The Three Khavian Principles of a Decent Human Being

There are three principles any person claiming to be rational and moral ought to have: that of submitting to

1) Truth
2) Logic
3) Morality

No marriageable woman ie a woman of good character of child-bearing age who is rational and moral would want to marry a man who does not at least subscribe to these three principles.

The first two principles are easy enough to understand, but what is morality?

I would say it is a system of rules designed to keep the group in existence and apart from others. Religion has this effect and some religions are better at it than others. If the man in question is atheist, then he must at least be prepared to discuss what morality means, if he disagrees with my definition. Unfortunately, most women are not capable of having this discussion, though if she is already of good character, she should have a father capable of having this discussion with her intended.

Dishonest, irrational and immoral people would not be capable of having this discussion and should not be permitted to marry, for obvious reasons.

Two logic tests for Muslims on Donald Trump

Create your own user feedback survey

https://t.co/MIhmSNQuTY Logic test for Muslims on Donald Trump @realDonaldTrump

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) December 9, 2015

Trump against overthrowing the governments of Muslim countries

The Bishop of Bradford's grammar and the Syrian Question

http://nickbaines.wordpress.com/2013/09/01/something-must-be-done/

It is a cry that has gone up many times in the last couple of weeks. Something must be done about Syria. But, what exactly… and to what end?

• Something to save the lives of innocent children?
• Something to save the lives of innocent children from chemical attack?
• Something to save the lives of innocent children from any form of violent attack?
• Something to save the lives of innocent children from a future shaped by sectarian hatred, rage and revenge?

You have to laugh at the grammar of the Bishop of Bradford who wrote this egregious piece of idiocy.

If you ever you wanted an example of inane prattling, you can find no finer example than this.  

All properly formed sentences and questions would have a subject and a verb, but the bishop himself does not know this.   

What is he trying to say?

Fuck knows.  

What is he actually doing?

Wringing his hands and show to all and sundry that his wringing his hands like the good liberal he is.   

Being a nationalist, my guiding principles are:

1. to only embark on a course of action that serves the long term national interest
2. to refrain from embarking on any course of action that is detrimental to the long term national interest

The Bishop of Bradford only cares to display his liberal credentials, but the average voter cares nothing about his liberal credentials or about UK foreign policy because these matters are too abstract and far-removed from the concerns of the ordinary voter who only cares about the price of beer, milk, bread and other such mundane matters.

They might be prevailed upon to give a stuff or two about women and children if the women and children concerned are British, or European, or Western, but these women and children are Muslim, and we all know that the average non-Muslim Briton does not much care for Muslims.      

Ordinary voters suspect that the British political establishment is in thrall to Israel and her allies and/or Western arms manufacturers whose business will be improved when the government buys and uses armaments on its new and latest victims.  They assumed that there would be enough lobby fodder MPs to approve Cameron's warmongering, but were very pleasantly surprised.   

This was thanks to Diane Abbott, who threatened to resign if Ed Miliband rubber-stamped Cameron's proposal to romp into yet another war of liberal interventionism.   

All it takes is a few good men and women in Parliament capable of logical thought and moral reasoning to dig their heels in.   

Sadly, for the Church, it is now stuffed with second rate female vicars and infested by liberalism, feminism and third rate minds.  

Montaigne:

"Grammar is the logic of language."

"The greater part of world's problems is due to questions of grammar."  [When you let women have too much power, the study of grammar will be neglected, and the ability to reason logically will be arrested. Feminine hypocrisy and cowardice will be rewarded while masculine courage and truth punished.  These are all signs of a matriarchy, and the most conclusive sign of a matriarchy is when the institution of marriage has been desecrated with the connivance of those who are supposed to maintain the morals of the people ie the Church.]

Grammar is the logic of language and the British are largely illogical and immoral

A sign of degeneracy is the NUMBER OF people who say "the amount of people" with no one noticing or daring to correct them.

That is why the immigrants (who are not mostly sluts and bastards) keep coming. Most people who learn English as a foreign language know not to say "amount of people" and say instead "number of people".

Or they have their fathers who are around to correct them.

Or their elders do, without being stabbed in the face or accused of being paedos.