Blogger Insanity Bytes had an article yesterday critiquing a post written by Rev. Toby Sumpter. Sumpter is a Protestant minister in Idaho who has some affiliation with the Rev. Doug Wilson; a fellow who's crossed our radar-screens a few times before. To say that this particular church is embedded in controversy would be an understatement. However, we're not especially well-versed in these internal political machinations among the various Protestant sects. What concerns us is when they preach doctrines adverse or harmful to Christendom as a whole.
Sumpter's post is a sick attempt at parodying Domestic Violence victims; a poorly-written satire purporting to be written by the Corinthian Church to St. Paul the Apostle. Domestic Violence and related crimes seem to be an especially recurring issue among the leaders and followers of this particular church. Whether some or all of the allegations made against them are true or not; we cannot at this point say. But given their writings on these and other issues incline us to believe at the very least that Wilson and Sumpter are a pair of shady characters and it wouldn't be amiss for Christians to keep a close eye upon them.
A section of Sumpter's parody reads as follows: "The first rule of abuse prevention is that you must always side with anyone who claims to be a victim over against anybody accused of abuse. Trained and professional abuse counselors don't need outmoded methods of investigation, witnesses, and due process."
Idaho State Law actually differs with this. Title 18-918 of Idaho Statutes defines Domestic Violence as:
1. Felonious Battery: "Any household member who in committing a Battery as defined in Section 18-903 of the Idaho Code, inflicting traumatic injury is guilty of a felony."
2. Misdemeanor Assault: "A household member who commits an Assault as defined in Section 18-901 of the Idaho Code against another household member not resulting in traumatic injury is guilty of a misdemeanor. "
3. Misdemeanor Battery: "A household member who commits a Battery as defined in Section-903 of the Idaho Code is guilty of a misdemeanor."
The website FindLaw states that Idaho Law covers "physical injury, sexual abuse, forced imprisonment or threat thereof" as Domestic Violence. It seems that these are hardly matters of one person's word against the other.
Sumpter then says: "The second rule of abuse prevention is that you must never say or write anything that would give the alleged victim that their situation is tolerable." He then goes on to compare St.Paul's instructions to slaves as somehow binding on abused family members! Essentially, he is arguing tangentially that slavery is not only morally correct; but that wives and children are the chattel of husbands and fathers.
We have to understand two things here. One is that, contextually, human slavery was universally practiced in St.Paul's time. His instructions to Christian slaves was no more an endorsement of that institution than Christ calling His first disciples from among fishermen means that God prefers ex-sailors for ministerial duties.
The second thing is that there is no parallel between marriage and slavery whatsoever in the New Testament. Roman women actually enjoyed a (relatively) high standard of social and civil rights; much higher than, say, women in the neighboring Parthian Empire did. The Christian Fathers are all very clear that Christian women---married or not---are sisters in Christ. They stressed this point so much that early enemies of the Church falsely accused Christian teachers of promoting incest.
But this absurdity is not only held by Sumpter, but by many in the Red Pill Cult: Dalrock, Artisanal Toad, and Rollo Tomassi being among its most prominent promoters. They hold---or at least strongly imply---that the State has no moral authority in domestic abuse issues. This idea not only finds no support from Christian Doctrine but has never been a legal tenet of Western Civilization for millennia. Since we mentioned the Romans: although fathers and husbands had more legal authority over women than we do; even they were subject to Roman Law. Today's Islamic States are much the same way; a man's jurisdiction over his women is not unlimited but subject to Sharia Courts. And those Courts give more protections to women than our Media gives them credit for.
Sumpter is very clearly out of his depth as a pastor; and the Moscow, Idaho area seems to be having some real spiritual problems. Maybe we can persuade Pope Francis to send some Christian missionaries there, because it they could really use them.
Today from John Horvat of America Needs Fatima, we learn of a new business enterprise coming out of Canada. The same effete and degenerated culture that's given the world Justin Trudeau and South Park has introduced a new ice-cream chain called Sweet Jesus.
The letter 't' is inverted as an upside-down Crucifix and the 's' letter in Jesus' name is written in Gothic runes---like the Nazi SS symbol.
The perverts running this company have concocted advertising slogans like "soft serve and beverage for sinners" and some of their desserts are called Pimped-Out Cones and Sweet Baby Jesus. Really brilliant stuff, guys.
Sweet Jesus is part of a conglomerate owned by the aptly-named Monarch & Misfits Company. They describe themselves as a "handful of rule-breakers rewriting the restaurant game."
This collection of losers have even posted a disclaimer on their website claiming that their products are not intended to offend anybody's religion. Which is about as credible as the Red Pill blogs' disclaimers that they oppose violence. Horvat did mentioned that the company did however change its name in Dubai, so as not to alienate Moslems.
Actually, looking at both the prices and the hideous-looking concoctions they serve, most people would boycott this joint regardless of one's religious beliefs. Seriously, just look at some of this garbage:
I feel nauseous just looking at these pictures. They don't look like delicious ice-cream at all. Ben & Jerry might have been a pair of flaming Liberals too; but at least they made high-quality ice cream. This stuff looks like something that marketing directors threw together without consulting any actual chefs.
And, I strongly suspect that this the whole angle behind Sweet Jesus. A place for people who care about such things to 'be seen'. One of the Kardashians ate there and recommended it. It's the perfect place for those who consider the Kardashians a public role-model.
Anybody interested in signing a petition protesting this chain's choice of names can find it here.
Just as we predicted only late last year, Vox Day and his cult would fail in their attempts to co-opt the comics industry. As a sign of the impending decline, Vox announced with considerable arm-flapping that retailers are now selling his propaganda "at 24.5% less than the top 300 best-selling comics." He also promised---as he has with previous failures---that "the deluge is coming!" The deluge of bankruptcy attorneys and creditors, most likely.
What kinds of products do booksellers typical mark-down? Usually either publishers' overstocks or unpopular material that they can't otherwise sell. The reason that the top 300 comic books cost more is because customers will pay more for them and the lower-ranked stuff is cheap because it either sells at a loss or goes to the recycle-bin as a tax write-off.
The guy just doesn't understand market forces. Or much of anything else, for that matter. And it's a bit ironic anyway, considering that just a few months ago he told us that "Comic shops are going out of business left and right, so we see no need to pay any attention to them at all."
This is what happens when people on the Right try to use the tactics of the Left: it always backfires. Take for example an ABC television show called The Real O'Neills. The show was conceived by a Catholic-hating homosexual named Dan Savage. The first few episodes got high ratings because they were'edgy' and 'controversial'; but the rest ended up losing advertisers and had to be subsidized. Why? Because after the initial shock-value wore off, the only viewers interested in its message were other Catholic-hating homosexuals.
It's the same dynamic with 'Alt-Hero'. Vox miscalculated by thinking that the grovelling flatterers who fawn over him in the comments' sections of his blogs are representative of Mainstream America. Once the political incorrectness of 'Alt-Hero' stopped "triggering SJW's," nobody cared. Vox was actually half-right; in that consumers of contemporary comics are disgusted with its content; but that's because of bad writing and overt politicizing. Vox' mistake was throwing more bad writing and overt politicizing into the mix.
In case everyone has forgotten here: comic books are a literary form of escapist entertainment. People of all ages read them to relax and identify vicariously with heroes---not to be triggered and lectured by social engineers or political reactionaries. This is how the NFL sabotaged itself: with anthem-protests and other PC pandering at an audience trying to get away from that nonsense for a few hours on Sunday.
The comics industry overcame a similar problem during the early 1960's and solved it with some innovative, out-of-the-box thinking. That's what it's going to take to turn it around again.
One of the striking things about the Red Pills and their movement in general is their immaturity of judgment. This is particularly obvious when reading their discourses on sexual relations---which they've glossed up with terms like 'Game' and 'Pick-Up Artistry'. They sound like a bunch of Middle-School punks who've never had actual sex pontificating about things they don't understand to impress other boys who've never had actual sex.
Their politics and sociology isn't much different. Actually they're as bad as Antifa and other Bolsheviks who think that Government is an institution existing solely to serve and cater to their every need or wish. Government is not a baby-sitting service for adults. In a Representative Republic we elect people whose job it is to craft policies for the general welfare of the whole nation---as the US Constitution expressly says.
One of the Red Pill blockheads calling himself The Z Man has been stirring up the cauldron in the Manosphere lately; going on a week-long rampage over several posts distancing himself from President Trump. He writes as though this were some principled stand---even though the President has been distancing himself from the Alt-RINOs and their fascistic philosophies for well over a year now.
Z Man is angry because (according to him) Trump has 'caved in' on DACA and has expressed some sympathy for some very minimal gun-control laws.
Both of these are issues upon we'd intended some commentary. The first, on DACA: Trump can't get DACA repealed---just like the Obamacare repeal---because enough Liberals and RINOs in Congress want to keep those programs. So Trump does what a democratically-elected leader does under such circumstances: he fixes what parts he legally can while compromising to gain support for other programs. Trump didn't 'cave' on DACA any more than he did Obamacare.
This is an example of the Red Pills' political immaturity. They don't understand how things actually work in a democracy and ignore all of the Administration's accomplishments because of one issue that really isn't going to change things much. If DACA is reformed, it wouldn't be such a bad law, except to hard-core xenophobes like most Red Pills are.
As for the gun issue: Trump has expressed a willingness to ban 'bump-stocks', something that practically no gun owner--- including many NRA leaders---had ever heard of prior to the Las Vegas massacre committed last October by a drug-addict. Bump-Stocks are really questionable as to their safety. They're a variation of what used to be called a 'zip gun'---a home-built firearm that fired by recoil rather than a trigger-mechanism. Everything I've seen about bump-stocks indicate that they are unreliable and even dangerous. Many pro-2nd Amendment people support Trump on this issue. Either way, favoring a bump-stock ban is hardly a major piece of gun control. And let's not forget that the Administration recently lifted restrictions on certain automatic shotguns which had been in place since the 1970's.
Z Man shows his lack of sophistication by saying things like: "Everyone is vexed with me for bailing on Trump. This is understandable. Sensible White Americans have been conditioned to defend 'their man' against all attacks." No, Z Man. Sensible Americans---regardless of color---weigh the good against the bad in its proper context and every four years have the opportunity to make such evaluations. Z Man throws out this very typical Red Pill argument that anyone opposing their often extremist positions is simply a knee-jerk, go-with-the-flow type. It's no accident that they've chosen the Red Pill motif for their entire movement.
So far from being 'knee-jerk' we criticized Trump's Middle East policy less than a week ago. We've criticized other of his positions too, and have openly said that some of his advisers and cabinet picks were terrible choices. But Trump has done much more positive than negative things; and, at any rate, it's too early in his first term to conclude that he is either one of our greatest presidents or one of the worst.
These guys really need to grow up. Trump's compromises (so far) are nothing like the wholesale sellouts that we experienced under the Swamp-RINO, Bush; or the equally conniving GOP Congress under neocons Trent Lott and Dennis Hastert. The worst thing in our opinion that Trump has done were the military operations against the legitimate Syrian government. Even still, Trump showed enough maturity of his own to reverse his policy in Syria after meeting with the more sagacious President Putin and with Pope Francis.
America has always been a country for grown-ups. Let's follow our President's lead and not go running for a safe space at the drop of a hat.
It's about time, but it seems that mainstream Conservatives are finally waking up to the danger posed by a vocal contingent of extremists who barely agree with us on anything. The link above is to a good article in The National Review by Kevin Williamson calling out these fakes.
"Those of us who play roles in the public discourse have a special responsibility to be scrupulous with the facts, especially those touching our opponents and rivals." he writes, "When people get used to hearing prominent Conservatives lying about their opponents, it makes it easier for honest and fair-minded people to dismiss Conservative arguments out of hand."
Very true. One reason why the Corporate Media has lost so much credibility is because they have been exposed as liars so often. Why should we follow their example?
Williamson's article refers to the fake-news pouring shamelessly from the Alt-RINOS. Vox Day recently jumped on the 'Parkland is a hoax' bandwagon as have other Red Pills. It seems to be an issue---like Sandy Hook and Pizzagate---that they can't let go of.
There are basically two variant fake stories floating around right now. With certain modifications, they hold either that 1) Sheriff Scott Israel and his men carried out the massacre themselves and framed Nicholas Cruz as the scapegoat; or 2) that the entire episode was faked by the Media who employed actors.
As we've pointed out before, the FBI's own training manual points out that a large-scale conspiracy's weakest points are exponentially expanded the more people who are involved in it. A good example of a real conspiracy was Obama's domestic spying program. With all the powers of the national government propping it up, the whole scheme was unraveled by Edward Snowden---a low-level NSA technician. That's a working example of how easily a conspiracy can break down. Think of all the major scandals our government has gone through and every single time---for whatever reason---someone talked.
That's why every detective---whether police or private---always has a network of informants. The Ancient Romans used to have a saying about secrets being carried about by the spirits of the winds. That was a metaphor for how people involved in such things can't keep quiet about them. To believe either of the scenarios above would require that nobody talked about it.
While we don't necessarily agree with everything Williamson said---particularly his questioning Trump's integrity---he makes good points. I tend to believe that Trump, as a political novice, has been imposed upon from time to time by bad advisers. This doesn't make him a bad president: in fact, Harry Truman and General Eisenhower had the same problem. A President is not a Pope and there's no ex cathedra clause in the US Constitution.
But Williamson's conclusion is to the very point: "If the Conservative movement cannot prevail in the marketplace of ideas without lies, then it does not deserve to prevail at all." Either we have faith in our own beliefs or we haven't; and that faith implies that our ideals can stand on their own merits.
The Iraqi Media reported earlier today that a mass grave found on the western outskirts of Mosul contained the bodies of Christians who disappeared during the city's ISIS occupation. Some of the corpses were holding rosaries and crosses which a prelate of the Syrian Orthodox Church identified. The unidentified priest told Iraq News that all forty remains were of persons known to have been kidnapped by ISIS. Their whereabouts were unknown until today.
The grave was excavated by military engineers of the Peshmerga Militia. The Peshmerga and Hezbollah forces led the spearhead that broke through ISIS defenses in Northwestern Mosul.
Church sources also stated that several of the martyrs were children and their mothers, who were found buried in a separate section of the grave. Some were holding Crucifixes when they died.
This is fairly typical; ISIS was known in Syria to have segregated the mothers and children. The fiends would demand that the women convert to Wahhabism; and if the mothers refused, these incarnate devils would murder their children in front of their eyes. According to some accounts from Syria, mothers with several children were forced to watch their children killed one by one with a demand to convert after each murder. The mothers were finally killed too after all of their children were slain.
Lest we forget too---in the midst of all of the current anti-Trump hysteria---that Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and John Kerry helped make scenes like these possible. These three scumbags refused to grant refugee status to Iraqi and Syrian Christians; and pressured other Western governments to do the same. As we mentioned in several articles back then, this was part and parcel of a deliberate policy to stand down while ISIS savages ethnically-cleansed the region of its Christians.
Some might recall back then that the Obama Administration and its supporters were suing Christian businesses for not catering to homosexuals; or pharmacies for not providing abortifacients. They were also working to defund Christian schools and charities which opposed their anti-Christian policies; as well as looking the other way when violence and property damage was being done in churches. The Left sneered at suggestions that this was persecution.
Though these things were grave injustices, of course they weren't as serious as ISIS locking Christians inside of churches and burning the buildings down over their heads. But the same spirit was there. During American Occupation in Iraq, the US military wasn't allowed to intervene against radicals who attacked Christians. In fact, both Bush and Obama were quite antagonistic to Iraqi Christians and even approved discriminatory laws. Once the precedent of discrimination was set, the mass-graves of Mosul and Palmyra were the consequence. Both Syrian President Assad and Iraqi Prime Minister Abadi have since granted more freedoms to Christians in their respective countries. They've seen the outcome of religious discrimination first-hand.
When Hitler became German Chancellor in 1933, his government did start rounding up and executing Jews the next day. The Holocaust didn't really start until 1942. First, Jews lost rights to serve in government. Then there were laws against race-mixing. Then there were boycotts and expropriations of Jewish-owned businesses and properties. Then Jews were compelled to wear distinguishing insignia. Then they were put into camps. And then The Final Solution. By that time, the German people were psychologically prepared for it.
That's essentially what we Americans were being psychologically prepared for. If the 2016 Election had gone the other way, Christians could expect very little sympathy from Hillary Clinton. Trump has dismantled most of the anti-Christian policies from the Clinton Era forward.
We need to keep in our sights on the bigger picture. Whatever policies Trump makes that we may disagree with, the alternative would have been much, much worse.
UPDATE: Since this article was published, the Mayor of Nineveh, Iraq has disputed the Church's claim that the Christians in this particular grave were killed by ISIS. He claims that they were killed during the Iran-Iraq War during the 1980's. It may be so; but keep in mind that over 70 mass-graves containing Christians have been found in Iraq since the country liberated itself from ISIS last year.
The National Association of Religious Broadcasters, an organization composed primarily of Evangelical Protestant media figures, is holding its annual convention in Nashville this week. Dr. Ben Carson has been attending these conferences for several years now. This year, Vice-President Mike Pence also visited, and spoke at a luncheon hosted by The Life Issues Institute. Pence reassured the audience that President Trump is "the most pro-Life president in history" and that---unlike previous GOP administrations since 1974---is proactively working to end the hideous practice of legal abortion.
Pence listed some of the Administration's accomplishments to date; many of which were ignored by the Corporate Media:
1. During Trump's first week in office, he issued an Executive Order prohibiting Federal funds from being dispersed to private organizations which promote or perform abortion in foreign countries. Not only did this policy take a major bite out of George Soros' profit-margins; it eliminated a huge cause of anti-American sentiments abroad.
What isn't widely known is that, since the Clinton years, the US Government often made foreign aid conditional upon accepting Cultural Marxist programs like abortion-on-demand. This naturally caused resentment in many foreign countries where abortion is either illegal or not culturally acceptable.
2. Related to Point #1, the Trump Administration suspended all further payments to the United Nations Population Fund. This group paid for abortions globally. Actually, Trump's decision was a measure of 'Swamp Draining' too. Because it was primarily American Leftists in this fund who were imposing abortion on other countries.
3. The President signed into law H.R. 354---one in which Pence cast a tie-breaking Senate vote. This Bill allows states to block unilaterally Federal Title X funding to abortion mills like Planned Parenthood. Unfortunately because of a pair of RINOs---Senators Collins and Murkowski---the Senate failed to pass a subsequent Bill which would have banned abortion after 20 weeks.
Most importantly, however, is that Trump has been appointing consistently pro-Life judges with the ultimate aim of repealing the infamous Roe vs. Wade decision of 1973. That year, by 7-2 majority, the Court ruled that state laws restricting abortion violated the 14th Amendment's Due Process Clause. The Court Majority that year was comprised of a number of Deep-State Swamp-RINOs, Left-Wing activists, and the legendary jurist William O. Douglas, who was in an advanced state of senility. Another legendary jurist---Byron White---dissented from the vote, noting the obvious objection that there were state laws against abortion long prior to the 14th Amendment's ratification. White also stated that:
"I find nothing in the language or history of the Constitution to support the Court's decision. The Court has simply fashioned and announced a new Constitutional Right for pregnant women and, with scarcely any reason or authority for its actions, invests that Right with sufficient substance to override most State abortion statutes. The upshot is that the people and legislators of all 50 States are Constitutionally disentitled to weigh the relative importance of the continued existence and development of the foetus on the one hand, against a possible spectrum of impacts on the woman."
We quoted this passage from the late Justice White to show that, contrary to pro-abortion propagandists, opposition to Roe vs. Wade was not and never was, an argument based solely on religion, but based on established legal precedent. White further said, "As an exercise of raw judicial power, the Court may have authority to do what it does today; but in my view, its judgment is an improvident and extravagant abuse of the power of judicial review which the Constitution extends to this Court...while I might agree with the Court's values and priorities, I see no Constitutional warrant for imposing such an order of priorities upon the people and legislatures of the States."
Also contrary to pro-abortion propagandists, Vice-President Pence also stated his belief that public attitudes are shifting against the abortionists, even---and especially---among the young. Given this Administration's record of successes, it's not wholly inconceivable that we could see the downfall of the Abortion Racket within a few years.
