Grey Thoughts
Physics and the Trinity
Some things are worth repeating.

Joe Carter has linked to John Schroder who asks
John Schroeder asks, "So, wave/particle duality is the "weirdest" physics theory? Now, here is my question of that ages: "Why can completely rational physicists the world over use that theory without comment on that fact on a daily basis, and at the same time decry religious notions like the Trinity and Christ's dual nature as hocum?" Just wondering."
Joe responded...
They shouldn't. At least that's what Huston Smith says in an short interview on quantum weirdness. As Smith intriguingly points out, there are three orders of magnitude, "three worlds" --the mega world (galaxies), the macro world (our world), and the micro world (quantum level). It is impossible to map the mega or micro world on the mega world, says Smith, and sense our language is designed to describe the macro level, it is impossible to talk about those "worlds" without running into contradictions (e.g., "light is both a wave and a particle). Since we can't even comprehend the finite physical realm, how can we expect to speak about such topics as the Trinity or the Incarnation in a way that does not sound, to some people, like "hocum?"
This is a new thought to me, but one that is obvious once you read it.

Physics is telling us that a cat can be both alive and dead at the same time, yet people complain about how hard it is to understand the trinity.

Comments Policy
I have had to delete some comments today. So I thought I would post my commenting policy.

1) The comments here are for responding to what was written in the post
2) Please refrain from swearing in the comments. If you can't make your case without it, don't bother making it.

This means that I will only delete posts for reasons like the following
1) Advertising
2) Irrelevant segue's linking to other sites
3) Excessive swearing
Allies of Terrorism
Little Green Footballs has a few more organisations and people that seem happy to be enemies of America and it's allies.
U.N. Secretary-General
Kofi Annan stressed Friday it was not the peacekeepers' task to strip the guerrillas of their weapons, saying that was an issue for Lebanon's government and "cannot be done by force."

"The troops are not going there to disarm Hezbollah. Let's be clear about that," he said.
Check the LGF site for a picture of a French UN vehicle flying a white flag in southern Lebanon.

Former Malaysian president
Mahathir Mohammad: What enabled the Israelis to do what they are doing now is the United States, so the main culprit is the United States, in particular the present government of the United States. I wouldn’t blame all the Americans. A lot of Americans do not like this war, but their leadership advocates war, as a solution - not only to major problems, even minor problems - we have to kill people. These are really war criminals. That is why we think that something has to be done against the United States.
Yep. Minor problems like launching thousands of rockets indiscriminantly into civilian areas.
Axis of Enemies
With many elite academics on the left, the Islamic threat has influential allies. What is less obvious however, is that many other organisations seem hell bent on ensuring the destruction of Israel and Western civilization. Many of these organisations seem to have swallowed the economic imperialist propaganda from the socialists and communists.

Thanks to the blogsphere, other organisations are starting to be seen for their true agenda. The latest are the Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International. These organisations are meant to be about all human rights, yet all they seem to do is criticise Israel and the West. In the latest Israel-Hezbollah hostilities, their bias is quite obvious. From Volokh
At the sites visited by Human Rights Watch—Qana, Srifa, Tyre, and the southern suburbs of Beirut—on-site investigations did not identify any signs of military activity in the area attacked, such as trenches, destroyed rocket launchers, other military equipment, or dead or wounded fighters."

It apparently raised no eyebrows among HRW staff that of the fifteen "civilian" victims in Srifa it identifies in its report, all were men, and thirteen of them were of normal fighting age (17-35)....UPDATE: Dershowitz at the Huffington Post has much more on HRW, concluding that it is repeating "demonstrably false conclusions."

*Here's the evidence that HRW had for Israel "indiscriminately" attacking civilians in Srifa: According to a villager who was in the village at the time of the attack:

There was no Hezbollah in the neighborhood. This neighborhood is known to be partial to the Communist Party, not Hezbollah. There are no Hezbollah people living there. Hezbollah does not have a need to be in this neighborhood, because we are 40 kilometers away from Israel, and the neighborhood looks out over the sea, it is not a strategic place.

Two additional villagers told Human Rights Watch in separate interviews that Hezbollah had not been present in the neighborhood around the time of the attack. "Except for one person, who didn't even belong to Hezbollah, no one in that neighborhood knew how to handle weapons," said Hussain Nazal. He added, "If they hit some houses that belong to Hezbollah we would understand, but this is not the [Hezbollah] neighborhood."

Apparently, HRW thinks it's okay to accuse a country of war crimes based solely on hearsay evidence of male "villagers", acquired while the war was ongoing, who are hanging out in a POG stronghold during an Israeli bombardment, after being warned to leave. Even if these villagers were not POG affiliates (but maybe they are) or even sympathizers, how do you think Hezbollah would have reacted if they had been quoted in an HRW report during the war as stating that Israel was only carefully targeting POG strongholds? I certainly wouldn't issue life insurance to them under such circumstances.
Yep. HRW is cherry picking whose information to report. Just like the media, who are printing fake pictures and accepting whatever propaganda Hezbollah give them.

So how often do AI and HRW condemn Hezbollah for firing rockets indiscriminately with the intention to destroy civilian targets and kill civilians? Or for using the civilian population as human shields? Instead they simply criticise one side. I suspect partly because they realise they have no hope of influencing those who blow themselves up for their cause. The ultimate effect is that they are losing credibility whilst white-anting western civilisations ability to defend itself.
Evolutionists Going Banana's Over Hitler
Coral Ridge Ministries is releasing a documentary this week called "Darwin's Deadly Legacy" on the links between Darwin's evolutionary theory and Hitler. What is really amazing however, is that people are criticising the documentary before seeing it. Kind of like making up your mind before even looking at the evidence. Hmmmm... a pattern.

My favorite comment so far...
I would argue that even if Hitler really did use Darwin's theory as inspiration for the mass-murder of Jews, he got it wrong. Throwing millions of Jews into death camps is, in my opinion, artificial selection! It is stacking the decks, not proving the superior adaptability of a breed of human.
This is trying to place human's above other animals who compete and kill each other in the wild. But on what grounds does an atheistic evolutionist have for making this distinction? On their grounds, we are just animals. We have bigger brains and better tool use, but this in no way should render our actions as 'artificial selection'.

Ah well. There is plenty of evidence linking Hitler and Darwinian theory. Even secular evolutionists like Niles Elderidge have admitted as much. Darwinian theory has underlied both Naziism, and communism....not a good record.

Update: In related news, LGF has some footage of Hitler meeting with the islamic Mufti of Jerusulum.
Elites Against Freedom
I mentioned earlier the soft-spot that many elites/academics have for communism. Well, Michael Barone makes the case that many of these elites are actively working against western civilization as covert enemies so to speak.
These are the ideas that have been transmitted over a long generation by the elites who run our universities and our schools, and who dominate our mainstream media. They teach an American history with the good parts left out and the bad parts emphasized. We are taught that some of the Founding Fathers were slaveholders — and are left ignorant of their proclamations of universal liberties and human rights. We are taught that Japanese-Americans were interned in World War II — and not that American military forces liberated millions from tyranny. To be sure, the great mass of Americans tend to resist these teachings. By the millions they buy and read serious biographies of the Founders and accounts of the Greatest Generation. But the teachings of our covert enemies have their effect.

Curiously, I was just thinking last night that part of what has been ripped out of our education is not just the common values and history, but the common vision of the future that used to define our nations. This common vision lead us in the same direction. Now that has been removed and replaced with the lets bash western civilisation theme, which has no real vision for creation, just one for destruction of western civilisation. "Without vision, the people perish"
Genesis and History
When people complain about the accuracy of Genesis (specifically the first 11 chapters), I always wonder what they have based their criticism on. Most of the time it seems to be based on evolution or deep age geology, both of which are based on many untestable assumptions.

One thing that people don't often check however is how history relates. For instance, a little historical sleuthing enables you to track the 16 grand sons of Noah to present day communities.

Another way to investigate is to ask what we would expect to see if the young earth genesis chronology was accurate? The first thing would be that almost every culture which had historical records would have a reference to a great flood. You would also expect that humans would have experience of and stories about dinosaurs. Remembering that the word 'dinosaur' was only created in around 1841, we would need to look for stories that match the description of dinosaurs. Not suprisingly, there are many stories from all around the world. (As a side note, it is also important to remember that many species thought to be extinct for hundreds of millions of years on the evolutionary time scale have been found alive today. The reason they thought the species was extinct was that no fossil's existed in the fossil record for that time period. This also means that finding a live dinosaur today would not invalidate evolution.)

One final bit of history also provides similar evidence. Many, if not most cultures have stories about snakes. Many of these stories have many common features with the biblical account. It's almost like the came from the same source or something. One example
What should we make of the Bassari people of west Africa speaking of a great god, Unumbotte, who made Man and made Snake; when Snake proposed the eating of fruit, “Man and his wife took some of the fruit and ate it. Unumbotte came down from the sky and asked, ‘Who ate the fruit?’ The first couple admitted eating the fruit and said Snake had told them to do so.”

(HT: Creation Safari's)
UK Muslims Push For Sharia Law
CNS has the scoop. The 'moderate' muslim groups say that it will help them reign in the extremists and also that the UK government should stop its current foreign policies that are providing ammunition for the extremists.

In normal speak that means give us what we want or the terrorism will continue. So subtle.
Leftist Academic Elites Blindspot for Communism
As I mentioned earlier, many anti-American Americans seem to love communism in comparison the America. Walter Williams, over at the Jewish world review, makes a similar observation of Leftist Academic Elites. Walter explains it thus
While academic leftists, and I'd include their media allies, are not communists, they are anti-anti-communists. In other words, they have contempt for right-wingers, conservatives or libertarians who are anti-communists. Why? Academic leftists, and their media allies, are in agreement with many of the stated goals of communism, such as equal distribution of wealth, income equality and other goals spelled out in Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels' "Manifesto of the Communist Party." Leftist elites love the ideas of communism so much that they are either blind to, or tolerant of, its many shortcomings.
Indeed. Academics will often use the line that Mao, Lenin and Stalin perverted communism to try and salvage many of the stated goals of communism for their own beliefs. The key is that they are secular humanists, who think that we will 'progress' through our current society to a communist like one. This is why the academics evaluate capitalism based on the real world, whilst they evaluate communist ideals on the utopian end-vision. As Walter explains
Often, when people evaluate capitalism, they evaluate a system that exists on Earth. When they evaluate communism, they are talking about a non-existent Utopia. What exists on Earth, with all of its problems and shortcomings, is always going to fail miserably when compared to a Utopia. The very attempt to achieve the utopian goals of communism requires the ruthless suppression of the individual and an attack on any institution that might compromise the loyalty of the individual to the state. That's why one of the first orders of business for communism, and those who support its ideas, is the attack on religion and the family.

In a related story, Bill Meuhlenberg has written a response to another such lefty elitist, dealing with her brushing over the communist history and equivocating all religion with the worst of religion (Of course, the worst of secularism is never equivocated with all of secularism).
Bone however simply dismisses the killing fields of communism, by claiming communist ideology is “similar to a religious ideology”. That is like saying Bone’s ideology is similar to Archbishop George Pell’s ideology. Her argument does nothing to lessen the charge of secular blood-letting. But her comment does make the case that non-religious people and their beliefs can be just as zealously promoted as any religious belief can.

She then suggests that for religious people to raise the issue of communism is like saying “there is no point in curing tuberculosis because malaria kills more people”. No that is not the point. It is Bone who is trying to make the case that secularism makes for better, safer societies. But the evidence tell us just the opposite. The fact that religious people have killed others is deplorable, but in most religious traditions, such killing is seen as tangential to the faith, as an aberration of it.

But in secular ideologies like communism and fascism, mass murder is fully justified in terms of their own worldview. Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, et. al., were all fully prepared to justify the killing of millions. It was not a perversion of their ideology, but the fulfilment of it.

By lumping all religions together, Bone betrays a great ignorance of religion.

Read the whole thing.
The Dating Game
Answers in Genesis (AIG) has a chapter from Marvin Lubenow's book "Bones of Contention". The chapter deals with a particular case of dating a hominid fossil from Kenya, and shows clearly how plastic the dating methods that are being used really are. Essentially the history goes something like this.

1) Skull KNM-ER 1470, a very modern looking skull is found and dated at 2.9 million years old

2) This caused a conflict of having a modern looking skull dated so old

3) A Volcanic Tuff provided strong maximum and minimum ages for fossils around it. Specifically many australopithecine fossils and human artifacts, and mammals had been found below the Tuff.

4) The tuff was dated at 212-230 Million years old (mya), far to old for the fossils around it and so an ad hoc explanation was given to explain away this age.

5) After selecting 'fresher' samples, a new date of 2.61 mya was found for the tuff and agreed closely with the 2.7-3.0 mya given for the fossil. A seemingly rock solid (pun intended) proof of how two independent methods give similar ages. However, the researchers dating the fossil also made the following comment...
The correlations shown in Figure 4 are not fully independent, and rely partly upon K.Ar and faunal evidence as well as upon the basic polarity data.

The starting point for the correlation is the age of 2.61 ± 0.26 Myr obtained by Fitch and Miller from selected sanidine crystals from pumice specimens from the KBS Tuff.
So in essence, they started with the 2.61 mya and went from there....hardly independent.

6) because of the problem of having an 2.9mya homo skull, more investigation happened. Another researcher dated the tuff at 1.6 and 1.8 mya. And then yet another two studies came out with of roughly 2.4 mya.

7) Another two studies concluded that the age of the tuff was 1.87 and 1.89 mya

8) Ultimately, the dating argument was decided by pig fossils close to the find. Which, using similar dating games elsewhere, helped them to select the 1.8 mya figures as 'correct'. Of course, this ignored the elephant fossil's also close to the find which favored an older date. Why was the pig date chosen? Because it matched the evolutionists expectations (given evolution is true and that their idea of how things evolved in what sequence is correct) better.

Read the whole thing, and notice how many 'discordant' dates were rejected even in coming through this somewhat contrived process. This the 'science' that evolutionists continue to lament as being undone when creationists put forward their ideas. Well, if this is the quality of science under evolution, I say it needs to be undone.
Questions to Ask the Anti-war Left
I;m often amazed at the number of people who rejoice when America gets a setback. I don't know how many times I have heard people gloat over America's failed military attack of Cuba. So to those people, I want to ask these three simple questions...

1) Who is worse, George W Bush or Fidel Castro?

2) Is America a better place to live than Cuba?

3) Why do you think tens of thousands of people risk death to flee Cuba for America?

Cuba is a totalitarian state with a dictator at it's head. I know which answers I would choose.

Update: If you think I am making this stuff up, check out this article, written by communist Marc Frank. (And yes, the Sydney Morning Herald is printing articles by communist journalists...reuters)
Christians and Self-Righteousness
How often do you hear the complaint that Christians think they are better than everyone else, that they are self-righteous?

It has been something I have been pondering lately. The bible tells us how morally flawed we really are, yet some don't seem to realise it. Often times I think that non-Christians think this because they don't understand when Christians talk of morals and doing the right thing, the Christians recognise that they fail to do the right thing all the time. Christians in fact, will generally recognise how far they fall short to a greater degree than non-Christians. Ironically, this means that the Christians generally will think of themselves as worse people, than the Non-Christians think of themselves.

C.S. Lewis understood this contrast when he said "When a man is getting better he understands more and more clearly the evil that is still left in him. When a man is getting worse, he understands his own badness less and less....Good people know about both good and evil: bad people do not know about either" (Mere Christianity p73)

I have to agree, the more I try and improve myself morally, the more I see how sinful I really am. J. Budziszewski wrote about the flip side of this when he talked about "The Revenge of Conscience"
Conscience is not a passive barrier but an active force; though it can hold us back, it can also drive us on. Moreover, conscience comes not from without but from within: though culture can trim the fringes, the core cannot be changed. The reason things get worse so fast must somehow lie not in the weakness of conscience but in its strength, not in its shapelessness but in its shape.
Budziszewski goes on to explain why our consciences drive us to justify worse and worse behaviours once we have started down that road. I have often heard it said that one of the reasons Christians don't stand up more against abortion is that too many of them have had one. To admit abortion is wrong would be devastating to them. That is what Budziszewski is talking about. Our conscience gives us a choice to either rationalise our sins further and further, or face the devastation of recognising our sin. The worse our sins, the harder it is to choice the second option and that is the revenge of conscience.
More Media Bias
Tim Blair has a great post highlighting the Sydney Morning Heralds bias.
Police report on a robbery last night in Sydney:

The first man was described as being of Middle Eastern/Mediterranean appearance, about 160cm tall with a skinny build. He was wearing a black coloured jumper and balaclava.

The second man was described as being of Middle Eastern/Mediterranean appearance, about 170cm tall with a chubby build. He was wearing a black coloured balaclava and an orange and red coloured jacket.

SMH report on a robbery last night in Sydney:

The first man was described as about 160 centimetres tall, skinny and wearing a black jumper and a balaclava.

The second man was about 170 centimetres tall, chubby and wearing a orange and red coloured jacket and a balaclava.
Hmmm. What piece of information did they leave out? And just in case you think it is a one off occurance, Tim's readers supply more.
Police report on men sought over arson attacks in Revesby:

They are described as being of Middle Eastern/Mediterranean appearance, about 175-180cm tall and all aged in their early 20’s. Three of the men have a thin build while the fourth in described as being large.

SMH report (sourced from AAP) on men sought over arson attacks in Revesby:

The four men are described as about 175-180cm tall, and aged in their early 20s. Three of the men have a thin build, while the fourth is described as large.

Makes you wonder how the SMH would describe Osama bin Laden were he ever to be on the run in Sydney: “The man is described as tall, of thin build, with Robert Fisk attached to his arse.”
Yep. The Sydney Morning Herald...protecting terrorists and theives for decades.
Theocracy is Coming - The Sky is Falling
So many people (especially on the left) scream blue murder when ever religious people actually want a say in their own country. The most common cry is that 'Theocracy is coming', with the obligatory mention of Muslim theocracies etc etc etc. Of course, if you want to take a look at history, you can quickly realise that this is all a crock. A scare tactic as opposed to a rational argument.

Case in point, the Secular HumanistDemocrat Party. They aren't interested in everyone having an equal say, just in using whatever means they can to shut up competing religions to their own.

This latest event should give them cold shivers and bad dreams. John Howard endorsing a Christian forum which made the case that we should re-establish Australia as a Christian country.
"Judeo-Christian ethics, the progressive spirit of the enlightenment and the institutions and values of British political culture have been central to the development of Australian values"

The forum was organized by the Parliamentary Christian Fellowship, a non-partisan group of Christian Members of Parliament. The group’s president, former Nationals leader John Anderson, opened the forum at Parliament House and pointed to the Christian origins of the principles underlying democracy.

“I think we confuse in the public mind very much what we really are, and certainly our government is secular,” he said. “It's actually a Christian concept that you should separate church and state -- it's one of the great differences between us and Muslim societies.”

“What is a secular value system?” he asked. “I could argue the extreme case, that a secular value system gave us World War II via Nazism.”

The Australian quotes Anderson saying that Australians enjoy the “fruits” of a Christian value system but warned that “no fruit will survive without you tending the roots that provided the growth in the first place and without replanting.”

The obvious case is this. Australia (and America) had a lot more Christian influence in the past without being a theocracy. Moving back towards that level of influence obviously does not entail becoming a theocracy.
Science News
CNN is reporting that scientists are now thinking the universe is 15% older than previously thought. This would require a modification of Hubble's constant. (Or not so constant as the case may be....) How many times have you heard confident pronoucements that the age of the universe is 13.7 Billion years. The boy who cried wolf comes to mind.

There are of course, many implications
If accurate, the finding would be difficult to mesh with current thinking about how the universe evolved, one scientist said.
This is hardly suprising. Every week we hear of some observation with doesn't mesh with current thinking about the universe evolved. This is just another.

Creation Safari's (CS) has a couple of information articles as well. Firstly, the evidence is out that America ranks nearly last in evolution belief. Of course, the science types blame the fundamentalists (Hmmm...didn't the germans blame everything on the jews...scary pattern). CS notes that this is cast as a bad thing, which is circular logic as it is assuming that belief in evolution is a good thing. He also notes that most of the Muslim countries were excluded from the study (Needed to make America look bad I guess). Check out the full thing for more of the smear tactics used by the apparently benevolent scientists.

The second article is on the passionate rivalry between physicists over the anthropic principle. CS points out that there is less objective and much more subjective emotional responses to the observed data. Scientists are people like everyone else. It's important to remember that.
More People Not Getting It
The other day, I pointed out how the self-esteem crowd just don't get it. Well, today, we have another example. After all the sex-ed and free love and feel good, do what you want mush that they have been fed, the UK is distributing day after abortion pills to girls as young as 12 (at school) in an attempt to get the teenage pregnancy rate down.

The sex-ed doesn't work, so they try and compound the problem. Brilliant.
Democrats on God and Government
My ethics lecturer has been following the Democrats efforts to get religion out of politics. Another great sign that he is going to continue his one-sided education (I believe the correct term is indoctrination). I checked back at the democrats site though and noticed something interesting. (And no, I don't mean their incredible hypocrisy at decrying pregnancy clinics who do not refer for abortions, whilst supporting planned parenthood who earn their living off discouraging adoption). What I noticed is this. At the bottom of the page on God and Government, the Democrats link to 3 sites.

Humanist Society of Victoria
Humanist Society of South Australia
Rationalist Society of Australia

Someone should tell them that Humanism is a religion, as the Humanist Manifesto I and II both declared. it seems the democrats merely want their religion used in government. Such upfront and honest people.
Wierd People With Chips On Their Shoulders
People who know me, know that I am a fairly blunt person. I tend not to stuff around with flowery phrases and generally speaking, I take people at their word. When I find people who say they 'believe in being a good person', I may wonder what they mean by 'good', but I generally believe they try to act morally. It isn't till they start acting inconsistently with their claims that I get more suspicious.

Enter 'The Tempest' a blog run by a couple of homosexual couples. Never heard of them before. I only found their blog by doing a search on the Dr Laura email that was used in one of my philosophy texts. What my search turned up was this post, by Daniel aka 'The Tempest'. Daniel had added his own salutation to Senator Brownback, and still claims to have added the first paragraph (even though most of it is plagiarized), but the rest of the letter in it's entirety is a copy of the Dr Laura email. Nowhere did Daniel use quotes or attribute the work to anyone else, in short, this is what is known as plagiarism, that is, a form of stealing. In my general blunt fashion, I mentioned this to Daniel, and also mentioned that copying hopelessly warped and misleading email was kind of pathetic. Daniel responded by the mature and responsible method of deleting my post, insulting me and then avoiding the issue. A second comment by me, in which I pondered his immature response, was also deleted. At least then however, Daniel added the better, but as mentioned previously, still incorrect disclaimer.

So here we have Daniel, who claims to try and be a good person, being abusive and upset, when it is pointed out to him that he was doing something that even the secular humanist gay rights feminist academics think is wrong?

I read further. It seems Daniel has received a lot of abusive email from Christian's and though I can't really speak for them, I am sorry that it has happened. Daniel, however, still seems to be adding to his inconsistencies.
And stop with the “You’re Anti-Religion!” I’m NOT your religious enemy! I never once have said your religion sucks and you’re all a bunch of brainwashed yahoos. I have only said - and will continue saying till my dying day- I don’t want religion in my life.
There is a method of communication called passive-aggressive. This is where the communicator tries to come across as the 'victim', when in reality, they are trying to insult, deride or manipulate you. Daniel's entire post is attacking Christianity and Christians. He compares a Christian run country with Islamic ones. He mocks and derides. The pulls more passive-aggressive tricks saying
I honestly don’t write anything that is meant to offend any of my so-called “targets”. You can’t offend someone with the truth.
My favorite part though is where he condemns himself
Unless your religion is actually HYPOCRISY.
You see Daniel. Whilst the Christian's who insult you may be misguided and not acting according to the bible, they too believe they are telling you the truth. And if they believe they are telling you the truth, then why do you get so worked up about it? "You can't offend someone with the truth" remember. Perhaps you should drop this idea of berating others for doing the same thing you are doing. What is that called again? Hypocrisy I believe.

Daniel of course, doesn't seem to want to let things go, and continues to be upset that someone would dare point out he was plagiarizing.
Thanks to one of God’s favorite soldiers. He decided to take it upon himself to verbally drag me into the square and (again verbally) publically flog me. All in the name of Christ.
Wow. I 'verbally publically flog[ged]' him. This guy seems to major on the minors. Overreaction becomes an art to some I guess. Now remember, he isn't anti-religious, especially when he says
Thanks, Alan, for playing Virgil and escorting me around your realm. If it weren’t for good ‘Christians’ like you, the Inquisition would have been dull-dull-dull, wars would be bor-r-r-ing, and I would not have seen the light.
Yep. Inquisition, wars, good 'Christians'. He doesn't sound antireligious at all...

Now Daniel's partner, Steve has also given a good example of being anti-religious.
You are deluded, sad, and pathetic. You are no more a Christian than those embryonic cells you fight so vehemently to protect, while on the other hand, turning your back on the wholesale slaughter of peoples American, Arabic and African as well. I was brought up Christian, but I know this faith is not for me, at least not the variety (Southern Baptist) that I knew. But Christianity, TRUE Christianity, based on the teachings of Jesus Christ, have very little to do with the things you say, do, and email. True Christianity values love (remember, “The greatest of these is love?”) above all else. Your desires for molding everyone in your twisted version of Christianity are hideous and devoid of anything even close to love.
Yep. Steve knows what 'true christianity' is and everyone else is just deluded, sad and pathetic. Steve can tell us that Satan was modeled after the pagan god Pan, and hell was manufactured by the church. It seems Steve's version of 'true christianity' would let him do everything he wants and somehow call this 'love'.

Steve continues
The hullabaloo by the right wing fringe is that gay marriage will undermine the family and traditional marriage as we know it.

BULL#$@!. If I marry my life partner of nearly five years, I can no more undermine the marriage of either of our very supportive heterosexual neighbors’ marriages, any more than moving in next to them has undermined my relationship.
I always wonder when I hear this sort of comment... are they simply being used and duped? Are they uninformed of the true aims of the reformation of marriage?

Steve and Daniel talk about love. They may even say they love each other. But there is an incredible dearth abundance of evidence at how destructive the homosexual lifestyle is. I don't about you, but when I think of love I think of wanting the true good of the person being loved, not of wanting to do things to harm them.

Update: Fixed incorrect use of the word 'dearth'
Media Dupes or Co-conspirators - Green Helmet Guy
Meryl Yourish has video proof of Green Helmet guy staging photo's for the allegedly uncorruptable media. It is also important to note that the red cross worker helps in this charade.

Yourish also has details of the Palestinian's lying about the cause of death of a young girl in order to blame Israel. The media seems to just lap this stuff up. Where is the balance?
A few days ago, the world press accused Israel of killing a child while going after terrorists. Surprise—the palestinians lied.

Also Thursday, doctors said that a 5-year-old Palestinian girl initially believed to have been killed by an Israeli military strike Wednesday apparently died after sustaining head injuries during a fall from a swing.

The girl suffered a fractured skull and there were no signs of shrapnel, said Kazim Abu Libda, a doctor at Gaza’s Shifa Hospital.

They Just Don't Get It - Raising Kids
The self-esteem chorus (generally the secular humanist influenced people who think if we are just nice enough, everyone will be 'good') continues to go from cluelessness to cluelessness. In latest news, many kids don't compete, but instead everyone wins a trophy (A few 'Christian' kids games do this as well). The main thrust of the article is the rule in many schools that you can't talk about a party unless everyone in the class is invited.
Coach Boon, from Remember the Titan's sums this approach up perfectly
"You think you are helping these kids? You're crippling them".

These kids won't be able to avoid reality when they get out of school, and because they have never learned how to deal with losing, or not being 'included' they will get angry, go postal or crack a mental. Sounds like a lot of people on the left really.

Of course, for those who bow down at the secular humanist, perfect people altar, it doesn't matter how much your efforts create the opposite effect to your goal, the solution is to do even more of the same ludicrousness. From the article
Susan Reel, a mother of two living in Madison, Connecticut, doesn't see a downside to inviting the whole class to a birthday party....
She believes that schools are paying more attention to children's feelings because they understand better today the damage done when a small group of kids is consistently excluded.

"When we went to school, people were bullied. Now we know kids have a much greater instance of suicide and depression when they've been bullied," she says.

Yep....blinded by the cult of self-esteem.
Eugenics Returns
In Texas, you can now buy designer babies. (Gattaca anyone?)

And in the UK, they are going to kill off male embryo's of parents with autism in their history.

On the other end, UK doctors dehydrate eldery people to death (Happens in Australia too) even against their wishes.

When our society decides who is fit enough to live, sooner or later the standards raise and more and more are killed.
Beruit Under Attack has posted the latest photo, apparently from Reuters showing the attacks on Beruit!
Lessons in Bias
I have come across my first biased course doing philosophy at Uni. Somewhat disturbingly, the course is introduction to ethics. The lecturer has made comments like
"...the God the Jews invented" (How does he know that?) and talks about how the bible says we should execute people who eat shellfish.

Even the text we are using is hopelessly biased. If you remember a few years back there was a pro-homosexual lobby email that went around as if it was addressed to Dr Laura. Well this email is actually IN the text book. The copy of the letter in the textbook also has errors...attributing statements in the bible to the wrong verses.

This email also seems to be the source of our lecturers misguided notions about shellfish, as it says
f) A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination (Leviticus 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?
(My textbook has this as Leviticus 10:10). Ignoring the complete lack of knowledge of the whole bible, a major problem is the word used in Leviticus 11:10 that is sometimes translated as abomination is different to the one used in Leviticus 20:13 when dealing with homosexuality. Lev 18:22 & 20:13 uses To-ebah to-ebah (Pronounced to-ay-baw), which means (from strongs) - properly something disgusting (morally), that is, (as noun) an abhorrence; especially idolatry or (concretely) an idol: - abominable (custom, thing), abomination whilst leviticus 11:10 uses sheqets (pronounced sheh-kets) which means (from strongs) - filth, that is, (figuratively and specifically) an idolatrous object: - abominable (-tion).

So, completely different words are used...the email equivocation is pitiful, as is it's failure to mention that according to the bible eating shellfish only makes you unclean, whilst a man lying with a man is punishable by death.

The lessons being
1) Fake email letters are not good sources of knowledge about the bible
2) Lecturers and Text book authors who rely on such letters are, well, lame.
Media Bias on Israel and Lebanon Continues
In followup to a previous post, I continue to notice unusual focuses in news reports. This morning on the radio I was told that Hezbollah killed 12 IDF troops yesterday, whilst the IDF killed 19 civilians. Anything missing? Like how many civilians Hezbollah killed, how many Hezbollah IDF killed and where is the blazes the news media got these figures from.

Of course, EU Referendum continues to be all over 'Green Helmet' and the Qana incident. It seems more and more suspicious, in fact, I am now moving towards certainly viewing the entire incident as a Hezbollah setup. The American thinker tells us that one of the photographers from Qana has been busted for doctoring photographs. Which makes a mockery of the MSM's defense of 'Green helmet' where they try and pretend that professional photographers wouldn't do that sort of thing. Even our own ABC has been gullible enough to print the doctored photo's. They have their beliefs about the conflict and happily accept even the dodgiest 'evidence' that supports their presuppositions.


Make sure you read the full American Thinker article which gives a lot more details of the dodgey things going on.
Beyond Marriage - The Real Agenda
People often complain about Christian's using a slippery slope argument in trying to protect traditional marriage. Well, a document that is now available shows the true goals of the homosexual marriage proponents. At their site 'Beyond Marriage', things become clear that Christian's concerns are not unfounded.
we advocate:

Ø Legal recognition for a wide range of relationships, households and families – regardless of kinship or conjugal status.

Ø Access for all, regardless of marital or citizenship status, to vital government support programs including but not limited to health care, housing, Social Security and pension plans, disaster recovery assistance, unemployment insurance and welfare assistance.

Ø Separation of church and state in all matters, including regulation and recognition of relationships, households and families.

Ø Freedom from state regulation of our sexual lives and gender choices, identities and expression.

Marriage is not the only worthy form of family or relationship, and it should not be legally and economically privileged above all others. A majority of people – whatever their sexual and gender identities – do not live in traditional nuclear families. They stand to gain from alternative forms of household recognition beyond one-size-fits-all marriage. For example:

· Single parent households

· Senior citizens living together and serving as each other’s caregivers (think Golden Girls)

· Blended and extended families

· Children being raised in multiple households or by unmarried parents

· Adult children living with and caring for their parents

· Senior citizens who are the primary caregivers to their grandchildren or other relatives

· Close friends or siblings living in non-conjugal relationships and serving as each other’s primary support and caregivers

· Households in which there is more than one conjugal partner

· Care-giving relationships that provide support to those living with extended illness such as HIV/AIDS.
What is truly ironic is that they seek 'Freedom from state regulation of our sexual lives and gender choices, identities and expression' whilst wanting 'Legal recognition for a wide range of relationships, households and families'.
No Media Bias? Israel and Lebanon Show otherwise
I've been listening to the news lately about the Israel/Lebanon conflict, and one thing I have noted is the lack of balance in how they present the news. There are often statements about Israel attacking 'what they say' were Hezbollah targets. There is always the conditional statement attributing the comment to Israeli statements, as opposed to a verified fact, which is fair enough.

The problem is that this is not used consistently. With the Qana incident, the news constantly reported that Israel strikes killed 60 people, including 30 children. This was always stated as if it was a verified fact, even though there was some doubt as to the cause of the buildings collapse. The news media also never mentioned that the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) also told Qana residents to leave well before the attack, and now it seems that the numbers of those killed was vastly overstated as the Red Cross has confirmed that only 29 people were killed, including 19 children.

This isn't an unbiased approach to the conflict. A large part of this war is a public relations war. It seems clear which side the media is on. Whether they are innocent dupes or wilful participants is unclear, but their bias is obvious.

If you want to see some really suspicious examples of the propaganda war being waged by Hezbollah (or other organisations...maybe even an aid organisation), EU Referendum have a really troubling roundup of suspicious and staged photographs. There are obvious shenanigans going on here as well as clear examples of why some arguments being put forward are plain old lies.
From our stance, what is especially interesting is that sometime after dawn a call went hour to journalists and rescue workers to come to the scene. And come they did, in droves. Says Israel Insider, while Hezbollah and its apologists have been claiming that civilians could not freely flee the scene due to Israeli destruction of bridges and roads, the journalists and rescue teams from nearby Tyre had no problem getting there.
Check out the entire thread and notice that in the picture from 1996, the man is in army fatigues in another obviously staged shot. Considering the fake Jenin massacre, propaganda man, and the 6 or so hours between the bombing and the calling of journalists and rescue workers, the whole situation has the very bad odor of a setup.

Update: The ABC has apologised for the bias in one of its childrens news shows. The show described Hezbollah, whose stated aim to to wipe israel off the Middle east map as a "Palestinian refugee organisation". The show also saidthe UN "wants the two groups to stop fighting but Israel says it'll continue to fight until Hezbollah is destroyed" but did not mention that that Hezbollah would not stop fighting until all Jews are out of Israel.
Clarity in the Confusion
I had a light bulb come on last night when thinking about the current strife in Lebanon. The biggest thing I note is the moral equivalance that many on the loony left seem to have when it comes to Israel and Hezbollah. I have heard them time and time again blame Israel for attacking Lebanon, when it seems pretty obvious that Israel had few alternatives (other than taking their bat and ball and leaving the Middle East). So why do those on the left continue with such an obviously wrong moral equivalance?

The answer I think, is in Utilitarianism. In Utilitarianism, the intention and purpose of an action is irrelevant to whether it is moral or not. It is irrelevant to a utilitarianist why Israel is attacking, it is only the affect that matters. And in that respect, Israel has had a much worse affect than Hezbollah. Hence, the left slam Israel.

What do you think?
Sweden's Nose Dive Continues
A whilst back, I commented on how Sweden and other Scandinavian countries were being held up as role models of socialism for us to follow. At the time, I commented
the crime rate exceeds that of New York City, Violent outdoor muggings continue to increase at an alarming rate (15% last year), drug abuse is out of control with a doubling of the number of overdose deaths in the last 10 years and finally, the incidince of rape is one of the highest in the world.
Verum Serum has some economic data that is a good indication that highly socialist Sweden's economy has lost all the momentum and efficiency gained from it's more capitalist past. Quota a Jonah Nordberg article
Sweden was rich: In 1970 it had the fourth-highest per-capita income in the world, according to OECD statistics. But at this stage the Social Democrats began to radicalize, with coffers filled by big business and heads filled with ideas from an international leftist trend. Social assistance was expanded and the labor market became heavily regulated. Public spending almost doubled between 1960 and 1980, rising from 31 percent to 60 percent of GDP.By 2000, Sweden had fallen to 14th in the OECD’s ranking of per-capita income. If Sweden were a state in the United States, it would now be the fifth poorest.
Other problems include huge absenteism, and lack of effort at work with sick pay consuming 16% of government expenditure.

It is clear, the socialist model breeds laziness and innefficency, not effort and innovation. It may be able to leap briefly off the back of a successful capitalistic economy, but ultimately, the lack of work ethic destroys socialism from the inside. Add in the aging population (The CIA fact book places their fertility rate at 1.66, well below replacement levels) and you have a recipe for societal disaster.

Verum serum also has some links to Magic Stats and an old New York Times article on the same topic which are worth following.

Powered by Blogger Weblog Commenting and Trackback by