facebook Check out my photos on Facebook Hi Mauriceenchel.igster, I set up a Facebook profile where I can post my pictures, videos and events and I want to add you as a friend so you can see it. First, you need to join Facebook! Once you join, you can also create your own profile. Thanks, Scott To sign up for Facebook, follow the link below: http://www.facebook.com/p.php?i=1765441388&k=ZW12YWV5U5WEUCC1VGX4UTS&r mauriceenchel.igster@blogger.com was invited to join Facebook by Scott Cogswell. If you do not wish to receive this type of email from Facebook in the future, please click here to unsubscribe. Facebook's offices are located at 156 University Ave., Palo Alto, CA 94301.

The Reprimitivized Future -- Mark Steyn

Mark Steyn exhibits a sense for and a vision of world politics beyond the horizon of the common enthusiast. And his style imposes upon you to feel and live it.

“Civilization is not an evolution of mankind but the imposition of human good on human evil. It is not a historical inevitability. It is a battle that has to be fought every day, because evil doesn’t recede willingly before the wheels of progress.” -- Andrew McCarthy, former federal prosecutor, senior fellow at the National Review Institute, and author of Willful Blindness: A Memoir of the Jihad.

DHS Enlists Local Authorities to Profile Conservative America

'Liberals' have their transformational faith in the bureaucracy of the Executive and oppose other institutions, particularly those "non-liberal social forces" like Church and family that often find expression in the organizations of neighborhoods, small cities, and even several States. Modern liberalism sees "central government as the more promising instrument of progress, and the others as obstacles."

This administration has been successful in casting dispersion on the free market, and will now attempt to do the same to conservative society.

 

 

San Francisco Values

 

WSJOnline -- April 3, 2009

News From Nancy Pelosi's District
Government schools in San Francisco are trying to boost their students' aspirations, the San Francisco Chronicle reports:

"Remember the first time you heard Jimi Hendrix?" reads the cover of the district's new 51-page education guide. "Our plan is as transformational now as his music was then!"

The manifesto is aimed at transforming the educational "experiences for every child in each of our schools."

To drive home the point, a portrait of the '60s rocker--looking somewhat pensive, somber and perhaps stoned--graces the cover and every page of the manual.

The book also comes with a Hendrix poster and Hendrix-emblazoned canvas bag, which were handed out to a couple hundred administrators at Superintendent Carlos Garcia's back-to-school confab in September.

An editorial in the same day's Chronicle faults the San Francisco school board for defying the will of the voters and refusing to preserve the city's Junior ROTC program:

The program will come to a halt in June unless board members vote to reverse a November 2006 decision to end it. Last November, San Francisco voters endorsed an advisory measure, Proposition V, in support of keeping JROTC.

The usual complaint--opposition to the federal law barring open homosexuals from serving in the military--doesn't apply here: "Young people of all sexual orientations are welcome in the San Francisco program." But ultraliberal school board members still object to JROTC as, in the Chronicle's words, "an indoctrinating recruiting tool."

So in San Francisco, if you're willing to risk your life for your country, you must be brainwashed. If you choke to death on your own vomit, you're a role model.

 

 

 

The Elite Culture of American Democrats

Democrats: feeding the hungry… clothing the naked…

WSJonline – Best of the Web Today, 3/12/2009

Your Tax Dollars at Work
"More than one out of every five dollars of the $126 million Massachusetts is receiving in earmarks from a $410 billion federal spending package is going to help preserve the legacy of the Kennedys," the Associated Press reports from Boston:

The bill includes $5.8 million for the planning and design of a building to house a new Edward M. Kennedy Institute for the Senate. The funding may also help support an endowment for the institute.

The bill also includes $22 million to expand facilities at the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library & Museum and $5 million more for a new gateway to the Boston Harbor Islands on the Rose Kennedy Greenway, a park system in downtown Boston named after Kennedy's mother and built on land opened up by the Big Dig highway project.

We suppose if you can't make history, you might as well buy it with other people's money.

Wage Protection Will Slow Recovery

Since the federal government has decided to expropriate the future earnings of America's children to avert an economic 'catastrophe', its only fitting that these resources be used most efficiently, guaranteeing a rapid return on investment. Otherwise, what we will see is the debilitatingly prolonged recovery of the depression era.

 

Even government bureaucracies should use sound market principles and fiscal responsibility in dealing with crisis. Meaning Davis-Bacon policies should have no place in the effort to restore our country's economic stability.

 

Just as the Bush administration suspended the Act in Katrina ravished Louisiana to facilitate rapid response and recovery, so the Obama administration and Congress should do the same for the sake of our national economy.

 

In conservative circles, wage standards discriminate against poor communities and drive up unemployment in general. With unemployment climbing of its own, job protectionism and labor unions as the primary beneficiaries of stimulus contracts, will retard growth.

 

 

 

 

Beware Of The Counselor

 ... passing along some information that we all should be concerned about.

 

If allowed by the respective state governors, the country's 'child advocate' NGOs and Government run orgs like CPS will get millions from the PelObamaReid federal stimulus.

 

Nothing like bolstering an already powerful and potentially dangerous taxpayer funded, government led syndicate chalk full of 'academic experts'; teachers, school administrators, counselors, psychologists, sociologists, lawyers, judges, etc., who view the family as an impediment to the proper socialization of children.

 

Disclaimer:

 

To be clear... the argument is with the anti-family syndicate, not you the upstanding teacher, administrator, counselor, psychologist, sociologist, lawyer, judge, etc.

 

 

Family & Friends,

 

I recently attended court as a supporter for a dear friend of mine who lives in a nearby town.  She and her husband have four children, the oldest of which is a typical 13 year old girl.  Like most girls her age, she is testing her limits.  She tries manipulating, “stretching” the truth, and trying to get her way.  She is a good girl, but definitely pushing the envelope.  Her parents are good parents and they don’t take garbage from their kids.

 

Last November, this 13 year old was irritated that her mother took her cell phone privileges away until her grades improved, so she made an appointment with the school counselor and ranted and raved that her mother was unfair, she exaggerated and got carried away about the situation, and complained her mother had “hurt her feelings.”  The counselor contacted my friend and made her recommendations about the situation to which my friend basically told her it was none of her business.  Then, when her daughter got home they had a discussion and the mother told the daughter not to go to the counselor anymore.

 

Late January, Child Protective Services (CPS) came to the house and took all four children from the babysitter at the house and charged both parents with “emotional abuse.”  Apparently, the counselor had tried to set up another appointment with this 13 year old, who said “my mom says I shouldn’t talk to you anymore.”  The counselor determined, from that statement, that there must be something wrong at home…otherwise there wouldn’t be any reason they couldn’t talk.  She then contacted CPS and thus the removal of the children.

 

It has now been three weeks, the parents cannot see or talk with their children because the parents “may influence the children’s version of events,” even though this is all based on the eldest’s meeting with the counselor. My friend and her husband have had three previous court dates during which they have never been allowed to speak to the judge.  The system has them trapped and their lawyer estimates it will take 4-6 months to get this resolved and their children home. They have boundaries, expectations, and limitations for their children and they are being charged with “emotional abuse”. 

 

Our laws are giving children all the power.  Being a good parent is at the mercy of the observer, many of which do not like the moral stance we teach our children, especially in light of Proposition 8.  Beware the counselor.  They tell our children they only want to help, and I mean no disrespect, but their job entirely depends on people having problems! For example:

 

My own daughter, Evelyn, made an appointment with the school counselor just before winter break because she was having problems with the kids in her table group.  She got back from winter break and her table group had changed (it does every month) and the counselor called her in.  Evelyn couldn’t even remember why she had made the appointment, so the counselor began fishing around.  By the end of the appointment, Evelyn’s best friend had been called into the office and they were both crying over some event in Kindergarten (4+ years ago).  The counselor seemed very pleased when she called to tell us she had taken care of a “little problem” between these two!  Seriously!? Dredging up problems from Kindergarten and making little girls cry over it is a good thing? I think you see my point.

 

Please talk to your children about this.  I know we have.

Government 'Spend-on-us' Bill

http://snipurl.com/chznw 

 

"Disgraced Democratic Sen. John Edwards was right about one thing: There are two Americas. One America is full of moochers, big and small, corporate and individual, trampling over themselves with their hands out demanding endless bailouts. The other America is full of disgusted, hardworking citizens getting sick of being played for chumps and punished for practicing personal responsibility."

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            -- Michelle Malkin

 

maurice enchel

 

 

An Abortive Abortion

Best of the Web: Wall Street Journal, Feb. 10, 2009

The Associated Press reports from Tampa, Fla., on an abortion that went awry:

Eighteen and pregnant, Sycloria Williams went to an abortion clinic outside Miami and paid $1,200 for Dr. Pierre Jean-Jacque Renelique to terminate her 23-week pregnancy.

 

Three days later, she sat in a reclining chair, medicated to dilate her cervix and otherwise get her ready for the procedure.

Only Renelique didn't arrive in time. According to Williams and the Florida Department of Health, she went into labor and delivered a live baby girl.

 

What Williams and the Health Department say happened next has shocked people on both sides of the abortion debate: One of the clinic's owners, who has no medical license, cut the infant's umbilical cord. Williams says the woman placed the baby in a plastic biohazard bag and threw it out.

 

Police recovered the decomposing remains in a cardboard box a week later after getting anonymous tips.

The AP reports that "the case has riled the anti-abortion community, which contends the clinic's actions constitute murder." There was a time when even people outside "the anti-abortion community" would have agreed that killing a baby after birth constitutes murder.

animal farm

 

http://snipurl.com/alipa  [www_ibdeditorials_com]

 

Animal Farm -- George Orwell, 1945

from a summary of themes with my edited notations: sparknotes.com

The Windmill

The great windmill symbolizes the pigs' manipulation of the other animals for their own gain. Despite the immediacy of the need for food and warmth (strong economy, freedom, liberty, & independence), the pigs exploit Boxer and the other common animals (naïve working class) by making them undertake backbreaking labor (income, payroll, capital gains, estate taxes, etc.) to build the windmill, which will ultimately earn the pigs more money and thus increase their power. The pigs' declaration that Snowball (George W. Bush (Republicans)) is responsible for the windmill's first collapse constitutes psychological manipulation, as it prevents the common animals from doubting the pigs' (Obama, Reid, Pelosi et al (socialist Democrats)) abilities and unites them against a supposed enemy. The ultimate conversion of the windmill to commercial use (stimulus spending buys preferred stock in American companies whose future dividends will not go to repaying the American taxpayer, nor will they be available to fund the companies' growth, but will instead be reinvested in a new, new deal.) is one more sign of the pigs' betrayal of their fellow animals. From an allegorical point of view, the windmill represents the enormous modernization projects undertaken in Soviet Russia after the Russian Revolution (which failed and will fail our economy -- Federal 'infrastructure, uneconomical 'green' industries, universal healthcare, etc.).

 

http://snipurl.com/ama9v  [www_dickmorris_com]

 

 

"...but some are more equal than others."

There is no greater example of hypocrisy than opponents of school choice preferring an alternative to public education for their children. 

Why I can't vote for a Democrat

 

 

Why I can't vote for a Democrat.

 

Conservatives & Republicans give more in charity and offer their time and service to others most consistently, regardless of income (Arthur Brooks). Democratic Socialists, who now have come to power with the election of Barack Obama, don't because they can't confirm whether or not everyone else is, nor can they be sure of the magnitude. Mere compassion is not as important to them as 'fairness in giving' as they've defined it. This is the distinction.

 

Socialists are not sufficiently humble to give for the sake of giving. They envy those who horde wealth, therefore, remain uncharitable. The perception that others of similar social status are not givers precludes them from considering personal generosity. It is of a sense that it is unfair that while they might give, others keep. They protect vehemently their discontent with inequity and use government to ameliorate it because they are conflicted. On the one hand they see the need for generosity, even their own gifts and sacrifices, and yet they vanquish the guilt of inaction by citing injustice. Which is the moral position, to give without conscience or demand fairness at the end of the barrel of a gun?

 

 

 

 

Herd Mentality

This is a very interesting topic. 'Nature' follows a complex of reactionary behaviours at the subconscious level. This subconscious conformity or 'tyrrany of the mind' must also stem from the same psychology.

Scientifically it may be encoded in DNA, but ultimately its power is metaphysical.

Put the question of safety in numbers to Carl Jung, or before him Gottfried Leibniz and others, and you might get an answer more compelling. All, understood and respected the perennial philosophy,

"that recognizes the divine Reality substantial to the world of things
and lives and minds; the psychology that finds in the soul something similar to,
or even identical with, divine Reality; the ethic that places man's final end in
the knowledge of the immanent and transcendent ground of all being; the thing is
immemorial and universal."

'Jung emphasized
the importance of balance and harmony. He cautioned that modern people rely too
heavily on science and logic and would benefit from integrating spirituality and
appreciation of unconscious realms.'

Human societal behaviour is not unlike that of a school of fish; reactionary in the fulfillment of existential responsibility. What is unique is that 'human society', especially in the west, has conquered much of the predation. This success in overcoming our environment is paramount to societal growth. The freedom of the individual to push societal restrictions in accordance with Divinely guarded transcendence is the progression of civilization. An individual or societal resistence to the Divine then is detrimental to either or both. Wierdos, deviants and loners are ostracized for good reason. When society does reach out to them it is always with the intention to bring them into conformity. Who associates with such for another reason but those same conflicted souls?

Of course we emulate those we perceive to be more successful. Ultimately 'our' success depends on it.

The 'tyrrany of the mind' can only be true tyrrany when the ideology or behaviour we are to emulate is not in accordance with the Divine. (Certainly it is tyrrany when others mandate it through government and make its nonconformance punishable.)

Divine law and truth, and obedience to them, is liberating.

The key phrase you've mentioned Brian is, "... as it [rigid confomity] becomes more and more detached from reality." This is then a discussion on the nature or reality. Certainly rigid conformity with the fundamental nature of reality is not dangerous, but essential. The fact that you have put quotes around the tribe's 'truth' shows me you understand this.

Divine Intelligence encompasses every aspect of the universe including our proclivity for particular behaviour as individuals and as societies.

Thanks for this topic Brian. It has strengthened my testimony of a living God.

Make Your Argument

In the reluctance of the left in our culture to defend their positions fairly, they have resorted to tactics which seek to redefine certain english words and terms to their advantage.

We must guard against the tendency toward political correctness.

If the 'Right' allows the left (particularly in academia) to continue to define our positions by redefining certain words like, argument, intolerance, profiling, marriage etc., we will have no recourse. Already, our society has been so influenced by this political correctness that it is uncivilized, particularly from the right, to enter into argument on issues dear to them.

Look at the definition of the word argument. Its root is from latin argūmentum, from arguere, to make clear. Clarity, like Truth, is God. To argue for clarity should be encouraged. It is a catalyst of further enlightenment. Without it, our advanced society will not progress. But ask any child what he has been taught about argument.

Another example that really bothers me is the left's redefinition of the word intolerance to denote hatred. Teachers are using it to label conscientous objectors as either racist, homophobic or just plain haters in their plans to teach global and community peace projects. I have to combat this at home.

I tell my son that intolerance to misguided and unseemly behavior and situations is not wrong and is actually an important survival instinct. It means unendurable. Certainly there are important ideas and behaviors that should not be tolerated. The left has so confounded the definition that intolerance in any situation is hate filled.

Our culture is so concerned with people's values and ideologies being challenged, but it is very important that we make these challenges. The left is tired of their iniquity being challenged.

I told my father that there is not enough argument in our society anymore. The free exchange of ideas and opinions is what is being protected by the first amendment. But the left is seeking to close argument and debate down, or atleast close the 'Right's' ability to make argument by characterizing ours as fascist, fundamentalist, and out of the mainstream.

It has even had influence in The Church. The last place it should happen.

We must ever keep in mind that collectivized socialism is part of the communistic strategy. Communism is fundamentally socialism. When socialism is understood, we will realize that many of the programs advocated, and some of these already adopted in the U.S., fall clearly within the category of socialism. What is socialism? It is simply governmental ownership or management of the essential means for the production and distribution of goods ((CN: or services?)). The socialistic-communistic conspiracy to weaken the U.S. involves attacks on many fronts. Their press and other propaganda media are therefore constantly selling the principles of centralized or federal control of farms, railroads, electric power, schools, steel, shipping, and many other aspects of the economy - but always in the name of public welfare.. ((Compiler's Note: Medicine?))

What can priesthood holders do? We should become informed about communism, socialism and about Americanism. What better way can one become informed then by first studying the inspired words of the prophets and using them as a foundation against which to test all other material? We should know why collectivism or unnecessary federal supervision will hold our standard of living down and reduce productivity. We should know why the communist leaders consider socialism the high road to communism. We should treat socialistic-communism as the tool of Satan. We should follow the counsel of the President of the Church and resist the influence and policies of the conspiracy wherever they are found in the schools, in the churches, in government, in unions, in business, in agriculture.

We should help those who have been deceived or who are misinformed to find the truth. Unless each person who knows the truth will stand up and speak up, it is difficult for the deceived or confused citizen to find his way back. Thousands of patriotic Americans, including Latter-day Saints, have helped the communists without realizing it. Each priesthood holder should use his influence in the community to resist the erosion which is taking place in our political and economic life. He should see that his party is working to preserve freedom, not destroy it. He should join responsible local groups interested in promoting freedom and free competitive enterprise, in studying political issues, promoting good men in public office and scrutinizing local, state, and federal agencies. He should not wait for the Lord's servants to give instruction for every detail. In doing these things, a member of the Church is not only making himself an opponent of the adversary, but a proponent of the Lord. May God give us the wisdom to recognize the threat to our freedom and strength to meet this danger. (Pres. Ezra Taft Benson - CR Oct 1961)

 

Speaking of Dubai's Planned Development and High Gas Prices

What a successful example of human ingenuity and capitalism. Think of the individuals whose ancestors spent centuries in such a God forsaken place. Now look at it. It took people to build that. And it will take people to run it. People who just 20 years ago had nothing. Now they are certainly enjoying hot and cold running water, air conditioning, satellite television. Should everyone around the globe someday enjoy such fruits of human invention. Should everyone have the hope that their communities should thrive thusly.

 

Did anything exist here for even thousands of years but sand? Now there are jobs and a thriving economy. This is good for people. 

 

If there is blame to be had for our high gas prices, it should pass to China and India where people are actually beginning to enjoy the kinds of technology that we've had for almost a century now. But mostly it should pass to those in wealthy Western societies who have little faith in the ability of free men to utilize the earth's resources and, simultaneously, develop technologies to mitigate their affects on human communities and the environment.

 

 

 

 

Clarity Resolves Differences

“Hillary is for abortion, gun control, gay rights, and so is Gulliani [sic]…”

The comparison of Rudy to Hillary in such flippant terms is dangerous.

It is my understanding that satan has successfully employed academia and the media in undermining what was once the desire of intelligent, thoughtful people in discerning and conveying objective Truth.

In reality, Giuliani is not for 'gun control' in the context of what many people understand it to mean, that by which a socialist or dictatorial regime intends on eliminating any private gun ownership. Certainly, in attempting to eradicate violent crime from the streets of NY, restricting access to and distribution of guns by unsavory characters by making the licensing procedures a little more demanding does not compare to the prescriptions of the particular ideologies and governmental philosophies that Hillary manifestly represents.

As far as the abortion issue goes, I believe that there is a real fine line one is forced to walk if one wants to participate in earthly governance.

It is the decision one makes to fight on earth for a position of authority in order to influence the course of human events for good, even if that fight forces one to observe cultural perversities which run counter to personal principle. The opposite is the abandonment of the fight all together for the sake of celestial principle, and to suffer the designs of tyrants.

I know, as a personal testimony, that Giulianni believes abortion to be an abomination. He has said so himself. He does not believe it to be a good policy in any respect. But for him to be able to make a difference and to attain a leadership role in a city that had virtually lost all morality, he had to make a sacrifice. In following the law - what all good men must do according to the LDS Church’s 12th article of faith - he had to say, as any man would say who really cares to win and as even Mitt Romney, when running for a Senate seat and the governorship of MA, had to say, that he would support the right (not a supernal right, but a terrestrial right by earthly law) of a woman to seek an abortion. If he could not say this, there would never have been an opportunity to use the influence of the position to make the needed difference.

This position stands in stark contrast to that of Hillary Clinton who fully supports abortion as a sound policy for ridding a woman of an unwanted and accidental burden, and has expressed, through her promotion of organizations like NOW and NARAL, her unconditional defense of abortion itself, not just the choice of it.

I have not studied Giulianni's position on gay rights because the executive branch of government has very little jurisdiction there. The way Rudy, or the President elect, will have any influence is through the selection of Supreme Court justices. Make no mistake, this issue alone is the most important issue facing our country's domestic policy with the potential retirement of 4 judges in the next 10 years. I am certain that he is not for redefining 'Marriage' to include gay relationships. He understands that it is individual liberty, family and small government that are the foundations of strong societies. Hillary on the otherhand, well we don't have to guess where she stands.

My point, really, and again I want to stress that I am very impressed with your knowledge on these issues. I appreciate those who take seriously the admonishment in Doctrine and Covenants 88: 118 - "...seek ye out of the best books words of wisdom; seek learning, even by study and also by faith.", but I worry about how, as a society, we tend not to discern differences clearly. And then to make matters worse, we communicate poorly about those details and differences, such as I have outlined above. It ruins the strength of our arguments. I see a great gulf between the ideas and policies of Rudy Giulianni and Hillary Clinton and I need to make it clear. You know, I tell my kids all the time to think clearly about what they want to say and then find the right words which will convey most effectively their message. I think it is one of the most important things we can teach our kids in order to restore a living God to this planet.

Indulge me to give a real clear example: A friend, in Church, was talking about the Constitution. He expressed that it was a 'living and breathing' document. Now, I know for a fact that he does not think that the Constitution should be interpreted differently by elite tribunals, age upon age, based on the progressive circumstances of the current society. His intent was to express that through an appropriately rigorous process, it could be amended. But this term, 'living and breathing document' was coined by the factions on the left to mean just that, that the Constitution is not a legal document defining societal order into perpetuity, but that it really is open to interpretation by the powerful Judiciary in order to prevail upon society the agendas of multi-culturists and egalitarians. So why would he use such a term in front of not a few otherwise ignorant and impressionable minds who would, having respect for his intellect and upon hearing the term somewhere else connoting the opposite of his intention, not conclude that he believes just this about it?

This is how satan works, therefore we must be very careful about the arguments we make. satan will ensure that everything we hear, see and say is somehow miscontrued (Reference C.S. Lewis - The Screwtape Letters) to benefit his annilihation of Truth, which is God.

I hope you can respect my concern?

Modern 'Liberalism' is irrational

Liberalism is a mental disorder. – Michael Savage

Extreme liberalism exists in the inability of an individual to rationalize empirical evidence throughout a greater human context. Its values are perception and emotion based. It does not generalize data across the greater spectrum of human understanding.

 

It is an immaturity; a state of being that, for some, never progresses to the higher state of rational human.

 

It is an inability to associate historical empirical evidence with modern outcomes. It is a state of ignorance to ‘what has been’, ‘what will be’, and ‘what will always be’, and perpetuates an impossible idealism.

 

When a human refuses to accept raw data, but rather sustains and guards a belief about some character of earthly existence at the superficial level of emotions and feelings, there will never be personal enlightenment.

 

Human enlightenment comes, and positive change can only occur, once one is able to accept the most basic understandings of how the world works.

 

These experiments and tests have continued for the thousands of years of human existence, and the outcome never changes. The whole thing has been recorded by successful civilizations; first the Hebrews, then the Greeks, then the ‘Catholics’, then the ‘Protestants’. Nothing has changed… except for human understanding to depths and degrees beyond what was available before.

 

 It is liberalism’s unwillingness to accept this ‘doctrine of humanity’ that holds it beyond rational thought. It is not so much an acceptance of Evolution that they purport, but the denial of historical, societal empiricism.

 

 One very clear example:

 

Animals will die… Children too…  No matter how much one cares. However, one has to realize that fewer children will die when the most productive in society are allowed to be as ‘selfish’ as they wish. That without the greedy desire to be better or richer, to have a better technology or own a bigger house, the truly talented who drive industry cannot help, in a circuitous way, the poorest ascend to new echelons of existence.

 

Nevertheless, in order to support this idea, one has to realize that, although one is taught to be all you can be, and that the riches of the earth are the right of every individual to pursue, not all pursues them in the same way, and not all achieve in the same way. Sometimes a bitter pill to swallow.

 

Rational humans realize that if they are to make up the disparity, that it is up to them, but ultimately count their blessings at the end of the day…. Irrational humans seek justification for their inabilities and demand compliance to egalitarian demands, at the expense of the society as a whole.  

 

 

--
Posted By Maurice Enchel to Maurice Enchel at 8/15/2007 09:40:00 AM

Mind your P's and Q's

One thing I try to express to my children is the importance of saying precisely what you mean.

Truth and clarity are the goal of righteous men. We must use specific language at every opportunity to express and clarify our ideas. We should communicate without false intention, but in truth.

Language is a way we express what we think and feel. Through language we are able to expedite activity that becomes either productive or nonproductive, based on the clarity of the message. It also allows us to express ideas that are consistent with our understanding of things, and more importantly, our understanding of truth.

If you think about it, it is through the words we use and the intentions we exhibit that we are able to come to much of the consensus that makes our free society possible.

I have become increasingly aware, however, of how the progressive culture has removed the importance of meaning from language and purposefully alters reality by employing bombast and distortion as tools of persuasion. It is rhetorical knavery perpetrated by radical groups in our society who have the support of liberal factions in academia, news media, and law. All are perceived as authorities presiding with influential power over the mass of information age consumers, holding sway over popular opinion.

Their flippant use of rhetorical propaganda and demagoguery tells me they have no interest in discovering truth, only that they are concerned with protecting their own selfish ideologies, lifestyles and habituations.

Clearly, the example from this column portraying Kenneth R. Willard as "against the teaching of evolution" is, least of all, a disqualification of his true intent. Aren't reporters taught to report openly and without bias? Likely the distortions in the piece have nothing to do with the quality of education Ms. Dean received, but are deliberate perversions by Ms. Dean and the editorial staff of the New York Times to put forward a position which paint a picture of Mr. Willard as a crank.

He will surely spend a lifetime justifying his position as not against the teaching of evolution, but for free speech rights in schools, and for the introduction of competing philosophies. Ideas that are being barred from intelligent debate by the radical secularists who have come to power in education and media.

This article by Cornelia Dean is just another gross example of the venality so prevalent in popular print and television media. An example of the plain and unabashed deception and word play that they'll employ in order to dominate cultural perceptions.

It is much more common from the right that statements are clearly communicated; where words are chosen carefully which express ideas and viewpoints that are consistent with reason and logic, and which tend not to embellish on particular understandings.

In another example easily defined, a phrase like "anti immigration" applied broadly to refer to anyone who opposes an open border policy is ludicrous. But this kind of rhetoric is used everyday in the press to demonize those who believe in a sane, responsible legal immigration and documentation policy.

In another example where the perpetrator was not so witting, I present a previous post which includes a note to a colleague who used the term "the Constitution is a living and breathing document" to express an idea about how revelation from God could clarify gospel doctrine. While we do have a living God that testifies his truth to each and every one of us through the holy ghost, the constitution is a legal document whose reinterpretation requires supermajorities for ratification. It should not be subject to tyrannical trifles.

I found out later that he meant that at some point the Constitution could be amended and ratified by the community of citizens. This explanation does not absolve this individual from the linguistic misstep which will have lasting effects. When we use words or phrases that have been adopted by counter cultural factions to delineate destructive positions and ideologies, we are perpetuating these harmful ideas regardless of our intent. It is so important that we remain conscious of the rhetoric used by the counter-culture and resist the temptation to duplicate it in conversation simply for its familiarity.

So the next time someone wants to talk with you about the 'ban on gay marriage', please remind them that what is proposed is not a ban on gay marriage, but a clarification of what civilized societies have deemed marriage to be for thousands of years, a union between one man and one woman for the blessings of procreation and the perpetuation of the species. 'Ban on gay marriage' assumes there is such an institution as gay marriage which has the support of law through a legislative process. No such thing exists except by judicial fiat which is not characteristic of our democratic heritage.

So you see how simple words, used either purposefully or unintentionally, can have a dramatic impact on the morality and sanity of our culture.

 

 

 

 

Foot in Mouth

"When they put out that deadline, people realized that we were going to lose," said an aide to an anti-war lawmaker.

One of the most telling revelations of this war era; an illustrative admission by the left that setting deadlines, even in the battle of ideas, is perceived as a prelude to surrender.

(htip: Opinion Journal – James Taranto 5/25/2007)

 

 

 

 

The Left's Inclination?

 

Struggling for a foundational explanation of anti-American, left-wing behaviour, I came across this comprehensive study that puts the root in social rejection.