Revoking the Looting License

Businesses which encourage theft and looting through a policy of ‘do nothing’ should receive nothing from honest customers.

How many reading this have seen the videos (more every day) which chronicle the unabashed crimes of those who descend upon places of business to loot and rob with abandon, filling bags and backpacks with stolen items and then scurrying out the door? What to do? Apparently nothing, as the employees have been instructed by their employers to do nothing, and the brokers[1]the ‘woke’ of our new world have emasculated the police and justice system to the point where it seems that questioning or critiquing the status quo is a far greater threat to the peace and welfare of the country than wanton looting and robbery.

Here’s a novel idea: send an email to such establishments, informing them that you will not be spending money at their stores until such time as they work to prevent such crimes. Why? Well, first of all, crime should be prevented. Secondly, making them accountable (and perhaps driving them out of business) will lead to a moment’s reflection that the broke[2]‘woke’ policies championed by many of them have created the very problems they’re experiencing, and from that a lesson will be hopefully learned. But, from a more self-serving perspective: honest customers always end up having to pay the price of those stolen goods[3]Of course, it’s true, that if a store were to hire a security guard, that we’d still end up footing the bill, but at least a stand against immoral behavior will have been taken.. Ironic, considering that the honest customers are typically the honest taxpayers, i.e. those who have, through the provenance of ‘welfare,’ provided the looters with their housing, food, medical and dental care, schooling, clothing, etc. from prior to birth, up to and including the moment in time when they display their utter ingratitude and malice by committing their smash and grab crimes.

Notes and References

Notes and References
1 the ‘woke’
2 ‘woke’
3 Of course, it’s true, that if a store were to hire a security guard, that we’d still end up footing the bill, but at least a stand against immoral behavior will have been taken.

Disney’s Dystopia

Disney has a perfect score on the Corporate Equality Index, a survey administered by the Human Rights Campaign Foundation (HRCF). Despite its officious, grandiose, and even magnanimous sounding pretenses, this organization is largely dedicated to furthering the normalization of transvestite, homosexual, and other sexually chaotic behaviors into schools, politics, places of business, halls of justice, restaurants, churches, and virtually any place where normal people might congregate, whether they like it or not. In order to get this score, Disney had to (among other things)[1]https://www.hrc.org/resources/corporate-equality-index-criteria appeal to this rather tiny, but ever-growing[2]Through the proselytization of children and market-driven efforts to normalize that which is morally repugnant. seamy underbelly of human behavior by

  • Providing health coverage that caters to a host of deviancies, up to and including ‘medically necessary care.’ Considering that by default, health insurance plans tend to cover medically necessary care for normal people experiencing actual ailments, diseases, and accidents, why the specific proviso for the sexually perverted? Because, only the unhinged would consider mutilative surgeries and years-long hormone injections ‘necessary.’ The covered surgeries include, but are not limited to
    • removal of the testicles (orchiectomy) where the skin of the testicles is used to create lumps of skin made to simulate female genitals. The skin of the penis is used (vaginoplasty) to create a ‘vaginal’ canal and ‘labia.’
    • removal of the uterus (hysterectomy) of a woman as well as the removal of her vagina (vaginectomy) . In another surgery, skin is taken from another part of the body, rolled into a shaft (called a neopenis) and attached to the groin (phalloplasty). The skin typically comes from the forearm, thigh, and/or back.
  • Creating marketing and advertising campaigns that specifically cater to them.
  • Providing support to at least one organization dedicated to the transmission and dissemination of the perverse beliefs embraced by them.
  • A record of not lending support to any organization or person who does not agree entirely with them.[3]I.e. support for or endorsement of any Christian organization is forbidden.
  • The creation of ‘gender neutral’ restrooms where males and females make use of the same facilities.

Like all people of sound mind, I recoil in horror at even a brief glimpse into what denying biological realities entails, and I also feel great sympathy for any person who is ensnared in such an all-encompassing web of lies, where the distortions and excesses of the mind lead to a mutilated body, but my sympathy does not extend to what is essentially hatred. For hatred it is, to countenance such perverse beliefs and actions and not reject them out of hand on moral and rational grounds and to point the way to the healing and freeing power of the true and the real. How monstrous must one be to encourage or look aside when presented with such beliefs and actions? It beggars belief.

So much for the corporate side of things, does Disney cater to and encourage the sexually deviant in their theme parks? The answer to that is an obvious ‘yes,’ given that such is required by the HRCF. Indeed, for well-over a quarter of a century, Disney has welcomed (and even sponsored) ‘gay days’ at Disney’s theme parks, subjecting unsuspecting adults and children to the grotesque and perverted vision of the homosexual. Disney also sponsors children’s shows with transvestites encouraging kids to endorse and experiment with a whole host of deviant behaviors.

Having digested all of the above, let’s move on to an event that recently took place at Disney World: a young woman who was wearing a half shirt was told that she could not enter the park without changing her attire. The Disney World FAQ addresses their dress code here [4]https://disneyworld.disney.go.com/faq/parks/dress/. The pertinent clauses inform Disney World customers that Disney reserves the right to deny admission to any “any person wearing attire that is considered inappropriate or attire that could detract from the experience of other Guests” and that clothing that qualifies is that which “exposes excessive portions of the skin that may be viewed as inappropriate for a family environment.”

So, in other words, Disney encourages and funds the most horrific and barbarically sexually deviant beliefs and behaviors both corporately and publicly, but on the other hand, in the name of ‘appropriateness’ for a ‘family’ environment, will refuse entry to the park to a young woman for displaying her midriff[5]In an actual family environment provocative clothing should not be allowed. The point here is the blatant hypocrisy evinced by Disney.. Hopefully, the disconnect from reality at Disney is glaringly apparent.

Given the immorality of our time and lack of cogency on pretty much every issue of relevance, Disney unfortunately has the legal right to have a chaotic and unhinged dress code, but, those of sound mind have a duty not to yield one red penny to such a perverse enterprise and to starve it into the oblivion it so richly deserves.

Notes and References

Notes and References
1 https://www.hrc.org/resources/corporate-equality-index-criteria
2 Through the proselytization of children and market-driven efforts to normalize that which is morally repugnant.
3 I.e. support for or endorsement of any Christian organization is forbidden.
4 https://disneyworld.disney.go.com/faq/parks/dress/
5 In an actual family environment provocative clothing should not be allowed. The point here is the blatant hypocrisy evinced by Disney.

Injection Irony

“Political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind. ” –George Orwell

For many years, those women who have supported the murder of children in the womb[1]AKA ‘abortion,’ which is the accepted euphemism for this by today’s benighted people. We help no one but those who seek to commit murder on a massive scale by allowing them to … Continue reading have defiantly cried out “My body, my choice!” Concomitantly, males in support of this evil practice have echoed that sentiment with “Who am I am to tell a woman what to do with her body?” This rubbish [2]An example of the ignoratio elenchi fallacy which conveniently disposes of the fact that such proclamations have nothing to do with the individual and unique human life that is actually at stake and … Continue reading has been swallowed hook, line, and sinker by an ever-more credulous public eager for the pretense of morality without any of the accompanying effort or cost and all of the perceived perks and benefits.

Lately, this pernicious phrase has come to the fore in the service of a movement that actually has merit, namely that individuals in an ostensibly free society should not be forcibly injected with substances without their consent upon the whims of the decrepit ruler of a panicked and unhinged demos. Let me first state that which should be obvious to all imbued with even a bare modicum of wisdom: there is no quick and easy answer to the subject of vaccinations. Anyone who states that we all should allow ourselves to be injected with whatever a government ‘expert’ and his corporate henchmen stipulate, whenever they stipulate it, is a fool, as is anyone who states that there is no situation, ever, in which measures should be taken to protect a community from those who are verifiably transmitting deadly disease to others [3]Exhibit A: the ‘blood terrorism’ advocated and practiced by homosexuals to purposely infect the blood supply with AIDS in the hopes of securing more taxpayer funding by making the disease … Continue reading. To reason is to proceed carefully and with nuance, and to the mass of people today[4]Sadly this is almost as endemic to the majority of the right as it is to the left. But, thankfully, many on the right, even if they don’t have a proper grounding in the proper use and … Continue reading, these are anathema. The thinking behind entering this phrase into the political/moral arena is essentially: “What’s good for the goose is good for the gander,” i.e. it is hypocritical for leftists[5]For indeed it is the leftists who are the most vocal and shrill about this. While there are those with the label of ‘Republican’ who align themselves with the left on this, I am not aware … Continue reading to demand forcible vaccination of those people who choose not to be vaccinated, for such forcible vaccination violates their autonomy and privacy, which according to the left is supposedly sacrosanct, in fact, sacrosanct unto the death of innocents.

One of the problems with adopting this tactic is that it gives tacit assent and support to the lie that the salient issue in not allowing women[6]Let us not neglect to mention that if these women were involved with an actual man who did not shirk responsibility and manhood, many of these women wouldn’t even consider such a terrible … Continue reading to commit infanticide is that it is an attack upon the woman’s autonomy and privacy. Another problem is that by invoking this narrative, the core issue, the core truth, is missed yet again, which is precisely what the enemies of that which is true desire. It should also serve as a warning signal that even those who might say the right things and who might even be motivated by commendable beliefs, oftentimes lack the perspective and operative principles to understand what it is they are actually doing and why they are doing it, and hence they become unwitting allies of those who propagate beliefs which are rightly regarded as abhorrent. This surface-level approach in the United States and the West to all things of relevance runs deep indeed.

But what is the core reality that is being missed? It is, that just as the destruction and subsequent disposal of the unborn into the trash is rooted entirely in selfishness, so it is with forced vaccinations: they are both a consequence of individuals who have taken the message of self ‘love’ to its murderous and logical conclusion, i.e. that the self is all that matters, and anything or anyone that impedes the desires thereof must be destroyed or cast aside[7]It is fascinating and ironic indeed, that the Latin root for ‘abort’ has connotations of making something ‘disappear’ and that that Latin word is itself a modification of the … Continue reading. Just as the barbaric cultures of the Aztecs, Mayans, and Incas of old murdered their children by the thousands to appease the ‘gods’ in order to ensure a good crop yield and for their lives to be easier or more comfortable, so do today’s barbarians execute their children by the millions in the pursuit of the same ends. As Solomon said three millennia ago: There is nothing new under the sun.

Consider: Forcible injections are not new to the left, for one of the many horrific realities about the monstrosity of the homicide[8]In 1974, The West German Federal Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht) wrote, “The usual language, termination of pregnancy, cannot conceal the fact that abortion is a homicidal … Continue reading of the unborn, is that for many years it was achieved via an injection of saline into the amniotic sac and/or directly into the baby: “Saline abortions use a saline solution to poison the baby, which burns him or her inside and out, even burning off the outer layer of their skin. The child suffers in these conditions for over an hour until their demise, and the mother must deliver her dead child the next day.”[9]From Born-Alive Abortion Survivors: Just the Facts, https://downloads.frc.org/EF/EF19E62.pdf It is revealing that even the murderous advocates of this moral atrocity acknowledge that a death has occurred: “Fetal death within one hour of injection has been documented by hysterotomy. The hypertonic saline infusion causes water to diffuse into the amniotic sac from surrounding fetal and placental tissues. The damage resulting from this fetal dehydration is probably responsible for fetal death.” [10]Cronenwett, Linda R., and Janice M. Choyce. “Saline Abortion.” The American Journal of Nursing 71, no. 9 (1971): 1754–57. https://doi.org/10.2307/3422026. ‘Probably’ responsible. Who knows? Who cares? All that matters is that the threat to the self’s autonomy and independence has been dispensed with. As indicated above, because this barbaric practice often required a stay at the hospital so that the dead baby could be safely and sanitarily ‘delivered,’ it was supplanted by cheaper and more expeditious means of killing our offspring[11]what the term fœtus actually means.

Many of the people who have advocated for these horrors (or via their votes have lent their support to it) are woefully uninformed about the realities of it, hence, it should surprise no one that they would tend to follow blithely and mindlessly along with the architects of atrocity down the path towards enforced vaccination. As to those who do know the grisly details, is it any less unsurprising that the members of a party where the primary shibboleth for entry and candidacy is advocacy of such murder, are the same people clamoring for forcible vaccination of those, who like the unborn baby, are guilty of no crime against them? Thus, it follows, that the advocates of the murder of the unborn are being consistent (not hypocritical) when out of their terror at the perceived imperilment of their own ease and comfort, they lend their support to policies that pursue forcible injections of hastily developed and poorly tried concoctions passed off as trustworthy vaccines along with terrible penalties for those that refuse, for these are the same people who out of the darkness of their understanding are enthusiastic supporters of the slaughter of innocents for the very same reasons. Forcible injection, ostracization, and making pariahs of those who exhibit probity and aren’t ruled by fear, is a small matter compared with the horrors they’ve willingly and knowingly supported or inflicted upon untold millions of children for decades[12]Let us not forget those pitiable women and the males who stood by apathetically or even actively encouraged them in such an evil path who have to live with the knowledge of their crimes against God … Continue reading. Only in the very penumbra of reality has the heinous practice of terminating a pregnancy through a variety of grisly and terrible means been about autonomy and privacy, and so, whenever someone proposes that a moral horror be ‘tolerated’ or made legal, all those of sober mind should work from the assumption that there is an abominable lie lurking within whatever is said in the defense or support of said horror. Therefore, the lesson to be learned is that while we must always eschew psittacism, we must be especially careful to avoid echoing any statement made by those who have demonstrated that they are the avowed enemies of the true and the good.

So while it is true that contra the claims made by the left regarding a woman’s right to instigate the murder of her own child, the statements made by those in regards to privacy, autonomy, and choice in respect to vaccination have actual cognitive and moral legitimacy, it is also true that because the phrase “My body, my choice” is so polluted and stigmatized with the stain of the blood of 100s of millions of victims, it cannot be wisely used for anything other than as an object of contempt, derision, and ultimately great sorrow because of the vast evils perpetrated under its banner.

Notes and References

Notes and References
1 AKA ‘abortion,’ which is the accepted euphemism for this by today’s benighted people. We help no one but those who seek to commit murder on a massive scale by allowing them to suppress the truth in the unrighteousness and deception of the words they choose for their propaganda.
2 An example of the ignoratio elenchi fallacy which conveniently disposes of the fact that such proclamations have nothing to do with the individual and unique human life that is actually at stake and the real source of contention.
3 Exhibit A: the ‘blood terrorism’ advocated and practiced by homosexuals to purposely infect the blood supply with AIDS in the hopes of securing more taxpayer funding by making the disease more prevalent amongst those who engage in normal and natural sexual activity.
4 Sadly this is almost as endemic to the majority of the right as it is to the left. But, thankfully, many on the right, even if they don’t have a proper grounding in the proper use and limitations of reason, at least affirm that which is worthy of belief.
5 For indeed it is the leftists who are the most vocal and shrill about this. While there are those with the label of ‘Republican’ who align themselves with the left on this, I am not aware of any conservative (read paleoconservative) who has so aligned himself.
6 Let us not neglect to mention that if these women were involved with an actual man who did not shirk responsibility and manhood, many of these women wouldn’t even consider such a terrible course. But, of course, if actual men weren’t in the minority, what I’m writing wouldn’t even need to be written, but I digress…
7 It is fascinating and ironic indeed, that the Latin root for ‘abort’ has connotations of making something ‘disappear’ and that that Latin word is itself a modification of the Latin word oriri which means ‘to come into being’ or ‘to be born.’
8 In 1974, The West German Federal Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht) wrote, “The usual language, termination of pregnancy, cannot conceal the fact that abortion is a homicidal act.” Certainly, other courts have denied that a human being is being extinguished. I mention this only to indicate that some courts do, from time to time, state the truth of the matter.
9 From Born-Alive Abortion Survivors: Just the Facts, https://downloads.frc.org/EF/EF19E62.pdf
10 Cronenwett, Linda R., and Janice M. Choyce. “Saline Abortion.” The American Journal of Nursing 71, no. 9 (1971): 1754–57. https://doi.org/10.2307/3422026.
11 what the term fœtus actually means
12 Let us not forget those pitiable women and the males who stood by apathetically or even actively encouraged them in such an evil path who have to live with the knowledge of their crimes against God and for which they will ultimately have to answer.

Women’s Fib

After weeks of hearing and reading the platitudinous pablum which is spewed out in support of “women’s” history month, the following thought occurred to me:

Prior to the women’s lib movement, ‘feminists'[1]I put this in single quotes because what they advocate and present to the public is antithetical to what a man would recognize as truly feminine. ostensibly fought against the ‘stereotype’ of being nags to their husbands.

Post the women’s lib movement, ‘feminists’ engage in near-constant nagging of everyone and have no husbands[2]emasculated stand-ins for actual men don’t count as husbands.

Notes and References

Notes and References
1 I put this in single quotes because what they advocate and present to the public is antithetical to what a man would recognize as truly feminine.
2 emasculated stand-ins for actual men don’t count as husbands