THE VOICE OF REASON
Solon, (born c. 630 BCE—died c. 560 BCE), Athenian statesman, known as one of the Seven Wise Men of Greece (the others were Chilon of Sparta, Thales of Miletus, Bias of Priene, Cleobulus of Lindos, Pittacus of Mytilene, and Periander of Corinth). Solon ended exclusive aristocratic control of the government, substituted a system of control by the wealthy, and introduced a new and more humane law code. He was also a noted poet.
Translate
Showing posts with label Mary Whitehouse. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mary Whitehouse. Show all posts
If you wake up after casual sex feeling violated, it's not because you were raped. That's your conscience admonishing you for allowing yourself to be used by some stranger who doesn't love you. You consented to, and participated in, your own degradation.
Casual sex doesn't violate consent, but it does violate human dignity. That's why you feel gross the next day. Not because you were raped, but because you allowed yourself to be degraded for the sake of cheap and fleeting pleasure.
Notice all of the people who immediately assume that this tweet is targeted only at women. They really don't understand that men are conscious beings who can also feel regret. It is truly astounding how little the Left comprehends the human condition.
I think consent is pretty simple. If you willingly choose to participate in something, you consent. Feeling pressure or temptation does not negate consent. If it does, then nobody has ever fully consented to any sinful act. https://t.co/DUMY1Jtf2R
Question the wisdom of casual sex and watch how almost every response from the other side consists of them snickering and calling you a virgin. They are so desperate to avoid any notion of sexual morality that discussion of the subject reduces them to corny, adolescent taunting.
Elizabeth Smart is not a gray area. She was kidnapped and repeatedly raped. Clearly not consent. Consent is not nearly as complicated a subject as we pretend. It isn't calculus. If you're forced to do it, you didn't consent. If you volunteer, there is consent. https://t.co/YGgA1XXLbe
What happens to people who say we should return to Christian morality?
They are mercilessly mocked.
The late Mrs Whitehouse was mercilessly mocked.
No one takes Christianity seriously, and even if they did, it is hard to defend because of the requirement to believe in the doctrine of the Trinity, which is controversial enough even amongst Christians.
Not only that, the Catholic Church, the most powerful church in the world, now has a liberal Pope and is hopelessly mired in the paedo priests scandal. It no longer has moral authority and clergy are afraid of discussing morality or anything controversial to do with standards of sexual morality. If clergy got into trouble with the media over standing up for a principle, they would be hung out to dry and their career obstructed and ended.
Michael Voris and the Church Militant are now classified as extremist just for holding on the Catholic principles.
Catholics who take Catholicism seriously are on the whole middle aged to elderly with the young not much interested. No revolution ever was organised by the senescent and elderly.
There is no prospect of sedevacantism succeeding without armed force and no prospect of acquiring this armed force in a society that is overwhelmingly atheist.
If you wanted to use religion as a basis of effecting a revolution, it would not be Christianity, simply because it is perceived as stale, tried and failed. It is perceived to be the the religion of the senescent and is certainly not in the ascendant. If Catholicism is a moon, it is waning, not waxing. We also know that the reason why Catholic clergy are so supine is because they know that the only choice left to them in the face of accusations of paedo priests is simply to surrender and submit to the prevailing matriarchy and hope they get to keep their position and pensions while they live.
There is only one religion that causes consternation and controversy in the political establishment, and it is the one Islamophobes hate and fear.
Oderint dum metuant.
Like it or not, the Koran is the only reliable source of social conservatism, and social conservatism is the indispensable ingredient of patriarchy and nationalism.
Without leadership and without being encouraged or exhorted to do so, people will not voluntarily and naturally turn from vice to virtue. If Europeans spontaneously and suddenly felt an overwhelming desire for religion and social conservatism, they would not be turning to the tired, stale and failed religion of the elders. The church has been completely rotted by feminism and it stinks to high heaven. The old may cling to Christianity, but the young know it is not for them if they want a future for themselves, their children, their descendants and their nation.
The young already despise the old for the way they have frittered away their inheritance, or they would when they think about it. Baby boomers have been identified as the ones most liberal and most irresponsible, socially and fiscally. They are the ones now in charge and therefore the ones in denial while they continue to fuck things up.
If we think we are on our way out, we just do what we are comfortable with: go to church and pray the way we used to, and hope the church and the clergyman we are used to continues to exist until we ourselves are no longer in need of it.
Christianity is not going to inspire anyone capable of effecting a change. Only the young are capable of doing so. The young will have no time or patience for the platitudes of the elderly about to fade away who are not thinking about the future of the next generation, only about staying well within their own comfort zone and pretending to themselves and to next generation that they did nothing wrong.
Michael Voris of Church Militant is fighting a losing battle because he will never get enough Catholics to join his cause to make Catholicism both powerful or viable without a counter-revolution. Even if Voris were already Pope now, he would still be compromised and cucked the way Trump is, with the deep state gunning for him. Whatever populist ideology the people would back at the risk of life, limb and property to effect a counter-revolution against the sex revolution and matriarchy cannot be done on the back of Catholicism or any other established church for all the obvious reasons of being perceived to be old, tired, weak, corrupt, effeminate and fatally feminised.
The balance of our population, our human stock is threatened. A recent article in Poverty, published by the Child Poverty Action Group, showed that a high and rising proportion of children are being born to mothers least fitted to bring children into the world and bring them up. They are born to mother who were first pregnant in adolescence in social classes 4 and 5. Many of these girls are unmarried, many are deserted or divorced or soon will be. Some are of low intelligence, most of low educational attainment. They are unlikely to be able to give children the stable emotional background, the consistent combination of love and firmness which are more important than riches. They are producing problem children, the future unmarried mothers, delinquents, denizens of our borstals, sub-normal educational establishments, prisons, hostels for drifters. Yet these mothers, the under-twenties in many cases, single parents, from classes 4 and 5, are now producing a third of all births. A high proportion of these births are a tragedy for the mother, the child and for us.
Yet what shall we do? If we do nothing, the nation moves towards degeneration, however much resources we pour into preventative work and the over-burdened educational system. It is all the more serious when we think of the loss of people with talent and initiative through emigration as our semi-socialism deprives them of adequate opportunities, rewards and satisfactions.
Yet proposals to extend birth-control facilities to these classes of people, particularly the young unmarried girls, the potential young unmarried mothers, evokes entirely understandable moral opposition. Is it not condoning immorality? I suppose it is. But which is the lesser evil, until we are able to remoralise whole groups and classes of people, undoing the harm done when already weak restraints on strong instincts are further weakened by permissiveness in television, in films, on bookstalls ?
