Hic et Ille III

The Next Step Down the Slippery Slope

The Christian dating site, Christian Mingle, has now been compelled, through a discrimination suit brought against them by a couple of homosexual men, to expand the options available from “men seeking women” and “women seeking men”. Mark Richardson of the Oz Conservative blog has observed that this case “demonstrates clearly how liberal claims to tolerance and neutrality simply don't work in practice.” It is also the next step down the path of antidiscrimination towards the outcome that I discussed in my essay “Discrimination and Justice” last month, namely, mandatory universal omnisexuality. We are fast approaching the time where social and legal pressure to conform to the new culture of “tolerance” will be the instruments of a raptum omnium ab omnibus.

Speaking of Bad Court Rulings

On November 1st, 2015, an Indian woman named Tamara Crowchief went up to a white woman named, ironically, Linda White outside a pub in Calgary and, yelling “I hate white people”, punched her in the face causing her to lose a tooth. Calgary provincial court judge, Harry Van Harten just ruled that there was insufficient evidence to support classifying this as a “hate crime”. “I am not satisfied”, the judge declared “beyond a reasonable doubt that this offence was, even in part, motivated by racial bias.” Does anyone seriously doubt that he would have been satisfied if the scenario had been reversed? Hate laws, which declare a criminal act to be more serious and to come with a more severe penalty if motivated by prejudice are fundamentally bad laws because they forbid politically disapproved thoughts and feelings rather than criminally unacceptable acts. Punching someone and knocking her tooth out is properly against the law regardless of the motivation. Although hate laws are bad at the conceptual level, it is even worse for judges to apply them to members of one race but not to members of another even if the racial hatred of the latter is overt, obvious, and explicitly stated. What this case demonstrates, as if we needed any more evidence, is the truth of the meme that states that anti-racist is merely a code word for being anti-white.

Feminism and Anti-Racism Kill Brain Cells

Judge van Harten isn’t the only one who applies rules differently to different races. Over in Sweden, where an über form of political correctness has sadly replaced Lutheranism as the state religion, and where rape is rampant with just under eighty percent of the rapes being committed by those their victims identify as foreigners, Barbro Sörman, a feminist politician with the Swedish Left Party recently raised eyebrows by tweeting that it is worse when Swedish men commit rape than when immigrants do because the former, having been programmed to be egalitarian all their lives, should know better. In North America, feminists spend all their time complaining about the “rape culture” on university campuses, all of which resemble mini-Swedens in their ultra-liberal thought control, but their Swedish counterpart, excuses rapes on the grounds of the culture of those who commit them. People really ought to be warned about the dangers of opening their mouths while under the influence of feminism.

The Religious Right Died A Long Time Ago

A little over a week ago Lydia McGrew made the remark that “the religious right has died, not with a bang but an abject whimper” and referred her readers to an article by Michael Farris of the Christian Post declaring that the event late last month when thousand or so evangelical leaders went to Trump Tower to hear Donald Trump speak and meet with him signalled “the end of the Christian right.” I hate to break this to Mrs. McGrew and Mr. Farris but the Christian or religious right, died a long time ago. Its demise is indeed related to the Donald Trump campaign, but not in the way supposed. The efforts of the American religious right, since the formation of the Moral Majority almost forty years ago, have been concentrated on rallying the support of American evangelicals for approved candidates in the Republican primaries, and then for the Republican nominee in the American presidential election. The intended end of this was the turning back, or at least the halting, of the tide of moral, religious, and cultural decay represented by decreasing church attendance, increasing secularism, the new sexual permissiveness, rising divorce rates, and the abortion holocaust. Yet even when their candidates – such as Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush – won both the Republican nomination and the presidency, the decay continued unabated and the globalist agenda pursued by these presidents in practice, if anything, accelerated that decay. It is this same globalist agenda of free trade, open immigration, and the erasure of national boundaries in general, that is being rejected by those rallying behind Trump today. If the religious right has ceased to be, in the words of Lydia McGrew, “any sort of credible force in politics” it is not because its leaders are now embracing Donald Trump, but because they spent the last forty years embracing the kind of globalist politicians that Trump is getting so much mileage out of railing against today.