A Conundrum

Let’s pretend that there is an ideology that, if practiced according to its fundamental document, would encourage pedophilia, abuse of women, killing homosexuals, and murder of those who disagree with said ideology.

Let’s pretend that for 1500 years, those who follow their fundamental document have engaged in violent conquest leaving behind a trail of corpses and severed heads.

Let’s pretend that this ideology follows a book written by a man who married a six year old and only became more violent as he aged.

Let’s pretend now that the apostates who refuse to follow the violent, pedophilic, minority murdering book were now seen as the “fundamentalists” of the ideology, while those who continue the 1500 year traditions are called “radicals.”

Let’s pretend that the leaders of countries where these “radicals” have been waging a targeted war decide that there should be a safety measure in place to make sure that the locations where violent pedophiles generally form en masse have less access to their targets.

Let’s pretend that a group within a targeted nation is one that would be slaughtered by these “radicals” if they were in these dangerous locations, and these minorities who would be murdered now protest to fight for the very “radicals” who want to kill them to come over to where they are.

Does this make any sense?

Let’s pretend that there are 20 houses on my street. If one house in my neighborhood was full of people who wanted me dead, I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t send out invitations for my cookout to them and their friends.

Let’s pretend that not only did I know that those in that house wanted me dead, but I knew that they had already killed some of my neighbors and even burned a house to the ground with a family inside.

Would it make sense for me to not want them on my property?

Advertisements

The Bias of Unbiased Science

It’s fun to think of the scientist as a person seeking empirical knowledge without bias.
 
The belief that science is the superior, or even only, means to gain knowledge IS biased; and flawed. How many of sciences findings have been replaced with updated research? The Earth was flat until it wasn’t. The sun revolved around the Earth until it didn’t. Newton’s laws of physics were the standard until Einstein. Einstein’s findings have been surpassed by quantum physics. Pluto was a planet until it wasn’t. The “Big Bang” was the catalyst for the existence of the universe, until it wasn’t. Brontosaurus was a type of dinosaur until it wasn’t. Piltdown man provided evidence of evolution until it didn’t. Fat is bad for you, now it’s good. Butter was bad until it wasn’t.
 
I could go on and on.
 
Yet scientists (and those who value science above all types of knowledge acquisition) would have you believe that this is superior to religious texts. In my study of The Bible (KJV ONLY, baby), I have found more verified scientific data than any evidence that has been “debunked” through scientific study.
 
The TRUTH is that there are so many phenomena that science has no answer to. The Bible is riddled with the supernatural that science either ends up verifying (germs, blood disorders, intelligent design, Earth revolving around the sun, a round Earth) or contains supernatural phenomena that science cannot disprove nor verify.
 
Most phenomena is supernatural until we come to understand it. Science, as it slowly progresses, verifies Biblical phenomena. It stands to reason, then, that The Bible may very well hold the answers to questions of the supernatural that are true, but have yet to be scientifically verified.
 
Of course, by no means does that mean that God’s Word is not empirically tested.
 
We test the teachings of Scripture every day, and we collect data through our experiences that we need only to apply a theory to (in this case, that THE BOOK is always true) in order to obtain knowledge.
 
Some of us put our faith into a dogma of scientism that is constantly challenged by more current science.
 
I put my Faith into The Bible that has never been debunked and has only been verified by empirical study.
 
But what do I know? I am just too biased.

The Myth of Modern Masculinity

Let’s assume that we understand what a “man” is. If using the word to describe those who XY chromosomes offends you, then go ahead and stop reading. This is not a critique of transgenderism or the social construction of masculinity. This is a critique of Christian heteronormative masculinity as it relates to the 21st century.

Men. What has happened to us?

In the home, the workplace, the education system, and churches, men have become the subservient ones. We have become submissive. Chivalry is not dead, but it has been distorted and denigrated. There are many of us who still wish to open doors for ladies and pay for meals. However, we also capitulate to women with regard to finances, discipline of our children, and making sure everyone is ready for church on Sunday mornings.

We have mistaken showing love for giving up our leadership roles.

We fear being labeled a sexist at work, so we allow women to take promotions away from us. We fear being seen as oppressive in the home, so we hand total control of our children to our wives. Why are we so afraid to take control of what God has commanded us to do?

Society has become an emasculating force the likes of which have never been seen. While simultaneously being slammed for our privileged position in a “patriarchy” (a fancy term that is never truly understood by those who use it), the ham-handed media forces television shows and films featuring “strong” women down our gullets. Sometimes these women are business leaders. Other times they are supposed to be physically dangerous heroines that save the day through martial arts or expert weapon usage. Reality does not reflect these vain imaginations, but the idea is to brainwash us into thinking it not only possible, but normal.

It is not. Nor should it be.

Of course, this is not an excuse for men to belittle women. Just because God commanded women to be subservient to their husbands, we do not get to treat women like second class citizens. In fact, God commanded men to LOVE their wives. We don’t love our slaves or servants. We love ourselves, do we not? We should love women with as much vigor as we love ourselves.

How is it possible to do this in today’s effeminate society without compromising our strength and leadership?

  1. We should not compromise our competitive nature for anyone, but we should show everyone compassionate sportsmanship. Win with grace. Lose with dignity. This can be at work, where you fight hard for that promotion, but don’t be dirty about it. Earn it. If you are rewarded, avoid rubbing others’ faces in it. If you are passed up, congratulate the victor. If your main competition is a woman, admire her drive, but do not capitulate. If your new boss just happens to be a woman, treat them with the respect that the POSITION requires.
  2. Make sure to have the final word at home. Many men operate under the “doctrine of separate spheres.” That is, the woman’s sphere is the home and the men’s sphere is outside the home; never the twain shall meet. It is a bit old fashioned, but there is some merit there. Sure, some men end up being stay-at-home dads, but even those who are the breadwinners should know what is happening inside their houses. Regardless of how busy you believe you are, you can still do a budget and help raise your children.

The one of the top cited reasons for divorce is money (along with poor communication). The Bible says “the love of money is the root of all evil.” Thus, finances are clearly important. A true leader understands that they should be in charge of the most important things in any relationship. So you, as the leader of your home, must handle the budget.

There is a ton of research out there that shows that the best thing that can happen to a child is to be raised in a two parent household where they are both loved and disciplined. Moms should never be responsible for doing both while dad coldly closes off his relationship with the child. Mothers are naturally nurturing (sorry, social justice warriors). Men are also naturally dominant (sorry, feminists). Men are physiologically more intimidating. We tend to be larger and have deeper voices. This is a great tool for disciplining a child. In a two-parent home, it allows a “good cop-bad cop” game. Accept it, and use it.

I would like to give a special shout-out to the single parents who must play both roles. Your task is that much more difficult; but should you find a suitable spouse after raising kids alone, allow your new mate to step into the proper role. Men, allow your new wife to love and care for your children. Women, allow your new husband to do the budget and discipline your children. It is always scary to give up power to another, but that is the essence of marriage.

  1. Be the spiritual leader in your home. Men should be the ones who make sure everyone knows that the family is going to church in the morning. Men should be the ones to suggest prayer at the dining room table and before bedtime. Men should be the ones who step into leadership roles at the church. I believe this is where we, as society, are lacking the most. There is a shortage of strong, spiritual men.

We sleep in because of a massive hangover. We stay home to watch football. We once again give our wives complete control over the children, so that mom ends up leading prayer. We fail to study God’s word, and those of us who do often do it so privately that our wives and kids do not see us doing it.

Most importantly, we do not live a spiritual life. Our kids know when we have a cigarette or a shot of whiskey. They copy our language when we cuss out a telemarketer. They mimic to others our tone when we constantly shout. They may eventually find our stash of pornography or overhear a conversation when we talk bad about our pastors. We must take responsibility for our actions, and understand that we are role models for others — whether we want to be or not.

Our number one role model for masculinity is Jesus Christ. He was a strong, spiritual leader. He inspired multitudes of followers. He also expressed his love in a plethora of ways from constant companionship to dying for us. He respected even the lowest on the social acceptability ladder and treated everyone like they were worthy of his time.

If men in our society were to implement compassion with unfettered leadership as Christ did, all of us would be better off. Rather than choosing one path or the other, we need to be more complete. We are not only made in Christ’s image, but we can do all things through him.

At the very least, just try to be a better human being.

Transreality.

A little girl born with girl parts grew up liking other little girls with girl parts. Now that little girl is a boy with girl parts who likes other boys with girl parts. Soon, that little girl will be a boy with boy parts who likes other boys with boy parts.
 
Yet we are told that gender is a “social construction.” That it is “fluid.” Why the need to change sex organs (which will not function, by the way) in order to violate biology, when a person could keep what they were born with an “identify” however they wish?
 
The fact that “society” (i.e. academia and Progressive lunatics) believes that this is just as normal a state of mind as being “cis-gendered” (which is when your “gender” and “sex” align), when over 90-95% of the American population is cis-gendered, serves to prove that academics and Progressives in society are mentally ill.
 
Our “trans” family and friends deserve our love. They deserve our attention. However, they do not need for us to endorse their delusions. I know people close to me who are in the midst of hormone therapy working toward sexual reassignment surgery at this very moment. I love them, therefore, I cannot support their decision.
 
4.6% of the American population overall has attempted suicide. That number climbs to around 15% for gays and lesbians. Transgender individuals attempt to kill themselves at an alarming rate of 41%, with the rate of suicide INCREASING post surgery.
 
90% of all suicides are due to (mostly untreated) mental illness. Trans people, I believe (and so does the head of John’s Hopkins), are suffering from a body dysmorphic disorder (being unhappy with one’s body due to “perceived flaws”) and body integrity identity disorder (which affects those who believe that they were born healthy, but are meant to be disabled and seek removal of limbs to make their dream a reality).
 
Transgender identity is a mental disorder. Like someone with depression or PTSD, we must treat them with love and kindness, but understand that they may not be well. The only difference is that “society” has told us to embrace this disorder. In fact, laws are being enacted for such an end.
 
Openly endorsing a mental disorder will not only have disastrous effects for individuals suffering with the affliction, but for society as a whole. God help us as we continue to abandon centuries of common knowledge for placating absurdity. Our ancestral beliefs are under attack, and this new “trans movement” will not be the end. Our constructs are in danger of being lost. We should do our best to keep that from happening.