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.
Mark 14:55–59 states that the chief priests had sought witness against Jesus to put him to death but did not find any, so they arranged false witnesses against him, but their witnesses did not agree together. Mark 14:61 states that the high priest then asked Jesus: "Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?" And Jesus said "I am", at which point the high priest tore his own robe in anger and accused Jesus of blasphemy. In Matthew 26:63, the high priest asks: "Tell us whether you are the Christ, the Son of God." Jesus responds "You have said it", prompting the High Priest to tear his own robe,[2][9][10] breaking Mosaic Law (Leviticus 21:10).
How many of the Ten Commandments have Christians broken? (They forbid idolatry and blasphemy.)
How many of the Seven Noahide laws have Christians broken? (They forbid idolatry and blasphemy.)
Even Christians cannot deny that the New Testament was written by mortal and fallible men. Christians do not claim that the New Testament was written by Christ, let alone God while Jews believe that the Torah was God's Word for Jews and Muslims believe that the Koran is God's Word for gentiles.
Could Christianity be a practical joke played on the credulous and intellectually dishonest?
After 2000 years of blasphemy and idolatry, when will the penny drop?
Did God send Jews and Muslims to the West to make Christians uncomfortable enough to examine the burned and bloody history of Christianity?
Surely the only people who have the right to call themselves Christians are those who have been confirmed?
Churches define the strength of Christianity with "bums on pews" rather than numbers of confirmed Christians because they are now so few that the Catholic Church no longer even releases these figures.
Christianity only managed to sustain itself through state intimidation because its doctrines are so absurd that only fear of execution and state persecution would stop people from questioning the Trinity. Once government lost the political will to do so, that was the beginning of the end of Christianity.
The fatal blow to Christianity was from the Americans when they separated the church from their state. Most of the Founding Fathers denied the Trinity, paving the way to Islam. After all, a righteous gentile who wishes to worship the Abrahamic God without being guilty of idolatry and blasphemy is closer to being Muslim than Christian. The Founding Fathers were really proto-Muslim. https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/724/church-of-the-holy-trinity-v-united-states
Jews and Muslims have the protective wrapper of religion which atheists lack. All societies have a religion or they become extinct. When the Romans stopped believing in the gods, they converted to Christianity. The Vikings were pagans who settled in France and became Christian. Where are they now? They have assimilated themselves out of existence. Monotheism is the most eloquent demonstration of less is more. Jews who were monotheists before Muslims are still with us today and the theocracy of Iran still defies America, which Britain cannot, being its poodle. If Iran had not had their Islamic Revolution, they would be practising liberal democracy and still a Western vassal state.
The writers for The Conservative Woman, being Christians and Islamophobes, refuse to discuss whether Christianity is kaput. In view of all that has been happening, it really is not that hard that to put two and two together and conclude that the West is now as Christian as a human skeleton used to be human. Isn't it actually dangerous to proceed without one?
Do Jews and Muslims have a duty to warn Christians that their religion has failed? Do they have a duty to warn the mainly atheist and nihilistic Post-Christian Westerner that his society will collapse without a religion at least effective at maintaining minimum standards of sexual morality? Britain is now a society of sluts and bastards with more unmarried parents than there are married parents. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2285670/Most-children-of-British-mothers-born-out-of-wedlock.html A serial sirer of bastards is now Prime Minister of Britain and his bastard lives there with him. That the British are now indifferent to bastardy is a sign that it has become normalised. In this nation of sluts and bastards, even the Archbishop of Canterbury is a bastard. https://justthetalk.com/uknews/37387/the_archbishop_of_canterbury_is_a_bastard,%20absolute:true)/47
If Jews and Muslims either collectively or individually refuse to warn the non-Muslim Western gentile that Christianity is kaput, is cowardice, indifference or hatred their reason?
If the societies of their host nation collapse won't they also suffer?
Isn't the quickest way of warning the non-Muslim gentile Westerner to point out that Christianity was doomed to failure because of its idolatry and blasphemy?
What could be more idolatrous than to worship an executed revolutionary who claimed his papa was Allah Himself as His co-equal?
What could be more blasphemous to Jews than for gentiles to worship a man they had condemned to death for blasphemy as the co-equal of Hashem?
If you see someone about to consume noxious and toxic food and drink, do you not have a duty to warn them of its noxiousness and toxicity?
Or are Jews and Muslims just sitting back and enjoying the show after getting their kosher and halal popcorn ready to watch the world burn?
If that is what they are doing, do they not also deserve punishment?
Is it a sign of God's forbearance that He has not already destroyed the West?
Revenge is a dish best served cold. If God could be said to revenge Himself on His creatures, the sin is in itself the punishment. The punishment for practising an illegitimate, idolatrous, blasphemous and absurd religion is that the even more vacuous religion of BLM will move into the moral vacuum of Christianity.
Rabbi Singer's speaking style leaves much to be desired, but what he says should be of great interest to Christians: Christianity is idolatry. Muslims would agree with him. If Judaism is monotheism for Jews and Islam monotheism for gentiles, what is Christianity then? We know they couldn't even agree with each other on the Doctrine of the Trinity at the Council of Nicaea, called by a Roman Emperor who was not even Christian. We know the New Testament was not by Christ, let alone God. We know that the Koran lets Jews off as Christ-killers because it says Christ was not in fact crucified, it only appeared that he had been. Unfortunately, the Christian narrative is that Christ became the co-equal of the supreme and eternal Abrahamic God and Christian practice has been to worship Christ as the co-equal of God knowing full well that the Abrahamic God had specifically and explicitly forbidden idolatry and blasphemy. It is undeniably supreme blasphemy to worship someone convicted of blasphemy as the co-equal of God, is it not? If Christianity no longer works in the West and the religion of the West is about to become BLM, perhaps this is a way of God punishing blasphemers and idolaters for neither worshipping Him correctly nor obeying His laws for 2000 years.
0:30 How can you defy the world of the prophets and hope to be saved? 4:39 Deuteronomy
2:00 Isaiah 46:9 is not proclaimed in churches.
Deuteronomy 4:15
3:00 There is nothing resembling the Trinity in the Tanakh.
6:00 The idolatry of Christianity
7:00 Rabbi Singer confirms that he is indeed comparing Jesus to crack.
The ritual cannibalism of Christianity
8:00 Rabbi Singer's message to Christians who were told as children by grandma that "Jesus loves you"
47:00 Why Secular Koranism is called Secular Koranism
When Muhammad imposed Sharia on Mecca I bet not everyone was Muslim because it was a pagan city. He must have said "Look at these rules, Meccans: you could work within them. Chapter 2 verse 256 says you don't actually have to be Muslim to submit to sharia. Mecca will accommodate non-Muslims. Islam accommodates the People of the book: Jews and Christians. And also pagans. You just have to obey these laws but we won't force you to believe. We know that most people in the West are atheists and that is the problem. They no longer believe in Christianity which is why they don't follow it. They hate themselves and they hate their history. They're very confused about their place in the world and they have a problem with their sense of identity which is why the topple the statues of their ancestors. But if you say "I'm going to convert you to Islam and make you follow Sharia" they'll get even more angry and frightened and confused so I have to guarantee that their freedom of belief will be respected guaranteed otherwise they'll say "You're going to force us to believe in Islam and if we don't you're going to cut our heads off!" You know how they get hysterical so if you say: "You have to convert to Islam to get Sharia", it'll never happen and we'll be dead long before anything like that would happen.
The message of Secular Koranism:
Enjoy the benefits of Secular Koranism first, because you are going to like it so much when you get good results that you will be happy to become Muslim and bring up your children Muslim.
1:04:00 My position on idolatry is in harmony with Islam.
"There is something called hidden idolatry. The Prophet Muhammad himself acknowledged that even Jews and Muslims praying correctly could be guilty of it when they're praying if they just wanted to display their piety. They are not actually worshipping God in their mind and that was called hidden idolatry. So that would be my argument for Muslims allowing pagan temples in their country as a guarantee of religious freedom [prescribed by quran.com/2/256]. If Jews and Muslims praying correctly could be guilty of hidden idolatry, they have no business closing down the temples of other people. The Koran does not express great hatred for idolatry and idolaters. It just asks people why they would worship idols that can neither help nor harm them. It asks a rhetorical question. doesn't it? "Why would you worship idols that can neither help nor harm you? The penalty for idolatry is not death as it would be for Jews. The penalty for idolatry for Jews is is death."
The people asked, "O messenger of Allah, what is secret Shirk?" He replied, "When a man gets up to pray and strives to beautify his prayer because people are looking at him; that is secret Shirk." Umar Ibn Al-Khattab narrated that the Messenger of Allah said: "Whoever swears by other than Allah has committed an act of kufr or shirk." (graded hasan by Al-Tirmidhi and saheeh by Al-Hakim) According to Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab, Ibn Mas’ood, one of Muhammad's companions, said: "That I should swear by Allah upon a lie is more preferable to me than that I should swear by another upon the truth.
Islam means logos if logos means the peace you get from submitting to the inevitable ie Truth, Logic and Morality. You can ignore truth until it becomes unignorable. You can refuse to use logic until you fall into error and disaster. You can refuse to follow your moral principles until your body politic is lying on the ground decapitated by the Elephant in the Room: Feminism.
You can only comfort yourselves by pretending that you never cared about the statues anyway and hope your shops are not looted if you kneel to the God of Anti-racism, since the government will no longer uphold the law or protect your rights even if you are Big Business. How can the headless corpse of democracy and Christianity protect anything?
Perhaps the Jews will save us since they are the people who are supposed to martyr themselves if they are forced to kneel before idols, and idolatry is worshiping anything that isn't the Abrahamic God.
The Abrahamic God never forbade slavery in either the Torah or the Koran. It is enough that He forbade usury which leads to irresponsible borrowing and lending by individuals and governments. It is indebtedness that leads us into behaviour such as gambling and reckless imperial wars which ultimately leads to our own enslavement when we lose at gambling and at war.
If you are an atheist always complaining about Jews and Muslims who appear to have taken over your country, should it not be patently obvious what the people you complain about have that you yourself lack?
If the idea of worshipping an executed revolutionary as the co-equal of the supreme and eternal Abrahamic God fills you with revulsion and the idea that your ancestors were forcibly converted into this religion fills you with rage, does this not mean that the religion of your ancestors was an illegitimate religion cooked up by con men who are now largely known for their sexual scandals as Creatures of the Liberal State? If there are only two Abrahamic faiths for gentiles and the one you are identified with has already failed, what should you do?
Perhaps you should wonder if the Abrahamic God if He exists is capable of a sustaining a rather cruel practical joke for 2000 years and wondering when you will notice that a trick has been played on you. If you were paying attention or cared about the principle of the thing, you would have noticed by now.
The principle of the thing is:
If it walks like a duck and sounds like a duck and quacks like a duck, is it a duck?
Isn't worshipping a man idolatrous?
Isn't worshipping this man as the co-equal of the supreme and eternal Abrahamic God ipso facto idolatrous and blasphemous?
If Trinitarian doctrine sounds idolatrous and blasphemous, is it in fact blasphemous and idolatrous?
What do Jews and Muslims say about Christianity? What does the fact that Jews are forbidden to enter churches but allowed to enter mosques tell you about their attitude to what would be for them the capital offence of idolatry if the Torah were still followed? What was Christ crucified for? He was crucified for the blasphemy of saying that his papa was the supreme and eternal Abrahamic God who created the Universe and now exists outside it as pure spirit.
Atheists and nihilists who know what religion is for but do not wish to make the sacrifices their ancestors did - that of marrying and having legitimate children - will be avoiding the question. They avoid the question because the answer - that of replacing a broken moral system forbidden by God with one effective at maintaining minimum standards of sexual morality - is obvious.
It should be noted that Daniel is an ex-Catholic and is now atheist. Atheists believe both monotheists and polytheists are mad and silly and do not distinguish between
a) the idolatry of non-Abrahamic deities and
b) the worship of the Abrahamic God.
However, any knowledge of Judaism would tell you that the Torah ordains death for any Jew convicted of idolatry. If Jews practised idolatry as the Normans did, they would, like the Normans, be now extinct having assimilated themselves out of existence. Christians are now virtually extinct in the West since very few who identify as Christians are confirmed and very few confirmed Christians actually believe that an executed revolutionary is the co-equal of the supreme and eternal Abrahamic God. In fact, the West is as Christian as a human skeleton used to be human.
In short, to affirm the divinity of Christ is ipso facto idolatrous and to affirm his co-equal status with the supreme and eternal Abrahamic God is ipso facto blasphemous.
Christ was crucified for blasphemy - a capital crime for Jews. Christians have themselves affirmed the blasphemy for which Christ was crucified and to this day affirm the idolatrous Doctrine of the Trinity, apparently blissfully ignorant of God's prohibition of idolatry and blasphemy in His Ten Commandments. If this is pointed out to them, they are indifferent to the gravity of this sin, and are clearly more pridefully invested in their idolatry than in the correct worship of God.
They are also indifferent to warnings that idolatry leads to self-worship and self-worship leads to self-destructive narcissism. Should they end up destroying themselves like Narcissus, they can always blame the Jews who neglected their religious duty to promote the Noahide laws - which also forbid idolatry and blasphemy - amongst gentiles.
And so the endless cycle of blame will continue, until and unless the correction of Secular Koranism is adopted and imposed. I like to think it is not too late to repent, even after 2000 years of idolatry and blasphemy.
Step 1, Regret. Realize the extent of the damage and inwardly adopt of feeling sincere regret. Step 2, Ceasing. Immediately stop the harmful action. Step 3, Confession and restitution. Verbalize the mistake and ask for forgiveness, either from God or from the wronged party. If possible, the wrong must be righted through compensation. If the sin is against God, acts of charity may be considered as restitution. Step 4, Resolution. Make a firm commitment not to repeat the sin in the future.
1:00 Apparently, "Jewish behaviour" is "feigning ignorance of what constitutes Jewish behaviour".
2:00 I am accused of being the Barbara Lerner Spectre of Islam and "avoiding the JQ".
3:00 Gandalf gets hysterical about the Noahide laws.
4:00 Universal laws and Natural Law
5:00 Rejecting the Noahide laws because they are Jewish
6:00 Spokesperson for the Rabbinate
7:00 Idolatry
8:00 Jews are godless. Does he mean they are liberal?
9:00 Wotan
10:00 Obsessed with Jews
11:00 Idolatry
12:00 Christ was an executed revolutionary!
13:00 "Jesus is divine by nature."
1:00 Just as most gentiles are liberals, so are assimilated Jews liberal. Should gentiles apologise to Jews for corrupting their morals with liberalism?
7:00 The concept of God definitely exists. If we see the point of obeying His laws, we will incline towards belief because belief in God who made laws for us would make us more likely to obey them from generation to generation thereby prolonging the existence of our civilisation.
The strongest principles we have are religious principles.
Western Man is politically inert because he is Post-Christian. The Post Christian no longer believes in having principles, preferring to be bribed or threatened in the way beasts of burden are motivated by carrot or stick.
Western Man, formerly Christian Man, is unprincipled because the most important principle of Christianity is a patent absurdity, for a Christian is defined as one who worships an executed revolutionary as the co-equal of the supreme and eternal Abrahamic God.
It has been said that Christianity and Hypocrisy march hand in hand. What could be more hypocritical than claiming to believe in the Abrahamic God while practising the idolatry of worshipping an executed revolutionary as His co-equal?
What could be more blasphemous than to claim to worship God who has forbidden idolatry than to be guilty of the Supreme Blasphemy and Ultimate Idolatry of claiming that an executed revolutionary is the co-equal of Hashem/Allah?
Once it became legal to deny the Trinity in 1813, the lifeblood of the lies that made up Christianity drained away. 200 years later, Christian faith is now so drained away that it was discovered that the Archbishop of Canterbury himself forgot that he was supposed to believe in that absurdity. He was heard to be declaring that while he sometimes doubted the existence of God, he was sure Christ definitely existed.
When Christians took their faith seriously, they would burn other Christians at the stake for heresy, which was defined as denying the Trinity. Michael Servetus was burned at the stake for this in 1553, but most Christians are not aware of the bloody and totalitarian history of Christianity.
His execution was at the behest of John Calvin who promoted usury which has now ended in negative interest rates to punish savers.
When you point out the idolatry of Christianity to Christians, they would look at you with blank incomprehension or claim they don't care that they are idolatrous, unmindful of the fact that the Abrahamic God that they claim to believe in expressly and specifically forbade idolatry from the time of Moses. Later, God also sent a warner against idolatry in the form of Muhammad, but because no violence was done to them, they thought they had escaped the consequences of their lies. But have they? God if He exists would be infinitely patient and has all of eternity to wait for the lying idolatrous hypocritical blaspheming Christian to suffer the consequences of the sin of idolatry, which is its own punishment.
The chief harm of idolatry is that it leads ineluctably to self-worship and the self-destruction of Narcissus.
The idolater would be so focused on his idolatry that he will ignore Truth, Logic and Morality itself while claiming to support it, so hypocritical is he.
0:01 I didn't manage to get the sound of the Aaron "party" stream after all. Apologies. This Neo-Nazi/alt-right house party in Jerusalem has been deleted.
2:00 Aaron Amihud won't let me on his streams because he hates and fears Secular Koranism. If you asked him for a reason, he would pretend it is for reasons of restoring the patriarchy, but that is just nonsense, and restoring the patriarchy does not mean not allowing Claire Khaw - who wants to restore the patriarchy - on your streams. My position is that only Secular Koranism would restore the patriarchy in Western nations and Aaron in his cowardice cannot accept that nor can he argue against it. Christianity is kaput and is in any case idolatrous, so as a Jew Aaron cannot tell Western nations to be more Christian. He knows he is conflicted, and he knows I know he is conflicted and that is the real reason why he bans me from his streams. In fact, I tried to ask him about his views on Chabad's Jew-administered Noahidism, but he ended a stream rather than answer my question, because he feared my forensic questioning. We presented five streams together at his suggestion and you can hear them all at https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLLiyerKd2Lcq7G082L7Ua182pWqkHNSyp It seems he gave up trying to demonstrate that Secular Koranism was not viable or moral and wants to deprive me of the oxygen of publicity by excluding me from the conversation, just like liberal media.
4:00 The irony of Jewish Aaron allowing White Nationalists and larping Nazis to take over his stream
6:00 My exchanges with Chabad rabbis on the Noahide laws
8:00 The medium of the written word is more subject to analysis than the spoken word.
10:00 Our religion defines our politics.
11:00 Religion is a standard of behaviour.
12:00 Unprincipled people make society unstable and life unpredictable.
13:00 A political system with a high turnover means the velocity of buck-passing is high and government unaccountable.
14:00 We prefer to deal with people we know and trust.
15:00 We want our leader to be the same person for as long as possible if we already trust him.
16:00 The obvious solution of a one party theocracy
17:00 All political parties should promote the national interest, and nationalism is government in the national interest.
18:00 Wisdom is long-term thinking with a goal in mind, and with the discipline of postponing pleasure, to the extent of waiting until the afterlife to enjoy guilty pleasures.
19:00 Time and energy is wasted in political rallies, making false promises and telling lies in liberal democracies.
20:00 Just govern the country properly already!
21:00 Democracy and Christianity is really stupid so it was always bound to crash and burn anyway. Antisemites attribute the indifference, incompetence and corruption of their governments to Jewish subversion and refuse to believe that their kaput religion that they themselves don't even believe in and the democracy that they now reject for a White Nationalist Dictator were anything less than perfect, until the Jews came along. They are like a householder whose roof is leaking going around beating up other members of the household after falsely accusing them of causing the roof to leak and evicting them rather than calling the roofer. Things will only get worse for the White Man if he does not adopt Secular Koranism pronto.
22:00 The bloody history of schismatic Christianity and the European Wars of Religion
23:00 People of the same race and religion can be horrid to each other eg European Wars of Religion, War of the Roses, the Highland Clearances, the American Civil War, WW1, WW2,
24:00 The in-fighting of echo chambers and the splintering of echo chambers into mini-echo chambers
25:00 Patriarchy is more likely to endure in a theocracy that promotes patriarchal moral values.
26:00 Even murderers can see the point of laws against homicide.
27:00 The New Testament is not a good enough document to base your theocracy on, but the Koran is. The Torah is far too harsh even for Jews, which is why over the centuries they have interpreted away most of it with the Talmud.
28:00 The defective scripture of Buddhism and Hindus explains why they have never achieved empire. The Chinese government is wise enough not to identify China with Buddhism because it is useless for statecraft. For statecraft, the Chinese government has always used political philosophers operating on legalism. Legalism would have a field day with Secular Koranism and I look forward to the day when I hear the Chinese government proclaiming that it is operating "Secular Koranisim with Chinese characteristics". It is envisaged that there will be many varieties of Secular Koranism eg American, French, Italian, German, Polish, Hungarian, Austrian, Russian, Irish etc and last but not least, one with British characteristics, whatever that will mean by then.
29:00 There is a natural and logical hierarchy of everything.
30:00 The impracticable ideas of the French Revolution
31:00 Egalitarianism is the greatest injustice of treating unequal things equally, but the caste system is too rigid. Secular Koranism will bring about a socially mobile meritocracy that is intended to benefit the traditionally despised lower middle classes.
32:00 A meritocracy logically and necessarily has class mobility and Secular Koranism would bring this about by giving society a formal hierarchy while allowing for class mobility. In practice, Secular Koranism would favour the lower middle classes that have been traditionally despised by those above and below them. Islamic inheritance rules and freedom of disposition
33:00 The eugenic nature of marriage and how it is the indispensable ingredient of patriarchy
34:00 I have been asking white people to take me to their leader for years but nobody can tell me who it is really because the velocity of the buck-passing is increasing ie the buck was being passed around faster and faster until it is now just a blur. Harry Truman was saying as long ago as the 1950s that the buck stops at the White House, but that didn't happen, did it? Perhaps it is time for America to have a more Chinese political system. This would stop them from being always angry and envious of the Chinese and I think this is what the Chinese are hoping the Americans will do, eventually. Presumably, this is why the Chinese are producing their helpful and tuneful propaganda videos with catchy songs sung in American accents about how China is run so much better with its much cleverer politicians because it just has a much more rational political system run by people who are not completely intellectually crippled through indoctrination by feminism and Political Correctness.
35:00 The long term national interest, national identity and how history is being taught
36:00 Female masochism
37:00 BBC Radio 4 dumbed down by feminism.
38:00 Perhaps 2020 will be the year my genius is nationally and perhaps internationally acknowledged. This is not just for my own aggrandisement and I am thinking of my dear parents. Currently, they think I am just a crank, so it would be so nice if they could feel proud of me after all they have done for me, having paid for my expensive education.
39:00 Phatic expressions of antisemitism are an emotional release for emasculated and helpless men like OV and his associates who know their matriarchy only wants them to become women and will provide them with the means to mutilate their sex organs and sterilise themselves, further morally crippling the men and making it impossible for them to even aspire to become a society of married fathers that is a patriarchy. Make no mistake: a matriarchy is in fact satanic, and, dare I say it, Amalekite. I am not saying they should be exterminated by Jews, of course. In any case, Jews are only a very small minority of humanity and lack the personnel to do so even if they wanted to.
"As of 2010, there were about 14 million Jews around the world, representing 0.2% of the global population."
The problem is that there is an Amalekite in each of us in the form of the Yetzer Hara, the evil inclination. It was Muhammad who said that the Greater Jihad is the struggle with oneself.
If Jews have a duty to the gentile, the it must be to denounce Christianity as being kaput, idolatrous and blasphemous to monotheism and to raise the status of Islam by being declared it Noahide-compliant.
My communications with a Chabad Rabbi Michael Schulman https://asknoah.org/wp-content/uploads/rebuttal-of-claims-that-secular-koranism-is-noahide-compliant.pdf have revealed that Chabadniks are not about to endorse Secular Koranism as Noahide-compliant because they are themselves pushing a Jew-administered Noahidism on ex-Christians who are presumably Islamophobic and dim-witted. Indeed, they do not regard Muslims or Islam or the Koran as being Noahide -compliant. The reason they give is that the Koran does not punish idolatry or blasphemy as harshly as Jews ie with the death penalty.
Why would any gentile subject himself to a religion run by rabbis who would execute gentiles for idolatry if they could rather than trust other gentiles to run their society properly without infringing the First Amendment as Secular Koranism is guaranteed to do? One has to wonder at the as yet unplumbed depths of human stupidity.
40:00 Why I like discussing religion with rabbis
41:00 Why is child prostitution not being run by white men but by non-white and foreign gangs?
44:00 Condoning underage sex plays into the hands of child prostitution gangs
45:00 If child prostitution gangs were run by white men, Islamophobic white men would be shrugging their shoulders.
46:00 White sex predators work alone because they lack male solidarity having never met their unmarried fathers and were "educated" in their co-ed schools by female teachers. Non-white men tend to come from married parents which means they are more likely to have the male solidarity and male co-operation necessary to share information and resources with each other to run an enterprise, criminal or otherwise.
48:00 No British philosopher will even discuss the definition of masculinity, certainly not the late of Roger Scruton who pointedly refused to discuss feminism with me. Indeed, I recently heard a rumour that he was known to be bisexual. https://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.com/2013/03/roger-scruton-conservative-philosopher.html While my own morals have not been perfect, I have no difficulty at all discussing what the law should be as regards sexual morality and propose to treat unmarried parents as sex offenders attracting the punishment of quran.com/24/2.
50:00 I define a Christian as someone who has been confirmed. There are not that many of them.
Canon Angela Tilby feels "existential dread" while thinking of God "questioning our pride and reminding us of our smallness". She thinks of the doomed expedition of Captain Scott and of the 16th century philosopher Francis Bacon speaking with such confidence of "stretching the limits of human dominion", of "putting Nature on the rack of science and torturing her for her secrets".
She is uneasy after so many centuries of blasphemous idolatry by the British, of worshipping the supreme and eternal Abrahamic God as a man with a friendly kindly face, and wonders whether we now need to "discover how far away we are from God to recognise God's love confronting us through fire and through ice, with an otherness we can barely comprehend*, even as it calls us to weep our way to sanity."
Damn right, Angie baby.
* In my view, the Jewish and Islamic conception of God as the Supreme Being who created the Universe by kicking it off with the Big Bang but who now lives outside it as pure spirit, sending the Holy Spirit from time to time to perform miracles, is probably the most logical way of looking at things. This makes Christianity the odd one out and the weakest link. However, I like to think it is not too late to repent.
The law under liberalism is an ass, but why doesn't Christianity protect Western nations from gay marriage? Because it is kaput. Can any society survive without practising marriage and family values? The fact is that a matriarchy is a society whose members mostly do not practise marriage. All advanced civilisations are patriarchies, and all primitive, declining, extinct or soon to be extinct societies are matriarchies. If matriarchy is the problem, then patriarchy must be the solution. If patriarchy is the destination, then theocracy must be the vehicle. The kind of theocracy to choose would be one based in divinely revealed scripture eg the Torah or the Koran, because everything else is changeable or would fall out of fashion. Both Jews and Muslims are agreed that Christians are idolatrous because they worship an executed revolutionary as the co-equal of the supreme and eternal Abrahamic God.
Since the West became great as a Christian nation practising patriarchal moral values, it is time to consider its replacement, because no society can survive without a religion to bind its members together. Religion comes from the Latin "religare", which means "to bind". Religion is therefore the means that will obtain your society social cohesion and the building blocks of a stable society are families in which both husband and wife live together rearing their children in a loving relationship. The golden thread that runs through all the five world religions is respect for the practice of marriage and family values. Christianity no longer maintains the minimum standard of sexual morality that makes couples marry before they have children. The link between criminality and illegitimacy has been well-established over the ages.
If you believed in the Abrahamic God, you would find it easy to accept that Christians would be cursed by God for practising the idolatry He has specifically and explicitly forbidden in His Ten Commandments for 2000 years without showing any signs of remorse.
Even if you did not believe in God, you should be able to see how idolatry leads to self-worship because idolatry implicitly rejects the rule of God's laws found in the Torah or the Koran. Self-worship would lead ineluctably to self-destruction, which was what happened to Narcissus. It is not for nothing that a mental disorder was named after him. How long could any civilisation survive if both the governed (who will soon become ungovernable) and their government suffered from Narcissistic Personality Disorder?
The point is that practising idolatry means that we eventually fall into self-worship and therefore what happened to Narcissus will also happen to us and our civilisation if we reject Truth, Logic and Morality in favour of our own emotional, irrational and immoral nihilistic preferences.
1) Is there a panel of senior rabbis - Chabad and non-Chabad - prepared to discuss honestly and rationally whether America is a Noahide nation?
2) What is to be done by Jews, God's Chosen People, if it is concluded that the greatest superpower on earth is not a Noahide nation?
3) Are senior rabbis obliged to carry out Kiddush Hashem if it is agreed by them that America is not a Noahide nation and its political establishment refuses to repent?
4) Are senior rabbis religiously obliged to declare whether it is Christianity or Islam that is more in conformity with the Noahide laws?
5) What were Jews chosen by God to do if not to promote the Noahide laws among gentiles for the advancement of civilisation?
7) If Jews do not have the power to enforce the Noahide laws on gentiles as a nation, are they not at least religiously obliged to formally declare whether Christianity or Islam is more in conformity with the Noahide laws?
8) Is the reason why America is not a Noahide nation because the Americans separated the church from their state?
9) What is the state but the enforcer of laws?
10) What is so bad about Christianity that its church had to be separated from their state?
11) Is the reason why the Americans separated the church from their state because of the idolatrous and totalitarian nature of the Doctrine of the Trinity and the schism and fanaticism this caused in different competing Christian groups?
12) If Christianity is kaput, are Jews not obliged to point this out to save the Post-Christian Westerner from error and disaster?
13) Are senior rabbis neglecting their religious obligation to God if they refuse - out of cowardice - to declare whether Christianity or Islam is more in conformity with the Noahide laws?
14) How long have senior rabbis been neglecting their religious obligation to point out to Christians that they are committing the abomination of idolatry?
15) Now that Westerners are overwhelmingly Post-Christian rather than Christian, is it now safe for senior rabbis to point out the idolatry of Christianity, perhaps jointly with Muslims who agree with Jews about the idolatry of Christianity?
16) What should happen to Jews who neglect to perform their religious obligations towards to the gentile because of moral cowardice?
18) Should Israel of all places in the world be a theocracy rather than a colonial outpost of d declining empire promoting Transnational Progressivism AKA "globohomo" falling into its Thucydides Trap?
19) Are senior rabbis who refuse to perform their religious obligation to the gentile to save him from error and disaster in fact guilty of Chillul Hashem?
20) Are senior rabbis who refuse to perform their religious obligation to the gentile to save him from error and disaster in danger of being swallowed by a whale?
27:00 Judaism is stricter - requiring the death penalty - about idolatry than Islam because Jews are only a tribe, while gentiles are far more in number than Jews
29:00 Why God might be offended by idolatry
30:00 Why the Normans assimilated and disappeared
31:00 Jews are the world's most ancient tribe
32:00 Judaism has preserved the existence of Jews.
33:00 Jews would be nothing without Judaism.
34:00 Nancy Pelosi
35:00 The adherents of the Abrahamic faiths don't practise their religious principles.
36:00 Ideological determinism and the neurosis caused when your nation and your people lose their identity through the failure of their religion
37:00 The irreligious alt-right eg Richard Spencer, Brutus, Greg Johnson
38:00 The Darwinian struggle for survival of the deities. The Titans and the Olympians
39:00 The advancement of civilisation is evidenced by the reduction in the number of deities.
1:09:00 Sharia dispenses with a parasitic priesthood.
1:10:00 Only God can forgive us our sins, no member of a corruptible priesthood has the capacity to forgive us our sins.
1:15:00 Confession was the Big Brother of the Middle Ages
1:16:00 Morality should not be an option but enforced by law.
1:17:00 God helps those who help themselves. If something should be done, then it must be done. If it must be done, then it should be done as soon as possible.
1:18:00 We don't want degenerate badly parented offspring.
1:19:00 I am accused of being utilitarian
1:20:00 Apathy and despair is stirred up obviously ineffective action.
Prophets are givers of unwanted advice to nations, empires and entire civilisations and are sometimes imprisoned and executed for their efforts. Shall I aspire to be an prophetess or am I already one? If my success as a prophetess is uncertain, let there be no mistake that this is what I intend.
My message is simple: it is not too late to repent, even after 2000 years of idolatry.
The fact that God has not yet zapped the West after 2000 years of idolatry is evidence of His patience, but it is not inexhaustible.
It should have been obviously long ago that worshipping an executed revolutionary as the co-equal of God is ipso facto idolatry, and idolatry has been specifically and explicitly forbidden by the Abrahamic God Christians claim to worship in His Commandments.
That Christians claim to worship the Abrahamic God while blatantly practising the idolatry He has forbidden is one of the infamous exhibitions of doublethink and pious hypocrisy.
If Jews are indeed light of the nations and Muslims indeed those who enjoin good and forbid evil, they would have issued their joint statement denouncing the idolatry of Christianity as soon as it became possible to do so without being burned at the stake.
Since the danger of this happening has receded through the centuries, the time for doing this is now ripe. There is therefore now no excuse for the cowardice of Jews and Muslims.
I have in mind Rabbi Sacks and Tim Winter AKA Abdal Hakim Murad holding a press conference to this effect.
It only has to be pointed out that Christianity is less in conformity with the Noahide laws because of its idolatry than Islam (which more than satisfies its minimum moral standards because it does not fall foul of the Commandment against idolatry). When this is finally made clear and understood, the way to the right path will become clear.
From 52:00 Church of Entropy accuses me of being a worshiper of graven images because I want to go by the book and follow the rules.
I had to leave the hangout because there was a call I wanted to take.
If @Theocracy4all was a mother, I can see her putting her child into the dryer to "toughen them up" and later on being confused about why they weren't grateful for the "service". pic.twitter.com/W536uYElXU
I think it is because you are not a mother that makes you want to mother immature adult males who may be considered vulnerable or suffering from mental illness or some defect of character or error of truth, logic or morality. They should not be encouraged.
you're actively discouraging people from participating in an important conversation. your ad homs are tantamount to censorship. I simply seek to teach in a healthy environment whereas you are actively corralling people with tabloid threats. that's why you fail. https://t.co/O74NWZlODI
I think the lessons would be quickly learned when we have a debate on a topic of your choosing and then conduct a post mortem on why you lost the argument. This would be most enjoyable and educational.
It has been suggested and encouraged of me that I should begin writing more on my thoughts. I have spoken on the subject of Objectivity so I will attempt to explain my opinions on the matter. Objectivity is an interesting concept but I have come to doubt if its possible for us to be objective. I believe that there is such a thing as objective truth, even it is for practical reasons and I say this because there was a time where I doubted the very existence of Truth. This was a dark time in my life and during that time I became very familiar with nihilism. Alas, here I am on the other side writing about how my ideas evolved. As I have said, I believe in objective truth for practical reasons; although can we know objective truth? That is my question. I’m not a scholar, I’m not an academic. I’m a layman that thinks he has something worth saying and so here I am. I suppose I’ll start at the beginning. How do we come to know things? I say we learn through symbols. Language, picture, example; these are all types of symbols; a method of communication that simplifies a message for transportation from one mind to another. The idea, for example, that is in my mind is very easy for me to picture. I can explain my thoughts to myself with very little effort and very little time but to explain my thoughts to another requires me to write hundreds of words in a specific order and I can assure you, its taking much more effort and much more time. This is why I say that we communicate in symbols; even the very words I’m writing are symbols, painting images (hopefully) in your mind; and this is why I say that we cannot know objective truth. For do images tell us objective truth? Does seeing a painting allow you to understand the emotion that the painter felt while painting as he felt them, or is it merely symbols of his emotion? If you’re honest, I think, you know the answer. You can feel something close perhaps, but certainly not the same. And this is what I’m trying to articulate. We can get close to objective truth but how close? It’s impossible for me to say. But there is such a thing as purposeful deception, therefore anything in the opposite direction to purposeful deception brings us closer to objective truth but when we reach this place we call objective truth, and we see or hear it with our senses; can we perceive it honestly, or are we still seeing symbols and silhouettes as our senses attempt to translate this truth into our minds? Furthermore, if we tried to communicate this truth to another, could we do it? Would they understand what we were trying to paint in their mind? Could we paint the truth in their mind as it was painted in ours? To understand a truth as you yourself understand it, would require someone to be you. You have given words their meanings, symbols mean something to you that is unique to you by the very act of being conscious, having memory, and living. How long would it take, how many words would you have to write or speak to get your message across? And even if you felt that you phrased or painted your message in the best way you could, even if you thought you did a perfect job, would that be sufficient? How many languages would you have to learn to be able to translate your message to every person in the world? Can everyone know objective truth? Is that a good thing? My position is one I call Subjective Absolutism. I believe there are evils in this world and goods but I recognise that I can’t convince everyone on Earth of my opinions. Does that mean that I ignore my life experiences because I can’t prove it scientifically or if I can’t find someone who agrees with me? Emphatically no. To deny these truths would be akin to denying my very existence. So what is the best course of action? I hold many controversial beliefs, and some of my beliefs I would die for. Is it worth my time to convince someone to believe what I believe, and die for them also? Probably not. So what I do instead is move against the direction of purposeful deception. I don’t aim to convince people of truth, I just speak my truth (forgive the leftist language) and people agree or disagree.
I’m not interested in converting people to my views, neither am I interested in being converted. I weigh the truthfulness of a statement with my own knowledge and judge the statement accordingly, as does everyone else. I have done an insufficient job at trying to explain why its theoretically impossible and highly improbable for the human mind to comprehend objective truth although I have tried, and my aim wasn’t to convince you. I guess what I’m trying to do is say that objective truth is more-or-less irrelevant to our lives. I suppose I’m trying to make a case for Relativism that doesn’t throw away Objectivity because to say there is no such thing as objective truth is (not only saying that the Universe is nothing but lies) an oxymoron for that is a truth statement which goes against the tenets of Relativism. Not only is the mainstream caricature of Relativism self-contradictory, its also evil. This is why I feel the need to offer up an alternative and the best one I can come up with is Subjective Absolutism. Things are true for me without the need to prove them to you. I can only convince someone who is able to be convinced.
This may seem like more of the same from the Cultural Marxists, Moral Relatives etc. But I think I’ve formulated a coherent framework to understanding truth and in fact I think that being able to discard the belief that anyone has the ability to spread the gospel of Objectivity actually empowers people. You can fight for what you know to be true without having to justify it. You can act on your instincts and manifest the world according to your own Will to Power. You don’t have to live under anyone else’s myths. Form your own and seek the truth.
And with that, I’ll leave you.
WLL2PWR
QUESTIONS FOR WILL
1. On what matter do you wish to know "the objective truth"?
2. What made you doubt "the very existence of truth"?
3. What was the attraction of nihilism when you became "very famliiar" with it?
4. What is "the other side" of nihilism?
5. Why are you obsessed with "the objective truth"?
6. You ask if images tell "an objective truth". Can you give an example of an image whose objective truth you wish to know?
7. You ask: "Does seeing a painting allow you to understand the emotion that the painter felt while painting as he felt them, or is it merely symbols of his emotion?" Which painting by which painter do you have in mind when you ask this question and why do you want to know his emotions? If he is already an important painter, there will be a range of scholarly interpretations of this painting and that should satisfy you.
8. Is your search for truth an affection and if so, what is the purpose of this affectation?
You ask: " ... if we tried to communicate this truth to another, could we do it?" It is always possible communicate the truth of our opinion ie that "X believes Y" even if this belief is arrant nonsense.
9. You ask: "Would they understand what we were trying to paint in their mind?" You must know that it is impossible paint any truth in anyone's mind. Therefore you speak in metaphors and then confuse yourself by taking your metaphor literally. What you may mean to ask is "Is it possible to make oneself understood?" and bear in mind that it is impossible to explain or understand nonsense. The best thing to do when faced with people talking nonsense is to question their mental health and ask what motivates them to talk nonsense eg affectation through wanting to come across as deep, romantic, troubled, passionate etc.
10. You ask: "How long would it take, how many words would you have to write or speak to get your message across?" It depends on how good you are at expressing yourself and your command of the language you are using.
11. You ask: "And even if you felt that you phrased or painted your message in the best way you could, even if you thought you did a perfect job, would that be sufficient?" Sufficient for what? Persuade your listener to agree with you? You and I already know the answer. Many people are not respectful of truth, logic or morality and consider their egos to be more important than submitting to the truth, the exercise of logic and obeying the rules of morality. Are you perhaps one of them?
12. You ask: "How many languages would you have to learn to be able to translate your message to every person in the world?" Why would anyone want to do that unless they had an important message? What makes you think your message, whatever it is, is that important? If your message were sufficiently important, you would already have been able to articulate it in your own language to persuade your own countrymen of its importance. If they also thought it was important enough, they would make it known to the world.
13. You ask: "Can everyone know objective truth?" The objective truth of what?
14. You ask: " Is that a good thing?" Can you think of an example of it being a bad thing for someone to know "objective truth"?
15. You ask: "Does that mean that I ignore my life experiences because I can’t prove it scientifically or if I can’t find someone who agrees with me?" Who is asking you to ignore your life experiences? Which idea of yours do you believe to be so important or useful that you so earnestly desire it to be validated by others?
16. Which beliefs of yours are you prepared to die for?
17. When you speak of moving "against the direction of purposeful deception", are you talking about government propaganda?
18. What is your truth?
19. When you say: "I’m not interested in converting people to my views, neither am I interested in being converted," are you saying that your ideas are not up for debate and you are not prepared to debate other people's ideas? If that is the case, then you are expecting people to agree with you without understanding the basis of your beliefs or theirs. You seem to be asking for unconditional love. What makes you think you deserve this?
20. You say: "I guess what I’m trying to do is say that objective truth is more-or-less irrelevant to our lives." If what you are trying to say is that the objective truth is irrelevant to our lives, then why are you wasting time and energy agonising and obsessing about it?
21. "Things are true for me without the need to prove them to you." On the one hand, the truth (about what?) is so important that you have been agonising and obsessing about it for years, on the other, you say it is only your subjective opinion about some unimportant matter that it is not worthwhile to discuss. Which is it?
22. You say: " You can fight for what you know to be true without having to justify it." What do you know to be true? What is the truth that you cannot justify? Why would you fight for something that you dare not articulate and have so far failed to explain?
23. You say: "You don’t have to live under anyone else’s myths." What myths are you referring to?
24. You say: "Form your own and seek the truth." What myths are you forming? What truth are you seeking?
25. Are you confusing fact with opinion?
26. What is the truth you are avoiding?
27. Are you seeking a definite answer to whether there is an afterlife and whether God exists?
28. Do you lack the maturity to accept uncertainty as well as submit to truth, logic and morality?
29. Has it occurred to you that if you find uncertainty distressing, you could choose to believe in God?
30. If you want to worship the Abrahamic God as a gentile, only Islam remains now that you know Christianity has been idolatrous for 2000 years. You may remember from the Ten Commandments that God has forbidden idolatry and should expect Him to punish it, especially after 2000 years of its practice.
We can deduce God's will through His laws. If we are Jews, we follow Judaism. If we are gentile, we follow God's laws for gentiles. The New Testament has nothing to base any laws on, so we follow the Koran which informs us that Christians are idolatrous. Jews hold the same view. https://t.co/EDPYyg3mGC
The rules work only as long as people follow them, as logic would tell you. Why aren't the rule breakers punished? We know that all people break their own rules, but also know that none have done so as blatantly as Christians or for as long ie 2000 years over the worst sin.
I think your problem is your inability to acknowledge that the doctrine of the Trinity is idolatrous or the endemic corruption of your priesthood over the centuries. The defects of your religion and political system you blame on Jews, with very little self-examination.
The corrupt Christian Trinitarian bargain is as follows: people who call themselves Christians *pretend* to believe that an executed revolutionary is the co-equal of the supreme and eternal Abrahamic God and their corrupt priesthood *pretend* to forgive them their sins.
The bargain made between your Christian ancestors and their government was as follows: call yourself Christian and pretend to believe that an executed revolutionary is the co-equal of the Abrahamic God to be different from Jews and Muslims, and the state will not persecute you.
Not surprisingly, the moment people who called themselves Christians were allowed to deny the Trinity, that was precisely what they did. And now the baby of Biblical morality has now been well and truly thrown out with the bathwater of their idolatrous Trinitarianism.
Not everyone can be persuaded to believe in God, but it is the law that limits our immorality. Our laws should be in conformity with our chosen moral system. The US constitution allows freedom of belief but Christianity is totalitarian and says you must believe Christ is God too.
When Rome fell in 476 CE, the Romans had the excuse of not having Islam available to save their civilisation. The Koran was revealed in the 600s. We do not have that excuse available to us.
Christians are basically people who are supposed to know from the Ten Commandments that idolatry is forbidden but have been practising it for 2000 years. When they took their religion seriously, they would burn anyone at the stake for pointing this out. https://t.co/e8SCoKpDwn
Knowing something is forbidden by the Ten Commandments yet practising it when you pray to an executed revolutionary you believe to be the co-equal of God for 2000 years is the best and biggest example of what Orwell described as doublethink. https://t.co/sUUEbITBAl
The idolatry of Hinduism is nothing compared to the hypocrisy of Christian idolatry, who were idolaters who would punish you for pointing out their idolatry. Because of the Crusades and Inquisition, Jews and Muslims to this day fear to point out Christian idolatry.
Having been practising idolatry for 2000 years, Christians imagined that God must have decided to retrospectively allow it. But God moves in mysterious ways and patiently waits to see if Christian idolaters will correct themselves in the light of their failing civilisation.
God if He exists has created a logical universe, that is, a universe that can be explained through the use of truth and logic as well as problems solved through the use of truth and logic. What stops us from using logic to solve problems is the presence of sin. pic.twitter.com/vS9yZ2KkA1
Even if you were an atheist, you would have to acknowledge, if you were being logical, that the laws of a deity supposed to be omnipotent and morally perfect would be better than anything lesser deities could come up with. Jews are conclusive evidence of divine protection.
Even if you were an atheist, you would have to acknowledge, if you were being logical, that the laws of a deity supposed to be omnipotent and morally perfect would be better than anything lesser deities could come up with. Jews are conclusive evidence of divine protection.
Since the narrative for Jews is that they have been given divine protection because they are God's Chosen People, it must be supposed that they were chosen to do some particular thing, which is to impose minimum standards of morality on gentile nations through the Noahide laws.
It can only be supposed that gentiles who reject the Noahide laws are Judeophobes, since they are truly universal motherhood and apple pie. https://t.co/qv3LvcNH62 No gentile who rejects the Noahide laws has been able to successfully disguise his or her burning antisemitism.
The battle for the West is really between Jews and Muslims with only one possible outcome. Christians have long ago dropped out of the picture since the West descended into deepening dementia. When it awakens, it will be as Muslim because Islam is easier than Judaism.
Why am I having such difficulty making these simple points? You would have thought many political activist would be eager to discuss the possible causes of Western and racial malaise, but these alt-right men seem incapable of even uttering the three words: RESTORE THE PATRIARCHY.
Addled by their atheism, alt-right men are incapable of responding to any call to arms. How would these men fight their eagerly awaited RAHOWA when they cannot bring themselves to discuss restoring the patriarchy, already knowing themselves to be hopelessly unmarriageable?
In a matriarchy, all men are lower than the unmarried mother, including POTUS. All that need be done is that men actually discuss the accuracy of my diagnosis with each other and leave off complaining about Jews, Muslims and non-whites, but they cannot even do this.
Alt-right men know that calling for the restoration of the patriarchy would not infringe any hate speech laws the way expressing hatred for Jews, Muslims and non-whites would. The truth is that they do not wish to restore the patriarchy because they are in fact unmarriageable.
Patriarchy is a society that prioritises the preferences of married fathers who want to parent their legitimate offspring properly. Matriarchy is a society that prioritises the preferences of unmarried mothers indifferent to the parenting of their illegitimate offspring.
Marriage is eugenic because it compels women to choose their male sex partner who must also be their husband on his ability to be a good husband and father, and men to choose their female sex partner who must be their wife on her ability to be a good wife and mother.
Marriage is eugenic because it compels women to choose their male sex partner who must also be their husband on his ability to be a good husband and father, and men to choose their female sex partner who must be their wife on her ability to be a good wife and mother.
Bastardy is dysgenic because the production of a bastard is conclusive evidence that its parents were not married at the time of conception, meaning that the copulating pair - who should be treated as sex offenders - were heedless of the rules of marriage and eugenics.
We should not be too surprised, however. The leading lights of the alt-right are men not known for being good husbands and fathers: an adulterer and sodomite whose followers are unmarriageable bachelors or husbands and fathers too terrified to reveal their identity.
The alt-right are therefore men rational marriageable women would avoid as husbands. Being unmarriageable, they are low status. Being low status, they can be ignored by senior men in the political establishment because they have no use at all for low status unmarriageable men.
The rational thing for low status men to do would be to demand status, or a rules that would give them a reasonable chance of raising their status. They do not ask for the rules to be changed, presumably because they don't expect to benefit from them even if they are changed.
These men are addled by their atheism, probably abusive and neglected childhoods brought up their unmarried mother, suffer from risk aversion and degeneracy. Many of them are past their prime suffering from autism, OCD, narcissism, sex addiction and other mental health issues.
The difference between unmarriageable atheists from broken homes suffering from addiction and marriageable men from whole families who believe in God with traditions to speak of are painfully obvious. If most of your countrymen are the former, your religion must have failed.
The failure of Christianity has no plausible deniability at all. The laughable attempt to save their souls by running from Protestantism to Catholicism and from Catholicism to Orthodox Christianity illustrates the inevitability of Islam. https://t.co/oJKIa254gA
There is an English saying, coined probably during the time when the English were pirates, that it is better to jump before one is pushed. Are there any particular advantages to jumping off the plank when made to walk it, before one is pushed off? Let us consider them.
Whether one jumps off the plank or is pushed off it, it is death. The most obvious benefit of jumping first is dignity and a shortening of the death process. We retain more of our dignity and we show that we took a rational decision rather than be crushed by a predictable event.
The most dignified to exist as a human is to be known for exercising reason rather than be the slave of the emotions of hate and fear. Western Man, having lost his dignity and reason, now only wishes to enjoy as many sexual encounters as he can have before he pops his clogs.
Degenerate Western Man knows that if were to talk about restoring the patriarchy he would have to talk about slut-shaming and talking about this would mean the withdrawal of sexual access to immoral women. He has in fact resigned himself to being lower than immoral women
As I have demonstrated, a matriarchy is society that prioritises the preferences of shameless unmarried mothers indifferent to the parenting of the next generation whose men shamelessly submit to them. Of course such men are not going to ever get their country back.
Since these men know they will not have descendants to speak of because they neither expect nor care to have offspring, they can only amuse themselves by complaining about their symptoms to each other but never seek a cure, because they do not expect to benefit from it. #nihilism
But why wouldn't an alt-right YouTuber have me on his channel for the sake of entertaining his subscribers? Because he does want to frighten them? Because he does not trust himself to discuss them? If that is indeed the case, then Western Man clearly does not deserve to be saved.
Why is idolatry to be avoided, if one is an atheist? Because if God did not exist, He is still an idea and the most powerful idea conceivable It is in fact impossible to conceive of anything more powerful than the Abrahamic God who is omniscient and perfectly moral.
Even if we denied the existence of God, we cannot deny the existence of what are said to be His laws in scripture. Therefore it would be prideful and irrational to refuse to read the Koran to consider the wisdom and justice of these laws when we are living in a failing state.
The alt-right could be a debating forum where full and frank exchanges could take place, but its most prominent members seem more preoccupied in generating conflict for its own sake or giving what they know their subscribers want: stock antisemitism, Islamophobia and racism.
What is so bad about idolatry? If you practice it, you go from an advanced civilisation that seeks knowledge and is known for its legal system to a detestable ape that is a slave to its appetites and irrational emotions, as Western men now are, and wish to remain.
