Gender is a Biological Fact, Not an “Identity”

The topic of “gender identity” is a hugely controversial issue right now being pushed by the politically correct. If you even think about questioning it you’re automatically seen as insensitive and…

Source: Gender is a Biological Fact, Not an “Identity”

What’s in a Word

One of mine and my wife’s biggest grievances is the redefinition or misuse of words and phrases.

Whether these redefinitions or misusage is intentional or accidental is aside from the point.  The fact of the matter is that meaning and understanding are not possible when the terms used for meaning and understanding are constantly shifting.

2 + 2 always equals 4, unless you redefine 2 to mean 2.1.  It’s not really that different after all, but 2.1 + 2.1 doesn’t equal 4.  It equals 4.2.  It’s a rounding error really.  Get over it.  Just because words aren’t mathematical absolutes doesn’t alter the process and endgame of all this redefining.

Today I read this:

“Medicare-for-all is civilization. Campaign finance reform is civilization. Funding education is civilization. Progressive taxation is civilization. Dialing back the use of war is civilization”

What is civilization?

According to Merriam-Webster civilization is defined as follows:   a relatively high level of cultural and technological development;   the stage of cultural development at which writing and the keeping of written records is attained   the culture characteristic of a particular time or place

  1. 1a :  a relatively high level of cultural and technological development;specifically :  the stage of cultural development at which writing and the keeping of written records is attainedb :  the culture characteristic of a particular time or place

  2. 2:  the process of becoming civilized

  3. 3a :  refinement of thought, manners, or tasteb :  a situation of urban comfort

Oxford says:

The stage of human social development and organization that is considered most advanced:they equated the railroad with progress and civilization

The process by which a society or place reaches an advanced stage of social development and organization.

The society, culture, and way of life of a particular area:the great books of Western civilization the early civilizations of Mesopotamia and Egypt

The comfort and convenience of modern life, regarded as available only in towns and cities:the fur traders moved further and further from civilization

Writers, philosophers, lawyers, and cultural icons for millenia have used word redefinition to bring about cultural shifts and change opinions.

Redefinition doesn’t change the original meaning of a word or term, it just changes how you use it and how others hear or read it.  Culturally everyone usually is on the same page, but the problem really begins to rear it’s head when cultural schisms happen.

Conservatives believe one thing.  Liberals another.

Urbanites speak one way and countryfolk another.

Everyone speaks the same language, but with diverging philosophies and understandings of the world at large.  Words become very important to maintain a common

When the words we use are redefined or misused, that disconnect becomes increasingly more difficult to bridge because the meanings that both sides of that divide also differ.

Let’s go back to the civilization definition that I read today.  That definition is not what you find in the dictionary, but it is the understanding of the liberal left in America today.  The problem arises in that I, as a libertarian-leaning conservative, do not agree with the statement in whole or in part.

Medicare-for-all is civilization – forcing me to pay for someone else’s poor health decisions throughout life or lack of motivation to find an economically viable job in order to afford their own cost of care is slavery by taxation.  You, via the government, are forcing me to work and use the money I earn from that work to pay for someone else who chooses not to work or chose to destroy their body by smoking, banging, drugging, or drinking their life away.  Simply no.  That isn’t civilization.  That is barbarism, not unlike Vikings raiding prosperous farming communities because they didn’t want to work as hard and could “take” rather than “make.”  

Campaign finance reform is civilization – Really?  Legislating how someone spends their money (and yes, corporations are made up of people) is the opposite of civilization.  It is no different from the King “permitting” someone to petition the king knowing full well that that permission can be withdrawn ex post facto (after the fact) and the subject being fully subservient of the king and his life and speech are not free.

Funding education is civilization – I’ll admit that this one I can at least somewhat understand, but education though takes many forms.  Apprenticeships gave us some of the most brilliant thinkers in the world and many modern conveniences.  Higher education today has brought us runaway student loan debt and educational outcomes that aren’t reliant on the number of dollars spent per student.  Further, the question of where that funding comes from and who controls it is the real crux of this issue?  Is it really the best education if it comes from the top down (Common Core) and all students are to be taught to the exact same standards without deviation for talent in one field or another?  

Progressive taxation is civilization. Is it?  Punishing one group in order to reward the other?  How is this different from feudal lords requiring a percentage of the serfs crops for “protection”?  Using law to punish high wage earners is no different than economic slavery.  Progressive taxation is the exact opposite of due process when you really think about it.  All are not equal in the eyes of the law if progressive taxation is the law of the land because then some are “more” equal than others.  True equality would be a tax burden not divided proportionately, but rather levied as a percentage of income equal regardless of how much you make (the millionaire and the pensioner alike pay 10% of their income – a flat tax).

Dialing back the use of war is civilization.  This summary statement is just too broad to agree or disagree with.  Is war overused?  Yes.  Are some wars necessary?  Yes.  Can there be diplomatic peace between one nation and another that has sworn the destruction of the first?  Not a lasting one because there is no middle ground between the two.   This is no different morally than a woman telling her raper to only rape her halfway so they can go their separate ways.  It’s not going to work that way… it never does.  The only recourse for the “victim” nation or woman is to shoot their attacker in the face – to exert the ultimate deterrent force through the best, most effective, and most economic means at their disposal.  To do any less is to tell the offender that their life or nation is superior to one’s own.

So the statement made completely added to what is known as civilization.  Is civilization not dependent on steadfast standards, definitions, laws, and justice?

Is not the veneer of civilization threatened when the laws are twisted to allow what was once illegal?

Is not the veneer of civilization threatened when justice is denied or unequal based on who you are, what you are worth, or who you know?

You can’t redefine words, because the underlying truths remain unchanged.  Redefining the words alone does not make anything true, rather it denies the truth much like Orwell’s opus 1984 states

War is peace.

Freedom is slavery.

Ignorance is strength.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A Gun Reality

Absolutely fantastic point by point breakdown of why arms are so quintessential not only to freedom and liberty, but why they are essential from a logical perspective as well.

Riofaith's Blog

A gun reality  (an unedited work puke)

I have watched with great interest the response of our elected officials and those known as the “liberal left” in response to the recent terrorist attacks in France and the United States.

Gun control and more infringement of our Second amendment rights is their consistent demand.

I can appreciate their right to opinion and belief.  I would never attack someone for their closely held beliefs, no matter how poorly thought out or wrong I believe them to be.

Here are a few issues I believe need deeper thought and self-assessment:

  1. Average police response times in our country is 10 minutes.
    1. A lot of bad stuff can happen in 10 minutes
    2. If someone is bursting into your home, church, workplace, business, etc., you have seconds to react and respond – not minutes.
    3. What is the best use for those precious seconds?
      1. Fumbling with your…

View original post 1,275 more words

27 Ways to Be a Modern Man (According to the NY Times)

The New York Times published an article detailing what they think makes a “modern” man.  Most of their “definitions” are benign, and some I even agree with (such as the bit about not cutting fat off your steak and eating the entire thing).  One in particular struck me…

25. The modern man has no use for a gun. He doesn’t own one, and he never will.

Wow.  That isn’t just a philosophical bungle, it is flat out a denial of man’s role as the defender of his family, and of the physically weak.  Luke 22:36 expressly records Jesus Christ instructing his closest disciples to sell their cloak, their most prized personal possession and their identification of status in Jewish society, and purchase a sword.  With Christ there are always multiple interpretations of what He said, but one cannot ignore the very literal words spoken in order to read into a statement what you want to see.  Sell your clothes… buy a weapon.  Not a spear, or a bow… a sword.  The sword was the equivalent of the modern firearm.

Jesus Christ instructed his followers to arm themselves so that they could defend themselves and each other.  There are other deeper meanings as well, but let’s just stick with the literal words spoken because it seems that the New York Times just said that Jesus was wrong because according to them, a real manly man doesn’t need to have the ability to defend themselves or someone else.  Considering the source I shouldn’t be surprised.  Don’t mind that, if not for someone with a [gatling] gun, that joke of a paper would have been burned to the ground by a riotous mob back in the 19th century.

I argue that the NYT is flat wrong and here is why…

“The Gun Is Civilization” By Maj. L. Caudill, USMC (Ret)

Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that’s it.

In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.

When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force.

The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gang banger, and a single guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.
There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we’d be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a [armed] mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger’s potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat – it has no validity when most of a mugger’s potential marks are armed.

People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that’s the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

Then there’s the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser.

People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don’t constitute lethal force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level.

The gun is the only weapon that’s as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weight lifter. It simply wouldn’t work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn’t both lethal and easily employable.

When I carry a gun, I don’t do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I’m looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don’t carry it because I’m afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn’t limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation… And that’s why carrying a gun is a civilized act.

By Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret.)

Fields of Grief and Joy

Years ago I stood in a quiet Pennsylvania field.  It was as beautiful that day as it was today, and as it was fourteen years ago.  I had my oldest son with me there.  He was just 3 years old and didn’t know why just being there was terribly difficult.  He didn’t understand the long granite path into a field that seemingly held nothing.  I didn’t tell him that day that free men and women died in that field not that long ago in the most recent shots of a clash of civilizations because he didn’t yet have the maturity to understand.  Funny thing is that the joy of taking a walk with his dad was infectious.

There was sadness and grief there, but there was also joy.  Joy in the bright sunshine and perfectly cloudless blue sky.  Joy in the quiet solitude of the field and the trees beyond.  Joy in the eyes of a child and the new place.

I have said before that I have learned so much more about God after becoming a father.  That day God used my son to teach me a lesson that I knew intellectually, but had never really thought through.

I knew the moment that I first saw the towers burning that Americans were dying at the hands of a mortal enemy.  I knew that moment that my life and everyone’s lives would change forever.  I was sad for my country and grieved the loss of life.  That grief turned to anger, as it did for many.

What I didn’t know was that God was setting me up for that day years later in that field – so that I might finally understand this:

You have turned for me my mourning into dancing;
    you have loosed my sackcloth
    and clothed me with gladness,
that my glory may sing your praise and not be silent.
    O Lord my God, I will give thanks to you forever!

Psalm 30:11-12

Bernie Sanders Calls for Sweeping Gun Ban That Would Outlaw All Self-Defense Firearms

Source: Bernie Sanders Calls for Sweeping Gun Ban That Would Outlaw All Self-Defense Firearms

The 2nd Amendment codified a pre-existent right to self-defense, born of our right to exist (all men possess the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness). If you (as a government agent, or individually) elect to deny any of those rights, I have an intrinsic right that precedes the written Constitution to defend those rights with every tool at my disposal up to and including lethal force.

The 2nd Amendment is not about hunting.  It’s not about my right to keep a 12-gauge single shot in the closet.  It is about my right to say when you ignore my vote, ignore the rule of law, ignore the rulings of the jury and push and push and push until my life or liberty is threatened, that I still have the right to vote… with a rifle, a shotgun, a handgun, or whatever other force of arms I can muster to myself.  So go ahead, make your proclamations Bernie and voice your opinion, something tells me that when push comes to shove, the standard bearers of the palladium of liberty will meet you and your kind and you are deathly afraid of that fact.

Planned Parenthood

Outrage.  Vile.  Evil.  The terrible racist roots of Planned Parenthood aside (the extermination of African American babies within America – don’t take my word for it – go look up Margaret Sanger), the videos being released just keep showing the absolute depravity of this organization.

The subjects of the video are cold, heartless, callous individuals.  They joke about the deaths of babies.  They negotiate prices for parts of these corpses – nevermind that selling those parts (for profit or not) is wildly illegal.  The depths of these videos puts the top-to-bottom depravity of PP on full display.

As a Christian, a Christ follower, I am astonished at the absolute callousness of these videos.  I am shocked that such behavior is not only tolerated within PP, but also finds defenders on the outside.  I am shocked, but then I am also reminded that all sin and fall short of the glory and righteousness of God.  Evil resides in every human heart.  While the cry for justice is on our tongues, the prayer of redemption and grace for the men and women in these videos must be also.

I don’t know why, but the Book of Micah seems applicable in light of these terrible revelations.

The godly has perished from the earth,
    and there is no one upright among mankind;
they all lie in wait for blood,
    and each hunts the other with a net.
Their hands are on what is evil, to do it well;
    the prince and the judge ask for a bribe,
and the great man utters the evil desire of his soul;
    thus they weave it together.
The best of them is like a brier,
    the most upright of them a thorn hedge.
The day of your watchmen, of your punishment, has come;
    now their confusion is at hand.
Put no trust in a neighbor;
    have no confidence in a friend;
guard the doors of your mouth
    from her who lies in your arms;
for the son treats the father with contempt,
    the daughter rises up against her mother,
the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law;
    a man’s enemies are the men of his own house.
But as for me, I will look to the Lord;
    I will wait for the God of my salvation;
    my God will hear me.

Micah 7:2-7

End the Insanity (Gun Free Zones)

Edmund, Oklahoma. Stockton, California. Killeen, Texas. Iowa City, Iowa. Olivehurst, California. San Francisco, California. Garden City, New York. Jonesboro, Arkansas. Columbine, Colorado. Fort Worth, Texas. Honolulu, Hawaii. Santee, California. Tucson, Arizona. Meridian, Mississippi. Red Lake Indian Reservation, Minnesota. Nickel Mines, Pennsylvania. Blacksburg, Virginia. Omaha, Nebraska. Dekalb, Illinois. Binghamton, New York. Fort Hood, Texas. Huntsville, Alabama. Seal Beach, California. Oakland, California.  Aurora, Colorado.  Oak Creek, Wisconsin.  Newtown, Connecticut. Santa Monica, California. Washington, D.C. Fort Hood, Texas (again). Isla Vista, California. Charleston, South Carolina. Chattanooga, Tennessee.

I’m sure you’ve heard of these places… they are all cities that played host to a mass shooting, an active shooter, or a Jihadi attack.  Hundreds dead and wounded when you sum them up.

Causation is hard to predict for each of these as motives differ as wildly as criminal insanity to Islamic extremism with a smattering of perceived revenge motives mixed in too.  There is one correlation that MUST be drawn from the proliferation of mass shootings.

In each case above, the lawful carrying of firearms by law abiding citizens were banned in such locations either by federal or state law (universities, schools, churches, military installations), or by prohibition by business owners (the ubiquitous “No Guns” sign).

There is no denying the simple truth that the overwhelming majority of these shootings are perpetrated specifically in locations where immediate armed self-defense is not available to the true first responders – the victims.

Any property owner or lawmaker that fails to account for this nearly universal correlating factor is being criminally negligent by prohibiting a fundamental human right – that of self-defense.

“Coexist” street artist beaten to a pulp by Muslims

“Coexist” street artist beaten to a pulp by Muslims.

I’m not surprised in the least.  You can only coexist when you view all members of society as equal in all respects.  Jews and Christians believe that God created man and woman and each carries the spark of the Creator.  Christians further believe that Christ sacrificially died for so that all could come to the Father.

Islam though shares no similarity with these two other stalwart monotheistic religions.  There is built in to the Islamic system a fundamental inequality.

Qur’an (4:11) – (Inheritance) “The male shall have the equal of the portion of two females” (see also verse 4:176).  In Islam, sexism is mathematically established.

Qur’an (5:6)“And if ye are unclean, purify yourselves. And if ye are sick or on a journey, or one of you cometh from the closet, or ye have had contact with women, and ye find not water, then go to clean, high ground and rub your faces and your hands with some of it”  Men are to rub dirt on their hands if there is no water to purify them following casual contact with a woman (such as shaking hands).

Qur’an (4:3) – (Wife-to-husband ratio) “Marry women of your choice, Two or three or four”  Inequality by numbers.

This all implies fundamental inequality.  In systems of inequality, violence against those “lesser” than you can easily be justified morally, ethically, and legally (under Shariah law).

So color me surprised that the artist got himself beat up by the very people he wants everyone else to “coexist” with.

 

 

History Channel’s Sons of Liberty Miniseries

If you haven’t watched this series, I would highly recommend you give it a chance.  I will warn that it takes some dramatic license and condenses the time frame in order to present a tight, three 2-hour miniseries rather than a more drawn out season-long series centered on the men who became known as the Sons of Liberty.

The series is focused on the events leading up to the arrival of General Gates of the British and the formal Declaration of Independence.  Many of the men that would go on to become our nation’s Founding Fathers have prominent roles in this miniseries.  For all of the series’ faults, it does an excellent job conveying the tone and the overarching themes and threats of the time.  It showed the British soldiers more as an occupying army than anything else, but it also showed the patriots as drunks, thugs, and rioters.

During the lead up to the Boston Massacre on screen, you can understand the motivations of either side.  The British, outnumbered and in the midst of an unruly crowd on the verge of violence, had justification in defending themselves.  The Colonists were likewise shocked when they did just that despite their own provocations just moments before.

Where the series has it’s faults are in the details.  Phrases and quotes were spoken by the wrong person, and the series falls short of providing the full discourse and philosophical thoughts that the HBO John Adams’ series so perfectly nailed.  The History Channel’s production though succeeded in showing the events in total and how each side kept escalating the situation until violence between the two was inevitable.

What I want to mention though is that the miniseries did one amazing thing.  It showed that the rebellious Sons of Liberty would have been rounded up and hanged pretty soon after General Gates’ arrival if not for their willingness to fight and their ability to fight on equal terms of the British regulars who marched to Lexington and Concord.  The British had numbers and experience.  The farmers, millers, and minutemen assembled on Lexington Green and at Concord Bridge had neither, but they had weapons with which to oppose and turn away the British Army that day.

What is so often forgotten in the present age is how the colonists were as well armed as the British regulars with privately held muskets, pioneer long rifles, and cannons.  Yes, cannons.  The American colonists were able to defend their right to free speech, their right to assemble, and to be secure in their papers and property, etc etc etc BECAUSE they had arms.  They had weapons, modern military weapons including weapons of such destruction as heavy cannons, and they were equal to those of their oppressors, not weakened civilian grade versions or likenesses.

At one point George Washington at the Contintental Congress was asked what the Massachusetts men could do with General Gage pressing martial law in Boston.  He said to resist.  I don’t know if Ole George ever gave that advice, but if he did, he had to have known that the only means of resistance when your oppressor means to bring arms to bear against you is to take arms up in defense and for that one must OWN, KEEP, and HAVE those arms and ammunition at your immediate disposal.

That is the foundation principle behind the Second Amendment to the American Constitution.

Thank you History Channel for really highlighting that, whether you meant to do so or not, because without those privately held arms, Samuel Adams, John Hancock, Joseph Warren, and the others would be only footnotes in history as traitors to the Crown and the troubles in Boston would have been quashed by the full might of the British Empire before they became full blown rebellion.

LadyRaven's Whisky In A Jar - OH!

Coffee? Tea? Whisky! - Aspirin anyone?

Stately McDaniel Manor

Culture, Politics, Firearms, Education, Literature, Philosophy, Music, And Other Musings

High Heels and Handguns

This princess is armed- The prince can't always be there to rescue you

Sheeple: People unable to think for themselves

Here to help educate the Sheeple before the slaughter

Fellowship of the Minds

"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act."

Reality Check

American Patriot's Reality Check

The Firewall

Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it

Freedom Is Just Another Word...

Rules?? What Are rules? I don't need no stinking rules!!!

Evil of indifference

"Now, we must all fear evil men. But there is another kind of evil which we must fear most, and that is the indifference of good men. " from Boondock Saints

The Radio Patriot

Because I have so many words...

Eatgrueldog

Where misinformation stops and you are force fed the truth III

Reality Of Christ

Christian, End Time, and Conspiracy News!

DAYLIGHT DISINFECTANT

DAN SANDINI'S NEWS OUTSIDE THE MAINSTREAM

WR2A: The Line In The Sand

We Are the Second Amendment, and you cannot stop that.

The Longwood Institute

A site dedicated to the appreciation of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness along with the responsibilities these God-given unalienable rights invoke.

Ten Smiths Blog

What does the Declaration of Independence really say?

Short Little Rebel

Because loving Christ is the most rebellious thing you can do

Deaconmatson's Blog

observations from America

America: Going Full Retard...

Word: They are acting. They are creating. They are framing their reality around you. And we … we bark at the end of our leashes. Our ambition for freedumb is at the end of our leash.