Friday, March 27, 2015

Human Progress and Evolutionary Skepticism

I’ve had an interesting thought about evolution in the past week.  I wasn’t able to write it down sooner because the job I do to make money has been very busy lately.  That is why there has been sparse postings lately.

Anyway, I was thinking about all the accomplishments of humanity as a whole.  How we have found a way to farm, to build, and to create amazing and complex machines.  More so than that, we are able to comprehend complex concepts that no other species on the planet seems even remotely capable of.

Granted, there are so many things that humanity has done that are horrible, pointless, and otherwise horrendous acts of evil.  We have destroyed the very things we’ve created, both abstractly and literally.  Billions of lives have been snuffed out for the sake of evil.

But on the whole, we’ve been moving forward.  Yes, our current civilization is on the decline, but I see more and more people each day taking up the call to restore what we have lost.  Eventually those voices will be too loud and numerous to not hear.

Now compare what we have done over the thousands of years of our existence to the accomplishments of animals during that same time span.  Even the most intelligent of animals, like chimpanzees or dolphins, don’t seem to create anything more complex than a stick used to pull bugs out of a mud pile.

Yes, animals do build things.  Most of the time it is out of instinct and the shelters tend to be temporary.  They don’t have plumbing, electricity, or any furniture.

Here’s my main point: in the millions of years in which we have supposedly evolved, there has been no species besides man that has managed to build even the simplest of devices.  There has been no monkey who created a small cart to carry his bananas.  There has been no dolphin who has created a floatation device to allow their crippled and young to keep to the surface.

Instead we see animals who operate primarily on instinct.  They build not because they are inspired or because they see the long term, but purely out of instinct.  To top that off, their days are not filled with stories or complex entertainment but simply foraging and surviving.

Human beings strive for greater things.  We seek to do better than just getting by.  Sure, we do that from time to time and there are always tribes of people who do not strive for more.  But of all the creatures on this planet, man is the only one who not created simple machines, but complex ones as well.

We are philosophers, engineers, priests, and leaders.  We form tribes based on common ideas rather than common sub-species.  And we have tamed animals to live among us without trouble (most of the time).

The progress of man is what makes me a skeptic of evolution.  This is because the basic premise of evolution is that human beings are animals, just of a slightly higher order.  This premise is flawed in the face of how much of a higher order humanity is when compared to animals, even the chimpanzees we supposedly evolved from.

There is something special about us that sets us apart from nature.  We require this planet to live and yet we seem to be not altogether part of it.  We bend and break the rules that other animals follow on a daily basis.  It is as if we have our own rules to live by.

I find it odd that most evolutionary priests like to present humanity as some complex animal while at the same these same people tend to condemn us for destroying nature.  Yet in our hearts, we know ourselves to be different, to not operate by instinct alone, and that seems to indicate that there is more than just nature, just animals, and just natural selection.

Friday, March 20, 2015

Unrestrained Feminism in Christianity

When I was a brief missionary in Uganda (didn’t spread the Word, just built simple solar-powered lighting systems in rural areas), my team came to a village where most of the parents were dead due to AIDS.  What was left were children and teenagers all guided by the local clergy.

Our team had with us a retired bishop of Uganda, a man who had witnessed the tyrannical regime of Idi Amin including the deaths of fellow clergymen and congregants.  He was appalled by the village and how the children were behaving.  He took time during the celebration to push for them to clean up their act and get their town in order.  It is a shame that he could not stay and guide them.

We could not speak up ourselves really.  We were just the white people from a foreign land coming to install electrical lighting.  But he could.  He could convict them to turn their lives around and not make the mistakes that their parents made.

In what was once Western Christendom, we have an entirely different story, especially when it comes to matters of marriage, romance, and sex.  We have abandoned Biblical principles when it comes to these matters and instead tried to adopt the misguided standards of the post-modern elite.

Just today I come across an article written in Christianity Today that encouraged people to re-think Margaret Sanger.  For those who don’t know, Margaret Sanger pioneered birth control, family planning, and eugenics.  Her non-profit organization, Planned Parenthood, is much more notorious for promoting abortion, posting record profits, and getting subsided by the US Federal government.

But that is neither here nor there.  In the article mentioned, the writer talks about how Sanger didn’t promote abortion in her lifetime and instead sought out a way for women to gain greater access to contraceptives, especially poor women.

The article blathers on about her own experiences in the third world where girls as young as 13 were getting pregnant and some women were giving birth to defective children due to STDs, among other things.  The writer, who is female, naturally assumes that all of these things could be avoided if women had more contraceptives.

So, according to this writer’s logic, all we have to do in order to stop unwanted pregnancies is to not encourage girls and boys to make responsible decisions but instead give them the means to which they can freely engage in even more fornication.  To young teenage girls, no less.

I am actually appalled that an outfit like Christianity Today would allow such an article to be posted.  But I suppose it is not altogether surprising.  Modern Christianity has fully embraced feminism, whether it knows it or not, and declared that women are not accountable for their actions when it comes to sex.

The overall message of the article was not to encourage churches to push for reforms in their society that seek to make sex a sacred part of the marriage sacrament, but to allow people to more freely engage in it and not be burdened with the consequences.

I am not personally opposed to contraception.  I would argue that if your daughter is going to college, she needs to be on the pill, especially if it is a liberal arts college or realm of study.  I would also argue that we are failing our daughters when it comes to teaching them to be feminine and that we are instead encouraging them to behave like teenage boys well into adulthood.

If we are to save Western Christendom, or restore it, we need to start encouraging our daughters to not go to college and waste their prime fertile years fucking 20% of the guys they meet and instead prepare them for suitable lifestyles that most women want to live.  And most women would rather be at home with their children.

Civilization wasn’t built on contraception.  It was built by people who were willing to make a better life for the many children that they had.  Contraception is the result of civilization, not the foundation of it.  If you want the third world to grow and become a better world, you cannot give them the means to permanently destroy themselves.

Contraception does not save lives; it merely prevents lives from being created in the first place.  Very few people go to their graves wishing they had less children.

But this is part in parcel with the fight against feminism and restoring the virtues (both feminine and masculine) which maintain Christendom.  Feminism is female sexuality unrestrained while restraining male sexuality as much as possible.  Always remember that and whenever you see one, the other is sure to follow.  Condemn those amongst your own Christian groups who encourage such destructive behavior.

Wednesday, March 18, 2015

Oklahoma Moves Toward Freedom in Marriage

Recently, the Oklahoma state House passed a law that would effectively eliminate marriage licenses in the entire state.  If the law passes the state Senate and is signed by the governor, then the state of Oklahoma will be the first state to effectively make marriage a private contractual matter and not one that concerns the government.

Already there are a lot of critics against the bill.  It eliminates “gay marriage” or it prevents atheists from getting married.  The truth is, nobody is losing their ability to get married in that state.  What effectively happens is that you can still get married, just that it has to be a religious figure of some kind.  Since atheists and agnostics don’t have a religion, they’d have to settle for someone willing to marry them off.

But I suspect that major opposition to this bill will come from Christian conservatives.  This is because despite the bill effectively eliminating the gay marriage debate, it also removes a major cause from the Christian Right’s own movement.

Christian conservatives are often primarily focused on social issues rather than fiscal issues.  They tend to vote for politicians who support their moral worldview through legislation.  This is why abortion is still a major issue despite many attempts though legislation at both the state and Federal level to eliminate it.  Christian movements need their causes to cling to.

I welcome this kind of legislation and I hope that it spreads to other states.  It is insulting to me that you have to swear an oath to your own state before you swear an oath to God concerning you status as a married person.  I know that isn’t much of a big deal to most Christians, but it is to me.

Social conservatives tend to believe that morality comes from the government you live under.  In theory, this is simply not the case, especially when the people who run the government are the people you directly select via voting.

Instead, government enforces justice, which are moral infractions, but not morality itself.  It is supposed to concern itself with resolving disputes and protecting its citizens from foreign invasion.  Instead, many people have a huge stake in pushing government to enforce their will on others.  This includes people who are supposedly in favor of limited government.  Except for social issues.  Or military spending.  Or food regulation.  Or clown cars.

It is very strange for Oklahoma to have passed this bill though with a 67 person majority.  This is a libertarian approach to marriage, not a conservative one.  But I am happy with them and I hope my state will do this in the future.

Thursday, March 12, 2015

Against Anti-Racism

Being anti-racist is tyrannical. Then again, anything that becomes standard government policy amounts to tyranny eventually.

Racism is the belief that one race is superior to another race purely because of race.  Honestly, going on that definition, it is hard to logically come up with a reason to be anti-racist, especially in light of genetic science reinforcing racial differences.

In essence, I see the difference races as sub-species more so than simply people with different skin color.  Notice I said “sub-species”, not “sub-human”.  We are all human but our genetics do determine a lot about us.

Yes, horrible things have been done in the name of racism.  And also horrible things have been done in the name of science, religion, communism, and for no real reason at all.  In fact, if we go by body count, atheism and communism has racism beat.  Better a racist than a communist.  You’re less genocidal that way.

But people who are going out of their way to either end racism or prove they aren’t racist are either fighting a losing battle or infringing on the civil rights of others.

One of the rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights in the United States is freedom of association.  What this means that you are allowed to associate with any person you desire to associate with.  That include racist groups.  They are allowed to meet, rally, and party as much as they want, provided they bring no harm to anyone else’s life, liberty, or property.

I do not care for racist groups, whether they are white, black, Hispanic, or whatever else.  I couldn’t care less about what they do, provided they don’t harm others in any way.  Once they do bring harm to others, that is when I will call for justice.  Justice is blind to race, creed, and social standing.  At least that is the idea.

And I think that is the central point: it wasn’t racism that was the real problem with the South, it was that their governments had embraced it to the point that they were willing to allow racist groups murder, rape, and pillage other people who weren’t part of their race.  Because their governments, which were supposed to represent law and order, didn’t fulfill their duty, it became a real problem.

We are supposed to be considered equal under the law.  The law is supposed to be applied equally to every person regardless of race, gender, or ideology.  Instead we see the anti-racists pushing an agenda that specifically targets a certain race, gender, and ideology.  Ironically these people are usually of the same race and gender.

Personally, I don’t see much necessity in racism.  I judge people by their actions, not their race.

And judging by the actions of the anti-racists, I’d rather be on the opposite side of them than on the same side.  They disgust me.

Monday, March 9, 2015


Hope is the most difficult, terrible thing that man has.  Despair is so much easier in the face of problems that we face either personally or collectively.  It is easy to lose yourself in it, to absorb your sadness into your heart and to bring yourself into those dark places we all go from time to time.

Not everyone can deal with it properly.  Most people can’t really.  We close off our family and friends.  We find ourselves in isolation and become even more solipsistic than before.

Others lash out at people.  They attack others for not fulfilling them.

People are often mistaken when they believe that others can make them whole.  It isn’t limited to the realm of the ignorant either, just the foolish.  The great Greek philosophers would speculate on people making other people whole.

I know that becoming whole is much more than simply finding comfort in another person.  We are all hollows wandering this world seeking to devour our happiness and find our hearts.

But I would rather starve.  I would rather be alone in my misery than see others suffer for it.

Sometimes that can’t be helped though.  If human beings are social creatures, then we are doomed to affect those around us whether we like it or not.

Share This