Sunday, November 22, 2015

The Quran vs. ISIS

This is the article I wish I didn’t have to write. But such are the circumstances of the world that I feel compelled to believe it is absolutely necessary. There will be some who disagree with me. There will be some who may write me off as an idiot and never read anything I write again. There are some who won’t bother to understand what I’m really saying here and some who won’t like it. So be it. My integrity to myself is far more important than followers and readers.

Honest and personal evaluation is needed in this case. No other opinion will do.

I have asked many people many times to provide me with irrefutable proof that the Quran is a book of violence. I have received in return many arguments, none based on the actual text of the Quran. I have received links to several sites that supposedly exposed violent passages from the Quran. All of those supposed references were either terribly mistranslated when compared to the actual texts, cross referenced with eight different translations, or they were taken terribly out of context.

It needs to be understood that I am ONLY comparing ISIS to the Quran. My current study is very limited and very specific. I am not saying that Islam is a great religion or a bad one. I’m not comparing the Quran, except where absolutely necessary, to the Bible. That ISIS is a bunch of psychopathic and rabid animals who cannot share the dignity of being called human needs no further endorsement from me than an observation of their own actions of any who care to look at them.

For the sake of definitions of terms and axioms there are many definitions of what insanity is. There is one that stands in my mind as the quickest and most comprehensive index as to what is considered to be insane. Insanity is the ability to distinguish differences.

Sunday, November 8, 2015

The anti-Liberal Techniques: Part 5

Criminals always accuse others of their own crimes. Always.

In my article “The anti-Liberal Techniques: Part 2” I wrote the following: “Do you think Rosie O’Donnell wants gun control laws to keep you from owning a gun? Maybe, but I think deep down she knows she’s a raving lunatic who is out of control of her own behavior, just enough to sense that it is her who shouldn’t have a gun. Think about this; it’s an irrational fear that someone is going to kill someone with a gun which they use as a reason to ban them. If it’s in Rosie’s head enough for her to say it, it must somehow also apply to her because she is the one saying people use guns to kill people. Whether this pattern of human nature is actually true or not, or even if you believe it or not, this is a line of logic that seems to work and so liberals have some serious trouble with it.”

In this article I’m going to develop that idea just a little bit further.

Let’s say you’re having a conversation about welfare with a liberal. You say something to the effect that you don’t think welfare should be increased. Now is the time to pay close attention to what they say next! Liberals don’t think. They are too full of unmitigated rage for that. They react emotionally to ideas they’ve got stuck in their own heads. By far the usual response will be something along the lines of, “You just want to starve children!”

Forget for the moment the complete lack of civil discourse here. Yes, it’s a bit shocking and completely untrue. Yes, you will be extremely tempted to react. But remember, the liberal is the one who doesn’t think. Don’t react! One helpful idea I keep in my mind for just such occasions is, “Just because I don’t agree with you doesn’t mean I endorse whatever delusion you think is the opposite.” You can say this to them if you like, and it’s great for creating those long pauses and stammering, but the best thing you can do is listen and think about what has just been said to you.

“You just want to starve children!”

Friday, November 6, 2015

The anti-Liberal Techniques: Part 4

A number of days ago I had one of those agonizing conversations with a liberal about the government funding for Planned Parenthood. It was instructive to the person who would study ways to defeat the liberal arguments. This particular liberal claimed to be very Pro-Life yet he was completely for the government funding of Planned Parenthood based on the other services they provide.

I have stated rather openly in my article “The anti-Liberal Techniques: Part 3” that the driving force behind all liberal policy is to kill people while pretending to help. Here you have just one more piece of evidence to support that supposition but it is still necessary to look a little deeper into why this is so; and more importantly how to defeat the argument. To that end we must first take a look into the issues of morals.

The subject of morals can be frustrating and complicated in and of itself. There are a lot of different points to consider between the various secular and non-secular arguments but I think for the most part, the vast majority of people, regardless of their religion, understand at some instinctive level what they are without actually putting the words to it. But that is not to say there aren’t adequate words to convey the basic idea succinctly, so that the broad masses of people could easily and unambiguously understand what is being discussed. When Thomas Jefferson wrote these words; “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness,” he hit the nail right on the head.

In spite of his invocation of their Creator in this statement, the words, “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness,” gives us a simple basis for understanding what morals are in relation to government, quite independent of any complicating religious factors. It is immoral to unjustly deprive a person of his life. It is immoral to unjustly deprive a person of his liberty. It is immoral to unjustly deprive a person of their ability to pursue their happiness. For a government to do any of these things is like a solid punch in the gut to any decent human being.