About Me

My Photo
“Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become more corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.” Benjamin Franklin

Friday, 29 May 2015

VW Kombi's, hippies and the sexual revolution.

I have in my time owned some old and unreliable cars.  In our first year of marriage we owned a 1954 VW Kombi that was in less than pristine condition. However, in 1971 at the height of the hippy movement, it was de rigueur.

I remember filling it with friends and heading off to Mt Hutt ski field.  Not that we skied mind you, we were too cool for that, but just to hang out and fool around in the snow. Getting up the mountain was a huge struggle for the VW, and as I recall we had to get people out of the van to help push it up the last steep access path and into the ski field car park.

Moving downhill on the return journey was easy, the problem was reversed, how to prevent it from gaining too much speed on the way down the mountain when it was overloaded and under braked, and preventing a great day out from turning into a disaster.

It’s been a long slog up hill for the sexual revolution, with everyone finally getting out to push gay marriage into the car park of public respectability.  We have played in the snow for a while, and are now on the way back down the hill.  I’m surprised how quickly we are gaining speed.

In today's papers, two articles came to my attention.  The first in relation to sex education in schools, which contained the extraordinary assertion that the program was going to focus on “examining the bias that opposite sex relationships are normal.

You might want to pause for a moment and reflect on the profound implications of that statement made by a representative of our Ministry of Education.

As we gather speed downhill, we can no longer assume that a state sex education program will be predicated on the historical idea that opposite sex relationships are normal. That is now a ‘bias’ that needs to be redressed in the minds of the next generation.  

Parents, fasten your seat belts please.

However, that’s only the beginning.  Our educationalist elite sincerely believes that gender is just a social construct, and has little or nothing to do with your biology that is defined at conception.  In other words, we are environmentally determined. Consequently, having separate and distinct school uniforms, one kind for boys and another for girls, simply reinforces negative gender stereotypes.

This cannot be allowed to continue. The Ministry of Education is now urging schools to address this negative gender bias issue the next time their school uniforms are redesigned.

Oh, I almost forgot, there is a recommendation to ‘review toilet spaces’ as well.  Having ‘male’ and ‘female’ or ‘boys’ and ‘girls’ on the doors really does make the ‘transgendered’ and ‘gender flexible’ students feel confused about where to pee.

At one level, it is very difficult to take this seriously, but be assured, these agents of social change are deadly serious, and your children and grand children are their targets.

Then Stuff launches what can be best described as an unashamed promotion for web and mobile phone apps that facilitate one night stands and random hook ups, implicit in the text is the notion that monogamy is now ‘old school’.

In the article Jessie tells us, maybe she wasn't quite like the ladies she saw at church, that maybe the sexual strictures of life in D.C.'s monied suburbs weren't for her.”

Her first marriage, in her early 20s, had ended after an affair. (Hers.) Her second marriage, started shortly thereafter, was "happy — very happy," but as her boys grew up and moved out and moved on, she was left faintly bored. She thought about cheating on her husband of 20 years. She considered bars, parties, a review of the lapses in her mid-20s.

Instead, she sat her husband down and told him something that more and more progressive couples are beginning to realise. They loved each other and wanted to stay together — but in the age of Tinder and Ashley Madison and OkCupid, they also both wanted to have other options. Options they knew were just a click away.’

How very adult, progressive, sophisticated and de jure.

Don’t you like that she ‘sat her husband down’ and explained the facts to him in words of one syllable so he could understand.  I’m sure he would subsequently enjoy having her accompany him to his staff Christmas parties, delighted that she has taken a shine to the new accounts clerk that he recently employed.  That would make for interesting dynamics at work.   Or perhaps he has been cheating on her with the same guy, and now that it’s out in the open, the three of them can just ‘kiss and make out’?

Once you open this door, there is no limit to the sexual expressions available to consenting adults.

Stuff then goes on to quote the founder of ‘Open Minded’ who says:

"If you look at marriage, it developed as a survival strategy and a means of raising kids," Wade said. "But relationships are no longer a necessary component of life. People have careers and other interests — they can survive without them."

The brakes on the Kombi are truly smoking!

All we need to be fully satisfied is to have relationship free uncomplicated sex with multiple partners.  Who knew?

In a recent post I referenced a book, ‘Family and Civilization’ by Charle C. Zimmerman, that refers to three family types, Trustee, Domestic and Atomized.

The Atomized family type was the one that preceded the collapse of ancient Greece, and also ancient Rome.  They were characterized by divorce, promiscuity, and homosexuality.  These outcomes are the fruit of lives focused on individual choice, and sensuality rather than the collective sacrifices necessary by both husband and wife to produce, nurture and raise the next generation.

As wade said, ‘relationships are no longer necessary, we can survive without them’. Perhaps, but logic dictates this can only be true for one generation. 

What happens to our culture, our civilization or even our economy if we continue to devalue the natural family and the monogamous relationships designed to protect and sustain it?  Absent children, who are going to be the consumers and the rest home ‘care givers’ for the present generation when they grow old? 

Perhaps it will be the immigrants that don’t share our values?

The Kombi will get to the bottom of the hill that much is certain; the only question surrounds the condition of the occupants when it arrives.  With the present rate of change, we won’t have to wait very long to find out.

Thursday, 28 May 2015

“Our Values Are of no Interest to Immigrants” - A Vienna defence attorney's reflections.

I have reproduced this article by practicing Vienna Attorney Rudolf Mayer because he makes two observations that I have repeatedly asserted.

First, in respect to immigration, and specifically Muslim immigration he says Social romanticists are attached to the idea that succeeding generations automatically integrate better. So the second generation is better integrated than the first, and the third better than the second. 

Anyone who says that today is naïve and out of touch with real life.”

And second, What is needed to prevent young people from going bad is a counter-offer, a kind of counter-propaganda.” I often refer to this as ‘a more powerful idea’. “What is our appealing counter-offer? The only thing we can use to attract them is earning money. But that is of no value to them.”  Here he is repeating my often stated view that the pull of secular materialism is insufficient to capture the hearts and minds of these young people who have embraced 'a more powerful idea'. 

Prominent Viennese attorney Rudolf Mayer makes a devastating judgement on integration policy.

VIENNA. Attorney Rudolf Mayer (67) represented Josef Fritzl, the “Ice Cream Killer” Estibilaz Carranz and the serial murderer Elfriede Blauensteiner, known as the “Black Widow.”* Less prominent were the numerous youthful criminals represented over a 34-year span by the former parole officer.

Currently among his clients is a 14-year-old alleged jihadist, who is said to have planned a bomb attack on Vienna’s Western Train Station. Mayer is also representing a 16-year-old in Favoriten district, who with his twelve companions is said to have broken into 300 cars and to have relieved other young people of their cell phones. Mayer had already gotten his client out of pre-trial detention when the latter went robbing again.

This Turkish gang, in turn, was relieved of its ill-gotten gains by a Chechen gang called “Goldenberg.” And those even tougher Favoriten youths are being tried for several break-ins to supermarkets and pharmacies.

In his practice, Mayer has studied what an example such youngsters are for criminals. Speaking with the Wiener Zeitung, the attorney gives his account of domestic integration policy. He considers it a failure.

His focus on younger, male immigrants already going bad may represent just a snippet of reality. Nonetheless, we think it appropriate, in the context of a broad debate on integration, to document his provocative opinions. Subsequently, social workers and integration politicians will have their turn to speak here.

“Integration in the third generation is worse than in the first”

“Essentially, every person ought to have the right to choose his residence on the earth, with no time limit. The idea of cosmopolitanism must be revived. But that also includes not seeing integration through rose-colored glasses, but addressing the problems seriously, so that coexistence functions better. Social romanticists are attached to the idea that succeeding generations automatically integrate better. So the second generation is better integrated than the first, and the third better than the second. Anyone who says that today is naïve and out of touch with real life.

The guest workers of old, who worked their whole lives for the sake of their children — they are the model immigrants. Despite that, many a grandchild is traveling to fight in Syria or goes out robbing, because the code of honor, pride and battle taught in the parks is more important than the word of mother or grandfather. The third generation in my experience is more poorly integrated than the first. And if only one percent of them are self-radicalized, then we have a huge problem. This generation is also more brutal. Previously fights ended with a headlock. Nowadays you win if you jump the other guy more than he does you.

“Veiled women, completely at a loss, sit in my office and cry. They say: ‘Mr. Mayer, I gave my son pocket money, I raised him well, sent him to school — but he went to the park and learned from the others there how to steal cellphones.’ I advised that woman to go back to Turkey with him and return after he reaches puberty — to get some distance from the park. That is how far it has gone. All isolated instances? I can refute that from my experience. If we keep taking the path of least resistance, we will be overwhelmed by the problem.”

“Our values are of no interest to many immigrants”

“What is needed to prevent young people from going bad is a counter-offer, a kind of counter-propaganda. Youths, especially outsiders or boys without a father, dream of violence, uncomplicated sex and a strong group. The jihad propaganda in the internet offers this in its snake-charmer-like tones. What counter-propaganda can combat these drive and enticements? What is our appealing counter-offer? The only thing we can use to attract them is earning money. But that is of no value to them.

The values for immigrants from very traditional societies come from religion, respect for the elderly, modesty. Our churches are empty, we stick our old people into old people’s homes, our women are too willing for the liking of many immigrants. Our values of tolerance, emancipation, democracy are seen as weaknesses. As the saying goes: ‘Better to die standing than to live on your knees.’”

“Not all immigrants are equally capable of integration”

“I question how long things can go on, when people with this canon of archaic social values enter a world shaped by the Enlightenment. Show me a Chechen or Afghan from the park for whom his honor is not more important than his life. An insult is enough. Compromise, diplomacy — they are terms of abuse. When youngsters refuse to be told what to do by a woman — and one who does not even wear a head-scarf — I wonder how integration, education and advancement are possible. For a long time now, there has not been a parallel society, rather parallel societies. Ethnic groups that hate each other’s guts will not have a neighborly cup of tea in Vienna. And it seems to me that these conflicts among ethnic groups are increasing. So we must make up our minds how many more immigrants with a different idea of society we can take in.”

Rudolf Mayer started out as a probation officer and since the mid-1980s has been a criminal defense attorney. Cases like that of serial killer Elfriede Bauernsteiner made him one of Austria’s most famous attorneys. Youthful criminals are also a specialty of his.

Hat Tip gatesofvienna.net

Wednesday, 27 May 2015

Australia, Islam and the politics of defeat.

Australia appears to have a significant and growing percentage of its Muslim population that shows no interest in integrating with its host culture. In a recent post I mentioned that because of their frustration with the radicalization of their fellow believers, some moderate Muslim leaders in Australia have called for less Muslim immigration! 

The founding president of the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils (AFIC), Haset Sali, who also served as both a president and legal adviser to the organisation, said moderate Muslims had been sidelined by an Islamic leadership promoting more fundamentalist views…

“Sometimes the truth has to be faced and if the truth is awkward, then it has to be faced anyway, and I really do believe we have to be more careful about who we let into this country and who we grant refugee status to, because I think it’s just getting beyond a joke quite frankly,”

Meanwhile The Australian reports that Muslim families are increasingly turning to Islamic schools to reinforce ‘their values’.

Enrolments in hard-line Islamic colleges are growing nine times faster than those of mainstream schools, as more Muslim parents demand a strict religious education for their children in Australia.

Six schools controlled by the conservative Australian Federation of Islamic Councils now boast 5481 students — a 53 per cent rise in enrolments in five years. Federal Education Department statistics show that 28,267 students attended Australia’s 39 Islamic schools last year — 82 per cent more than the 15,503 who were enrolled in 32 schools in 2009. In contrast, student numbers in all Australian schools grew by 6 per cent over the same period, to 3.7 million.

As with most private schools, taxpayers contribute 80 per cent of Islamic schools’ running costs, providing $300 million in commonwealth and state funding in 2013. The latest official data shows the AFIC schools received $42m in taxpayer funding in 2013, plus $21.5m in government funds for new buildings and other capital works between 2009 and 2013.

Unsurprisingly a few ‘problems’ have begun to surface with these schools that makes for depressing reading:

Victoria’s Registration and Qualifications Authority is investigating the ultra-conservative Al-Taqwa College that has 1,700 students over allegations the principal banned girls from running because they “might lose their virginity’’.

At the nation’s biggest Islamic school, the AFIC-controlled Malek Fahd Islamic School at Greenacre in Sydney’s southwest, enrolments have risen one-third to 2412 students. The controversial school received $17.5m in commonwealth operational funding in 2013, and $6.6m in taxpayer building grants between 2009 and 2013. The school was forced to repay $9m to taxpayers after The Australian revealed in 2012 it had been funneling money to AFIC.

Dr Jones said most imams teaching religion at the Islamic schools were foreign-born, and not all were qualified teachers, but he insisted Islamic schools were not turning teenagers to jihad. “Mostly they (the jihadists) are kids who are bitterly alienated in the state system,’’ he said. “These (Islamic) schools take a very firm line that suicide is forbidden, it’s forbidden to kill women and children and you can’t kill other Muslims, and ­violence has to be sanctioned by the state.’’

It’s difficult to know what is worse for Australia, indoctrinating children in Islamic ideology, or having ‘bitterly alienated’ Muslim children in the State school system.  Neither option bodes well for future integration.

AFIC appoints the board members and religious imams at the six schools it controls. Police are investigating claims AFIC has tried to siphon money from the Islamic College of Brisbane, which received $8m in taxpayer funding for its operations in 2013 — plus $6m in building grants between 2009 and 2013. The school’s student numbers have grown 20 per cent, to 949 students, in five years.

The Rissalah College, also in Sydney’s southwest, had its public funding frozen in 2013 amid allegations it misused funding. The school, which is not affiliated with AFIC, received $3.6m in taxpayer operational funds for its 505 students in 2013, and $4.9m in capital grants between 2009 and 2013.

South Australia’s schools registration board is investigating parents’ complaints about teaching and curriculum standards at the AFIC-affiliated Islamic College of South Australia, which has 630 students — a third more than it did five years ago. The Adelaide school, which received $6.4m in taxpayer funding in 2013 plus another $6.1m in capital grants in the five years to 2013, reportedly prohibits boys and girls from mingling in the hallways.

Enrolments have more than doubled to 657 students at the AFIC-affiliated Langford Islamic College in Perth, where even the Year 1 girls are required to wear a headscarf.

The blatant ‘misappropriation’ of funds to one side, the school in Perth sounds like they are establishing a very caring environment by mandating that girls even in year 1 are not exposed to harmful radiation from the sun’s rays.  Ensuring headscarf’s are worn has the added benefit of teaching females they are under male domination, and subject to their rule.  You can have as many ‘feminist’ Muslims as you like assuring us that they wear the headscarf voluntarily, and that may be true for them, but when their schools insist upon it from day one, there is also another narrative at play here.

A narrative that Victoria’s new Police Commissioner Graham Ashton is very familiar with, stating shortly after his appointment that ‘home grown [Islamic] terrorism problems in Australia will get worse’.

“Those issues aren’t going to go away; in fact they are probably only going to worsen as a challenge for the community to meet,” he said.

“I am up to speed on that information and that tells me that the current conflict, the amount of people involved in it, the way that young people are attracted to the movement — the (Islamic State) movement particularly — are situations that are worsening around the world and they are worsening here.”

Mr Ashton, who will take up his new duties on July 1, has had a 34-year career in policing, including working with Victoria Police, the Office of Police Integrity and the AFP.

During his first AFP stint, Mr Ashton jointly headed the investigation into the 2002 Bali bombings that killed 202 people.

He has carved out a reputation for dealing with the threat of terrorism that appeared to stand him in good stead in his application to head Victoria Police.

Premier Daniel Andrews, who effectively chooses the force’s commissioner, said Mr Ashton’s ability throughout his career to anticipate and tackle threats early was one reasons he was appointed.

From the Premier down they are taking the threat of Muslim terrorism seriously, so much so that it influences the selection criteria for choosing the senior law enforcement officer for the State of Victoria.

I often wonder what decision makers and law enforcement officers like the Premier and the Police Commissioner think is being taught at Islamic schools in their region, not just directly at a curriculum level, but also from the attitudes that are imparted to pupils by Imam’s who it seems are mostly foreign born and trained.

Do you imagine for one moment that these Imams believe in the equality of the sexes, pluralism and liberal democracy, all of which are foundational to western civilization?

Unfortunately, we are our own biggest problem. Progressive secular ideology, the myth of neutrality and the embrace of cultural relativism alluded to by Bruce Logan in yesterday’s guest post, now prevents us from taking any defensive measures against Islam, its schools and its ideology both in Australia and other western nations.

The irony is that by rejecting Judeo / Christianity, a faith that has provided a framework for living that sustained our liberties, we have opened the door to the triumphalist religious ideology of Islam that is now proving to be stronger than the multiculturalist secularism we have embraced.

Ultimately there will be one dominant religious ideology animating what we have formally known as western civilization.  Secular materialism is a transition point on the journey, not the destination. We are presently in a cultural battle that we cannot win by constantly ceding ground to our ideological enemies, regardless of how few in number they appear to be.

There was a lesson for western civilization in Iraq this week.  200 ISIS fighters routed 2,000 US trained and equipped Iraqi army solders at Ramadi and for one reason only.  They were ideologically committed to their cause, even to the death, while their opponents although 10 times superior in numbers, were not.

You cannot defeat something with nothing.  As Ramadi has taught us, very little can trump a transcendent ideology that holds promise for this life and the next. 

Consequently, secular materialism will prove insufficient for the task of defending what remains of western civilization.  While this is becoming increasingly obvious from events in Europe and Britain, it now seems Australia is determined to follow in the same path.

Who would have thought that possible, even a decade ago? 

As I mentioned in a previous post, Australian Jews have become the canary in the coal mine, having recently been granted more than $1.0M in government funding to raise protective bomb proof perimeter fences around a Jewish school in Sydney and a Jewish community centre in Melbourne.

These Government funded defenses have not been erected to protect the Jews and their children from the predations of German Nazis.

Yet civil authorities continue to pretend there is no Islam to see here, and those Muslims who do attack us are treated as criminals, rather than enemy combatants.  But what else can we do, if we were to admit Islam was the problem, or at least an interpretation of Islam that is embraced by a significant minority of Muslims, what do we do with all of the ‘fifth columnists’ living amongst us?

No western politician appears willing to address that question, or the threat it poses for all of us, not just the Jews living in Sydney or Melbourne.  They fear not only the politically correct domestic backlash, but also economic sanctions from our 'friend and ally' Saudi Arabia, and reaction from other Islamic states.  

Perhaps the reality of Surah 8:12 is already with us 'I will strike fear into the hearts of those who disbelieve'.  

It would appear that fear is preventing our politicians from speaking truthfully and acting decisively.  Instead they persist with the narrative that the present terrorist threat has 'nothing to do with Islam', and those who terrorise shouting 'Allahu Akbar' are not really Muslims.

Unfortunately, this strategy, if you can call it that, carries the risk that frustrated citizens will eventually take the law into their own hands.  This has started to happen already in Australia with several nasty incidents on commuter transport where Muslims are verbally abused and threatened.  The most recent case was reported in Melbourne today.  These incidents cannot be condoned any more than the fearful and timid response from western politicians that provoke them.

If Muslim immigration proves to be the Trojan horse that is responsible for the defeat of western civilization, no one can say we were not warned.

Tuesday, 26 May 2015

Do we hate our children?

I’m delighted that author and social commentator Bruce Logan has once again agreed to make a guest appearance on this blog.  Bruce is steeped in the faith, traditions and philosophies that have shaped western civilization for more than 1,000 years.  Today he provides a valuable insight in how changes in culture are impacting upon families, especially children.  

Do we hate our children? Odd question? Not really.  If one were to assess the merit of any society it would have to be, in the first instance, about its protection and treatment of children. Love, common sense and the drive to survive all suggest that. By way of contrast, it would not, like many ancient societies, sacrifice a family’s firstborn to a rapacious deity. 

In my lifetime, I’m 76, children have become increasingly estranged from the protection of the natural intergenerational family. By ‘natural intergenerational family’ I mean the order and security offered by parents and supported by grand-parents.

Something quite new is happening. The State is becoming a surrogate parent and the Law is beginning to mould our ethical beliefs and behaviour rather than the other way around. It would seem that the aim is individual happiness but it’s really about a liberal and anti-Christian elite having power over everyone else. That’s why offence invective and human rights legislation is being increasingly appealed to, in order to silence the dissenter.

Let me state what everyone once knew. Where marriage and family are strong, society is strong. When societies are under strain in times of war, political conflict, ideological repression or economic disorder families remain the major source of comfort. Broken societies are rebuilt as families regain their vigour. When marriage and the family remain unyielding to political ideologies they keep vital human truths alive. Decades of persecution in communist countries certainly weakened the family but it did not destroy it. The history of the Jews is a case study in the critical and formative role of marriage and the family.

Of course, modern life has determined that each generation might live thousands of miles apart. But modern technology has also made communication easier. Distance might inhibit satisfying intimacy but it does not distort it. It is not the major player in the increasing estrangement of children.

The cause of family disruption and discomfort lies in the massive shift that has taken place in our understanding of, and commitment to the authority of private and public virtue.

‘Virtue’, dismissed to the syntax sin-bin, is the operative word.

Once upon a time, (it does sound like a fairy tale to some) we knew four cardinal virtues from which our ethics evolved. Both Classical and Biblical, they were Justice, Wisdom, sometimes prudence, Courage or fortitude and finally Moderation, sometimes self-control or temperance. The Bible gave us three more, Faith, Hope and Love. These, foundations for good character, were all knowable and observable to the uneducated and educated.

It was not that we observed this as much as we should, but that was the point, we had a reasonable idea of what we should do. Human action had a guide that had the smell of permanence.

Failure to teach our children how to discover the difference between right and wrong is a lethal failure of parental and community duty. Young people, just to retain good mental health, must have a vision to challenge them. If they are to fly and not stagger they must believe that there are permanent truths worth living and fighting for. It should take little imagination to comprehend the foundational necessity of the virtues.

Again, once upon a time schools reinforced such a foundation. With some exceptions, that is no longer true. Seduced by the pervasive notion of personal autonomy, the vague euphemism of ‘fulfilling one’s potential’ and the absolute authority of personal choice schools are now ideologically driven institutions. Having no longer any belief in permanent truth, I am what I think I am. Life is lived out on the level of the slogan.
The old idea that once informed our law making, that we are all equal before it, has been replaced by the necessary politics of group identity.

In spite of the philosopher J. S. Mill’s utilitarianism and radicalism, or maybe because of it, he understood, more than most, where several generations of pervasive state education would leave us.

 A general State education is a mere contrivance for molding people to be exactly like one another, and the mold in which it casts them is that which pleases the predominant power in the government, whether this be a monarch, a priesthood, an aristocracy, or the majority of the existing generation’.[1]

While we cannot blame the schools, after all they cannot help reflecting contemporary ideology, they do not invent it. Nevertheless many schools now tend to encourage a range of misconceptions about life and how to live it. They express the sensitivities of a new secular and ultimately narcissistic priesthood.

Children educated in the secularised climate of state schools seldom discover that the civil liberties they still enjoy (for a little while yet) were struggled for and presently won in a Judeo/Christian culture. The consequence is a failure to give credit where credit is due, to devalue tradition and religion, and to misunderstand the purpose of both. In short we teach our children a lie.

The pervasive authority of ‘secularism’ encourages young people, and eventually adults, to believe in the “myth of neutrality’ which suggests that human reason is a tool without bias. Like the shapers of the French Revolution it continues to claim that one’s own reason is the primary judge of truth. Religion, and for practical purposes that means Christianity, is founded on ‘unreason’. De-Christianised secularism would, like its 18th century predecessor, erect its own temple to reason, not in Notre Dame Cathedral[2] but in the legal system.

Many, probably most, university students do not seem to grasp the necessary truth that there are different and valid ways to discover and assess knowledge; scientific method might be grasped, and perhaps personal experience. However, history, certainly as tradition, will only be vaguely perceived, and revelation with Scripture are donkeys by default. There is an irony here that many have missed in our genuflection before a new and inferior Paganism. One religion is rejected for another. One assumes that the attraction of the new paganism lies in that it makes few, if any, moral demands.

There appears to be little awareness of the Classical, Biblical and permanent fact. Any generation that makes personal choice the foundation of its morality will cause the next one to suffer. [Note: Italics are mine.]

The new Paganism encourages a modern version of narcissism. The centuries old Judeo/Christian explanation of equality is turned on its head. The notion of equality under the law, and the consequent liberties that follow are dissolved. Instead, we are forced to believe what we all know to be fantasy. We are all absolutely equal and therefore we all have equal claims to the good life delivered by the state. Law becomes an exercise in discovering an ever increasing pantheon of human rights. We have exchanged Jesus Christ for Prometheus.

The demanding morality of self-sacrifice has been replaced by the uncritical psychology of self-esteem. To put it another way we give up the ‘law’ of love for the love of law. [Note: Italics are mine.] It becomes almost impossible to value, or even understand the theological truths that once underpinned the social order that protected our children.  They included, grace, reconciliation, sin, forgiveness, shame, guilt, faith and hope against which, we used to believe, there was no law.

Where can one find any educator to talk insightfully about the interaction of any of these? Nearly all of them are so foreign that if they are considered at all, they are ‘suffered’ in the sentimentality of a non-consequential moral universe.

The secularised child has great difficulty in accepting that there is such a truth as a universal good order that sustains civilisation. Indeed the very word ‘civilisation’ is not ‘kosher’ in the secular vocabulary because all cultures are relative. In the new order civilisation does not exist because it calls up notions of permanent and universal virtue, not an increasing number of state invented and necessarily conflicting human rights. If a child is not taught that fallacy directly, he or she absorbs it by default.

Influenced by the new religion the child is likely to be confused about the nature of the family and civil society. There is seldom a suggestion that a family, by definition, must straddle at least two generations. Two people together, married or unmarried do not constitute a family.

Consequently the child no longer absorbs what we all once believed to be obvious; that marriage and family, the primary protector of children, is based on the natural complementarity of men and women. That idea of complementary sexes is now a foreign country from which the legal fantasy of same-sex marriage and the abstractions of gender theory prevent visitation.

Having no coherent framework, the young person comes to believe that the family is what the state declares it to be and in so doing prove J. S. Mill, in spite of his utilitarianism, an astute prophet. All children, in one way or another, become intellectual, if not physical wards of the totalitarian state. In failing to love them we, by default, hate them.

[1] John Stuart Mill. On Liberty. 1859

2.  Notre Dame was, for a period, during the French revolution a temple for a belief system created to replace Christianity: the Cult of Reason, which was based on the ideals of atheism. This "religion" was supposed to be universal and to spread the ideas of the revolution, summarized in its “Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité” motto, which was also inscribed on the Temples. The symbols of Christianity were covered up and they were replaced by the symbols of the Cult of Reason. In the Churches of Reason, there were specially created services that were meant to replace the Christian liturgy For instance, at the Notre-Dame Cathedral in Paris, on November 10, 1793, a special ritual was held for the "Feast of Reason": the nave had an improvised mountain on which stood a Greek temple dedicated to Philosophy and decorated with busts of philosophers. At the base of the mountain was located an altar dedicated to Reason, in front of which was located a torch of Truth. The ceremony included the crowd paying homage to a young actress dressed in blue, white, red (the colours of the Republic), personifying Liberty.

Monday, 25 May 2015

When you try to answer an absurd question you come up only with absurdities

The results are in, the Irish have found their ‘gay’ and embraced ‘gender equalitarianism’ with all the enthusiasm of a New Zealand politician desperate to establish their liberal credentials – and to hell with the consequences. 

‘We find ourselves asking each other questions that in a million years we’d never have dreamt of wasting a moment on – like, does a child really need his father and mother or might not the schoolmistress and the milkman, or the fireman and the milkman, be just as good? People are dizzy with this because when you try to answer an absurd question you come up only with absurdities.

Same-sex marriage is so radical an idea that it would make for a difficult sell even if the model on offer were free from detrimental consequences and canvassed with sensitivity and discretion as part of a listening process in which the normal checks and balances of democracy were in full working order.

Since the opposite is the case here, the results can only be catastrophic. Almost nobody - including many an intimidated nodding Yesser - is ready for what a Yes is likely to mean, so that, in time, the consequences flowing from a Yes would create a climate of antagonism towards gay people far worse than anything conjured up in the lurid imaginations of LGBT lobbyists. A Yes would also be a green light to any group of bullyboys in Irish society with an agenda to peddle. In this campaign, the blueprint has been written, refined and road-tested, setting out how, by threatening, demonising, intimidating, and smearing you can have your way.

There will be other consequences too: a new climate of prohibition concerning certain forms of thought and speech, an Orwellian revisionism directed at texts and records bearing witness to old ideas. And if you think this extreme, ask yourself: who among our political class is likely to resist?’

As Rod Dreher has reflected, ‘Gay marriage is the logical outcome of the Sexual Revolution, which in itself is the logical outworking of Enlightenment liberalism.’

Which of course it is, which in turn means ‘we ain’t done yet’ which in turn means all things are permissible between consenting adults, and as far as children are concerned, to hell with the consequences.

Tomorrow I will publish a guest post from author and social commentator Bruce Logan.  While it’s not directly on the subject of ‘gay marriage’ it will discuss how we have sacrificed our children to a new secular and ultimately narcissistic priesthood that is anything but pluralistic in its dogma.