Recent Comments
RSS feed
Landmark Report: Free Speech or Not – Part 1
May 20, 2011 — xanthippaThe first installment in the series by Kaffir Kanuck.
“…Combine those realities with the squeamishly absent Canadian politicians, who both advocate free speech yet have the testicular absenteeism of their convictions to be seen in public with Mr. Wilders, empowered are the extremist left who see a bigot under every honest debate just waiting to be exposed so they can turn them into the nearest Human Rights Commission for hate speech.“
Catching up…
May 19, 2011 — xanthippaSo much is happening in the world around us, it is difficult for me to keep up with all the things worthy of being brought to your attention – especially when others are doing such an awesome job of it.
Still, here are a few things that are worth reading:
The lack separation of church and state in Louisiana leads to multiple death threats against a high school student. No religion or religious law must be permitted to trump secular laws – no matter what! Otherwise, innocent people – like this kid – will suffer.
On a brighter note, Kaffir Kanuck gets a tour of Sun Studios from Ezra Levant.
Binks publishes his latest roundup.
And more from BCF….and Kaffir Kanuck…and The Sharpe Stick…
…let’s not forget young Walker, either!
‘The cult of Apple’ confirmed through fMRI
May 19, 2011 — xanthippa‘Religion’ is more than just a set of world-views.
There is a significant amount of evidence that some humans are ‘wired’ for religiosity: that their brains are ‘built’ so that their need for religious beliefs, practices and experiences is as physical as their other ‘human’ needs. This is why ‘religious belief’ is not an entirely voluntary thing…
‘Religiosity’ is a forseeable result of our social evolution – a feedback-loop, if you will, making it possible for humans to live in ‘unnaturaly’ large groups with top-down rules administered by an authority figure with minimal requrement for physical enforcement. Rules are essential for the functioning of early human societies: the individuals with the greater religiosity needs would submit to an authority figure’s rules through religiously-motivated self regulation. By reducing the need for social regulation through physical punishment, the authority figure is enabled to exert a great deal of control without the kind of revolt a physical enforcement of oppressive or invasive (or both) rules would elicit.
(Aside: OK – perhaps a better explanation is needed – but I do not want to go off on a huge tangent. So, let me be brief:
- our brains are capable of fully conceptualizing around 150 people – our ‘monkeyshpere’ – which is the ‘natural’ size of a human social group
- when we began to live in groups larger than our monkeysphere, we needed ‘social rules’ to govern our interactions with other members of our group, since we could not ‘know and care about’ each and every one in our group
- ‘religiosity’ is one of the evolutionary mechanisms through which this process is achieved)
Though many people are curiously resistant to the idea, ‘religions’ do not necessarily contain dogma about any deities, or afterlife, or any such concepts. Anthropologists and sociologists will confirm that in the past as well as in the present times, the one thing all religions share is belief is ‘powerful forces’ – whether these be physical or not. (‘God’ is just one paricular incarnation of these ‘powerful forces’.)
To paraphrase C. G. Jung, religions are concerned with things (including ideas and principles) that we believe important, powerful or beautiful enough to be recognized and or worshipped.
The following bit of news from Digital Trends therefore does not come as much of a surprise:
…Previously, the scientists had studied the brains of those of religious faith, and they found that, as Riley puts it: “The Apple products are triggering the same bits of [Brooks’ [‘an Apple devotee’s’]] brain as religious imagery triggers in a person of faith.”
“This suggests that the big tech brands have harnessed, or exploit, the brain areas that have evolved to process religion,” one of the scientists says.”
Which, really, really, really makes sense.
Pat Condell: ‘You’ll turn to God’
May 15, 2011 — xanthippaVlad Tepes on Geert Wilders
May 15, 2011 — xanthippaI realize this is coming a little later, my apologies. Going out to see Geert Wilders live was so exciting, it has taken me a few days to regroup…
Vlad Tepes has posted some excellent videos. Here is his interview with Geert Wilders.
Geert Wilders and Ezra Levant at the National Arts Centre
May 10, 2011 — xanthippaJust came home from the National Arts Centre in Ottawa from an evening with Geert Wilders.
Ezra Levant introduced him in his wonderful, bigger-than-life style.
The next speaker was a most excellent, engaging speaker – and, thanks to Kaffir Kanuck who ‘jogged my memory, I can now tell you his name. It was none other than Rabbi Jonathon Hausman, who came up from Boston for the event, and he shared his experiences with Islam and the dhimmitude of our elected officials and the government bureaucrats, south of the border. His speech was prepared and delivered very well indeed – too bad the content told of so many sad and, yes, tragic things.
Then came the highlight of the evenig – Geert Wilders!
What can I say about it?
It was classical Wilders – we have all heard him speak or read his words. So, it was not unfamiliar territory! But, hearing him speak those words in person felt like being part of history…
During the short Q&A afterwards, I was most happy that he got asked about the one thing he is most infamously misquoted on: thecall for banning of the Koran… And, Geert Wilders DID get a chance to clarify exactly what his position is!!!
Though he is very often quoted as saying that the Koran should be banned, he has never said such a thing!
Rather, we are dealing with an ‘IFF’ siuation here.
‘IFF’ – for those who are not familiar with the expression – stands for ‘IF AND ONLY IF’.
In the Neatherlands, Hitler’s infamous book ‘Mein Kampf’ (which, by the way, translates as ‘My Jihad’) was outlawed under that country’s hate laws. All Wilders did was stand up and say to the legislators:
- IF you have used your power to outlaw ‘Mein Kampf’ on the grounds that it contains anti-semitic hate speech
- THEN you have to outlaw other books that have anti-semitic hate speech that is just as strong, if not stronger
- The Koran is such a book: therefore
- IF you ban one, you MUST ban both
- Otherwise you must not ban either!
In other words – if and ONLY if!
This is not a demand for the Koran to be banned: it is a demand that laws be applied the same way, to everyone.
Not only is this stand moral and principled, it can be interpreted as ‘anti-banning-anything’!
Again, this is not a demand to ban the Koran – it is calling out of the moral relativism that applies laws selectively and a shaming of those who partake in it!
Geert Wilders truly is a hero!
Update: thanks to Kaffir Kanuck, the name of one of the speakers was added.
Xanthippa's Chamberpot 