This is untrue and defamatory.— Claire Khaw (@Theocracy4all) March 26, 2019
A baseless, malicious and defamatory tweet about me. It saddens me that people already astray would unhesitatingly traduce you for no apparent reason when they previously seemed reasonable and supportive. Men these days are as capricious and malicious as women. https://t.co/LUFVGOZwuh— Claire Khaw (@Theocracy4all) March 26, 2019
Supporter of @churchofuntropy casually and baselessly accuses me of supporting the murder of women by mentally ill Muslim men. https://t.co/LUFVGOZwuh— Claire Khaw (@Theocracy4all) March 26, 2019
We judge a leader by his followers. This follower of @churchofuntropy claims, without any basis whatsoever, that I support the murder of non-Muslim Britons by Muslim and mentally ill Frenchmen. This is libel. https://t.co/aJm8MDWGmp— Claire Khaw (@Theocracy4all) March 26, 2019
I can do without the support of people who baselessly accuse me of supporting the murder of British holiday makers by mentally ill Muslims.— Claire Khaw (@Theocracy4all) March 26, 2019
Do you want the support of someone who accuses you of supporting the murder of British holiday makers by Muslims? https://t.co/gMvWgsefjZ— Claire Khaw (@Theocracy4all) March 26, 2019
Would you find it funny if you were accused of supporting the murder of British holiday makers by Muslims? https://t.co/IWwrzysBeH— Claire Khaw (@Theocracy4all) March 26, 2019
Would @churchofuntropy be quite so casual about it if she herself were accused of supporting the murder of British holiday makers by Muslims? https://t.co/IWwrzysBeH— Claire Khaw (@Theocracy4all) March 26, 2019
PREVIOUS TWEETS FROM ANDREW TO ME WITH THEIR BARELY DISGUISED ANTISEMITISM AND ISLAMOPHOBIA
You deserve a greater audience and for your ideas to be more widely discussed certainly.— Andrew Cordeaux (@AndrewCordeaux) March 17, 2019
I see the entire Abrahamic deviation as having been rooted in the 18th dynasty monotheistic heresy of Akhenaten. So far as I am concerned the whole Exodus story was invented to absolve Jews of responsibility for subverting and being forcefully expelled from Egypt.— Andrew Cordeaux (@AndrewCordeaux) March 19, 2019
How many times will I have to tell you I am Buddhist?— Andrew Cordeaux (@AndrewCordeaux) March 19, 2019
I am sympathetic to Neoplatonism as far as western metaphysical schemes go.— Andrew Cordeaux (@AndrewCordeaux) March 19, 2019
@MarkBrahmin v @Theocracy4all on The Bride-gathering cult and Jewish Esoteric Moralization (and how Secular Koranism is a continuation of both) is a discussion I would love to hear.— Andrew Cordeaux (@AndrewCordeaux) March 20, 2019
And I feel increasingly inclined to leave western society because the Abrahamic God does not appeal to me.— Andrew Cordeaux (@AndrewCordeaux) March 20, 2019
I can vouch that friendship with Jen confers benefits, while drawing her ire has consequences.— Andrew Cordeaux (@AndrewCordeaux) March 20, 2019
True in the UK, but Americans will give up their Christianity as soon as they give up their guns.— Andrew Cordeaux (@AndrewCordeaux) March 21, 2019
However, if Europeans become Muslim they will be Shi'a and ally themselves with Iran Inshallah.— Andrew Cordeaux (@AndrewCordeaux) March 21, 2019
@Theocracy4all I suspect that the main objection most westerners have to Islam is a desire to to be counted in the same camp as Arabs and Africans. Understandable. Half the Muslim world hates them as well.— Andrew Cordeaux (@AndrewCordeaux) March 21, 2019
God has been revealed to everyone and most moral precepts are open for any reasonable person to discern. We have no need of following the scriptures of others or deferring to an alien people as if they were special or discovered the God whose existence is obvious.— Andrew Cordeaux (@AndrewCordeaux) March 21, 2019
I don't think the common people need a code of conduct beyond the pañcasīla.— Andrew Cordeaux (@AndrewCordeaux) March 25, 2019
One of the great potential strengths of having a pantheon is the ability to model an ideal family structure. @Theocracy4all— Andrew Cordeaux (@AndrewCordeaux) March 25, 2019
A family of gods headed by a father and mother, as found throughout the world's mythologies.— Andrew Cordeaux (@AndrewCordeaux) March 25, 2019
Stories of their relationships could be used to model idealized family interactions / support / structure.— Andrew Cordeaux (@AndrewCordeaux) March 25, 2019
The question is the validity of the revelation. I don't think we need to do more than condemn— Andrew Cordeaux (@AndrewCordeaux) March 25, 2019
1) murder
2) theft
3) lying
4) sex with protected women (adultery, rape)
5) alcohol
God's law is revealed by the working out of karmic consequences, not by written fiat.— Andrew Cordeaux (@AndrewCordeaux) March 25, 2019
Make it clear these actions have unpleasant consequences.— Andrew Cordeaux (@AndrewCordeaux) March 25, 2019
That's why we have the Manu Samhita.— Andrew Cordeaux (@AndrewCordeaux) March 25, 2019
Vedic Aryans— Andrew Cordeaux (@AndrewCordeaux) March 25, 2019
Zoroastrianism is also technically acceptable if you require a purely monotheistic system.— Andrew Cordeaux (@AndrewCordeaux) March 25, 2019
Yes, all law systems include punishments.— Andrew Cordeaux (@AndrewCordeaux) March 25, 2019
Nothing special to Sharia.— Andrew Cordeaux (@AndrewCordeaux) March 25, 2019
In any case, I don't see why European leaders could not adopt Sharia in bad faith and use it cynically to execute political enemies and oppress women and discharge it when it has done its job. I don't endorse this. #WhiteTaqiyya— Andrew Cordeaux (@AndrewCordeaux) March 25, 2019
Why can't we make our own out of whole cloth?— Andrew Cordeaux (@AndrewCordeaux) March 25, 2019
In India, mostly— Andrew Cordeaux (@AndrewCordeaux) March 25, 2019
However I believe the Vedic system is the original revelation and Vedic culture (varnashram dharma) was once universal (and can be again).— Andrew Cordeaux (@AndrewCordeaux) March 25, 2019
Make the laws what we see fit and invent punishments to suit. "The will of God" is what fathers want.— Andrew Cordeaux (@AndrewCordeaux) March 25, 2019
And yours is an argument of convenience ultimately, is it not? This is a system of law that can be used to brutally restore patriarchy. And we don't even need to believe the theology behind it. I can see the appeal of that.— Andrew Cordeaux (@AndrewCordeaux) March 26, 2019
THE MAN WHO LIBELLED ME
I am trying to be fair to Andrew and have included relevant tweets and they have not all been hostile. But I cannot see the point of having the fickle support of someone who does not know his own mind and changes it capriciously.
Westerners ignorant of their own history think that everything was fine with their idolatrous and inferior religion of Christianity until Jews and Muslims came along. Every failure of their religion was caused by Jews, many of them think. Some of them even believe that Christianity and Islam was created by Jews with the intention of making gentiles stupid and weak. It is for this reason that they reject all the Abrahamic faiths and run into the arms of Hinduism and Buddhism as well as paganism, which is even more aien to Western traditions as well as being less successful.
His patron Church of Entropy laughs it all off as a joke that I am overreacting to, but really, what kind of a person makes this sort of joke about a political activist in our highly-charged times of hysterical antisemitism and galloping Islamophobia? The fact that she made her threat and then blocked me on Twitter before I had a chance to respond is a measure of her moral courage and leadership skills.
As for Andrew who made his accusation apropos out of nothing I have ever said, what could explain this? Was it malice, stupidity or mental illness? What does it say about you if your male supporters are malicious, stupid, mentally ill or in lust with you, whose views are as capricious as women, alternating between crawling sycophancy and acts of sudden and inexplicable treachery?
The worst of it it as that Andrew even admits that Christianity is kaput, but refuses to acknowledge the supremacy of Judaism in the sense that it is the parent of all the Abrahamic faiths nor the superior scripture of the Koran, because he despises the brown Muslim immigrants in his country and cannot bring himself to accept that their religion is better than Christianity. He would rather adopt some obviously inferior scripture than the obviously superior Koran because of his chauvinism and hatred.
If you have made a mistake it is for your own benefit that you acknowledge it and vow not to repeat it again because unacknowledged mistakes are liable to be repeated. For this Jews have the process of teshuvah while Christians practise 2000 years of idolatry while denying they are practising it. https://www.thoughtco.com/what-is-teshuvah-2076801 If Jews are smarter than Christians, it is because their religion makes a point of not repeating a mistake, while Christianity is all about denying that worshipping an executed revolutionary as the co-equal of the supreme and eternal Abrahamic God is indeed idolatrous. They seem to think that doing it for 2000 years means God is now OK with idolatry. But haven't they noticed that their religion, political system and civilisation are now failing? There are none so blind as those who will not see.
Why would anyone unaware of the concept of Lashon Hara consider himself or his religion superior to Judaism? http://www.jewfaq.org/speech.htm Only an ignorant and chauvinistic antisemite and Islamophobe with no moral authority, infirm in mind, irresolute and capricious, thinking of leaving his country to become some kind of parasitic Buddhist monk, presumably.
Andrew says the Manu Samhita https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manusmriti is enough, heedless or ignorant of its inconsistencies, praising it as long as it is neither Jewish nor Muslim, shamelessly showing his irrational hatred.
Patrick Olivelle, credited with a 2005 translation of Manusmriti published by the Oxford University Press, states the concerns in postmodern scholarship about the presumed authenticity and reliability of Manusmriti manuscripts. He writes (abridged),
The MDh [Manusmriti] was the first Indian legal text introduced to the western world through the translation of Sir William Jones in 1794. (...) All the editions of the MDh, except for Jolly's, reproduce the text as found in the [Calcutta] manuscript containing the commentary of Kulluka. I have called this as the "vulgate version". It was Kulluka's version that has been translated repeatedly: Jones (1794), Burnell (1884), Buhler (1886) and Doniger (1991). (...)
The belief in the authenticity of Kulluka's text was openly articulated by Burnell (1884, xxix): "There is then no doubt that the textus receptus, viz., that of Kulluka Bhatta, as adopted in India and by European scholars, is very near on the whole to the original text." This is far from the truth. Indeed, one of the great surprises of my editorial work has been to discover how few of the over fifty manuscripts that I collated actually follow the vulgate in key readings.
— Patrick Olivelle, Manu's Code of Law (2005)
Other scholars point to the inconsistencies and have questioned the authenticity of verses, and the extent to which verses were changed, inserted or interpolated into the original, at a later date. Sinha, for example, states that less than half, or only 1,214 of the 2,685 verses in Manusmriti, may be authentic. Further, the verses are internally inconsistent. Verses such as 3.55-3.62 of Manusmriti, for example, glorify the position of women, while verse such as 9.3 and 9.17 do the opposite. Other passages found in Manusmriti, such as those relating to Ganesha, are modern era insertions and forgeries.
Nelson in 1887, in a legal brief before the Madras High Court of British India, had stated, "there are various contradictions and inconsistencies in the Manu Smriti itself, and that these contradictions would lead one to conclude that such a commentary did not lay down legal principles to be followed but were merely recommendatory in nature." Mahatma Gandhi remarked on the observed inconsistencies within Manusmriti as follows,
I hold Manusmriti as part of Shastras. But that does not mean that I swear by every verse that is printed in the book described as Manusmriti. There are so many contradictions in the printed volume that, if you accept one part, you are bound to reject those parts that are wholly inconsistent with it. (...) Nobody is in possession of the original text.
— Mahatma Gandhi, An Adi-Dravida's Difficulties
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manusmriti#Authenticity_and_inconsistencies_in_various_manuscripts
MINDSET OF ALT-RIGHT RACE REALISTS:— Claire Khaw (@Theocracy4all) March 26, 2019
"Our parents, grandparents, ancestors and government never did anything wrong at because they were MORALLY PERFECT but Jews and Muslims want to destroy our civilisation so kill or kick them out! Lying about them is the least you can do." https://t.co/LbJ1URpewc
19:30 Reference is made about a "Claire Khaw intervention hour".
23:00 My name is mentioned again by Church of Entropy who says I am stupid because I don't agree with her.
36:00 I didn't say we didn't need stories. I said Secular Koranism is not interested in the stories because it is rule based and not story based. This means Secular Koranism does not require you to believe in any particular story the way Christianity requires you to believe that an executed revolutionary is the co-equal of God, geddit?
49:00 What is your tradition? You cannot explain. Tradition implies some long and established practice. No one acknowledges your tradition. You cannot have a tradition because you have no followers and no known history of its practice. What you call your tradition does not even have a name. Conveniently, you claim that you only use an Oral Tradition, which means that you can change your principles as and when expedient, when I adhere to the Koran whose content is both universally known and universally available.
23:00 My name is mentioned again by Church of Entropy who says I am stupid because I don't agree with her.
36:00 I didn't say we didn't need stories. I said Secular Koranism is not interested in the stories because it is rule based and not story based. This means Secular Koranism does not require you to believe in any particular story the way Christianity requires you to believe that an executed revolutionary is the co-equal of God, geddit?
49:00 What is your tradition? You cannot explain. Tradition implies some long and established practice. No one acknowledges your tradition. You cannot have a tradition because you have no followers and no known history of its practice. What you call your tradition does not even have a name. Conveniently, you claim that you only use an Oral Tradition, which means that you can change your principles as and when expedient, when I adhere to the Koran whose content is both universally known and universally available.
56:00 58:00 1:00:00 1:02:00 1:05:00 1:11:00 1:12:00 1:20:00 My name is mentioned.
1:12:00 I am accused of idolatry but the accusation is incoherent.
1:24:00 Secular Koranism
1:26:00 Jay my streaming partner is mentioned. Church of Entropy says I make him happy.
1:28:00 Church of Entropy sings a hymn to Secular Koranism.
1:34:00 Secular Koranism is secular because a legally qualified non-Muslim can interpret it.
1:35:00 Will giggles at quran.com/2/256 which is the basis of the First Amendment. https://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.com/2017/05/the-first-amendment-was-derived-from.html
1:35:30 Church of Entropy refers to her Oral Tradition, which no one knows about and which she can change when expedient.
1:53:00 "We are all Secular Koranists."
1:58:00 I am accused of cherry picking and being immune to logic. Church of Entropy is of course indulging in projection. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection
1:58:30 Will admits to having been in need of the professional services of a psychiatrist.
2:00:00 False beliefs eventually lead to insanity.
2:01:00 Subjective Absolutism
2:05:00 Measuring emotions
2:08:00 "morality is essentially meta analysis of emotions"
2:09:00 I am "purposefully deceptive and immoral" because I do not accept the arguments of Will and Church of Entropy.
2:10:00 My moral authority is greater because I have a history of political activism, can make myself understood and have not ever been in need of the professional services of a psychiatrist or psychologist.
2:13:00 The duty of care of a mental health professional
2:14:00 "They [mental health professionals] don't even teach that the mind is a quantum computer!"
2:17:00 Will tells Jenn to have children and is "an attention-seeking virtual signalling maternal person who seeks authority so she can enact her own theocratic dictatorship".
2:18:00 Thirstiness for Brundlefly is mentioned.
2:20:00 The Big Bang, the masses and the elite.
2:21:00 Italian Fascism
2:22:00 An oligarchy
2:23:00 Conservatives and Liberals
2:25:00 OV's political solution to a spiritual problem.
2:26:00 We must have faith in the moral authority of our laws.
2:27:00 A benevolent theocracy must have legitimacy. (Secular Koranism does not care what you believe , Jenn, and quran.com/2/256 guarantees freedom of belief. OMG. How many times?!)
2:29:00 The broken arm analogy. Yes, the arm ie religion of the West is broken and so is its leg ie political system.
2:33:00 Stories and the unfolding narrative
2:33:30 Game of Thrones
2:35:00 I am described as being a "nuisance" to Church of Entropy including being"desperate and pathetic"because I do not agree with her
2:36:00 Will disagrees with me while refusing to debate with me and then says he is not interested in my ideas. He is basically saying he wants to win the debate without entering the arena of debate, which is completely infantile.
2:39:00 "There are probably a lot of people who would support [Claire Khaw's] views."
2:39:30 "Goodness is ... doing the right thing without worrying about the consequences."
2:41:00 "Even Claire isn't pure evil."
A young man claiming to be seeking the objective truth is in fact avoiding it
1:12:00 I am accused of idolatry but the accusation is incoherent.
1:24:00 Secular Koranism
1:26:00 Jay my streaming partner is mentioned. Church of Entropy says I make him happy.
1:28:00 Church of Entropy sings a hymn to Secular Koranism.
1:34:00 Secular Koranism is secular because a legally qualified non-Muslim can interpret it.
1:35:00 Will giggles at quran.com/2/256 which is the basis of the First Amendment. https://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.com/2017/05/the-first-amendment-was-derived-from.html
1:35:30 Church of Entropy refers to her Oral Tradition, which no one knows about and which she can change when expedient.
1:53:00 "We are all Secular Koranists."
1:58:00 I am accused of cherry picking and being immune to logic. Church of Entropy is of course indulging in projection. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection
1:58:30 Will admits to having been in need of the professional services of a psychiatrist.
2:00:00 False beliefs eventually lead to insanity.
2:01:00 Subjective Absolutism
2:05:00 Measuring emotions
2:08:00 "morality is essentially meta analysis of emotions"
2:09:00 I am "purposefully deceptive and immoral" because I do not accept the arguments of Will and Church of Entropy.
2:10:00 My moral authority is greater because I have a history of political activism, can make myself understood and have not ever been in need of the professional services of a psychiatrist or psychologist.
2:13:00 The duty of care of a mental health professional
2:14:00 "They [mental health professionals] don't even teach that the mind is a quantum computer!"
2:17:00 Will tells Jenn to have children and is "an attention-seeking virtual signalling maternal person who seeks authority so she can enact her own theocratic dictatorship".
2:18:00 Thirstiness for Brundlefly is mentioned.
2:20:00 The Big Bang, the masses and the elite.
2:21:00 Italian Fascism
2:22:00 An oligarchy
2:23:00 Conservatives and Liberals
2:25:00 OV's political solution to a spiritual problem.
2:26:00 We must have faith in the moral authority of our laws.
2:27:00 A benevolent theocracy must have legitimacy. (Secular Koranism does not care what you believe , Jenn, and quran.com/2/256 guarantees freedom of belief. OMG. How many times?!)
2:29:00 The broken arm analogy. Yes, the arm ie religion of the West is broken and so is its leg ie political system.
2:33:00 Stories and the unfolding narrative
2:33:30 Game of Thrones
2:35:00 I am described as being a "nuisance" to Church of Entropy including being"desperate and pathetic"because I do not agree with her
2:36:00 Will disagrees with me while refusing to debate with me and then says he is not interested in my ideas. He is basically saying he wants to win the debate without entering the arena of debate, which is completely infantile.
2:39:00 "There are probably a lot of people who would support [Claire Khaw's] views."
2:39:30 "Goodness is ... doing the right thing without worrying about the consequences."
2:41:00 "Even Claire isn't pure evil."
SUMMARY:
"I have my feelings which are only opinions whose correctness I cannot prove. I will still hold them even if no one agrees with me and I will call this brilliant idea of mine SUBJECTIVE ABSOLUTISM."
One of my ideas is Aryan Hebrewism because I can no longer believe in Christianity but cannot bring myself to worship the Abrahamic God as a Muslim. Because Jews were the first people with the idea of the Abrahamic God and are known for being cleverer than Christians, I would rather be Jewish than Muslim because I associate Islam with despised immigrant culture and people from low-status countries whose people I hate for being in my country.
I need to believe in God because I cannot cope with uncertainty but my pride makes it hard for me to be Muslim even though I have given up on Christianity.
Though I was Muslim for six months, I subsequently apostasised, because I prefer the company of my Aryan brothers."
A young man claiming to be seeking the objective truth is in fact avoiding it
No comments:
Post a Comment