Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
The Brits, Iraq and "Post Christian" values
Posted by: mcq on Friday, October 13, 2006

Today the big story is the Chief of the British Army has said it is time to think about getting out of Iraq.
The Army could 'break' if it is kept too long in Iraq and British troops should be withdrawn 'soon', the head of the Army has said today.

In a devastating broadside at Tony Blair's foreign policy, General Sir Richard Dannatt said: "I want an Army in five years time and 10 years time. Don't let's break it on this one. Let's keep an eye on time."
He's stating what is becoming obvious to most, even supporters of the war such as myself. The time has come to begin turning it over to the Iraqis in earnest.

Now the report seems to concentrate mostly on that portion and believes it to be a "devastating broadside" at Blair's foreign policy. Instead I see it as an acknowledgement of reality and a forthright assessment concerning the involvement of coalition troops in Iraq. As Liam Fox points out:
"They [British troops] said the reaction had gone from welcome, to consent to mere tolerance and they said that this meant we didn't have an indefinite licence to be there."
I don't think that is in question anymore. What is in question, as I discuss in the piece below, is if the present Iraqi government has the stones to take the helm of state and begin steering the ship. But, as I said, I discuss that below.

Of more interest to me is what he said about the moral foundation of the UK.
"When I see the Islamist threat in this country I hope it doesn’t make undue progress because there is a moral and spiritual vacuum in this country."

"Our society has always been embedded in Christian values; once you have pulled the anchor up there is a danger that our society moves with the prevailing wind."

"There is an element of the moral compass spinning. I think it is up to society to realise that is the situation we are in."

"We can’t wish the Islamist challenge to our society away and I believe that the army both in Iraq and Afghanistan and probably wherever we go next, is fighting the foreign dimension of the challenge to our accepted way of life."

"We need to face up to the Islamist threat, to those who act in the name of Islam and in a perverted way try to impose Islam by force on societies that do not wish it."

"It is said that we live in a post Christian society. I think that is a great shame. The broader Judaic-Christian tradition has underpinned British society. It underpins the British army."
If there is a "devastating broadside" contained in the General's words they're found here. This isn't aimed at Blair. This is aimed at British society and it is a warning. Whether you believe in such a thing as "Christian values" there is no denying that there is a "moral and spiritual vacuum" which has developed not only in the UK but in Europe in general. Mark Steyn discusses it at length in his book "America Alone".

Post-Christian Europe is throwing off its tradition of "broad" Judaic-Christian values for ... what? It is that moral vagueness which many see as a primary reason Europe is slowly failing and why a stronger culture which is transplanting itself there (Islam), is gradually exerting itself and is poised to overwhelm the continent in the not to distant future.

It is that warning, not Iraq, which is his most important warning. And it will, as usual, be ignored. But it is something I want to discuss at a later date in more detail (I'm on the road at the moment and need to get going, but hope to return to this subject sometime next week).

Happy Friday the 13th.
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
Post-Christian Europe is throwing off its tradition of "broad" Judaic-Christian values for ... what? It is that moral vagueness which many see as a primary reason Europe is slowly failing
Agreed, McQ. Traditional religion is being replaced by secular humanism, which is an empty philosophy. The history of secular humanism points to the fact that its adherents are unable to stand up to other major cultural movements without adopting an animating ideology (nationalism, fascism, Nazism, communism, Maoism, etc.). In short, secular humanism is a movement without a backbone. While it dominates in Europe, a cultural vacuum will continue to exist. And we all know that nature and politics abhor vacuums. I wonder what’s going to fill Europe’s?
 
Written By: The Poet Omar
URL: http://www.asecondhandconjecture.com
While [secular humanism] dominates in Europe, a cultural vacuum will continue to exist... I wonder what’s going to fill Europe’s?
I think the General Sir Richard Dannatt was rather clear what is filling the spiritual vacuum. it is Islam, particularly the niqab-wearing, electronically-ampilified shahadah blasting, "zionist" hating, polygamy endorsing, sharia-law instating, highly political and civil mandating type of Islam.

Frankly, I prefer secular humanism. But the secularists must stand up and demand Islam has no greater place in society than other religions! This is the catch-22 of humanism. Material-determanism and radical egalitarianism. The Muslims I just described in british society are seen as the brown-skinned minority group and therefore should be recipients of some form of affirmative action to strengthen their cultural identity over that of the white majority.
 
Written By: Jimmy the Dhimmi
URL: http://moorejack.ytmnd.com/
Note the false premise: one has to choose between
Judeo-Christian values and no values.

First of all, the hyphen between Judeo and Christian is a fairly recent arrival on the scene, and for much of hystory it’s been more of a Christian vs. Judeo values discussion. Given how the relationship between the two has evolved, there is no logical reason why it couln’t be utilized to read Judeo-Christian-Islamic values.

Western civilization has evolved precisely because it has learned from a vaiety of spiritual sources and removed them from debates about specifics, such as which is the best religion.

Remember that, like radical Islam now, Christians and Jews have a very spotty history when ti comes to applying their values in interactions with the ’other’.
As Europe struggles to define ’human values’ instead of religious ones, it would be self-defeating to put an arbitrary halt to the evolutionary process. Criticizing negative trends in the process is laudatory; it’s the way to find corrective measures. Throwing the whole process away is a suggestion on a par wtih book burning.

Why close the book, before you’ve read the last chapter?
 
Written By: Laime
URL: http://
"Post-Christian Europe is throwing off its tradition of "broad" Judaic-Christian values..."

Let’s be clear that Europe NEVER, EVER based its tradition on anything "Judaic". For centuries Europes Jews were relegated to second-class citizen status, forced to live in ghettos, taxed for the "privelege" of being second-class citizens, subjected to regular pogroms, inquisitions and blood libels, had their holy books placed on public show-trials and burned in an attempt to uproot their culture and, finally, liquidated in the greatest mass-murder perpetrated against a single nation in history. Many of these atrocites occurred within Merry Ole England including the expulsion of the entire Jewish population. Twice! Indeed, the only time Jews were ever afforded respect by broader European culture and England in particular was when they publicly renounced their Judaism and became Christians.

Not to belabor the point too much but no European leader has a historical right to the "Judaic-" culture that his forbears spent a millenium trying to obliterate. To those of us of Jewish extraction the mere suggestion of such is to kick sand on the graves of our martyrs and is a personal insult.
 
Written By: D
URL: http://
It is that moral vagueness which many see as a primary reason Europe is slowly failing and why a stronger culture which is transplanting itself there (Islam), is gradually exerting itself and is poised to overwhelm the continent in the not to distant future.
Islam is a stronger culture?!

Yeesh.

That’s kind of like saying, "We’re looking up at whale sh!t here!"

Yours, TDP, ml, msl, & pfpp
 
Written By: Tom Perkins
URL: http://
HOLY SMOKE! This guy said all that, and the headlines were about pulling out of Iraq?

Well, yeah, I can see how the MSM would like to use that part of it, and thus had to hide the other parts...

But, if a US General had just said that part, it would be headline news that Christian Fundamentalist Generals were harming our military.
 
Written By: Harun
URL: http://
Note the false premise: one has to choose between
Judeo-Christian values and no values.
Actually, that choice is correct. The main 2 choices facing society today: Radical Islam or Liberal "values" (read: Moral Equivalance) are no values at all.

 
Written By: Shark
URL: http://
Two people note an irony in the phrase Judeo-Christian.
"First of all, the hyphen between Judeo and Christian is a fairly recent arrival on the scene, and for much of hystory it’s been more of a Christian vs. Judeo values discussion."
"Let’s be clear that Europe NEVER, EVER based its tradition on anything "Judaic". "
If nobody noticed Christ was Jewish. And while it’s clear he fulfilled much of the law into pointlessness, Christianity is essentially Judaism with virtually all bronze age mysticism removed (newer mysticism grafted on in a few places, but whatever). The conflict between Christianity and Judaism in Europe never had any valid roots, but was purely emotionalism in every case I’ve ever heard of. The hyphen in the Judeo-Christian was inevitable when Christianity grew up, as Islam has yet to begin to do.

Yours, TDP, ml, msl, & pfpp
 
Written By: Tom Perkins
URL: http://
"newer mysticism grafted on" /= "newer mysticism regrettably grafted on" Yours, TDP, ml, msl, & pfpp
 
Written By: Tom Perkins
URL: http://
Actually, that choice is correct. The main 2 choices facing society today: Radical Islam or Liberal "values" (read: Moral Equivalance) are no values at all.
Actually, what scares wingnuts even more than radical Islam is a liberal democracy based on non-religious. secular, rationalist, enlightenment values. To wingnuts like Shark, Ted Kennedy is more of a threat than bin Laden.

Western values of individualism, due process of law, and republican government evolved in spite of Christianity, not because of it. If it were up to the church, we would still be ruled by absolutitst monarchs and the earth would still be the center of the universe. Our Western values are chiefly products of pre-Christian Greek and Roman societies, not Christianity.

 
Written By: mkultra
URL: http://
"The main 2 choices facing society today: Radical Islam or Liberal "values" (read: Moral Equivalance) are no values at all.’

This is only true for those who ignore the vast array of other possibilities. Reducing every scene to black-and-white still photos adds nothing to understanding the dangers as well as the possibilites for progress in the evolution of man’s understanding of man.
=====

"If nobody noticed Christ was Jewish"

This fact was ignored by Chirtian values advocates for hundreds of years.
 
Written By: Laime
URL: http://
The general missed Shayes request for a withdrawl from Iraq. Bush stated it was 18 months the next day. There will always be troops in Iraq, but not as many as are ther now.

The warning is old. The goal will be to be far away from England when it goes terror unstable.
 
Written By: orru
URL: http://
"If nobody noticed Christ was Jewish"
This fact was ignored by Chirtian values advocates for hundreds of years.
Which is why I wrote:

"The conflict between Christianity and Judaism in Europe never had any valid roots, but was purely emotionalism in every case I’ve ever heard of. The hyphen in the Judeo-Christian was inevitable when Christianity grew up, as Islam has yet to begin to do."

Their irony is vitiated by the inevitability of the hyphen...Also it hasn’t been that way for some time. Not in living memory to any degree of influence.

Yours, TDP, ml, msl, & pfpp
 
Written By: Tom Perkins
URL: http://
MKultra a "liberal democracy" is not based on enlightenment values.

Yours, TDP, ml, msl, & pfpp
 
Written By: Tom Perkins
URL: http://
Interesting to hear from the British Chief of Staff. I agree that you can’t beat something (Islam) with nothing (Human Secularism). Wrote about it in 2005 in my piece, "Why Europe Deserves to Die" http://www.americancivilization.net/articles/2005/Why_Europe_Deserves_To_Die.pdf

As to the discussion of Judeo-Christian...I use it for the U.S. because Jews were present as Patriots in the Revolution. They were a tiny, tiny minority but they were on the team. The worldview for ideas we hold and call American are more correctly called English Englightenment Protestant. At least that was the worldview that was a consensus from 1776 to about 1962 when the Culture War began.
 
Written By: James Atticus Bowden
URL: http://www.americancivilization.net
Actually, what scares wingnuts even more than radical Islam is a liberal democracy based on non-religious. secular, rationalist, enlightenment values.
Actually, what scares us is a democracy based on moral equivalence, self loathing, white liberal guilt, nannystatism, and suicidal multiculturalism, all of which Britain is a perfect example.
 
Written By: Jordan
URL: http://
What scares me is that Liberal/Progressive/Socialist Human Secularism is a branch of thinking like Nazi Human Secularism and Communist Human Secularism. Same line of thinking with three branches. Today’s Liberal is tomorrow’s Totalitarian.
 
Written By: James Atticus Bowden
URL: http://www.americancivilization.net
"The hyphen in the Judeo-Christian was
inevitable when Christianity grew up, as
Islam has yet to begin to do"

Agreed: the concept of a Judeo-Christian consortium began when Christianity entered into
a marriage of onvenience with Judaism to accomodate both parties. Neither party was asked to renounce its traditions or values in toto. As a result, the calls for radicalism died.

There is a lesson in that history. An allieance of reasonable men of all traditions can devise a means to co-exist, thereby creating an excellent counter-radicalism tool.



 
Written By: Laime
URL: http://
Actually, what scares us is a democracy based on moral equivalence, self loathing, white liberal guilt, nannystatism, and suicidal multiculturalism, all of which Britain is a perfect example.
Despots have come to power spewing this same kind of nonsense. It’s classic wingnut rhetoric that has no basis in reality, is meaningless, and is used to justify racism and bigotry. "Suicidal multiculturalism"? This same kind of rhetotic was used by Anglo-Saxons against Irish immigrants in the mid-1800’s. It’s the same kind of rhetoric used by those who believe that all Muslims are dirty, dark people who need to be rounded up and interred indefintitely.

The reactionary right is scared of change. Always has been. Racist and small minded. The more some things change, the more they stay the same.
What scares me is that Liberal/Progressive/Socialist Human Secularism is a branch of thinking like Nazi Human Secularism and Communist Human Secularism. Same line of thinking with three branches. Today’s Liberal is tomorrow’s Totalitarian.
You’re right. If a government isn’t a theocracy, it is evil. You would probably like it in Iran or Saudi Arabia.
 
Written By: mkultra
URL: http://
An allieance of reasonable men of all traditions can devise a means to co-exist, thereby creating an excellent counter-radicalism tool.
This implies the reasonable people hold the center of gravity of the groups involved, something far from true in Islam.

"traditions or values in toto"
Actually I don’t think either group was required to ditch any tradition or value, other than each group leaving temporal power to a nominally non-aligned governmental apparatus.

So far, I see no inclination the ummah is prepared to move minimally in that direction.

Omar is as good as it gets, he ain’t much, and he doesn’t even represent 1%, AFAICT.

Yours, TDP, ml, msl, & pfpp
 
Written By: Tom Perkins
URL: http://
Seems to me that modern, Liberal with a capital L, capitalist and democratic Europe was born by shucking aside the Christian construction of society for good secular values.
 
Written By: Mithras
URL: http://mithrastheprophet.blogspot.com
"I see no inclination the ummah is prepared to move"

So, don’t wait for them to move.
The Pope didn’t take part in European efforts to quell the strife or in its efforts to define human, as opposed to sectarian, values.

It’s often the case that leaders have to be dragged kicking and screaming to the table that seeks real solutions.

They may not make headline news, but there are many moderate and rational voices of Islam speaking out. It’s the moderate and rational voices on all sides that can save the day.

 
Written By: Laime
URL: http://
Actually, what scares wingnuts even more than radical Islam is a liberal democracy based on non-religious. secular, rationalist, enlightenment values. To wingnuts like Shark, Ted Kennedy is more of a threat than bin Laden.
Ted Kennedy is a leftist; a secular humanist, perhaps, but he hasn’t a clue about liberal democracy or enlightenment values (unless you define ’liberal’ as ’leftist’).
This is only true for those who ignore the vast array of other possibilities. Reducing every scene to black-and-white still photos adds nothing to understanding the dangers as well as the possibilites for progress in the evolution of man’s understanding of man.
Laime seems intent on proving Omar’s, Tom’s, McQ’s et al point on the weakness of secular humanism.

Laime,

Sometimes a simple moral understanding is quite useful. Sometimes you need to root for the home team. Black and white can in fact add clarity, particularly in some conditions.

And, aside from that, the understanding of secular humanism is typically no deeper in demension than that of religious folks; it simply replaces black & white with two similar shades of gray:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=410150&in_page_id=1770
 
Written By: Don
URL: http://
It’s often the case that leaders have to be dragged kicking and screaming to the table that seeks real solutions.
From what I can tell, none can do the dragging but M1A2’s in quantity. They have traction on the issue.
They may not make headline news, but there are many moderate and rational voices of Islam speaking out. It’s the moderate and rational voices on all sides that can save the day.
"Can" is the key word. From what I’ve seen, "won’t" will eventuate. The "moderates" are the minority.

By far the minority.

Yours, TDP, ml, msl, & pfpp
 
Written By: Tom Perkins
URL: http://
Omar is as good as it gets, he ain’t much, and he doesn’t even represent 1%, AFAICT.
Omar has very good libertarian beliefs. Except with respect to the danger presented by Islam, I can’t recall any time I’ve disagreed with him. Of course, that probably means he represents less than 1% of moderate Muslims. But then, it’s not like Christians, Jews, or anyone else seems inclined to flock to libertarian ideas . . .
 
Written By: Don
URL: http://
"Can" is the key word. From what I’ve seen, "won’t" will eventuate. The "moderates" are the minority.

By far the minority.
Tom, don’t wake Laime up from his dream.

 
Written By: Don
URL: http://
"Suicidal multiculturalism"? This same kind of rhetotic was used by Anglo-Saxons against Irish immigrants in the mid-1800’s. It’s the same kind of rhetoric used by those who believe that all Muslims are dirty, dark people who need to be rounded up and interred indefintitely.
Oh please. I know you can’t debate anybody unless you first declare them a racist or a chickenhawk or employ some logical fallacy like guilt by association because you can’t form a single cogent thought, but at least give it a try.
 
Written By: Jordan
URL: http://
"Our society has always been embedded in Christian values; once you have pulled the anchor up there is a danger that our society moves with the prevailing wind."
One Christian value is intolerance. From today’s LA Times:
October 13, 2006

SACRAMENTO — Organizers of the annual Rainbow Festival were prepared for trouble.

The Q Crew, a local "queer/straight alliance," distributed cards telling people what to do if approached by hostile demonstrators. Sympathetic local church groups formed a protective buffer along the festival ground’s cyclone fence. Mounted police were on patrol.

Jerry Sloan manned a table for Stand Up for Sacramento, a recently formed gay self-defense organization.

"So far, so good," he said. "No Russians."

The festival, held last month amid the gay bars, restaurants and shops of midtown’s "Lavender Heights" neighborhood, went off without conflict. But the elaborate security preparations reflected growing tensions between Sacramento gays and the city’s large and vociferous community of fundamentalist Christians from the former Soviet Union.

Over the last 18 months, Sacramento Russian-language church members have picketed gay pride events, jammed into legislative committee meetings when gay issues were on the agenda and demonstrated at school board meetings.

Incited by firebrand Russian Pentacostal pastors and polemical Russian-language newspapers, the fundamentalists turn out en masse for state Capitol protest rallies.

Last June, urging readers to attend a massive rally, the Russian newspaper the Speaker told them:

"Make a choice. It’s your decision. Homosexuality is knocking on your doors and asking: ’Can I make your son gay and your daughter lesbian?’ "

In most instances, the Russian-speaking demonstrators far outnumber representatives from all other anti-gay groups combined. Anti-homosexual rallies that a few years ago attracted a few dozen participants now regularly draw hundreds and sometimes thousands, many with a heavy Russian accent.

Even in a state capital where impassioned public demonstrations are a daily event, the Slavic fundamentalists stand out. Elderly women in babushkas stand next to small children carrying signs stating: "Perversion is Never Safe" and "I Am Not Learning About Gay People."

Speakers address the crowds fervently in Russian and Ukrainian.

After a wave of religious refugees that began coming here in the late 1980s, Sacramento now has one of the largest Russian-speaking populations in North America: an estimated 80,000 to 100,000 Slavic immigrants, community members say. They came primarily from the Ukraine, Georgia, Belarus and the other southern Soviet republics, and settled mostly in Sacramento’s northern and western suburbs.

These immigrants are different from their Russian-speaking counterparts in New York’s Brighton Beach, San Francisco’s Richmond district or West Hollywood, all established Russian-immigrant enclaves that are mostly Jewish or Russian Orthodox and generally coexist with large gay populations.

West Hollywood’s 11-member Russian Advisory Board recently voted 8 to 3 to send a letter to Moscow Mayor Yuri Luzkov, asking him to reconsider his decision banning gay pride events in the Russian capital.

"We want you to consider the unique partnership that has developed here in West Hollywood between the large population of Russian-speaking immigrants and the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community," the letter said.

The Sacramento community, on the other hand, is overwhelmingly evangelical — Baptist and Pentecostalist. The charismatic Pentacostal church, introduced in the Ukraine in the 1920s by missionary and martyr Ivan Efimovich Vornaev, includes speaking in tongues and washing of feet. The churches’ social views are based on a literal interpretation of the Bible.

"The main issues in the Russian community here," said Vitaly Prokopchuk, a Sacramento County sheriff’s deputy, "are gay issues, abortion issues and family-definition issues. To these people, these issues are very cut-and-dry in the Bible."

Sacramento has more than 70 Russian fundamentalist congregations. One of them, Bethany Missionary Slavic Church, has 3,200 members and claims to be the largest Russian-language church outside of Europe.

"Sacramento is the No. 1 gathering place for non-Jewish, non-Russian Orthodox, fundamentalist Russian and Ukrainian immigrants," said University of Oregon geographer Susan W. Hardwick, an expert on the Russian immigrant community. Similar but smaller communities, Hardwick said, have established themselves in Portland and Seattle, where they also are beginning to flex their political muscle.

But nowhere approaches Sacramento, which has a 24-hour Russian-language cable television station, two radio stations and several newspapers, all of which push a conservative message marked by strident opposition to homosexuality. A recent edition of the Speaker, for example, promoted a book, "The Pink Swastika," that contends that the extermination of Jews during World War II was the work of homosexuals inside the Nazi Party.
These aren’t muslims, people, these are Christians, evangelical Chrisitans. These people want to take us back to the Dark Ages. And they are the GOP’s base. Wingnuts find common cause with these people.

These people are bigots. Pure and simple. Imagine for one moment that the same protests were being made against blacks, or women.

These people share much in common with their homegrown evangelical brethren. A hatred of gays. It’s the same hatred that Bush tapped into in November 2004. Indeed, in that sense, evangelical Christians share much in common with the radical Islamists that the right claims to fear. A pure and unadulterated hatred of gay people.

And yet, according to some of the idiotic posts above, it’s the secular humanists that we have to fear, not the intolerant bigots who make up much of the evangelical Christian right in America.

Right.





 
Written By: mkultra
URL: http://
Oh please. I know you can’t debate anybody unless you first declare them a racist or a chickenhawk or employ some logical fallacy like guilt by association because you can’t form a single cogent thought, but at least give it a try.
Look, I’m not the one using the rhetoric of fear of people who are different from us. The person I was responding to said that if we learn to respect others, we are committing cultural suicide. That kind of racist rhetoric is off the charts. I don’t think you understand the implications of it.

And if you don’t think racism exists in this country, you need to get out more.

 
Written By: mkultra
URL: http://
Who is Maj. Jill Metzger, and what happened to her in Kyrgyzstan ?
 
Written By: Neo
URL: http://
Look, I’m not the one using the rhetoric of fear of people who are different from us. The person I was responding to said that if we learn to respect others, we are committing cultural suicide.
Really? Let’s see the quote then. Multiculturalism is not about respecting others, it’s about emphasizing cultural divisions and subordinating Western culture in favor of any other culture, including radical Islam. A member of the Taliban was admitted to Yale in the name of multiculturalism, while a group of Afghan women were denied admission. Media outlets refuse to print anything that Muslims deem offensive in the name of multiculturalism.

Mark Steyn (don’t have conniption fits) offers a nice summation:
Radical Islam is what multiculturalism has been waiting for all along. In "The Survival of Culture," I quoted the eminent British barrister Helena Kennedy, Queen’s Counsel. Shortly after September 11, Baroness Kennedy argued on a BBC show that it was too easy to disparage "Islamic fundamentalists." "We as Western liberals too often are fundamentalist ourselves," she complained. "We don’t look at our own fundamentalisms."

Well, said the interviewer, what exactly would those Western liberal fundamentalisms be? "One of the things that we are too ready to insist upon is that we are the tolerant people and that the intolerance is something that belongs to other countries like Islam. And I’m not sure that’s true."

Hmm. Lady Kennedy was arguing that our tolerance of our own tolerance is making us intolerant of other people’s intolerance, which is intolerable. And, unlikely as it sounds, this has now become the highest, most rarefied form of multiculturalism. So you’re nice to gays and the Inuit? Big deal. Anyone can be tolerant of fellows like that, but tolerance of intolerance gives an even more intense frisson of pleasure to the multiculti masochists. In other words, just as the AIDS pandemic greatly facilitated societal surrender to the gay agenda, so 9/11 is greatly facilitating our surrender to the most extreme aspects of the multicultural agenda.
One need only look at college campuses to see the myriad unconstitutional speech codes that have cropped up in the name of multiculturalism and (faux) diversity, too.

Even worse, Ontario seriously considered allowing Sharia law to be implemented in Muslim communities there. That should scare anyone. It’s most certainly not fear mongering.

And then we have France’s Undeclared Intifada
The media isn’t paying it much attention but according to recent reports French muslims are injuring an average of 14 police officers a day. 2,500 have been injured already this year. They’re calling some suburbs "no-go zones" and asking for armored cars. After reading this it sounds like armored cars might not be enough protection.
This is what happens when you insist on multiculturalism (a variant of segregation in my opinion) rather than assimilation.

Now I know race-baiters like you are incapable of taking a nuanced view of posts like mine, so I’m going to attach the obligatory disclaimer. Nowhere in there did I say that Muslims should be deported, imprisoned, killed, etc. Nor did I say that Islam is even incompatible with Western society. I said that Radical Islam is, and the multiculturalists are all too willing to accept it.
And if you don’t think racism exists in this country, you need to get out more.
Sigh. I really don’t know how you read that into my response. Oh wait, yeah I do.
 
Written By: Jordan
URL: http://
"M1A2’s in quantity"

If you win an argument by use of arms, you haven’t proved the value of your values; you’ve only proved that you have a bigger gun.
The lesson in European. or any other, hisotry is that force and values are two separate issues.

Force has to do with a struggle for supremacy, and does not define or rate values. Every army going into battle calls on God to be on its side.
 
Written By: Laime
URL: http://
If you win an argument by use of arms, you haven’t proved the value of your values; you’ve only proved that you have a bigger gun.
The lesson in European. or any other, hisotry is that force and values are two separate issues.

Force has to do with a struggle for supremacy, and does not define or rate values. Every army going into battle calls on God to be on its side.
So. Effing. What.

Winning by force of arms does not automatically mean that your values are worthless or bad.
 
Written By: Mark A. Flacy
URL: http://
And yet, according to some of the idiotic posts above, it’s the secular humanists that we have to fear, not the intolerant bigots who make up much of the evangelical Christian right in America.

Right.
mkultra, what we have to fear from the secular humanists is a lack of backbone. Granted, a pack of young secular humanists may act tough: dress in black, tear up Starbucks or McDonalds, but that toughness is shallow and absent any real courage.

 
Written By: Don
URL: http://
The person I was responding to said that if we learn to respect others, we are committing cultural suicide. That kind of racist rhetoric is off the charts.
Culture isn’t race. But you are right, it’s off the charts, since it isn’t on any chart of racism at all.
 
Written By: Don
URL: http://
Traditional religion is being replaced by secular humanism, which is an empty philosophy.
Poet, how is it you so recklessly label secular humanism as empty?

I hold no ritual, no dogma, no writ to couple with my values.

I use no spiritual bond with fabled Deities to dictate my desire for peoples to live free of state oppression.

How is it you hold judgment so callous as to dismiss the beliefs free of extraterrestrial guidance… empty?
Is the human mind so feeble?

Must we have a savior?
It seems to me that the only thing we need to be saved from is those who would use mystic rituals to manipulate week minds to do their selfish biddings.

Empty is the lack of conscience. Not the lack of ritualistic ceremony.
 
Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://ceilidhcowboy.typepad.com/
If you win an argument by use of arms, you haven’t proved the value of your values; you’ve only proved that you have a bigger gun.
The lesson in European. or any other, hisotry is that force and values are two separate issues.
The English won the Napoleonic Wars due to superior values; the Allies won WW1 due to superior values; and again the Allies won WW2 due to superior values. And, the West won the Cold War due to superior values.

Free markets represent superior values, and they were the values of the English in the above wars (except the English were slipping in the Cold War), and they were the values of the Americans as well. This value of free markets resulted in economic superiority, as well as a focus on Navel forces (the side with inferior values typically started out with the superior land force).

Further, the same values came into play in the American Civil War.

Winning doesn’t prove superior values, but values are a factor, often the dominant one.

 
Written By: Don
URL: http://
Poet, how is it you so recklessly label secular humanism as empty?
I doubt he can prove his point, but I’m inclined to suspect he’s right. Secular humanism in Europe seems unable to come to grips with radical Islam, and the American leftist secular humanists seem to have the same failing. At least in American, the secular humanists have Christian fundamentalists to protect them.
 
Written By: Don
URL: http://
At least in American, the secular humanists have Christian fundamentalists to protect them.
Thanks, man.
So glad that you are there to protect me from my own beliefs.

How... kind of you.
 
Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://ceilidhcowboy.typepad.com/
Don said:
Free markets represent superior values, and they were the values of the English in the above wars (except the English were slipping in the Cold War), and they were the values of the Americans as well. This value of free markets resulted in economic superiority,
He is correct - highest growth favors biggest guns. The aspect of our culture nobody has mentioned is that we choose to profit above all else. This choice is not Judeo or Christian and yet it opposes socialism and Islam. "Judeo-Christian" values co-exist only because they are secularized subordinate to this pursuit of profit. This profiting allows us to get the biggest guns.

This motivation to profit forms the context in which we deal with Islam as least as much as socialist secular-humanist motivations. The Islamists are problematic in part because they are wealthy and sit upon so much oil that if we attack them we will lose significant profits. In part because Europe needed labor for its factories.


 
Written By: unaha-closp
URL: http://warisforwinning.blogspot.com/
Ah, Pogue. It’s good to hear from you again. I see we are back on our old sparring ground crossing swords over the same issues. Bien. Commençons mon ami.
How is it you so recklessly label secular humanism as empty?
Am I being reckless? Let’s take a look at secular humanism through the eyes of some secular humanists. http://www.secularhumanism.org/ is NA’s leading organization of like-minded folks claiming to be secular humanists. From their site,
Secular Humanism is a way of thinking and living that aims to bring out the best in people so that all people can have the best in life. Secular humanists reject supernatural and authoritarian beliefs.
Really? Who are some of the patron saints (no pun intended) of the secular humanist movement? Voltaire [authoritarian, anti-democrat], Matilda Gage [who was actually a foundationist [some prefer the term theosophist] not a secular humanist], A.J. Ayer [who after a near-death experience, admitted that he suddenly believed in God], Jean-Paul Sartre [a communist apologist for terrorism], and Bertrand Russell [a socialist philanderer who never understood the nature of religon]. Not necessarily a group of people that seem dedicated to reject supernatural and/or authoritarian beliefs. Some of them, in fact weren’t even the secular humanists that the Secular Humanism Council claims them to be.

Throughout secular humanism’s history, we find that there is no animating ideology; all of its adherents seem drawn to other causes to give them courage and purpose. Nationalism, fascism, communism, monarchism etc. are the creeds that secular humanists cling to. A man of religion can simply be a man of religion; he needs nothing else with which to animate his spirit. He may choose to adopt a particular political cause or philosophy, but the bedrock of his character and outlook is his religion. What can a secularist fall back on when worldly ideology fades away? What is his core? Vague notions of "live free or die?" Hardly the stuff heroes are made of. And hardly the stuff by which nations are saved.

Religion, with all its attendant faults, offers more breadth and depth to the soul of a man than does the worldly belief in secular humanism. Religion is nourishment; a rich feast for the soul. Secular humanism is impoverishment of the soul; stale bread and foul water. Religion offers a search for the divine in all of us. It gives a sense our freedom; that there is life after death; that there is more to life than just earthly pleasures such as wealth and sex. Secular humanism merely promises that there is nothing after death; that one must live every day with no thought for the future, because there is no future. Secular humanism is the arrogance of the human mind. At it’s heart the idea that there is nothing greater than man. There is no God (or gods). There is only man and his supremecy over all. Man is the ultimate being. Let the universe bow down to us. And let God die. Assuming He/She ever existed at all.
 
Written By: The Poet Omar
URL: http://www.asecondhandconjecture.com
Religion offers a search for the divine in all of us.
If it is a revealed religion it will tell you what the divine is, no searching needed.
Secular humanism merely promises that there is nothing after death; that one must live every day with no thought for the future, because there is no future.
I have no children, but i hope to and that they will have children in turn. I wish the best for, and see the future as limitless (or until heat death of the universe). I do not acknowledge a doomsday or apocalypse proscribed by some G*d that will prevent this and so hope to provide the best for the future. Do I believe in G*d?
 
Written By: unaha-closp
URL: http://warisforwinning.blogspot.com/
This flurry of exchanges illusstrates my point exactly: you can’t have a rational conversation if anyone claims to be speaking ’God’s truth’.
So many Gods, so little patience.

My suggestion is that everyone cool off at their own church/temple/mosque/sacred tree and then consider how we can live together without killing each other.



 
Written By: Laime
URL: http://
年终总结 工作总结 竞聘演讲 八荣八耻 和谐社会 治理商业贿赂 社会主义荣辱观 社会主义法治理念 和谐社会专题 教师节专题 党员先进性教育 社会主义新农村 心得体会 述职报告 调研报告 事迹材料 工作报告 汇报材料 反腐倡廉 三农问题 十一国庆节专题 科学发展观专题 五五普法专题 七一建党专题 五一劳动节专题 庆祝中秋节专题 八一建军节专题 活动策划 企划文案 征文演讲 计划规划 中国文秘网
 
Written By: gasd
URL: http://
Ah, Pogue. It’s good to hear from you again. I see we are back on our old sparring ground crossing swords over the same issues.
I know, fun – eh? Umm… I do not mean to pry, but you don’t by any chance happen to have six fingers on your right hand?
Bien. Commençons mon ami.
.
.
.
EN GUARD
Am I being reckless? Let’s take a look at secular humanism through the eyes of some secular humanists. http://www.secularhumanism.org/ is NA’s leading organization of like-minded folks claiming to be secular humanists. From their site,

Secular Humanism is a way of thinking and living that aims to bring out the best in people so that all people can have the best in life. Secular humanists reject supernatural and authoritarian beliefs.
This is the quote you pull to defend your accusations that secularism is “Empty”???
Besides, you forgot the rest…

They affirm that we must take responsibility for our own lives and the communities and world in which we live.

…Wow. Emptiness, huh? You know, this sounds a lot like conservatism, doesn’t it?...

Secular humanism emphasizes reason and scientific inquiry, individual freedom and responsibility, human values and compassion, and the need for tolerance and cooperation.

…What a bunch of empty headed, soulless unfortunates.
“Take responsibility for our own lives and the communities”, “bring out the best in people”, “scientific inquiry, individual freedom and responsibility”. Heh.

[THRUST]
.
.
.
Really? Who are some of the patron saints (no pun intended) of the secular humanist movement?
I’m not quite sure why you would throw Voltaire and others at me!? Not sure how they prove secularism is “Empty”.
So a seventeenth century French monarchist was a secularist… And that has what to do with modern secularism???
Voltaire is remembered and honored in France as a courageous polemicist who indefatigably fought for civil rights — the right to a fair trial and freedom of religion — and who denounced the hypocrisies and injustices of the ancien régime.

[PASSATA-SOTTO]
.
.
.
Not necessarily a group of people that seem dedicated to reject supernatural and/or authoritarian beliefs. Some of them, in fact weren’t even the secular humanists that the Secular Humanism Council claims them to be.
Yeah, well. Nobody’s perfect.
Besides, I could easily drum up a humiliating list of historical figures that today’s religious would find embarrassingly difficult to defend after scratching a few surfaces. And there’s not enough time in the day to list all of the modern offenders.

You wouldn’t want me to sift through my Robertson file, now would you Omar?

[PARRY]
.
.
.
Throughout secular humanism’s history, we find that there is no animating ideology; all of its adherents seem drawn to other causes to give them courage and purpose. Nationalism, fascism, communism, monarchism etc. are the creeds that secular humanists cling to.
With what evidence do you make this bold statement?

And as if these other causes were void of the religious. The history of nationalism, fascism, communism, monarchism, etc. etc. is littered with the self-righteous, divinely deluded with benighted benevolence meddlers to others affairs. Great…, thanks.

You have no evidence that secularists require anything at all to give them “courage and purpose”. I am a secularist… you certainly wouldn’t claim that I have no courage or purpose, would you?
And who says I even need an animating ideology to give me courage? What if I just want to be left alone from the courageous and purposeful meddlers you claim is void of secularists?

Is this what you mean by “Empty”?
To live and let live???

[MOULINET]
.
.
.
Religion, with all its attendant faults, offers more breadth and depth to the soul of a man than does the worldly belief in secular humanism. Religion is nourishment;
No thanks, I’m stuffed.
Omar, you speak of the arrogance of man. What greater arrogance is there to believe that one knows about God(s)?

I can’t speak for other secularists/atheists/agnostics, but I find humility with my lack of faith. I am one, I am me, nothing more. I will do my part to defend what is me and mine, I will do my part to surrender what is to you and yours.

I do this with no void. No cavity to fill.
There is no hunger for unearthly victuals. No thirst for supernatural refreshment. I am satiated with my own comfortable perception and I require no benevolence from mortals peddling divinity.

This is where most of the religious go wrong. They assume that there is a hollow in me and others like me that must be filled. This is more arrogance.
And just because some have that hollow and require mysticism and ritual to gratify their lack of comfort, it doesn’t necessarily mean that we all do.

I lack no courage. I lack no purpose. I am not empty.

[COUP DE MAIN]
 
Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://ceilidhcowboy.typepad.com/
Omar:

Let’s begin by stating the obvious. First, there are good and bad people who subscribe to either secular humanistic or orthodox religous beliefs. Second, human beings constructed relgious systems almost as soon as they organized into societies. Third, the progression of the dominant culture in the world — Western culture — has been marked by recission of religious orthodoxy.

I think it is far too early to declare that secular humanism is a failed philosophy, or that it cannot serve as as a positive organizing force for civilization. Secular humansim is in its infancy. Secular humanism is difficult and challlenging, notably because it lacks many of the comforting features of orthodox religion (which you have accurately denoted). That doesn’t make secular humanism a failure; it doesn’t make it wrong, or bad. I suggest that, to the contrary, secular humanism more accurately reflects the human conditon and, being true (or truer), has a much greater potential for goodness than orthodox religion which, I think, is founded upon myths, fallacies and self-deception.

Now one may question what secular humanism has accomplished to date. And one may fairly criticize its most famous adherents. It and they may well be found wanting. But that must be balanced against what orthodox religion has wrought, and what it continues to visit upon us.

Perhaps most importantly, however, those seeking to reanimate religion as the dominant force in human culture are retrogressive. They are swimming against the tide of history and that, I suggest, helps explain why such people resort to more and more violent efforts to re-impose what has already been rejected.
 
Written By: David Shaughnessy
URL: http://dsthinkingloud.blogspot.com/
Note to MK: I am not religious at all. Personally have no use for it. Only hit temple once a year if that much and only then to appease older members of my family.

But when I hear people like you and various other leftist types go on and on and on, I increasingly find myself throwing my lot in with the religious people. I find it comforting to see people with real values and morality, as opposed to your garden variety liberal who sits there and says "this is wrong, BUT......"

MK, don’t hate on people who have a sense of morality and values simply because the concept scares you.

To Laime:
"The main 2 choices facing society today: Radical Islam or Liberal "values" (read: Moral Equivalance) are no values at all.’
This is only true for those who ignore the vast array of other possibilities. Reducing every scene to black-and-white still photos adds nothing to understanding the dangers as well as the possibilites for progress in the evolution of man’s understanding of man.
What other possibilities are on the board today? Maybe the west should adopt Buddhist values? Or maybe Wiccian? This isn’t about progress in our understanding of man, it’s about how we as a society will choose to conduct ourselves going forward.

 
Written By: Shark
URL: http://
And there there is vacillating and incoherence aplenty.

From Drudge:

Teachers loses job for wearing veil.

Airport Front Desk loses job for wearing cross.

There is nothing of the enlightenment here, or in modern day liberalism, except that a person instructing a language should in fact be showing children how unfamliar sounds are made. It is to be hoped the teacher’s firing will be uncontroversial, and that signs of the Christian faith will be as acceptable as signs of other faiths.

Yours, TDP, ml, msl, & pfpp
 
Written By: Tom Perkins
URL: http://
Laime wrote:
My suggestion is that everyone cool off at their own church/temple/mosque/sacred tree and then consider how we can live together without killing each other.
And in the mosques it is frequently heard that the infidel and the apostate should be subjugated by force, destroyed, killed, etc.

Recoginize that’s part of the problem, you’ll be halfway there.

Yours, TDP, ml, msl, & pfpp
 
Written By: Tom Perkins
URL: http://
My suggestion is that everyone cool off at their own church/temple/mosque/sacred tree and then consider how we can live together without killing each other.
My suggestion is that this mindset is part of the problem.

Not the implied moral equivalance in this statement- that this is a problem that everyone is causing and missing a proper solution to.

Uh-uh pal.

Us here in the west have generally reached the stage where we can live together w/o killing each other. The muslims? Not so much.

If you had said: My suggestion is that muslims cool off at their own mosqueand then consider how they can live together without trying to kill us. then you’d be on the correct path.

This is not a problem caused by the West, or caused by Judeo-Christian values. And I refuse to allow you to paint it as such with statements like that.
 
Written By: Shark
URL: http://

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider