28. November 2010 by admin.

Is there a moral balance between liberty and security, or are the two mutually exclusive?

Can the rich ever become so rich, that they strangle the poor?  And what qualifies as “strangling”?

Must a capitalist globalization lead toward an impoverishment of the American working class?

Should the poor have a safety net, and if they do, how much of a net should they have?

Do the rich have an obligation to bolster the wealth of society, aside from providing jobs and infrastructure?

Since the dawn of civilization, man has sought timeless principles to address the concepts of wealth and poverty, justice and equality.  Karl Marx was one of these people. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in natural law and rights, philosophy, politics, cultural/racial, economy | Print | 4 Comments »

5. November 2010 by admin.

Editor’s note: this article is dedicated to my first non-familial fan, Esky.

Why do we belong together?

This should not be an offensive question, yet it cannot seriously be asked in our modern political climate–particularly by conservatives–without expecting angry retribution.  But when John Jay wrote Federalist Paper #2, he did so out of the need to convince the American people that they must cede some of their natural rights for the sake of unity; that, although the states had distinct governments and oftentimes different interests, they would need to sacrifice some of these interests for a greater good.  Jay reasoned that this unity always comes at a price, but he was also able to guarantee that the overwhelming majority of identity and of morality would be preserved despite the institution of an American union.  Indeed, this small price for unity was one of his key arguments in favor of the US Constitution. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in natural law and rights, philosophy, politics, cultural/racial | Print | 1 Comment »

29. October 2010 by admin.

Is it fair to say that communism is only alive in Cuba and colleges?  Recently, with Castro’s decision to publicly deride communism as a failed system, many are starting to believe that communism has finally kicked the bucket.  But consider these principles from The Communist Manifesto, and how a large portion of Americans–maybe more than half–not only strongly support them, but enforce their belief through governmental intervention.  And then ask yourself: is communism really dead?

Nationhood:  “The Communists are further reproached with desiring to abolish countries and nationality.  The working men have no country.  We cannot take from them what they have not got.  Since the proletariat must first of all acquire political supremacy, must rise to be the leading class of the nation, must constitute itself the nation, it is, so far, itself national, though not in the bourgeois sense of the word.” Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy, politics | Print | 1 Comment »

28. October 2010 by admin.

One of the most entertaining videos I’ve ever seen about the principles of capitalism.  Very uncommon wisdom, worth sharing!

Posted in philosophy, economy | Print | No Comments »

26. September 2010 by admin.

One of the major insults the Left enjoys throwing at conservatives is that we’re xenophobic.  Every time the question of amnesty, border control, assimilation, and immigration is raised, it seems the Democrats (and even some high-ranking Republicans) go for the throat, loudly proclaiming that our only reason for serious immigration reform is a deeply-rooted racism, a fear and hatred of other cultures–especially brown and black ones–and a selfishness which keeps us from embracing the poor.  Unfortunately, this packs quite an emotional punch: much of the active American public are quick to take action against conservatives solely based upon this concept.

But before addressing the concept of conservative xenophobia, we need to have a clear understanding of Leftism.  According to Dictionary.com, Leftism is “A descriptive term for liberal, radical, or revolutionary political views, particularly the view that there are unacceptable social inequalities in the present order of society.  Communists and socialists, as well as moderate liberals, come under the term left-wing.”  In totality, and especially in regard to the issue of massive and illegal immigration, Leftists are concerned that the welfare of non-citizens is sub-par, and so Leftists want to allow them access to the wealth and political power of our United States.  It is this redistributionary stance regarding wealth and power that makes the Leftist a Leftist, and differs sharply from a conservative viewpoint on immigration, which values the immigrant solely based upon their contribution to the American dream by becoming a true-blooded American. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in multiculturalism, immigration, philosophy, politics | Print | No Comments »

20. September 2010 by admin.

This week, I had the pleasure of watching Ron “The Hedgehog” Jeremy debate a conservative on MSNBC regarding a new anti-pederasty bill.  Supposedly, the bill intended to create a national registry of porn stars for the purpose of ensuring the legal age of all porn stars, so that nobody could be paid to have sex before they turned 18–like infamous porn star Tracy Lords was.  And yes: suddenly self-righteous Americans were dumb enough to bring the first amendment into the issue, because they actually believe that making porn is speech.

But here’s a novel argument, brought to you by logic.  You may have learned how to do this in eighth grade geometry class. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in sex, philosophy, politics | Print | No Comments »

19. September 2010 by admin.

It’s no secret that most of the secular public enjoys labeling Christians (serious Christians, anyway) as irrational, backward, and dangerous.  Ever since the Enlightenment, humanity has increasingly become its own god, replacing the West’s foundational religion, Christianity, with reason.  Supposedly, this transfer of sanctity is supposed to beget a golden age of unprecedented civility and creativity, unhindered by the archaic bondage of religion, progressing our species into a liberated utopia in which every man would be his own king.  But secular rationalists–meaning, those who rely on mankind’s rationality as the sole source of morality and social advancement–are not being fair: under their own standards of humanist evolution, even the process of secular rationality fails to achieve its own goals. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in multiculturalism, natural law and rights, worldview, philosophy, Theology | Print | 5 Comments »

14. September 2010 by admin.

As it was intended, capitalism was to be the most liberating form of capital exchange in existence.  With the government leaving most forms of coercion out of the buying process (except in the prohibition of vices and other immoral/dangerous transactions), the value of products and labor was to be determined by the people, prices set not by an official with the threat of violence or monopoly of an entire supply, but by free peoples acting with their own money, determining exactly how much something was to be worth, and whether or not prices would have to be lowered or raised.  Supply and demand–the peoples’ wallets and the democratic votes which they theoretically represented–would guide the market into full production and a new kind of populism, one which rewarded those who benefited their customers most, spurning entrepreneurs who failed to live up to standards of public satisfaction. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy | Print | No Comments »

10. September 2010 by admin.

Most of the secular West has recently abandoned the concept of divine instruction, preferring the raw power of the human mind over Judeo-Christian moral code and its inflexible (unalienable, some might even say) system of human rights.  But if we’re at all fair, we’ll recognize that rationalism–meaning, the reliance on mankind’s rationality as the sole source of morality and social advancement–has some serious downsides, even according to its own standards.

First off, rationalism makes the assumption that human beings are eventually going to reach a greatly advanced (or even perfect) system of social and moral evolution, in which the human race will achieve an optimum harmony, which we’ll most likely reach through trial and error.  But this stance assumes too much of humanity: first, that human beings always remember all information, or that if they don’t, they’ll recognize correct information when they see it.  Information is important, because it precedes successful decisions, and its absence from the human thinking process threatens us not only with error, but also with social regression.  But we know that humans aren’t omniscient, which is one of the reasons that history tends to repeat itself.  And besides the fact that human beings aren’t always working with a full toolbox, we can’t assume that humans are going to accept useful information when it’s right in front of them.  After all, you can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make it drink. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy, Theology | Print | 1 Comment »

5. September 2010 by admin.

Most Leftists enjoy thinking of themselves as color-blind philanthropists, hell-bent on erasing bigotry from the public mind, bringing every racial category into economic harmony and uniting every culture in a sort of tolerant, egalitarian utopia.  But is this self-assessment true?

In order to be truly multicultural, one has to have a tolerant approach to all other cultures, since–coming from a postmodern, atheistic perspective–there can be no right or wrong culture, and we all have to live peacefully with one another.  But while most Leftists are increasingly tolerant with foreign cultures, their tendency toward domestic bigotry yields the assumption that multiculturalism is not truly multicultural, but is laden with racially-based tendencies.

For instance, the concept of tolerance first necessitates an “us” and a “them.”  Without this concept of “us and them,” there exists no standard of behavior for tolerance and generosity, since we would be incapable of defining who requires a more understanding and benevolent approach.  After all, when you are aware that someone has a different culture than you do, you should theoretically approach them as though there will be some misunderstandings, and as though you have an increased need to be patient and accepting. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy, politics, cultural/racial | Print | 1 Comment »

30. August 2010 by admin.

Most Americans don’t consider themselves to be sexually cruel people, preferring to describe themselves both sexually liberated and sexually non-discriminatory.  But this highly-esteemed self-assessment falls short when we consider that we would otherwise ban many sexual behaviors, if not for their association with sexuality.  For instance, consider that in each pair of the following equally-offensive scenarios, one behavior is legally permitted and the other prohibited.

1) Breaching a business contract you made with a neighbor, or 2) leaving a woman to whom you legally promised eternal fidelity

1) Accepting money in exchange for a car, taking parts out of it, and then holding the other person to the agreement; or 2) promising sexual faithfulness to a man, and then sleeping with a hundred men around the town Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy | Print | 1 Comment »

29. August 2010 by admin.

The other day, I had the privilege of watching the television while a smarmy Muslim condescendingly downplayed the significance of the 9/11 mosque controversy.  His argument consisted of something along the lines of “Is this what our national dialogue has been reduced to?”  As though almost to say that Americans were too culturally insensitive and bigoted to allow the building of a mosque which would overlook Ground Zero.  And to be sure, most people who support the building of the mosque adopt this pompous position, pretending that if we truly are tolerant and accepting of other cultures, we should be able to accept the building of an Islamic temple over a building ruined by an Islamically-motivated mass-murder.  Surely, they argue, we are beyond squabblings and sensitivities, and we should be able to just accept cohabitation with other cultures.

It is this attitude which precisely highlights the problem with the doctrine of tolerance.  While those who accept a multicultural postmodern perspective agree that acceptance must hypothetically occur amongst all in a racially diverse and religiously pluralistic society, the logical mechanics of tolerance suggest that the direction of tolerance can only exist toward one group in any clash of cultures.  Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in multiculturalism, Islam, immigration, philosophy, cultural/racial | Print | 2 Comments »

28. August 2010 by admin.

Editor’s note: this video was instrumental in explaining the historical foundation for western social liberalism to me, and I highly recommend it to anyone who is interested in being ahead of the thinking curve.  Covers subjects ranging from drug use to homosexual behavior, and why they–according to the foundational principles of genuine social liberalism–should be regulated.  Also: covers double standards of legal protection, explaining how children do not have the same protection from harm which our law affords adults. Don’t miss this!

Posted in philosophy, politics, cultural/racial | Print | No Comments »

15. August 2010 by admin.

If you’ve ever been cornered by a member of the gay mafia, you know that their arguments in defense of gay advocacy aren’t exactly genius.  But unfortunately, while most conservatives deeply know that gay advocacy envelops itself in non-logic, most of us don’t know how to counter effectively.  As such, for all those culture warriors out there who are tired of being beaten over the head with stupid, here are the eight dumbest and most widely accepted arguments of the gay “rights” movement, and the counter-arguments necessary to defeat them.

1) “We just want to be able to get married!”

Bizarrely enough, while most espousing gay advocacy claim that marriage isn’t an option for homosexuals, the truth is that it is.  If marriage is truly what gay advocates claim it is (to them, a declaration of lifetime devotion between two lovers), the miracle of reading shows that states can’t actually prosecute homosexual devotion.  In real life, the movement for gay marriage only exists to force entire states of people who don’t like gay marriage to recognize and support it. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy, politics | Print | 1 Comment »

8. August 2010 by admin.

These days, it’s common to hear someone say that the territory of the United States had been stolen from native Americans and Mexicans, and that illegal immigration–regardless of our opinion of it–is simply a reclamation of lost territory.  Fortunately, this kind of territorial originalism falls apart on its own, usually after anyone begins asking questions about the concept of territory.  For instance:

Who were the original native Americans, and where did they reside?

Were they culturally homogeneous?

Were there conquerors among them, or did every single native American people simply reside in their original location? Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy, Theology, politics | Print | No Comments »

2. August 2010 by admin.

While many would be comfortable defining the act of stealing as taking something which belongs to another person without permission, few today would have a clear answer as to whether the state should have a right to do the same to advance the public good.  Unfortunately, their lack of clarity isn’t irrational: our readiness to embrace a total secularism necessitates that many important concepts about thievery, justice, and liberty be left behind as well.

As such, it’s safe to say that while definitions of governmental thievery vary wildly in modern America, our founding fathers had a remarkably clear idea of what rights were.   We know this because they penned the Declaration of Independence, plainly stating that humans had very defined, theologically-based boundaries within which they were to be self-governed.  As an example: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…” Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy, Theology, politics | Print | 1 Comment »

1. August 2010 by admin.

To a lot of people, the idea of an angry God taking total justice into His own hands doesn’t make a lot of sense.  And generally, the intellectual errors fall into one of either two camps.  They either consider God’s anger toward sin to be slightly pompous and irrational, since we visibly perceive wrongdoings to be against people, and not necessarily against God Himself; or they take an entirely subjective perspective, thinking that the “big” sins we abhor are the only ones that matter, and that God is somehow keeping a tally in which the person overwhelmingly falls on the “good” side since they don’t commit too many big sins.  The problems with both philosophies are immense, however, and show a complete misunderstanding of God’s existence. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy, Theology | Print | No Comments »

29. July 2010 by admin.

It’s not uncommon to see a patriot mistreated over the issue of immigration, usually by people who consider themselves part of the human rights/anti-racism movement. But while “global human rights” sound a little bit larger and more glamorous a struggle than “American rights,” both the glamor and resulting anger toward patriots ensue from a major misunderstanding of the importance of citizenship. 

In a proper republic, citizenship extends rights to those who are legally obligated to make sacrifices. We all get the chance to vote, and usually to receive some sort of economic safety net, and be protected by the police and firefighters, and benefit from the infrastructure created through taxation. We have the right to a trial by jury, the right to keep and use weaponry, the right to pursue a job, and the right to reside within our limited territory. But these rights are only inherited by our citizenry because they were paid for with the blood, sweat, and tears of both our ancestors and us.  Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy, politics, cultural/racial | Print | No Comments »

25. July 2010 by admin.

There are many ways Christians know Jesus is God, but few more powerful than the testimony of His character.

For instance, as human beings we’re more than aware of our dependence upon other things, most notably through consumption. The human machine was built as a dependent object, something not only needing basic necessities such as food, air, and water, but also personal necessities such as the need to be loved and adored, the need to feel safe, and the desire to accumulate resources for survival.  At the base of our chemical, social, and spiritual existence, we’re really just needy beings, and at the very base of our need lies a personal connection: the need to experience our Creator, to know His presence, to have His guidance.

The average person–maybe even every person–can’t really give every second of the day to someone else without taking something, whether it be time, resources, or appreciation, so when we see people who impoverish themselves in order to give, many people are struck with a sense of admiration; as though, despite what we may all wish about humanity, perhaps charitable behaviors in the extreme were unnatural.  Or to put it another way, we all understand there’s no such thing as true human altruism.  And to a degree, we’re right. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy, Theology | Print | No Comments »

24. July 2010 by admin.

It’s an understatement to say that I’ve undergone some major changes over the past few years.  In 2001, I had just gone from being a fat and nerdy Christian homeschooler to being a drug-addled ultra-liberal party-boy, shedding my video games for the pursuit of women and a reckless lifestyle.  But not long after that, after college, after all the glamor of hedonism began to wear off and I began to feel deep hangover within my soul, I began to slowly drift back into conservatism.  And after that, Christianity.  And boy, did I ever swing back hard.

I swung so far to the right, actually, that my college “friends” we pretty worried.  After the overwhelming majority of them left me, I was stuck with my new self, a radically different person, since the one who’d lived a short while ago was for the most part dead.  But nowadays, even after explaining who I was to many mainstream Christian conservatives who know me (and the Leftists who seem to think that as a straight-laced conservative, I have no clue about Noam Chomsky, or drugs, or homosexuals), I seem to get a uniform explanation about why I swung into radical, unapologetic Christian conservatism.  Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy | Print | No Comments »

18. July 2010 by admin.

One of the most important necessities of true justice is that we apply it equally.  But while most on planet earth would readily agree that granting two people different verdicts for the same crime would be corruption, trends in the United States show us that our society is moving away from an equality-based law-system to one which considers the status of people instead of their actions.

As examples, a couple of major stories have caught the eye of Leftist “human rights” organizations lately. The first one, involving a police officer and two jaywalkers, resulted in an unruly pedestrian attacking the officer, which resulted in the assailant being punched in the face. The second story involved a Mexican smuggler being shot after he and his friends were throwing rocks at our border patrol agents. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy, cultural/racial | Print | 1 Comment »

10. July 2010 by admin.

Editor’s note: this article first appeared on American Thinker, and can be found here

I can still remember, sometime back in my hipster days a couple of years ago, near the dawn of my own conservatism, entering a bar which used to be my favorite and having something tweak my brain in the strangest way.  There I was, with my long hair, a beard, pants tighter than my own girlfriend’s, and a bright blue members only jacket, entering the well-known hipster bar (at the time, anyway) known as The Cha-Cha Lounge and seeing a sign which read something along the lines of “We will not allow any racism, sexism, or bigotry, so stay out if you like these.”  Like I said, not an exact quote, but the sign had been there for years, and it’s probably still there.

The thing that struck me so powerfully about the sign wasn’t that they were specifically prohibiting certain kinds of offensive judgments, however, but the fact that this bar–this bastion of sleazy, Leftist, Seattle hipsterism–was prohibiting racial and cultural judgment, even though it was widely known to house some of the most judgmental Seattleites the city could afford.  I’d find out just how judgmental they were when I returned after getting a cheap “civilian” haircut and some mainstream American Eagle jeans, and suddenly I could hear people whom I didn’t know telling others, right in front of me, how they’d just been to some terrible “bro” bar filled with guys like me.  So thanks for fighting racism, guys.  I’m totally drenched in love. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy, politics | Print | No Comments »

15. June 2010 by admin.

Earlier this week, I was surprised to discover that the Mormon church was using its money to buy a billion dollar mall in Salt Lake City.  Shockingly, the New York Times reports “When completed in 2012, it will encompass 900,000 square feet of retailing, including an outdoor pedestrian shopping mall capped by 115 apartments; 1.6 million square feet of office space in eight buildings; a grocery store; and five residential towers with about 600 condominiums.”  Yee-ikes.

My first reaction was one of outrage, my belief being that this project utilizes funds from its parishioners, who should be guaranteed proper stewardship of church property (while Deseret News reports that the funds came from Property Reserve Inc, the church’s real estate arm).  After all, when you pay 10% of your wages for the purpose of helping your particular ministry, you want it to fund something… holy.   But this is beside the point, since I’m not even a Mormon, which means I can’t hold them to Christian administrative standards, although those standards will be questioned later.  While there are certainly moral issues involved here, this massive expenditure raises serious questions about the separation of church, business, and state, the practical nature of philanthropy, and the nature of conservative values. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy, Theology, politics | Print | No Comments »

13. June 2010 by admin.

Here in the Pacific Northwest, many people say that drug abuse is a medical problem, which leads them to oppose the criminalization of drug use.  Their stances against criminalization can vary anywhere from fining people for possession (”high” standards), to providing users with needles and giving the addicts places to inject themselves (really really low standards).  Either way, their argument is the same: they say the physical act of taking drugs doesn’t directly harm another person, and drug addicts have a medical problem relating to urges.

To be fair, those supporting de-criminalization are correct: when a person has an overwhelming urge to take a substance, they’re dealing with a set of chemical circumstances and urges that the general public doesn’t, and those urges are caused by the use of drugs. But legalizers forget a few very important things about drug addiction; most notably that once a substance is consumed, the substance alters the user’s set of urges to something very different than what they had before, while at the same time lessening inhibitions. This should lead us to wonder: do we have to excuse those urges, too?  After all, if the urge to take a drug is only a medical problem, then the urges following drug abuse must also be medical, since the only difference between a sober person and a deranged addict is the chemical imbalance resulting from drug use. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy, politics | Print | 1 Comment »

30. May 2010 by admin.

“The LORD abhors dishonest scales,
but accurate weights are his delight.” -Proverbs 11:1

“Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but judge your neighbor fairly.” -Leviticus 19:15

Americans tend to take a pretty strong stance against cruel and unusual punishment, having been a colony governed by barbaric England.   But it’s interesting to note that while our system of justice prohibits reckless physical revenge, those suffering at the hands of greedy lawyers can be subject to whatever economic penalty an empathetic judge or jury desires.

For instance, a woman filed a discrimination lawsuit against NASCAR, worth $225 million, and she got her money.  Lawyers can also prowl nursing homes looking for clients with vague stories about “abuse.”  Allbusiness.com reports that lawyers in Florida were able to find clients in nursing homes after an active search, and took home half of their clients’ individual $750,000 payouts.  A young woman’s family once sued Honda for $65 million after she drank herself into a stupor, backed her car into a lake, and drowned because she couldn’t unbuckle her seatbelt.  The jury awarded the money, although an appeals court (luckily) threw the case out later. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy, politics | Print | 1 Comment »

14. May 2010 by admin.

Recently,  Nancy “Bibles” Pelosi told the Catholic clergy that amnesty legislation is “a manifestation of our living the Gospels.”   Now, to be fair, Nancy isn’t alone: many Christians today pursue a type of social justice that can result if someone takes Christ’s words out of context, and due to either laziness or outright disregard refuses to look at the big picture.  So what does the Bible actually say about immigration?

As Christians, all must admit that Pelosi is right about a couple of things.  First off, Jesus commanded us to love our neighbors as we love ourselves, and that means treating them with generosity.  But while Jesus absolutely commanded us to love our neighbors as ourselves, and spoke positively about individuals belonging to unpopular minority groups to show that His teachings apply to everyone, Pelosi and liberal Christians forget that the Gospels aren’t Christ’s first message, and that Christ had already made specific statements about how to engage in government.  After all, His own personal style of government was given through Moses in the Old Testament. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy, cultural/racial | Print | 2 Comments »

24. April 2010 by admin.

Editor’s note: Although I wrote this article, it borrows so heavily from the work of others that I can’t claim credit for it.  For a list of resources, videos, and organizations responsible for this and similar work, please see the end of the article. Thanks!

Almost every American today is aware that biological beings are constructed and maintained by using the language of DNA.  But how on earth did DNA come to exist in the first place? 

Let us consider for a moment that the theory of human evolution is true, and that–for some unknown reason–lightning hit a pool of primordial goo billions of years ago, leading some small portion of protein-saturated matter into surviving life.  In order for us to exist today, that living organism must have reproduced.  And if it needed to reproduce, it had to have some form of DNA/RNA.  Without DNA/RNA, the life form would be completely incapable of replication.

Now, what exactly are DNA and RNA? They are one-dimensional programming codes for three-dimensional beings.  By translating these one-dimensional codes, a living being is able to build–piece by piece, in sequential order–another living, functional organism.  And as one might imagine, without the ability to process DNA properly by copying it and reading it properly (a very complex process done by a series of complex machines), the next organism which it would have reproduced could not have been built. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy, Theology | Print | No Comments »

18. April 2010 by admin.

Where have all the real men gone?

For the past 50 years or so, real manhood has been disappearing, and the effects couldn’t be more clear: men are dropping out of school, leaving their families behind, and generally turning into the abominable video-game playing man-child.  The last twenty years have seen the metrosexual community gain a foothold in American society, the overtly-feminine readers of Men’s Health magazine focusing their lives not on inner strength, but on gaining abs or worse–shaving their chests more neatly.  And as the homosexual advocacy movement seeks to erase any and all boundaries for proper gender norms, turning what could have been Joe Dimaggios and John Waynes into Regis Philbins and Perez Hiltons, we have to wonder: can we please go back to having real men again? Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy, cultural/racial | Print | 3 Comments »

1. April 2010 by admin.

Seems strange to say, but the truth is that America could use a little more discrimination and failure.  

Now, before getting too far along, I should clarify something: by “discrimination” I do not mean racial prejudice, but rather the idea that the people of the United States must prefer some moral codes and behavioral trends over others. 

You see, the genius of America is that instead of having a short-sighted and often distanced leadership engaging in an oftentimes untrustworthy and corrupt discrimination, the economy, the neighborhood, and the government are intended to function with a kind of democratic discrimination.  This is something which an increasingly larger population of Americans seems to disagree about, but despite what some may say, the very value of discrimination is based upon three things which almost every sensible person agrees about: different societies with different worldviews will produce different behavioral results, the results will not be equally preferable, and people must necessarily be allowed to have preferences on those behavioral results.  It is completely impossible for a free country–or any country–to exist without these principles. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy | Print | 1 Comment »

28. March 2010 by admin.

Editor’s note: this Facebook discussion with a very intelligent evolutionist resulted after I created my sarcastic Facebook group (”Evolution affects my worldview on everything except racism and human rights”).  I felt that the conversation was too important to disregard, especially since it highlights critical arguments and topics regarding both evolution, intelligent design, and how racism is impacted by either philosophy.  I hope you enjoy this, and if  you decide to be persuaded by my side of the argument, feel free to join my group :)

Me: Just started my new group: “Evolution affects my worldview on everything except racism and human rights.”  Obviously I’m a Jesus guy, so don’t take this page seriously. Join it if you realize that evolution and human rights/racial equality are completely incompatible, and you’d like to make fun.  [Quote from group] “We also do not believe in social Darwinism, because every evolved monkey deserves a chance to feel good about themselves and have an education before they die a meaningless death on a rock which is flying in outer space. As such, we enjoy demonizing the rich for not sharing the wealth they accrued through superior adaption.”

Brad:  I guess for an evangelical Christian such as yourself, it would make a lot of sense to derive your worldview from your understanding of nature. Now, I’m not saying this approach is wrong, but without a good epistemic reason for doing so, it is not necessary. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy, Theology | Print | 1 Comment »