dabbled in "liberation theology"--which amounts to Marxism with a pseudo-Christian veneer. But was this just a passing phase?
One way of testing the claim is to document the actions of the Federal Government, for actions speak louder than words. It appears very consistent and a damaging litany. There is a prima-facie case to answer.
President Obama has been accused of anti-Christian cant. It is a charge he defends. Clearly he has dabbled in "liberation theology"--which amounts to Marxism with a pseudo-Christian veneer. But was this just a passing phase?
One way of testing the claim is to document the actions of the Federal Government, for actions speak louder than words. It appears very consistent and a damaging litany. There is a prima-facie case to answer.
Just and Unjust Wars
Darth Vader Flies Again
As the weeks pass it is more increasingly obvious that the US-led attempt to "build" a nation in Afghanistan is failing and is all but over. The US will withdraw as soon as it is politically less damaging to do so--sometime after the elections this November.
At this blog we have consistently opposed the war since it morphed into Obama's "War we Really Need to be Fighting" (as opposed to the war in Iraq). That was just a cynical election ploy to convince the electoral middle that he was not nearly as anti-war and radical as his opponents were alleging. He was just a regular American imperialist. But Obama could not bring himself to think of war as it must be thought of: legitimate and just only when it is exclusively focused upon defence of citizens against armed aggression. Obama had to morph the war into progressive political ideology by other means: Afghanistan must enjoy "nation building" at the hands of the US army.
As the weeks pass it is more increasingly obvious that the US-led attempt to "build" a nation in Afghanistan is failing and is all but over. The US will withdraw as soon as it is politically less damaging to do so--sometime after the elections this November.
At this blog we have consistently opposed the war since it morphed into Obama's "War we Really Need to be Fighting" (as opposed to the war in Iraq). That was just a cynical election ploy to convince the electoral middle that he was not nearly as anti-war and radical as his opponents were alleging. He was just a regular American imperialist. But Obama could not bring himself to think of war as it must be thought of: legitimate and just only when it is exclusively focused upon defence of citizens against armed aggression. Obama had to morph the war into progressive political ideology by other means: Afghanistan must enjoy "nation building" at the hands of the US army.
Friday, 16 March 2012
Doug Wilson's Letter From America
Conservative Republican Monkeys
Culture and Politics - Politics
Written by Douglas Wilson
Wednesday, 14 March 2012
Mittevitability is having a rough go lately. Last night Santorum -- a Roman Catholic -- took what might be called the hard evangelical states of Alabama and Mississippi. Any thoughtful student of American political history needs to say huh over that one at least a time or two. It took an administration jammed with Chicago pinkos to pull it off, but they did it. I mean, credit where credit's due.
Newt Gingrich, a supernova of ego, is now heading into his dwarf star phase.
Ron Paul continues to accumulate delegates, in numbers large enough to be important . . . but only if they turn out to be important.
Culture and Politics - Politics
Written by Douglas Wilson
Wednesday, 14 March 2012
Mittevitability is having a rough go lately. Last night Santorum -- a Roman Catholic -- took what might be called the hard evangelical states of Alabama and Mississippi. Any thoughtful student of American political history needs to say huh over that one at least a time or two. It took an administration jammed with Chicago pinkos to pull it off, but they did it. I mean, credit where credit's due.
Newt Gingrich, a supernova of ego, is now heading into his dwarf star phase.
Ron Paul continues to accumulate delegates, in numbers large enough to be important . . . but only if they turn out to be important.
The Left's Social Contract
Do We Have a Deal for You!
The NZ Labour Party appointed a new leader late last year. The faithful are still trying to work out what's inside their new package. Blogger Dim Post has been adding his speculations to the mix, in a piece entitled Back to Basics.
He writes:
The NZ Labour Party appointed a new leader late last year. The faithful are still trying to work out what's inside their new package. Blogger Dim Post has been adding his speculations to the mix, in a piece entitled Back to Basics.
He writes:
I thought Shearer’s interview was a bit insipid – but he did say one thing that gave me a little hope about his ‘Ides of Mars’ speech this week, which was a reference to the Social Contract. Maybe I’m being wildly optimistic here, but it could be pretty smart for Shearer to go back to the very principles of left-wing political philosophy, and simply make the argument that we’re a society of people with obligations towards each other – in contrast to the right-wing view-point in which we are a competitive market-place with no responsibility to each other outside of inter-party transactions.We think that paragraph sums up the simplistic ideology of the left.
Thursday, 15 March 2012
Modern Inquisitions
Bureaucracy, Data Management, and the Inquisition
Bring Out the Spanish Tickler
Christopher Caldwell
A Book Review appearing in The Literary Review
God's Jury: The Inquisition and the Making of the Modern World
By Cullen Murphy (Allen Lane/The Penguin Press 310pp £25)
The Spanish Inquisition was not run by a bunch of blockheads. It sought to root out heresy, which was a 'crime of the intellect'. Inquisitors were not interested in the blurtings of drunks or in what we would call Freudian slips. Testimony gathered under duress was admissible only if it was repeated freely on a later occasion. Nonetheless holy interrogators did feel the need, once in a while, to haul out the Pear of Anguish, Saint Elmo's Belt, the Heretic's Fork and the Spanish Tickler. These were all instruments of torture, although, as Cullen Murphy notes, 'they could just as easily be the names of pubs, or brands of condoms, or points of ascent on a climber's map'.
Murphy is a US magazine editor whose elegant books mine the ancient world for lessons about our own.
Bring Out the Spanish Tickler
Christopher Caldwell
A Book Review appearing in The Literary Review
God's Jury: The Inquisition and the Making of the Modern World
By Cullen Murphy (Allen Lane/The Penguin Press 310pp £25)
The Spanish Inquisition was not run by a bunch of blockheads. It sought to root out heresy, which was a 'crime of the intellect'. Inquisitors were not interested in the blurtings of drunks or in what we would call Freudian slips. Testimony gathered under duress was admissible only if it was repeated freely on a later occasion. Nonetheless holy interrogators did feel the need, once in a while, to haul out the Pear of Anguish, Saint Elmo's Belt, the Heretic's Fork and the Spanish Tickler. These were all instruments of torture, although, as Cullen Murphy notes, 'they could just as easily be the names of pubs, or brands of condoms, or points of ascent on a climber's map'.
Murphy is a US magazine editor whose elegant books mine the ancient world for lessons about our own.
Theologians of the Age
Butt Ends of Days and Ways
We are well aware that our society is ruled by a bunch of people whose god is the autonomy of their own minds. We accept that pagans have for a time, at least, won the battle i the West. We acknowledge that they believe we Christians live here at their pleasure. All of that is par for the course when Christians are a small minority in a pagan establishment.
What is risible in the extreme, however, is when the pagans attempt to argue theology and tell us what Christianity ought to be about. Even more risible is when they presume to lecture us about the teachings of our Lord Jesus Christ and turn them upon Him, calling good "evil" and evil "good". Such hectoring misrepresents the commandments of our Lord and is rank dishonesty. We have no truck with them. Better to leave them in their own darkness. Better to meet a bear robbed of her cubs than a fool taken in his folly.
In the UK the Anglican Church and the Roman Catholic Church are opposing the attempt to institutionalise homosexual "marriage". The Greek chorus has come out in force.
We are well aware that our society is ruled by a bunch of people whose god is the autonomy of their own minds. We accept that pagans have for a time, at least, won the battle i the West. We acknowledge that they believe we Christians live here at their pleasure. All of that is par for the course when Christians are a small minority in a pagan establishment.
What is risible in the extreme, however, is when the pagans attempt to argue theology and tell us what Christianity ought to be about. Even more risible is when they presume to lecture us about the teachings of our Lord Jesus Christ and turn them upon Him, calling good "evil" and evil "good". Such hectoring misrepresents the commandments of our Lord and is rank dishonesty. We have no truck with them. Better to leave them in their own darkness. Better to meet a bear robbed of her cubs than a fool taken in his folly.
In the UK the Anglican Church and the Roman Catholic Church are opposing the attempt to institutionalise homosexual "marriage". The Greek chorus has come out in force.
Wednesday, 14 March 2012
Ex Libris
Book of the Month/March 2012
Engaging the Culture - Book Review
Written by Douglas Wilson
Wednesday, 29 February 2012
The World-Tilting Gospel
Dan Phillips
Kregel Publications, 2011
I want to start a new feature on this blog, if I can keep up the pace. I have occasionally done extended reviews of books, blogging through them, but I think I would like to start reviewing a book a month in more of a one-off, hit-and-run fashion. But a nice kind of hit-and-run. These reviews will be unabashed attempts to promote a book I think needs to be far more widely circulated and read. Critical reviews will have to find another venue, or submit to the chapter-by-chapter treatment.
And the book I chose for my shakedown cruise is The World-Tilting Gospel by Dan Phillips.
Engaging the Culture - Book Review
Written by Douglas Wilson
Wednesday, 29 February 2012
The World-Tilting Gospel
Dan Phillips
Kregel Publications, 2011
I want to start a new feature on this blog, if I can keep up the pace. I have occasionally done extended reviews of books, blogging through them, but I think I would like to start reviewing a book a month in more of a one-off, hit-and-run fashion. But a nice kind of hit-and-run. These reviews will be unabashed attempts to promote a book I think needs to be far more widely circulated and read. Critical reviews will have to find another venue, or submit to the chapter-by-chapter treatment.
And the book I chose for my shakedown cruise is The World-Tilting Gospel by Dan Phillips.
Tolerable Opinions
The Creed of the Commentariat
Often times we have referred to the Commentariat. Some folk have inquired as to what this is. Is it a club? A secret society?
Not at all. It is an informal college of institutions and people who presume incessantly to tell us who we are, what we should be like, proclaim what ought to be done and declaim what ought not to be. This loose collective is a self-reinforcing group who see themselves as leaders and intellectuals, a cut above the ordinary Joe. The appellation "Commentariat" refers to the tiresome fact they these folk are always commenting upon public issues, deigning to tell us what we should think, how we should act, and what we should be like. Needless to say, the Commentariat reflects Orwellian "group-think".
Often times we have referred to the Commentariat. Some folk have inquired as to what this is. Is it a club? A secret society?
Not at all. It is an informal college of institutions and people who presume incessantly to tell us who we are, what we should be like, proclaim what ought to be done and declaim what ought not to be. This loose collective is a self-reinforcing group who see themselves as leaders and intellectuals, a cut above the ordinary Joe. The appellation "Commentariat" refers to the tiresome fact they these folk are always commenting upon public issues, deigning to tell us what we should think, how we should act, and what we should be like. Needless to say, the Commentariat reflects Orwellian "group-think".
Tuesday, 13 March 2012
Sloppy, Vacuous Darwinists
Uneasy Atheists
The following article appeared in the New Statesman. The primer reads: "To hardline atheists, it is now unreasonable and “dramatically peculiar” to argue that religion is not altogether evil. How did such intolerance become acceptable to rational minds?" How indeed?
Bryan Appelyard reflects upon the strange Islamic-like fundamentalism of the neo-atheists, whom he charges with having all the behaviours of a tyrannical sect. [For our part, we love these militant neo-atheists. They are perfect poster-boys for what happens when men deny God and try to mean it. They are thus "useful idiots", to employ Lenin's phrase, because they offer many teaching moments.
The following article appeared in the New Statesman. The primer reads: "To hardline atheists, it is now unreasonable and “dramatically peculiar” to argue that religion is not altogether evil. How did such intolerance become acceptable to rational minds?" How indeed?
Bryan Appelyard reflects upon the strange Islamic-like fundamentalism of the neo-atheists, whom he charges with having all the behaviours of a tyrannical sect. [For our part, we love these militant neo-atheists. They are perfect poster-boys for what happens when men deny God and try to mean it. They are thus "useful idiots", to employ Lenin's phrase, because they offer many teaching moments.
Science and Magic
Kissing Cousins
In all Unbelieving science there is an "irrationalist gene" waiting to break forth. We have seen this with modern cosmologists such as Stephen Hawking who now propounds the existence of a potentially infinite number of parallel universes in order to "make sense" of our own. Meaninglessness is required in order to cling to the possibility of meaning in our world. The rational/irrational dichotomy lying within all Unbelieving thought has long been documented by Christian thinkers.
A similar connection between post-Christian science and magic can be seen historically. David Bentley Hart makes the argument:
In all Unbelieving science there is an "irrationalist gene" waiting to break forth. We have seen this with modern cosmologists such as Stephen Hawking who now propounds the existence of a potentially infinite number of parallel universes in order to "make sense" of our own. Meaninglessness is required in order to cling to the possibility of meaning in our world. The rational/irrational dichotomy lying within all Unbelieving thought has long been documented by Christian thinkers.
A similar connection between post-Christian science and magic can be seen historically. David Bentley Hart makes the argument:
Monday, 12 March 2012
Can We Prepare Our Culture to Receive the Gospel?
[A powerfully prophetic call from J. Gresham Machen (1881-1937) for intellectual engagement in the culture as a means of pre-evangelism--Ed. Hat Tip: Justin Taylor]
We are all agreed that at least one great function of the Church is the conversion of individual men. The missionary movement is the great religious movement of our day. Now it is perfectly true that men must be brought to Christ one by one. There are no labor-saving devices in evangelism. It is all hard-work.
And yet it would be a great mistake to suppose that all men are equally well prepared to receive the gospel.
[A powerfully prophetic call from J. Gresham Machen (1881-1937) for intellectual engagement in the culture as a means of pre-evangelism--Ed. Hat Tip: Justin Taylor]
We are all agreed that at least one great function of the Church is the conversion of individual men. The missionary movement is the great religious movement of our day. Now it is perfectly true that men must be brought to Christ one by one. There are no labor-saving devices in evangelism. It is all hard-work.
And yet it would be a great mistake to suppose that all men are equally well prepared to receive the gospel.
Lest We Forget
Oxymoronic Science
Over the past two years, Queensland and New South Wales have endured extreme climate events that have brought devastation. Floods. Last week people were evacuated from Wagga Wagga as they faced the worst flood in 160 years.
Back up the clock. Two and a half-years ago the world was being warned that Australia was a poster-nation for the calamities that were coming as a result of global warming. Drought and heat had ravaged the land for so long farmers left, right, and centre were committing suicide. It was a harbinger of the devastation to come from rising temperatures.
At the time we read the following in the Los Angeles Times and jelly-fish ran up and down our spines.
Over the past two years, Queensland and New South Wales have endured extreme climate events that have brought devastation. Floods. Last week people were evacuated from Wagga Wagga as they faced the worst flood in 160 years.
Back up the clock. Two and a half-years ago the world was being warned that Australia was a poster-nation for the calamities that were coming as a result of global warming. Drought and heat had ravaged the land for so long farmers left, right, and centre were committing suicide. It was a harbinger of the devastation to come from rising temperatures.
At the time we read the following in the Los Angeles Times and jelly-fish ran up and down our spines.
Saturday, 10 March 2012
Letter From the UK
Why I am so rude to Warmists
James DelingpoleFrom The Telegraph
[James Delingpole is a writer, journalist and broadcaster who is right about everything. He is the author of numerous fantastically entertaining books, including his most recent work Watermelons: How the Environmentalists are Killing the Planet, Destroying the Economy and Stealing Your Children's Future, also available in the US, and in Australia as Killing the Earth to Save It. His website is www.jamesdelingpole.com.]
Sharing a car back from the BBC Big Question debate in Cardiff on Sunday I had a tremendous bust-up with one of my fellow panellists which I think many of you would have enjoyed hugely. (Our driver could barely keep a straight face.)
It was prompted when I very vocally expressed my disgust at one of the standard phrases trotted out by Warmists and other eco-loons in these debates (as, of course, inevitably, they did again on Sunday): the one about "preserving the planet for future generations".
The reason this cant phrase makes me want to throw up every time I hear it is that it's such a grotesque inversion of reality.
Zero Credibility
A Mouth In the Shape of a Polygon
Let's assume that most governments around the world of any consequence study the utterances of the President of the United States. Are his words to be taken seriously? Is he bluffing? Is there a hidden message? What is hyperbole or literary license? If so, what is the real message beneath the trope?
All political leaders eventually realise, if they did not know it to begin with, that credibility, if you have it, is an enormous boon. It buttresses one's influence and power far beyond laws, rules, and institutional power. In a democracy it is electorally life-threatening to lose one's credibility. If it gets to the point where a growing majority of people disbelieve what a leader says, and he is sinking in the credibility, stakes it is only a matter of time until he is rejected by voters.
In recent decades we have seen politicians rise up--usually on the Left--who believe that politics is all about focus groups.
Let's assume that most governments around the world of any consequence study the utterances of the President of the United States. Are his words to be taken seriously? Is he bluffing? Is there a hidden message? What is hyperbole or literary license? If so, what is the real message beneath the trope?
All political leaders eventually realise, if they did not know it to begin with, that credibility, if you have it, is an enormous boon. It buttresses one's influence and power far beyond laws, rules, and institutional power. In a democracy it is electorally life-threatening to lose one's credibility. If it gets to the point where a growing majority of people disbelieve what a leader says, and he is sinking in the credibility, stakes it is only a matter of time until he is rejected by voters.
In recent decades we have seen politicians rise up--usually on the Left--who believe that politics is all about focus groups.
Friday, 9 March 2012
Douglas Wilson's Letter From America
Alinsky Ball
Culture and Politics - Sex and Culture
Written by Douglas Wilson
Tuesday, 06 March 2012
Recent days have seen the media and/or new media in an uproar over a couple of incidents that invite a bit more investigation from the intellectually curious. I refer to Rush Limbaugh's insult of Sandra Fluke, and Kirk Cameron's gracious response to a question from Piers Morgan about homosexuality.
Now in the interests of accuracy, it should be noted that Rush has apologized for calling Ms. Fluke a slut, and so we should address the apology first. I confess I haven't mastered all the details of this important situation as I ought to have done, but if Ms. Fluke indicated multiple guys, then the comment should stand. That's what a slut is. But if she has a steady boyfriend, and she is faithful to him, then it really was uncalled for to call her that. She would be something more like a concubine.
Of sociological interest here is the same reaction for very different behavior, and different reactions for very similar behavior.
Culture and Politics - Sex and Culture
Written by Douglas Wilson
Tuesday, 06 March 2012
Recent days have seen the media and/or new media in an uproar over a couple of incidents that invite a bit more investigation from the intellectually curious. I refer to Rush Limbaugh's insult of Sandra Fluke, and Kirk Cameron's gracious response to a question from Piers Morgan about homosexuality.
Now in the interests of accuracy, it should be noted that Rush has apologized for calling Ms. Fluke a slut, and so we should address the apology first. I confess I haven't mastered all the details of this important situation as I ought to have done, but if Ms. Fluke indicated multiple guys, then the comment should stand. That's what a slut is. But if she has a steady boyfriend, and she is faithful to him, then it really was uncalled for to call her that. She would be something more like a concubine.
Of sociological interest here is the same reaction for very different behavior, and different reactions for very similar behavior.
Empty Vessels Making Dull Noises
Lazy Reasoning
We have been writing and publishing pieces on the "ethicists" who have advocating the killing of unwanted infants. Self-proclaimed liberal, David Farrar has waded in to the debate, which is most revealing. Farrar, of course, has repeatedly advocated abortion as a woman's "right".
But Farrar objects to the ethicists' position. We wonder why? He has no grounds whatsoever to sustain an objection. Just prejudice. Just sentimental question-begging. Here is his argument against the "ethicists":
We have been writing and publishing pieces on the "ethicists" who have advocating the killing of unwanted infants. Self-proclaimed liberal, David Farrar has waded in to the debate, which is most revealing. Farrar, of course, has repeatedly advocated abortion as a woman's "right".
But Farrar objects to the ethicists' position. We wonder why? He has no grounds whatsoever to sustain an objection. Just prejudice. Just sentimental question-begging. Here is his argument against the "ethicists":
Thursday, 8 March 2012
Dougla Wilson's Letter From America
Our Ruling Class
Sex and Culture
Written by Douglas Wilson
Thursday, 01 March 2012
I wanted to make sure that I made at least a couple points about this particular travesty from The Journal of Medical Ethics, HA! (JMEH!).
The first point to make is that when men have lost their soul, they have not yet necessarily lost their capacity to reason. They can still say B, and do so because they said A earlier. They are exactly right that there is no moral difference between killing a child here and killing a child there. But there are two ways to remove the inconsistency -- you can say B, and then C, so on down the line until you get to H for Holocaust, or Hell, take your pick. The other way to remove the inconsistency is by repenting of having said A. God is in Heaven, and He remains just. It would serve us well to remember that God is angry at America's ruling class, with us for tolerating them.
Sex and Culture
Written by Douglas Wilson
Thursday, 01 March 2012
I wanted to make sure that I made at least a couple points about this particular travesty from The Journal of Medical Ethics, HA! (JMEH!).
The first point to make is that when men have lost their soul, they have not yet necessarily lost their capacity to reason. They can still say B, and do so because they said A earlier. They are exactly right that there is no moral difference between killing a child here and killing a child there. But there are two ways to remove the inconsistency -- you can say B, and then C, so on down the line until you get to H for Holocaust, or Hell, take your pick. The other way to remove the inconsistency is by repenting of having said A. God is in Heaven, and He remains just. It would serve us well to remember that God is angry at America's ruling class, with us for tolerating them.
The Christchurch Cathedral
Not One Stone Left Atop Another
God has told us in no uncertain terms that He is a jealous God. He will brook no rival, no other "god" in His presence. To tolerate idolatry is to kiss lies, and offer respect to the demons behind it.
When His people elevate themselves or their accomplishments to the status of de facto idols we are warned that the wrath of God is kindled against us. One modern manifestation of idolatry in the Church is the elevation of buildings to the status of demi-gods. The brouhaha over the Anglican Christchurch Cathedral is just such a deformed imbroglio.
God has told us in no uncertain terms that He is a jealous God. He will brook no rival, no other "god" in His presence. To tolerate idolatry is to kiss lies, and offer respect to the demons behind it.
When His people elevate themselves or their accomplishments to the status of de facto idols we are warned that the wrath of God is kindled against us. One modern manifestation of idolatry in the Church is the elevation of buildings to the status of demi-gods. The brouhaha over the Anglican Christchurch Cathedral is just such a deformed imbroglio.
Wednesday, 7 March 2012
Easy Tools
The Consequences of Denying Human Depravity
We watched Hillary Clinton announce the "food for halting nuclear weapons development" deal with North Korea. We listened to the public celebration of a supposedly enormous breakthrough and triumph by President Obama. Incredulousness is the only appropriate response.
Here is a regime combining the bestial cunning of Stalin with the ghoulish psychopathy of Pol-Pot. Its horrors, once revealed, will make future generations blanch. It takes food from the West supposedly to relieve famine and uses it to feed its huge army. The rest of the population are left to starve.
We watched Hillary Clinton announce the "food for halting nuclear weapons development" deal with North Korea. We listened to the public celebration of a supposedly enormous breakthrough and triumph by President Obama. Incredulousness is the only appropriate response.
Here is a regime combining the bestial cunning of Stalin with the ghoulish psychopathy of Pol-Pot. Its horrors, once revealed, will make future generations blanch. It takes food from the West supposedly to relieve famine and uses it to feed its huge army. The rest of the population are left to starve.
Tuesday, 6 March 2012
Douglas Wilson's Letter From America
Clouds of Nuance and Ineptitude
Culture and Politics - Politics
Written by Douglas Wilson
Wednesday, 29 February 2012
I have been asked about my passing comment the other day that I thought military action in Afghanistan was justified, and probably in Iraq. This was coupled with my observations on the constitutional procedures for going to war -- Congress should declare war. Those who believe all the DC-lawyer-talk need to be asked what circumstances would have to pertain in order for Congress to declare war. Surely that provision of the Constitution means something. What does it mean nowadays? What does it mean in the 21st century? What countries would we have to declare war on before commencing hostilities? And why them, and not Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya?
Thus it is that I said we have had military actions that could have been justly pursued, but they weren't because the rule of constitutional law was by-passed.
But then was asked about the justification for the fighting itself, not the constitutional procedures. My questioner said that he was assuming that I agreed that military action on our part was only justified in cases of self-defense. Close, and almost.
Culture and Politics - Politics
Written by Douglas Wilson
Wednesday, 29 February 2012
I have been asked about my passing comment the other day that I thought military action in Afghanistan was justified, and probably in Iraq. This was coupled with my observations on the constitutional procedures for going to war -- Congress should declare war. Those who believe all the DC-lawyer-talk need to be asked what circumstances would have to pertain in order for Congress to declare war. Surely that provision of the Constitution means something. What does it mean nowadays? What does it mean in the 21st century? What countries would we have to declare war on before commencing hostilities? And why them, and not Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya?
Thus it is that I said we have had military actions that could have been justly pursued, but they weren't because the rule of constitutional law was by-passed.
But then was asked about the justification for the fighting itself, not the constitutional procedures. My questioner said that he was assuming that I agreed that military action on our part was only justified in cases of self-defense. Close, and almost.
It's a Very, Very Hard Road--But Right
Dead Beat Men Hanging Around Like Flies
We have been very gratified at one particular note struck in political discourse over recent days by the Minister of Social Development, Paula Bennett. She is on a mission (not yet achieved) to move people off beneficiary rolls into work. The opposition has not denied the intent, but has argued that it will fail miserably because there are just not enough jobs "out there". It is inhuman, the opposition alleges, to move people off welfare on to work when there are no jobs to which one can go.
As the debate progressed, qualifications crept into the opposition's case. It was not that jobs do not exist (any glance at a job-seeking website puts the immediate lie to that allegation) but that not enough "decent" jobs exist. We all know that there are lots of low-skill, low-paying jobs around, but to move people out of welfare on to those jobs is demeaning to them. They need honourable jobs, worthy jobs that are high paying and deemed socially desirable.
Bennett's retort has been right to the point.
We have been very gratified at one particular note struck in political discourse over recent days by the Minister of Social Development, Paula Bennett. She is on a mission (not yet achieved) to move people off beneficiary rolls into work. The opposition has not denied the intent, but has argued that it will fail miserably because there are just not enough jobs "out there". It is inhuman, the opposition alleges, to move people off welfare on to work when there are no jobs to which one can go.
As the debate progressed, qualifications crept into the opposition's case. It was not that jobs do not exist (any glance at a job-seeking website puts the immediate lie to that allegation) but that not enough "decent" jobs exist. We all know that there are lots of low-skill, low-paying jobs around, but to move people out of welfare on to those jobs is demeaning to them. They need honourable jobs, worthy jobs that are high paying and deemed socially desirable.
Bennett's retort has been right to the point.
Monday, 5 March 2012
Douglas Wilson's Letter From America
On Being a Lentendud
Liturgy and Worship - Church Year
Written by Douglas Wilson
Thursday, 23 February 2012
A few days ago I posted a little poem -- one of my periodic forays into high art -- about the affair of the sausages, as a result of which incident the Swiss Reformation began in earnest. It turns out that this poem and other related things generated some excitement on the Internet (and who does not believe that the Internet could always use a little more excitement?)
The poem was simply an application of some of the warnings contained in a joint statement that Christ Church and Trinity Reformed Church developed together. "We stand gratefully in the Reformation tradition which courageously freed the saints of God from those enslaving regulations related to saint days, penitential seasons, and superstititous fasting . . . [we] warn our people to likewise remember these lessons from the history of the church." Emphasis added, and you can read more on all this both here and here.
Liturgy and Worship - Church Year
Written by Douglas Wilson
Thursday, 23 February 2012
A few days ago I posted a little poem -- one of my periodic forays into high art -- about the affair of the sausages, as a result of which incident the Swiss Reformation began in earnest. It turns out that this poem and other related things generated some excitement on the Internet (and who does not believe that the Internet could always use a little more excitement?)
The poem was simply an application of some of the warnings contained in a joint statement that Christ Church and Trinity Reformed Church developed together. "We stand gratefully in the Reformation tradition which courageously freed the saints of God from those enslaving regulations related to saint days, penitential seasons, and superstititous fasting . . . [we] warn our people to likewise remember these lessons from the history of the church." Emphasis added, and you can read more on all this both here and here.
The S-Files
Smarter Than the Average Bear
ContraCelsum is pleased to announce that an S-Award has been given to Mr Dennis Roderick.
Mr Roderick is a truckie and, much to the chagrin of the intellectual elite, has probably never studied at a tertiary institution. But he is far smarter and wiser than most. This is what went down:
ContraCelsum is pleased to announce that an S-Award has been given to Mr Dennis Roderick.
Mr Roderick is a truckie and, much to the chagrin of the intellectual elite, has probably never studied at a tertiary institution. But he is far smarter and wiser than most. This is what went down:
Saturday, 3 March 2012
In Memoriam
Achilles has Fallen
Andrew Breitbart has died. He was a culture warrior for limited government, raised up by God in His common goodness to mankind. Whilst not a Believer, Breitbart was a force in restraining wickedness and the demonic attempt to re-aggregate corrupt power to the former Ruler of this World.
Michael Walsh from National Review Online provides the eulogy.
Andrew Breitbart has died. He was a culture warrior for limited government, raised up by God in His common goodness to mankind. Whilst not a Believer, Breitbart was a force in restraining wickedness and the demonic attempt to re-aggregate corrupt power to the former Ruler of this World.
Michael Walsh from National Review Online provides the eulogy.
Hell Bound
No Earthly Hope
The case of the Turangi child rapist has ended. The details are disclosed. Most will be left in despair wondering what on earth can be done to stop this kind of thing happening again.
The family life of the rapist, Raurangi Marino has consequently come to light. It is pretty much as we expected. Broken home, alcohol and drugs, beatings, (rival) gang affiliations, parental desertion, family violence, and sexual assaults (2) upon the young Marino.
The case of the Turangi child rapist has ended. The details are disclosed. Most will be left in despair wondering what on earth can be done to stop this kind of thing happening again.
The family life of the rapist, Raurangi Marino has consequently come to light. It is pretty much as we expected. Broken home, alcohol and drugs, beatings, (rival) gang affiliations, parental desertion, family violence, and sexual assaults (2) upon the young Marino.
Canterbury University sociology professor and criminologist Greg Newbold said children who got into this sort of trouble come from the worst families."You don't get many happy, stable families who produce kids who do things like this."Stuff provides the litany:
Friday, 2 March 2012
The Advantages of Black Gospel Music
Singing the Songs of Zion
There is nothing to compare with the Scripture itself when used in singing. But often Western musical idioms require substantial altering and editing of the text to fit the words of Scripture to music. One extreme response has been "Scripture in Song" which, while employing scriptural phrases--usually out of context--it uses both the Scripture and music in an infantile manner.
The Black Gospel musical idiom, however, has no such limitations. It can far more readily be employed to sing whole portions of God's Word--especially the Psalms. Here is the Brooklyn Tabernacle Choir singing Psalm 121 using the King James version. (The choir consists mainly of non-vocally trained members.)
There is nothing to compare with the Scripture itself when used in singing. But often Western musical idioms require substantial altering and editing of the text to fit the words of Scripture to music. One extreme response has been "Scripture in Song" which, while employing scriptural phrases--usually out of context--it uses both the Scripture and music in an infantile manner.
The Black Gospel musical idiom, however, has no such limitations. It can far more readily be employed to sing whole portions of God's Word--especially the Psalms. Here is the Brooklyn Tabernacle Choir singing Psalm 121 using the King James version. (The choir consists mainly of non-vocally trained members.)
Egregious Self-Service
Competition is For Other Stiffs, Not Us
Unions are largely about protection--protecting themselves and their jobs against competition. Unions are pretty happy about competition in general, as long as it is the "other guy" that is having to compete. When competition lowers food prices and supermarket goodies, unionists approve. When competition brings a flood of cheap, reasonable quality imports such as furniture, TV's, computers, and mobile phones into the country so that they become affordable, thereby raising living standards generally, unions applaud.
But when labour is overpriced and competition beckons, unionists protest with all the righteous indignation they can muster. Competition is for the other guy, not our guys.
Unions are largely about protection--protecting themselves and their jobs against competition. Unions are pretty happy about competition in general, as long as it is the "other guy" that is having to compete. When competition lowers food prices and supermarket goodies, unionists approve. When competition brings a flood of cheap, reasonable quality imports such as furniture, TV's, computers, and mobile phones into the country so that they become affordable, thereby raising living standards generally, unions applaud.
But when labour is overpriced and competition beckons, unionists protest with all the righteous indignation they can muster. Competition is for the other guy, not our guys.
Thursday, 1 March 2012
Letter From the UK
Wind No Longer in the Sails of "Green" Energy Companies
Command and control economies produce one thing consistently--massive waste. The government push to "green energy", of which subsidized wind "farms" are an example, illustrates the problem. Wind farms will never get off the ground literally until they can demonstrate that wind turbines can produce electricity as cost effectively and as efficiently as other energy sources.
To date, without massive government subsidies wind farming is like colonising the moon: a grandiose form of economic waste.
It seems that the mood is changing in the UK. Wind farms are being seen for what they are. Troughing big businesses--looking to cash in on a pile of government money--are now rethinking. Risks are rising for them as government funding becomes more and more uncertain.
This from The Guardian:
Command and control economies produce one thing consistently--massive waste. The government push to "green energy", of which subsidized wind "farms" are an example, illustrates the problem. Wind farms will never get off the ground literally until they can demonstrate that wind turbines can produce electricity as cost effectively and as efficiently as other energy sources.
To date, without massive government subsidies wind farming is like colonising the moon: a grandiose form of economic waste.
It seems that the mood is changing in the UK. Wind farms are being seen for what they are. Troughing big businesses--looking to cash in on a pile of government money--are now rethinking. Risks are rising for them as government funding becomes more and more uncertain.
This from The Guardian:
Inevitable Expansions
The Killing Fields Extend
Two Australian ethicists have argued in the Journal of Medical Ethics that infanticide is perfectly acceptable if the newborn is not wanted. If you happen to be a pro-abortion believer, it's hard to fault their logic. In fact, impossible.
Now, no doubt there will be plenty of effete liberals who (at least initially) would recoil in horror at the suggestions of their ethicists. But they will not be able to refute their arguments. If you are prepared to "terminate" or kill a baby in the womb you will have little reason to object ten minutes after the baby emerges from the womb. There will be those who wriggle around trying to find another sky-hook on which to hang some counter-ethical principle to justify in-uterus homicide and reject it ex-uterus--but it will all be without foundation, just a wish, a preference, a prejudice or a bias.
Two Australian ethicists have argued in the Journal of Medical Ethics that infanticide is perfectly acceptable if the newborn is not wanted. If you happen to be a pro-abortion believer, it's hard to fault their logic. In fact, impossible.
Now, no doubt there will be plenty of effete liberals who (at least initially) would recoil in horror at the suggestions of their ethicists. But they will not be able to refute their arguments. If you are prepared to "terminate" or kill a baby in the womb you will have little reason to object ten minutes after the baby emerges from the womb. There will be those who wriggle around trying to find another sky-hook on which to hang some counter-ethical principle to justify in-uterus homicide and reject it ex-uterus--but it will all be without foundation, just a wish, a preference, a prejudice or a bias.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)