Sunday, April 20, 2014

Annual Accusations of Easter Pagan Origins

Every year it's the same thing - we get bombarded with Facebook memes or other snippets that provide us with supposedly well-researched claims that Easter is actually a pre-Christian holiday. Although some are due to Leftists or atheists, most of these have their origins in the old anti-Catholic works such as Alexander Hislop's The Two Babylons, Ralph Woodrow's Babylon Mystery Religion. Both of these are (in the first case- deliberately) poorly researched and paint the picture of anything that is specifically Catholic having its origins in the old middle eastern religions. Woodrow relied heavily on Hislop's book, and years later he admitted in a thoroughly manly manner that he was too trusting and did not but should have made the effort to check on Hislop's credibility.

We normally get two claims -both of which claim to be the truth but contradict each other:

- that Easter comes from the Anglo-Saxon goddess Ēostre

-that Easter comes from the Babylonian Ishtar

I won't go into details as it would take too long and there are many good sources on these subjects that are readily accessible. I have read many sources through the years, and I hold that the best explanation for the English Easter and German Ostern  is that it was a reference to the season of Spring that in time was applied to the day that Christians use to mark Christ's resurrection -accidental, but not a problem. Suffice to say that Christianity did in fact incorporate or otherwise use some pre-Christian practices, such as weddings rings, the actual dating of Christmas, green branches in homes, etc. None of these things, however, take anything away from the means for which they are used by Christians for symbolic or practical purposes. We are not Muslims, so we do not and should not excise anything from our pre-Christian past that does no harm to our beliefs. If that sad attitude had existed before the 19th century, we would not have works such as Beowulf that were only preserved by the labor of monks.

In trying to change the name of Easter to - for example, Resurrection Day (but curiously keeping the Catholic dating of that day)  radical Evangelicals and Fundamentalists willfully ignore the most basic facts.

In most nations that have been Christian for the longest time, Easter is called Passover:

"....Greek “Pascha” (Pâques in French, Pasqua in Italian, Páscoa in Portuguese, Pascua in Spanish), which comes from the Hebrew “Pesah”, meaning ‘Passover’....." Basque Ondo izan Bazko garaian
Breton Pask Seder
Danish God påske
Faroese Gleðilig páskir
Finnish Hyvää Pääsiäistä / Iloista pääsiäistä"

"Càisg From Old Irish Cásc, from ecclesiastical Latin pascha, from Ancient Greek πάσχα (paskha), from Aramaic פסחא (pasḥa)"

In short, if anyone wants to petition for changing the name of Easter in English or German, he should try for Passover rather than bullying people into saying Resurrection Day. 

-From the The Blaze link at top:
"Did Christians steal Easter and Jesus’ resurrection from pagan traditions and co-opt them as their own? This is the claim that is sometimes made by secularists in an attempt to dismiss Christianity as a myth.

But Dr. Candida Moss, a historian and a professor of New Testament and early Christianity at the University of Notre Dame, believes these accusations generally lack merit.

“Among the rash of sensationalist stories we can expect through the season, the annual ‘Easter was stolen from the pagans’ refrain has sprouted again just in time for Holy Week,” Moss wrote in a recent op-ed for CNN. “Don’t believe the hype.”

In the same article, Moss went on to explain that one of the biggest pieces of misinformation that is often spread on the Internet is that Easter stems from a celebration of an ancient Near Eastern fertility goddess named Ishtar — an allegation she flatly denied.

“This idea is grounded in the shared concept of new life and similar-sounding words Easter/Ishtar. There’s no linguistic connection, however,” she wrote. “Ishtar is Akkadian and Easter is likely to be Anglo-Saxon.”......"

-previous posts : 

Evangelicals Erase Term "Easter"

The term Resurrection Day, which Evangelical and Fundamentalist Christians (Those who do not prohibit the celebration of the Resurrection of Christ altogether) has been pushed with a proud determination for some time now. Having a horror of any name or practice that has its roots in pre-Christian traditions*, they do their utmost to excise any an all remnants from not only their world, but those of others.


Easter is a sort of accidental name for the celebration of Christ's resurrection. In Romance languages, the respective word for Passover is used. Most linguists assert that the name came from the Germanic goddess Eostre, but some claim that it derives from the word "East", signifying a focus in the direction of Jerusalem.

Regardless of the actual choice of name for this day, the dating** and its actual day (Sunday), like all Christian holidays, are the work of the Catholic Church. Most Eastern Christians utilize the older Julian calendars. Evangelicals and Fundamentalists will I guess grudgingly accept the Catholic dating of Easter, the Church's decision on what books are in the New Testament, the doctrines of the Trinity (Excepting "Oneness" Churches) and Jesus' divinity and humanity, but a name for a holiday that has come down through the ages just will not do.

**The dating is certainly a bit confusing, but the Church eventually came to the conclusion that the resurrection should be marked on a Sunday.

While Catholics, Orthodox, and Mainline Protestants largely or entirely gave up on refusing to recognize each other as Christians and deriding their differing beliefs and practices, Evangelicals and Fundamentalists (EF's) are, in the words of Al Pacino's character in Scent of a Woman" ".....just gettin' warmed up!'" Having learned little about the latter two from their Pastors, E/F's take the fight to Catholics on a regular basis. Armed with a quite distorted picture of what the Catholic Church actually teaches and seemingly always on the alert for a chance to break in with a diatribe, EF's almost never pass up an opportunity to take a poke at their Catholic friends, family members, and coworkers. Interestingly, former Catholics tend to comprise a disproportional amount of EF's who walk around with apparently purposely distorted understandings of Catholic teachings (Former Catholics tend to stick with the rule of "never confuse me with the facts").

EF's have for about twenty years been promoting the change to switch the name Resurrection Day for Easter. It is almost embarrassing to see and hear them going out of their way to wish non-EF's a Happy Resurrection Day when Happy Easter clearly says the same thing, utilizes the universally recognized English word for the day, hurts no one, and allows no room for an absolutely unnecessary debate when we are in the middle of a holiday that should bring us together. Being fully aware that non-E/F Christians utilize the term Easter, their use of Resurrection Day smacks of an aggressive and bullying tactic. What is worse, EF's employ the new term in a manner that is clearly designed to suggest that it is they who are using the proper term and that all others are in the wrong.

Evangelicals and Fundamentalist Christians, despite the quite recent (In the course of Christian history) and significant changes to Christian doctrine and thought  that they have adopted, have nevertheless made tremendous efforts to present themselves not as a new Christian group, but as the Christian group. All others are dismissed as pseudo-Christian or less than that. For some Fundamentalist bodies, the work of railing against and printing literature assailing the Catholic Church comes perilously lose to matching the work of preaching itself.

As with Muslims, who adhere to a religion that is presented not as a new revelation given to Mohammed but as the religion from the beginning of time, Evangelical and Fundamentalists  continually struggle with the nagging reality that early Christianity had, in beliefs and practice,  immeasurably more in common with Catholicism, Orthodoxy, and much of Mainline Christianity than with E/F Christianity.

As Muslims labor to paint Noah, Abraham, Solomon, and Jesus as Muslims in heart, practice, and mind, so too do E/F Christians work to portray Jesus, the Apostles, and early Christians as classical-era Christians that taught and worshiped as, say, American Baptists. We are told or expected to believe that these early Christians had professions of faith that consisted of "accepting Jesus Christ and my personal Lord and Savior", altar calls, "witnessing" in which a laundry list of one's pre-Christian life is almost bragged about in public, "dedicating" as opposed to baptizing infants and  young children, believing in a forgiveness of sins "past, present and future" which locks a believer into salvation from the moment he accepts Jesus, and even the roughly two-hundred year-old belief in the pre-millennial and pre-tribulational Rapture. E/F Christians would have us believe that the early Christians would be as horrified as they are at the thought of Sacraments in any form, a belief in the intercession of the Saints, an apostolic succession, the use of images for any purpose, and most of all the sacrificial nature of the Christian liturgy.

All these things were kind of OK for E/F Christians to claim  when they and their communities could remain isolated from historical works that would refute their claims. Once this arrangement began to fall apart, however, E/F Christians were faced with a dilemma; what to do with our inability to demonstrate the existence of E/F Christianity in the early Church?

Aside from a few E/F writers that had no scruples about falsifying history outright (St. Patrick was a Baptist by Rev. John Summerfield Wimbish, and The Noble Army of Heretics by Bill Jackson, most E/F Christians have dropped the whole idea of wishing their beliefs and practices into the past and concentrated instead on usurping Christianity in the here and now.

The  E/F assault on Christianity had been relentless. Although, as I have fairly noted previously, E/F Christians defend much of Christianity such as the the doctrines of the Trinity and Christ, the family, and speak out against the threats of Leftism and Islam, their strategic switch to co-opting all of Christianity has led to a war of words in which E/F Christians work tirelessly to force their chosen definitions onto all who profess Christianity.

Christians who take part in celebrations such as Halloween that contain even the slightest residual element of pre-Christian practices are condemned and routinely mocked by E/F Christians. Please can we admit for once that maybe just a few old pagans did some nice things?

E/F Christians expend substantial efforts to pretend that practices such as abstemption from meat during Lent are something other than they are. A Catholic sits quietly at this lunch at work, an E/F fixes his gaze on the papist's meal, and the game of deception begins. "What are you eating?" - "Tuna sandwich". "Why Tuna?" - "It's Lent." "You know, that won't save you". The E/F obviously knows fully well that the Catholic nor his Church never believed that a good act or omission earns salvation***, and that the 'binding as loosing" authority of the Church includes designating religious practices but he still steers the conversation (while the guy is just trying to eat) into a picture that both eater and accusers know don't exist. The Catholic never gets a chance to explain as the E/F is too busy describing a scenario that he knows is not true.

***Salvation by works and without faith has been condemned by the Church throughout her history, especially at the Council of Trent, which was the body that dealt with the age of the Reformation.

Allowing a little imagination in the mind of a child is essentially verboten to E/F Christians. Refusing to allow that Santa Claus has anything to do with the Christian Bishop Nicholas of Myra, they deny their children a chance to have that spark of wonderful anticipation and imagination. Gone too are completely innocent stories about dragons and other mythical creatures; these all being seen as opening doors to the occultic world.

As I have noted in previous posts, EF's place no value on cultural aspects of Western societies that predate Christianity. This is unfortunate as there is in Western Civilization a wealth of literature and history that would be edifying for anyone regardless of religious preference. Even Christian monks were astute enough, for example, to record most of the saga of Beowulf with little Christian-friendly editing. No sense of the history of one's nation or people is a threat to one's faith if that faith is sincere. Steeped in the Bible, EF's grow up, in one way, just as the Left wants them, fully ignorant of their cultural past. This is dangerous in many ways. Possessing no basic understanding of the culture that bred his society, the Evangelical is vulnerable when confronted with the propaganda of the Left whenever a crisis of faith or moment of doubt arises.

Christians, Jews and others who hold our cultural inheritance dear have far too many real threats to be engaged on word-play with each other. Evangelicals and Fundamentalists need to be made aware of this. A deliberately placed "Happy Resurrection Day" should be tactfully answered with "Happy Easter to you too." A gentle reminder that the English word for the day of the Lord's resurrection is Easter would not hurt either.

Fundamentalists to be Mortified By 1,300 Year-Old Anglo-Saxon Girl's Grave

The grave of a 16 year-old Anglo-Saxon girl, most likely from an aristocratic/noble family, was recently found in Cambridgeshire. The time of her death was a fascinating time in history, as although the people were becoming Christians, many practices and traditions from the old Germanic religion were still is use. As I have noted in previous posts, such actions are anathema to the vast majority of Evangelical and Fundamentalist Christians. Allowing for any practice from a people's pre-Christian days will cause them to recoil in horror. Theirs is a mindset that to some extent mirrors that of Muslims, who not only refuse to acknowledge anything good about a pre-Islamic past, but will do all they can to suppress anyone else's appreciation for it, and make every effort to erase symbols, monuments, and harmless practices that go back before the days of their religion. That is why Evangelicals and Fundamentalists often express such an aversion to things such as Halloween, the sight of mistletoe, or kid's stories about dragons. Although I would never claim that a Evangelical/Fundamentalist-run society would even approach the level of oppression of an Islamic one, the result of a removal of pre-Christian imagery, legends, and traditions, would be much the same. Even examples of true virtue and bravery of pre-Christian Europeans are not only  ignored but rejected outright for any consideration at all by them.

When a kid from that world then gets told in a Leftist-run school that he (European descent in US) has no culture and that Muslims and others do, he is likely to believe his teachers.

To get back to the subject of the girl, the state to which the English/British state has fallen caused the thought noted below to cross my mind:

I feel terrible in saying this, but she must have been recently rolling over in that grave at the current state of the very nation that her people were building at the time.

Friday, April 18, 2014

Not-So-Good Friday Services

I have noted in several previous posts that I am a lifelong Catholic who has no tolerance for radical traditionalists but still sees that the Catholic Church has been steadily walking away from much of what make her "Catholic".

We read one account after another of Pope Francis making calls for what is in effect greater governmental control over the property/wealth of the individual. By his statements and firings of key leaders, he has also made it clear that the Church will largely abandon her traditional and obligatory role of protecting morality in the face of a West that is "going to hell in a handbasket".

One of the more disturbing manifestations of this ugly trend occurs in local parishes. There priests have taken to arbitrarily dispensing of time-honored and essentially hallowed traditions, many of which are crucial to the formation of the mindset that one would easily recognize as Catholic.

For children, simple yet effective practices such as Ash Wednesday, Palm Sunday, making sacrifices for Lent, and Good Friday services imprint on their minds good memories while concurrently teaching them important aspects of Faith. For adults, these have the added advantage of helping those who are weighed down with the stresses of work and periods of difficulty by reminding them that God's promise is a permanent one. They also have been the catalyst for fallen-away Catholics or those who have experienced crises in Faith to return to full communion with the Church.

These are precisely what are willfully being grossly abused by parish priests who seem to be enthusiastic about excising any and all symbolic practices that have long served to fuel both one's actual Faith and his imagination - the mental picture of what it means to be a son or daughter of the Church.

Today, it is not a rarity to walk into Church on Palm Sunday and become confused at being unable to see a table of palm fronds. After asking were then one may be able to obtain a palm - an object that (in the liturgy) is to be either carried in procession or held by the faithful for the annual blessing, the layperson is told "we give those out after mass". -sort of like a weekly church bulletin as you step outside to begin the rest of your day.

Corners have been cut too on Ash Wednesday. Not only does one no longer hear the words that remind him of those heard by Ezekiel  "remember you are dust and to dust you shall return" but is only exhorted "to turn away from sin and believe in the Gospel", but the member may not even have someone (today often Laypersons or nuns) to apply the ashes to his forehead; a bowl of ashes are on a table for self-service - I came here for this? I could have burned my own palms from last year and done the same thing at home.

About twelve years ago, I experienced a very ugly demonstration of this attitude. After the annoying revelation that came from discovering that our new parish (which incidentally was designed in the kumbaya-type semicircular pattern) had their own bizarre and sloppy means of distributing palms, I witnessed something that was akin to a punch in the stomach. The Passion reading, which is the only Gospel selection (different ones are used for Palm Sunday and Good Friday -for example Good Friday always features that of John) that is done in narrative format, was simply butchered.

The narrative - put put it as succinctly as possible, has the priest speaking the words of Jesus, a lector narrating, another lector speaking the words of characters other than Jesus, and the faithful speaking the words of a group or the crowd. Both young and old benefit greatly from this means of participation - particularly when we are all reminded that it we whose sins were the reason that the mob was to be persuaded by those who collaborated with the Romans to cry out that Jesus should be crucified. This yearly experience leaves an indelible imprint in the mind of a believer.

The narrative in this case was treated as something that must be hurried along - the short, portly priest took all of the speaking parts; it was a disgrace. There I was with my daughter, who was ten at the time and looked forward to the passion reading after having been raised doing so on Palm Sunday. After doing some mental math, I determined that if I left at that moment I could arrive for a mass at the church in my original hometown (which started at later time) to participate in an actual reading of the Lord's Passion. We left and did (just barely) in fact arrive in time for a decently-held Passion reading.

For the next thirteen years, things for the most part went well at the parish in which I had received all of my sacraments except for baptism and marriage.

That is, until today.

Our parish has a fairly large Vietnamese community - one that has enough members to have masses or services in their own language. Two years ago, the parish changed Good Friday service (not a mass on that day) to an earlier time so that the Vietnamese could have their service at a reasonable hour. That arrangement worked well enough; three hours is more than enough time to complete one service to make room for another.

This year, the schedule was the same. 5:00 PM for the Celebration of the Lord's Passion and 8:00 PM for the Vietnamese service - no reason to think that anything would be amiss.

After a hurriedly-done entrance by the priests and deacon (which was from the sacristy rather than  from the front of the church), the service began in an otherwise normal fashion. No longer with young ones in tow myself, I was happy to see a number of young families with their little ones. Once the moment for the Passion reading arrived, the priest made an announcement - and repeated the same, that the reading would not be done in the form of a narrative. I felt so badly for the children who were missing a truly precious monument in their lives; one that for which many no doubt felt great anticipation. He then read off the words as quickly as had the priest many years ago (note both of whom had enough people with them to help and more than a sufficient amount of time). I watched one parishioner after another place their missals down as following the text was no longer as necessary as they had expected.

The reading was a disgrace. It was rushed and left no room at all for the experience - the feeling, of being a part of a key part of the history of mankind - when the God Incarnate endured betrayal, suffered so greatly, and gave his life to undo the sin or our father and mother in the Garden of Eden.

Somehow, I was able to remain standing in place until the priests finished with his ugly act. Once it was over, I decided that I wanted no part of remaining at this service which apparently meant so little for him. I walked outside  and texted my son, who had wanted to go but had an engagement that he needed to attend, and told him that he didn't miss anything. I then returned home and resolved to prepare the words that I will need when I confront the priest and let him know what he did for the sake of brevity.

I will report back - hopefully within a week, with the results.

Thursday, April 17, 2014

Increase in Rapes, Abductions of Coptic Girls in Egypt

The life of a Christian in Egypt is a nightmare. If you are a girl or young woman, you are fair game. For a family, every morning offers the increasing likelihood that it will be the last day that you may see your daughter or sister.

To draw a parallel to Holy Thursday, every previous evening meal is a potential Last Supper.

When a Christian girl in abducted, she is raped, sometimes with the assistance of female members of the Muslim household, by the male to whom the victim has been given. She is then forcefully converted to Islam, taken down to the municipal offices, and registered as a Muslim. Her family now has little or no recourse to effect her return home.

While we in the US occupy ourselves with protesting against a Catholic school that  fires a teacher for contracting a homosexual marriage, Christians in Egypt experience true persecution and oppression.

John McCain no doubt would have no problem if all of Syria went this way - his daughters are safe here in the US.

"Young Christian women are facing a greater risk of being kidnapped by extremists, tortured, and even forced to convert to Islam since the Arab Spring ended in 2011.

This year already has seen a spike in the incidents, according to a report by the non-profit advocacy group International Christian Concern. It has been estimated by the ICC and other watchdog groups in the region that there have been 500 reported cases of young women being attacked by Muslim men since 2011, but unreported cases could send the figure much higher.

The girls are often assaulted, raped, kidnapped, forced to change their faith and sometimes killed, the ICC said.Making matter worse, nothing is being done by local authorities to prevent it in provinces across Egypt, according to officials from both the ICC and the Clarion Project, a US-based non-profit think tank and advocacy group.

“Not only are they turning a blind eye, they are often compliant,” Issac Six, a spokesman for the ICC told, citing one incident in which a father was assaulted by an officer for asking too many questions about efforts to have his abducted daughter returned.

“It’s pervasive; police at the local level are not stopping the abductions. There needs to be more pressure from the top,” he added. “We have seen cases before where we’ve seen victims returned when the police put pressure on the kidnappers. We know it’s possible, unfortunately, the police are often complacent.”...........

One reported incident occurred in the city of Luxor as recently as February when 15-year-old Amira Hafez Wahib attended a morning prayer service at a local church, according to the study from ICC. Amira had asked her mother if she could go to a store near the church to buy an item. Her mother let her go but urged her to hurry right back.

But Amira never returned and is still missing.

The next day, Amira’s family went to the local police to report she had vanished.

“We received promises from the police here that they would arrest the accused and return Amira to her family, but there is not any positive step from them till now,” Rafla Zekry Rafla, an attorney handling the case, was quoted as saying.

The girl’s family believes that they know who her kidnapper is-- a Muslim man, named Yasser Mahmoud, a soldier who was at one time assigned to protect their church. Mahmoud had tried to abduct Amira a few months earlier at a Christian store near the church where she worked.

The family immediately tracked down where the man lived with his family. Relatives told Amira’s parents that they had not heard or seen from Mahmoud since the same day that their daughter disappeared.

Another recent incident occurred on March 9 when a young girl was abducted in front of her school. The family went to the local police for help in locating her.

A few days later, the father was returning home when he was approached by two masked men on a motorcycle. He was stopped by the pair, who attempted to convince him to give up the search for his daughter.

He was told to “just forget her” and had his life threatened. The two men said they would also abduct his other daughters if he continued his search.

Things got worse for the family, whose identities have not been made public due to safety concerns, when the father went to the Civil Status Authority to get a copy of her birth certificate only to discover that her name had been changed and her religion had been changed to Islam............

“There’s a huge conflict between the Islamist and Christian populations in Egypt right now,” Ryan Mauro, a National Security Analyst with the Clarion Project, said to “The Coptic Christians are supporting General el-Sisi because of the military’s efforts to take the Muslim Brotherhood out of power.”

“The radical Islamists are angry. So they are retaliating,” he added.

The Brotherhood is not helping matters,” Mauro said. “They incite the people to carry out these aggressive acts, but when the people carry them out, they denounce it.”

“They know full well what they are doing.”

Wednesday, April 16, 2014

Pro-Hillary Dems Emply Soviet Iconography Featuring Their Choice

They no longer feel the need to candy-coat their intentions. Even if it was meant as a joke to parody what her opponents may say, the point is clear - Marxsim is to be celebrated and hiding it behind a veil of democracy is not necessary.

Westerners have become as well-trained as circus animals and now place their hopes in the individual who has been presented to them as their savior and caretaker.

"Last week, we noted that in a profile of White House Press Secretary Jay Carney’s wife, Claire Shipman, in Washingtonian MOM magazine, Soviet-era propaganda adorned the walls of the family’s home.

Today, a photo has been making the rounds, courtesy of the Ready for Hillary Super PAC’s Facebook page, of Hillary Clinton supporters standing in front of a piece of Communist-style, propaganda-esque art. The person depicted in the piece? Ms. Clinton herself......"

-From previous posts:
At one time, the fact that the City of Milwaukee had boasted (sic) a Socialist mayor was a surprise to many.

Today, it is no longer a big deal, and that is why the People must realize that we can no longer share the same nation with the enemies of Humanity. . 

Residents of the City of New York, a metropolis that has long been considered the prime example of the success of the market economy, recently elected Bill de Blasio as mayor. The new chief elected officer of NYC spent his honeymoon in Cuba and for years was an enthusiastic supporter of the Sandinistas. de Blasio ran as a Democrat, but given the fact that this party is now driven by the Left, his actual party label means nothing. One can imagine what political party, if any such entity still exists, would be a suitable home for Harry Truman or John F. Kennedy.

Residents of Seattle, not to be outdone by their East Coast urban comrades, elected Kshama Sawant - who eschews even the formality of using a traditional party label that  may cause some to let their guard down, to the city council. Sawant is a Socialist.

So gone to Hell is the Democratic Party of the United States and the individuals who cast their votes for its candidates that de Blasio could, knowing that it would not hurt his candidacy (a key point of this post), state the following when he spoke to a group of real estate developers -prior to the actual election.

"Business leaders in the city are scratching their heads over recent remarks by Mayor-elect Bill de Blasio.

Describing how he plans to govern once he takes office next year, the mayor-elect declared flatly that he doesn’t believe in the free-market system.......

Everything you heard about me is true. . . I am not a free-marketeer. . . I believe in the heavy hand of government,” de Blasio stated matter-of-factly during an hour-long presentation to some of the city’s biggest real-estate developers.

The meeting occurred several weeks before the election with de Blasio way ahead in the polls and New York’s business elite hoping and praying he wasn’t as much of a leftist as he said he was on the campaign trail.

Now that de Blasio’s been elected mayor with a resounding 73 percent of the vote, his comments have become a hot topic for business people trying to digest what life will be like with Comrade Bill in charge....."

Sawant too operates with the correct assumption that to speak like a Marxist is no longer even a minor hindrance to one who is seeking office. Indeed in many cases or regions in the nation, it may even help:

"......Sawant, 41, is on leave from her post as a Seattle Central Community College professor. She ran her campaign blasting income inequality and supported raising the minimum wage to $15 for all workers in the city.

I think we have shown the strongest skeptics that the Socialist label is not a bad one for a grassroots campaign to succeed,” Sawant told the Associated Press this week.

At a rally for slain teen Trayvon Martin in Seattle over the summer, Sawant linked so-called “stand your ground” laws to the capitalist system that she said was “at the root” of racism in America.

“Our task is far bigger than the repeal of a single law. We need to recognize what is at the root of racism, this hatred and fear of black people, of people of color, of poor people,” Sawant said. “The root cause of these blatantly unjust laws is the capitalist system itself … this system does not work for us. Racism is necessary for this oppressive system to exist. It prevents ordinary people from coming together of different races and turning their fire towards Wall Street, corporate politicians and the ruling elite as a whole … the bankers, the billionaires, the capitalists — they are the criminals of our society. They are amounting unimaginable wealth by exploiting the rest of us and maintaining their power by dividing us.”

We must reject this divided rule and build an independent united working class movement that will put on trial American racism, sexism, class and gender exploitation, and capitalism itself,” she said."

There you have it

One mayoral candidate of a city of well over 8,000,000 people, an entity that historians will note was once synonymous with the success of the free market, can state flat-out that he does not favor the market economy as a concept and add that he believes in the the chilling "heavy hand of government" - and win the election by a landslide. 

A new member of the city council of another once-great city can dive right into presenting capitalism as the source of evil in a nation that, while practicing that economic system, made more people free, well-fed housed, and clothed, as well as liberated more souls than any other nation on the history of the world. She goes on to claim that the evil capitalism has a natural outcome."Racism" (which never means anything but subjugating whites to the whims of everyone else) as the second enemy that must be taken head-on. She knows that she can speak in this manner  with no appreciable fallout for her hateful remarks.

As I have asked before in previous posts;

At what point will enough be enough for you?.

I see nothing more than two utterly different nations that are diametrically opposed to each other. They will not compromise. They will make more copies of themselves in the Halls of Academia (and with the Common Core in primary schools). They will work tirelessly to bring as many like-minded individuals from nations that have no history of our system of government; nations in which concepts that gave birth to the system that made us great is foreign.

In the Decline of the West, Oswald Spengler correctly noted that the mind of the Socialist is not motivated by compassion, but control - the fierce determination to force his will onto all"

"In spite of its foreground appearances ethical socialism is not a system of compassion, humanity, peace, and kindly care, but one of will-to-power. Any other reading of it is illusory.....The Socialist wants to organize and recast it [the world] in its form and substance, to fill it with his own spirit (emphasis his)...the Socialist commands. He would have the whole world take the shape he desires...."

The American People are at a crossroads, but they fear having to admit this to themselves. Roughly half of the minds in our nation are ruined*. The sooner that we begin to take steps to effect a divorce from the Leftist-run regions of the nation, the better. Each year that goes by while we ignore this unpleasant reality brings tens of thousands of new Leftists, and that is just the university-indoctrinated. The longer that we wait, the harder it will be to effect a break. The longer that we ignore the handwriting on the wall** that all can read clearly, the more of the nation that will have already been lost.
..........Keep your eyes and ears open for the language of the Occupy people.The Left has increasingly relied on utilization of the word "Democracy" to justify their intentions to abolish property rights, redistribute wealth, etc. It is a sort of hypnotic game that they are employing; keep throwing out the word Democracy when discussing things that have absolutely nothing to do with that political system until the people begin to equate your agenda with it. It seems to be one of their more recent ploys. Like many of the tactics that the Left commonly uses today, this falls within the Plan B genre; having been unable to convince Americans to sign on to their regressive agenda, they redefine a political system to mean what they want society to be. The idea is to make Marxism easier to swallow if they can wrap it up in a familiar-sounding package. As I have noted previously, Plan B also includes acts of Demagoguery such as importing massive amounts of new citizens from nations that have no tradition of Democratic or Republican governments as these types are more likely to embrace totalitarianism, whether it be its hard or soft version.

I watched this happen repeatedly in the pseudo-documentary of Mr. self-loather himself, Michael More - Capitalism, a Love Story. Especially toward the end of the movie, Mr. Moore mentioned Democracy several times, but each time it was thrown out, it was done so in its Leftist-degraded form. In the movie, Moore equated a political process (Democracy) with the demands of a portion of the population for more wealth. While at times Mr. Moore seemed to be willing to discuss things that are unacceptable to all of us, such as corporate crime and bailouts, he would continually bring these back around into his agenda of capitalism being "an evil system" and the concept of the government taking over the "means of production".

Moore even featured a movie clip of FDR that was so shocking that I absolutely thought that it was faked. In the clip, FDR outlines proposed new amendments. These all fell into the Leftist picture. The most frightening one of all was the "right of every family to a home." What FDR was advocating was that, by virtue of the successful performance of the procreative act, an individual would be entitled to a home.While we breathed a sigh of relief that FDR's demise got these proposed amendments out of the way at the time, Moore speaks of our dodging of this Leftist bullet as an unfortunate event.

What was readily apparent is that Mr. Moore, like the Occupy gentleman quoted at top, has no desire to respect Democracy but would rather apply his own sick meaning to it, tell you that that is about abolishing capitalism as opposed to protecting property, and hope that you either buy into his drivel or feel timid about possibly having to defend what Democracy actually is.

Instead of utilizing the term in the manner of its actual meaning, they mean to take the state of that system when it has reached its final form of decay, when a welfare state has broken the middle classes completely, leaving only the provided-for and the wealthy, and pretend to be under the impression that this pathetic period is what Democracy is supposed to be.

Since the inception of the LBJ-induced, Liberal-maintained, and now Obama-enforced welfare system, large blocs of the US population have effectively become part of a permanent sub-class of voters who will consistently vote for the candidate or party that promises the most financial support for little or no effort other than voting for those who are determined to keep them in bondage. Once such a standard of living becomes ingrained in the culture, the enslaved become comfortable with their fetters as long as they have to do nothing but periodically show up at the polls to cast a vote.

As this bloc grows in size, it morphs into a powerful tool for those who desire to bring everyone else under this umbrella of dysfunctional but powerful control. Since those who comprise the bloc will vote for no other candidate than their handlers, other parties too feel the need to court them. The result is a steady decline of work ethic, the migration of, as the rewards for staying out of it become perceived to outweigh the necessary efforts to do so, those of the lower and middle classes into that bloc, and the final result of what is essentially is a dreary Marxist society. If the chief executive is the same type as the current Occupant of the White House, a Fascist/Oligarchic mixture will likely be the product. With his advocating of a Civilian Security Force and his tolerance for the biggest of big businesses that are willing to cozy up to him, the latter is just as likely and possibly even more dangerous.

Since Democracy is the victim of false advertising, some clarifications of that system are in order:
Athenian Citizenship: The idea and practice of citizenship was first thoroughly explored by the Greeks in the 'polis' or city-state. The 'polis' was local or municipal in character as well as national. It was 'not only a unit of government: it was also a club' (Barker, 1960, p. 21). Aristotle, who included influential chapters on citizenship in Politics, thought ideally citizens needed to 'know each other's character' to best exercise their duties. In the 'polis' Aristotle (1960, p. 109) considered that 'a citizen is a man who enjoys the right of sharing in deliberative or judicial office (for any period, fixed or unfixed)'. Aristotle characterised man as a zoon politikon, or political being, which has sometimes been interpreted to mean that man is a 'political animal'. Political activity was regarded as an essential part of human behaviour and that a man's full potential and personality can not be achieved without participation in the 'polis'. Citizenship offered tangible benefits such as freedom, the security to pursue 'well-being' and the opportunity to win honour by guiding and even defending the community. Citizens who neglected their civic duties in the 'polis' by not attending assemblies, voting, serving on juries and giving military service were labelled as idions, the term from which the modern word idiot is derived. Aristotle indicated that a good citizen 'must possess the knowledge and the capacity requisite for ruling as well as being ruled' (Aristotle, 1960, p. 105). The opportunity to participate in the 'polis' did not extend to all persons. Women, children, together with resident foreigners, some labourers and slaves were not citizens and were excluded from the 'privileges of rule'. In fact Aristotle was at pains to distinguish between true citizens and those who could not justly claim the title. Aristotle was even concerned that certain working men, such as mechanics, did not have the aptitude or leisure to display true excellence in citizenship qualities. Immaturity and infirmity were two further barriers to the status of citizenship. [Italics added] By law any citizen who failed to take sides in key decisions would lose his membership in the 'polis'. Citizenship was about responsibilities which had to be met rather than about rights which could be claimed.

Now that the system is summarized, we can look at an idea of who could be a citizen and vote:

Citizens, Metics, and Slaves:

"The population of Athens was made up of three distinct groups: citizens, or men who were of Athenian birth and free-born; metics, or foreigners who lived in Athens but who had no citizenship rights, and slaves

It is estimated that in 431 B.C. there were roughly 50,000 adult male citizens, 25,000 metics, and 100,000 slaves in Athens.

Metics were non-Athenians who generally found the cosmopolitan city of Athens more appealing than their own homelands. Metics could not own property, which was crippling in Athenian society, but they could hold jobs for property owners and they did have to pay a tax."

There you have it, Democracy had nothing to do with a willy-nilly system of letting everyone vote and by extension be able collude to endorse candidates who will promise the most free stuff. 50,000 voters out of the total of 175,000 hardly constitutes the mass bloc of voters who will clamor for handouts as advanced by the Left. As Alexis de Tocqueville stated inDemocracy in America, Athenian Democracy was an aristocratic (His word) system in which those who could prove their Athenian birth (That refers to one's ancestors, not simply being born in Athens), that they owned property, and that they were not not slaves, could vote and hold office. Slavery was unfortunately a part of Athenian society, but we must not that these slaves were overwhelmingly ethnic whites. The free-born who could prove that their families were part of Athens from the early days and who owned property were considered to be responsible enough to have a say in their government. Note also that there was no voting for individual candidates.** They had a system in which candidates from the Demes (Subdivisions of the city) for the Council of 500 and other offices were selected by lot, thereby making it very hard to promise free stuff in order to garner votes.

Speaking of Toqueville, it would be a good idea to give just a taste of what American Democracy was about  in the early part of the 19th century, over two thousand years after the greatest days of Athens:

Speaking of the state of revolution and referring to how classes are affected by the spectre of such in Democracy in America Chapter XXI: Why Great Revolutions Will Become More Rare-

' Not only are the men of democracies not naturally desirous of revolutions, but they are afraid of them. All revolutions more or less threaten the tenure of property: but most of those who live in democratic countries are possessed of property- not only are they possessed of property, but the live in the condition of men who set the greatest store upon their property."

Tocqueville then briefly treats both the rich, who will likely always have financial resources left over after a revolution, and the poor, who care more for what they do not have than what they do and goes on to discuss the ensuing plight of the middle class.

"But the men who have a competency, alike removed from opulence and from penury, attach an enormous value to their possessions. As they are are still almost within the reach of poverty, they see its privations near at hand, and dread them; between poverty and themselves there is nothing but a scanty fortune, upon which they immediately fix their apprehensions and their hopes. Every day increases the interest they take in it, by the constant acres which it occasions; and they are the more attached to it by their continual exertions to increase the amount. The notion of surrendering the smallest part of it is insupportable to them, and they consider its total loss as the worst of misfortunes..........In a revolution the owners of personal property have more to fear than all others [rich and poor]; for on one hand their property is often easy to seize and on the other it may totaly disppear at any moment"

So, we have ancient Athenian Democracy, which was aristocratic, and we have American Democracy, where private property is also valued by the owner, who would fear its seizure in the event of a revolution.
So, if someone can come up with an explanation of how Mr. Moore, and of course, Mr. Graeber up top, can determine that Democracy has anything to do with governmental/popular seizures of property in any way, please let me know.

**Getting back to Athens, the following is the citation for how candidates for council and office were selected"

Selection by lot (κλήρωσις) involved bronze tablets (χαλκοῦς) (Dem. 39.10). It is not clear whether all 500 Councilors were chosen at once, in a central location, or whether they were chosen in the various demes. Demosthenesrefers to “the city selecting [Councilors — CWB] by lot” ( πόλις κληροῖ) (Dem. 39.10), which would suggest a centrally managed process. But Aristotle says this:

Read about the evidence
Aristotle (Aristot. Ath. Pol.).

“The officials elected by lot were formerly those elected from the whole tribe together with the Nine Archons and those now elected in the Temple of Theseus who used to be divided among the demes; but since the demes began to sell their offices, the latter also are elected by lot from the whole tribe, excepting members of the Council and Guards; these they entrust to the demes” (Aristot. Ath. Pol. 62.1).

This might mean that selection for the Council took place in the individual demes. It is more likely to mean that selection took place centrally, in the Theseum, the Temple ofTheseus, and that the 500 places on the Council were divided up not only into 50 for each of the ten tribes, but further within each tribe, so that each deme had a certain number of Councilors on the Council.

This site has an absolute wealth of information on Athenian society and government:

The above link can tell you much more than I can. For now it is enough to assert that what the Left pretends to be Democracy is not that at all. The site also has Aristotle's treatise on the various forms of Democracy.

A Democratic system must, if it is going to survive, have some restrictions on who is allowed to vote. It can be a simple property or income tax qualification ( My personal favorites), a proof that one is receiving no government assistance whatsoever, or a past military service requirement. One friend of mine held that anyone who receives any government-cut check, including public employees (He was one of those) should not be allowed to vote as his interests would be in question. A reasonable age requirement that provides for an presumption of some life or work experience is also needed.

What we do know is this - a Democracy that extends the vote to all, regardless of whether or not he or she effectively and tangibly contributes to the society (Or at least does not receive benefits for free) or can demonstrate a past record of appreciable service to it, cannot survive. After a period in which the doling out of free benefits becomes ingrained, the system gets bogged down and begins its inexorable march towards tyranny. This is the "Democracy" that is being celebrated by the Left. What they call Democracy is a system that, far from protecting the rights of citizens, slowly impoverishes and enslaves them while destroying their senses of identity and cultural vigor.

Tuesday, April 15, 2014

Glenn Beck Misrepresents Desperate Americans and Christian Teachings

I have no doubt that Glenn Beck is a nice man and that he is sincere in his reasons for advising people against violence. I too hold that the insurrectionist-type violence is a sure means of alienating other patriots was well as a sure bet for one who wants to lose.

I have asserted on numerous posts that The People need to find a way to unite with the aim of ending our steady slide towards a Socialist dystopia. This needs to be a coalition of religious and secular-minded people who want no part of - not only the economic disaster and consequent enslavement to which we are being led, but also the radical agendas of tyrannical atheists, gays, feminists, anti-gun, Fundamentalist Christians (such as Westboro Baptists), and so-called Liberal Catholics and Mainline Protestants who are Christian in name only.

The movement must be political and not reliant on physical force.

My problem with Glenn Beck is that he so abhors the thought of any possible armed action (even as a last resort) that he seems to feel compelled to misrepresent both the attitudes of some individuals and groups and the teachings of Christianity to make that religion a faith that requires its adherents to be sheep towards men as well as God.

Never put words, be they explicit or implicit, in other people's mouths.

"Glenn Beck has a message for anyone who is “crying for revolution, insurrection … and a call to arms”: He wants nothing to do with you.

“This morning I got up and I saw some more news reports, and more people in America that are standing up now and crying for revolution, insurrection, arming yourself, and a call to arms,” Beck said on his radio program Tuesday. “I will tell you I believe in the Second Amendment, and I will defend myself. I believe in the rights that we have. But I will tell you more than I believe in my rights, I believe in the responsibilities that we have to God. And God does not call anyone to anger. God does not call anyone to vengeance ever, ever, ever...."

Why does Mr. Beck think that it is OK to accuse desperate people of  feeling angry and vengeful, and who told him that these people believe that God is desirous of acts of anger and vengeance? The vast majority of those involved in the Nevada standoff were peaceable citizens, and I can't find one act of violence that occurred during that period. This is a far cry from Occupy Wall St.

God does want us to turn the other cheek - in regards to each other, and it should be made clear that this has to do with insults or wrongs, not attacks. One should not take this to mean that others should be able to harm you at will. A woman, for instance, should not allow herself to be harmed if she has the ability to defend herself. If you want to allow others to harm to you, that is your business, but allowing a government or another nation to harm yourself only encourages the bad guys to assume that everyone else will be like you.  

God has never taught his people to allow other nations or internal tyrants to walk all over them*, and as I noted yesterday, the Church rightly has a share of blame for so rigorously supporting the feudal order in Medieval Europe. Beck cites the example of Joseph Smith to justify his call  work only through legal channels, but the feudal order was also the legal channel of that time, and the oppressed often had not choice but to fight back. In some cases, the fighting had to be done against Church leaders such as bishops or abbots. 

*Excepting the times when God used other nations to punish his people - a specter that should hang over the heads of all of us.

I do also have a bit of a problem with Beck's use of the example of Joseph Smith (in an article I read yesterday), who founded the Mormon religion. He is free to believe whatever he wants, but he can use Joseph Smith as an example when speaking with his coreligionists. Christians believe that Joseph Smith was very much a false prophet, and although he too may have been a nice guy, his example is not one that Christians should emulate in matters of faith. 

Mormons, incidentally, at least were able to flee to Utah after being chased out of New York and Illinois. We Americans do not have the luxury of moving en masse to a new home (at least not at this point), so we have no choice but to do what we can right here. 

Monday, April 14, 2014

Nevada Standoff - What Next?

-Follow-up to this post:

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) - and presumably somewhere down the line,  the Obama administration, left the showdown in Nevada with a black eye, but I have every reason to believe that they will be back for more.

The old adage tells us that we must choose our battles carefully, and as I don't have sufficient knowledge of the law as it applies to this case, I can't say with any degree of certainty that this was the right time and place for a fight. Enough, however were in fact convinced that Cliven Bundy's case was cause enough for one, and consequently we were witnesses to a rare event  - bureaucrats, their hired hands, and law enforcement officers tasked with ensuring that the latter two were not harmed, gave ground in the face of the determined resistance.

For the record, I am not in any way supportive of calls for absolute avoidance of physical resistance such as those made by Glenn Beck and other radical peaceniks. Tyrants see this type of inaction as nothing but weakness, and however I may appreciate his aversion to violence, Glenn beck does not take the Christian position in this case. Turning the other cheek applies to persons, not peoples, and the God that he purports to worship is not known for telling his people to work only through approved legal channels when doing so is clearly becoming a losing proposition and will effect nothing but the full enslavement of future generations. God made us free, and we do not have the right to toss away the rights of those who follow us

Requiring that the oppressed work only through and within the system is precisely why the Church still has a black eye from her support of the feudal order in Medieval Europe. 

The after-actions reviews are no doubt being held at the Justice Department (or at least in the highest levels of the BLM) to determine both what exactly went wrong with the seizures of Mr. Bundy's cattle and how they are going to prevent another successful act of protest by Bundy's supporters.

If no compromise is reached between the rancher and the BLM, I think that the latter will back off long enough for a good portion of the protesters/activists to drift away. In the meantime, they will be planning a massive and thoroughly-coordinated operation that will be put in place quickly, neutralize the major participants, and prevent further supporters from arriving to bolster the number of those who were their at the time of the second attempt.

The next move (barring a settlement) will not be publicized, it will entail roadblocks on highways leading to that region of Nevada, and it may well begin during the night with a rapid movement to detain or arrest Mr. Bundy and others determined to be leaders of the protest. They may also seek to detain the embattled rancher when he leaves his property to go into town.

Either way, I hope that no shots are fired and that a fair settlement is reached. In this case, I would prefer that states such as Nevada take nonviolent steps such as those which would result in assuming ownership of the land in question or allowing ranchers to go back to earning their livelihood as their ancestors have for many decades.

Video in above link.

Sunday, April 13, 2014

Dubliners Running Pro-Marriage Journalist Out of Town

Being a third generation American of half-Irish descent (with a grandfather who was an actual Irish Nationalist and only came here in the 1920's because the Brits had his number and were about to arrest him), I as saddened by the societal collapse in Ireland as I am of the same in the US.

I have never visited Ireland, but what I have read about the attitudes of many modern Irish leaves me wondering if French are the only Western people that has any hopes of taking back what is theirs. Americans, British, Netherlanders, Belgians, and Germans (along with others) seem to be perfectly willing to allow the methodical destruction of their societies to continue unabated. The French a least have made efforts to protect both the identity of their nation and rallied against the governmental dismantling of marriage (and the massive overreach of authority that granting new rights entails), but the rest of Western Europe seems to be as blind as one of my otherwise staunchly conservative friends who asserts that he supports gay marriage because he believes "in freedom".

Again, all of my information is gleaned about the Ireland of today from articles that I have read, but what I have seen is disturbing. While being fully aware of how it has turned out in the rest of Western Europe, they seem to be quite happy with the increasing amounts of Muslim immigrants. Anti-Israeli attitudes appear to be rife in the Emerald Isle. Not much more than two centuries after the worst of the Penal Laws, they have done little (as a people) to make Gaelic a language for everyday use - this while the Jews brought back Hebrew after it had been dead for well over two thousand years (note that I find nothing wrong with the idea of being a truly bi-lingual nation for the obvious advantages of being fluent in English). One report I read a while ago gave a number for church attendance at less than 20% while the rest of the nation goes either secular or embraces the modern teachings of Evangelical Christianity.

On the subject of marriage, the cosmopolitan Irish (it's the only way that I could think to describe Dubliners) seem to have assumed attitudes as hateful and intolerant towards their opponents as are now routinely demonstrated in the US. In fact, the plight of the journalist featured in the Breitbart piece is virtually identical to those of many Americans who stand for both the truth and the preservation of Liberty against a government that takes upon itself the power to create new rights and institutions. The power to create new rights is the power to severely curtail or eliminate Natural Rights.

"Ireland, once a rock-solid Christian country, has now become so intolerant of Christian beliefs that its leading opponent of gay marriage may be forced to leave the country because of fears for his personal safety.

After repeated threats and obscene verbal attacks, John Waters, a nationally-known newspaper columnist, author and broadcaster who supports Christian family traditions, says he is now unable to go into the centre of Dublin at night because he fears for his own safety.

The attacks began after Waters threatened the state-owned broadcaster RTE with legal action after a drag queen called ‘Panti Bliss’ appeared on a television programme and called Waters and other conservatives "homophobic."..................

[Following a legal settlement with a broadcasting service in which he was slandered]........... gay-rights activists and left-wing politicians have continued to criticise RTE for paying damages to Waters. The journalist has been the target of a campaign of abuse online and from the anti-Catholic left-wing both in the media and in the Dail, the Irish parliament.

In the interview Waters said his opposition to gay marriage and adoption was “about free speech. It is about the rights of people to speak about what is important without being demonised.”

He is now frequently subject to obscene abuse in shops and in the streets by people who, he says, “are cowards, they shout something and keep walking, they don’t want to engage.”

“I won’t go into Dublin city centre at night. When you have that kind of toxicity generated out of nothing, what are you going to do?”

He says he has become frightened “almost in a metaphysical way, that people could be so full of hatred. That, in accusing me of hatred, they could manifest a hatred infinitely greater than anything I could possibly imagine.”
Waters described how the backlash had damaged his health: “I lost nearly a stone
[14 lbs.] in the first few weeks of this. I didn’t sleep.” He said he considered abandoning journalism and is still considering leaving Ireland to work elsewhere. “I have no friends in the media anymore.”

“You have a certain hope that somebody, somewhere knows you for who your are, you kind of have some kind of naïve hope that one of these people are going to stand up and say, ‘hang on, this is wrong, this is not this guy’ and that moment never came.”
He said his lowest point was when he realised no one would speak out in his defence:"

Saturday, April 12, 2014

College Free Speech Restriction Dealt Possible Blow

"Free Speech Zones" have become increasingly common in the mob-enforced censorship world of American Academia. The totalitarian suppression of any manner of expression that does not conform to the backwards thinking of Western Socialists has manifested itself in the creation of assigned locations on college campuses where pro-life, Christian, pro-Israel, national sovereignty, and other now-verboten speeches and information-giving are allowed to be conducted. These commonly consist of small areas in remote areas of campuses that do not provide for many attendees.

The message behind the establishment of these zones is clear - anything that runs contrary to the "Core Values* (what the faculty and their student-bots approve) of a particular school, is not allowed unless one is willing to be relegated to a specific location.

“Incitement” is another pretext for cracking down on unpopular views. Administrators claim that offensive or provocative speech will “incite” those who disagree with it to violent acts. But the legal meaning of incitement is “advocacy of the use of force or of law violation . . . likely to incite or produce such action.” You cannot “incite” people who disagree with you.........
Evergreen State College promises to stamp out “conduct, speech or expression that is motivated by bias based on perceived race, color, religion, ethnic/national origin, gender expression, sex, age, disability or sexual orientation identities but does not rise to the level of a crime.” That covers a lot. At Clark University, a “hate incident” can even be based on “social/political affiliation.”..........

".......Mr. Lukianoff reports that today’s students often do not understand the importance of this system [That of the protection of free speech] . They are more likely to think that people should be muzzled if that is what it takes for groups from different backgrounds to get along. One 2004 survey of high school students reported that they were “far more likely than adults to think that citizens should not be allowed to express unpopular opinions, and that the government should have a role in approving newspaper stories.”

One recent court case may have put a stop to this sick manner of restriction free expression: 

"The latest in a string of successful court challenges to college "free speech zones" is unfolding in Virginia, where lawyers are negotiating a settlement in the case of a student who was barred from preaching on campus.

The Virginia Community College System has agreed to suspend its student demonstrations policy in response to a lawsuit filed by Thomas Nelson Community College student Christian Parks. Both sides have asked a federal judge in Norfolk to put the case on hold until May 2 while a new policy and settlement details are negotiated.

Judicial history and recent legislative developments suggested Parks had a good chance of prevailing. Over the last dozen years, several similar policies establishing restrictive speech zones at public colleges have been invalidated by courts or changed by officials to settle lawsuits alleging violation of students' First Amendment rights. And on April 4, Gov. Terry McAuliffe signed legislation limiting public colleges' restraint on student expression.

"Coast to coast, these kinds of restrictions on student speech are a widespread problem," said Parks' attorney, David Hacker of the Christian legal advocacy organization Alliance Defending Freedom.

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education says about six in 10 colleges nationwide have policies that violate First Amendment rights -- and about one in six impose "free speech zones" like the policy at issue in the Virginia case -- even though such restrictions rarely survive constitutional challenges.
In 2002, West Virginia University dropped its free-speech zone policy after being sued by a civil liberties organization. Two years later, a federal judge struck down Texas Tech's policy establishing a 20-foot-wide gazebo as a free-speech zone. Last year, Des Moines Area Community College abandoned a policy restricting student leaflet-distribution activities to a table in the student center. And earlier this year, Modesto Junior College in California agreed to drop its free-speech zone and pay $50,000 to settle a lawsuit brought by a student who was barred from distributing copies of the U.S. Constitution on Constitution Day.

Free-speech advocates find it troubling that, despite the court rulings, many public colleges persist in squelching student expression.

"Colleges and universities are supposed to be a marketplace of ideas and should be encouraging debate," Hacker said. Instead, he said, too many are worried about offending someone........."


*One should note the term "core values" as used in the quote from the school in which they explained why they chose to cancel her invitation. "Core Values" is the new litmus test for anyone who is allowed to participate or even - as we saw in the case of Mozilla's co-founder and CEO Brendan Eich, be allowed to keep his job. Core Values encompasses any cause that the left holds dear. If you oppose the maltreatment of girls and women that is common in Islam, do not support the desecration of marriage and the massive overreach of governmental authority that codifies marriages between members of the same gender, or take any position that runs contrary to what the Left cherishes, you are in opposition to the Core Values of a slew of organizations in the United States. Core Values is the new "Americanism" is our dystopian world.