The Blaze
He says the “connecting dot” is BRA’s Constitution:
Note: This is why it is a waste of your time to get involved with Conservatism, Inc. The only way you will ever “conserve” anything in America is by dissolving the Union with the Northeast and West Coast.
Ahhh, so he has “evolved”. That goes well with his worship of MLK, Mandela, F. Douglas and Lincoln.
Yeah.
Hannity and Rand Paul and the rest of the circus also “evolved” on immigration in the aftermath of the election.
Once you accept universalism, then this is the “logical” conclusion.
That is why the mantra I propose starts off with a non-universalist, particular “we” as in: “We would be better off if we seceded from the Federal Government”.
It does not address everybody, all mankind, etc, just our people.
Do I “hate” others? Not when they aren’t violating my human rights.
Do I “love” others, perhaps in a vague detached way, but enough enough to compel political union.
I believe that a STRONG case can be made that we would be better off after we secede from the federal government. Hunter has been coming up with some great analysis of the welfare state, tax receipts, agriculture and energy.
I think most moderates and conservatives understand that case intuitively in its broad brushstrokes, but it has always been used as an argument to “take back America”. I don’t want to take back D.C. Chicago, Detroit , Manhattan and San Francisco. I want a divorce.
We just need to be peaceful and persistent, simple rather than complex, and events will do the rest for us.
I’d have to review the history to be sure, but my sense is that the argument that Mr. Beck and Mr. Jillette are making here–and which I’ve heard elsewhere–is backwards. Marriage is a legal institution, not a religious one; it dates at least as far back as the Code of Hammurabi, I think, which is about as far back as a legal institution can date. In a sense, it has to do with everyone except its two apparent participants, the couple. It has to do with their clans, whose bloodlines it shields from union other than the one that the marriage approves; it has to do with their nations, whom it shields from the burden of a child to whom the woman might give birth. Ultimately, it cultivates, throughout the nation, a reverence for the union of man and woman for creation of the future. Anyone who jokes about it, anyone who mistreats his or her spouse, anyone who thinks it appropriate to be harsh or “tough” or otherwise unloving toward his or her children is its enemy. The so-called solemnizing of a marriage by a Christian priest, who presumes to preside over its creation, is, I think, an historical imposition on what was originally a sort of contractual undertaking between families.
Didn’t see that coming.
Agree with Afterthought. The liberal self-destructive proclivities of the yankee BRA empire will lead to its eventual demise. The only concern we should have is mitigating the impact of those self-destructive tendencies among our own people and exposing the lies upon which the entire rotten system rests.
Does anyone really believe the controlled opposition, Lincoln-worshipping, creator of the inane “black founding fathers” lie is a real “conservative,” whatever that means anymore? Beck is a media-created attention whore who titillates the decrepit jingoistic sensibilities of simple-minded Amurrican teevee addicts.
Conservatism is as dead as the dodo. There is nothing left worth conserving in the entire yankee BRA empire–an empire built on the homicidal delusions of yankee hypocrites and their house of lies. Negro equality and sodomite marriage are only two of the most conspicuous of yankee lies.
Tell one lie, you wind up telling a thousand.
“Truth crushed to the earth is truth still and like a seed will rise again.”
Jefferson Davis
Deo Vindice
Mark my words gentlemen, BRA will have gay marriage. They have millions of dupe’s who have made it the struggle of their age that shit may be packed with society’s blessing. But it’s not even about that, it’s about equal access to our children.
There can be no right to a religious ceremony, period. That state performed marriages have been tolerated for a long time is due to the failure of the churches to take it out of those hands based on the First Amendment.
What Sodomites and homosexual women can do is demand civil unions, which are a type of contract, and come under contract law.
Naturally, the progressive/fascists don’t want that because it wouldn’t tear down the family, their goal.
Further, artificial insemination of homosexual women can be forbidden by law, to eliminate problems such as the children of people such as Jody Foster, herself the product of artificial insemination.
Sodom and Gomorrah we have arrived, nay we have descended lower than Sodom and Gomorrah(by we I mean the land we live in and the people who inhabit it). Have to be something wrong with folk, all white folk as much as I am displeased to say, it blankets the entire country; why is it not stopped? I believe it is due to lack of initiative partly, for people need a permit to do anything. A permit to brush your test, a permit to sit and flush a toilet(each sold separately), a permit to breath, a permit to start a lemonade stand, etc…
Obey the Monster, obey the Whore of Babylon, obey the State
Speaking of marriage, check this out: Sonia Sotomayor’s seven-year marriage began with her turning down a bag of Quaaludes ===> http://slate.me/T5SFuB
I don’t remember anything about here being divorced during the confirmation hearings?
One thing FOX has done right is let this guy go, he is a cult leader for “nice” white ladies. Total scam artist.
None of us are surprised I suspect. I’m certainly not. Any political figure who is anti-South despite what they may say on other issues is ultimately unreliable. The South and her symbols are a reliable litmus test politically.
The Man From Mars: I attribute it to a desire for comfort amongst our people, that is why the libs now that if they don’t push to hard to fast (that would make our people uncomfortable), that they can pretty much get whatever they want in time. Fighting back against small changes would be too uncomfortable for the rank-and-file white.
I don’t see that ever changing.
Thus we must leverage our people’s desire for comfort to other ends: notably survival.
@Afterthought I understand, but there comes a time when evil is so noxious and pervading that it must be dealt with, the other option is annihilation of everything good. You can’t take your money with ye after ye died.
You don’t have to be a blind syphilitic negro to see that Glen Beck, along with all the retarded Ayn Rand open border pro-immigration libertarian ideologues, is one of many media tools used to disorganize, fragment, and demoralize true conservative resistance to BRA.
But it helps. Just ask Ray…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFatAWbKow4
Once separated from them, we won’t have to put up with crazed yankee lunatics like Beck. A free and independent Dixie is the cure for what ails the Southern man.
Deo Vindice
I thought most libertarians were pro queer marriage as is ron paul. who is surprised?
Yes, but you see, Stonelifter, having queer marriage is the mechanism by which there will be a universal white racial revival. Just ask Alex Linder. He will explain how it works, step by step. Allowing businessmen unlimited immigration and free reign to do whatever they want is a step in the direction of our salvation, too. Just ask Linder.
Yeah these guys are always finding new Dots to connect in order to justify their positions of power and money in BRA.
Have any Church “leaders” come out yet to challenge Beck or are they going to “connect the dots” as well?
John B.
You do need to go back and study history. Babylonian civil institutions were based soley on religion. Actually look at the top of Hammurabi’s code. It’s a carved picture of him receiving the laws from their god Marduk. Sheesh.
Too bad none of them can ever “evolve” a pair of testicles.
Soon RuPaul will be a “conservative” icon the same way that MLK has become.
“The so-called solemnizing of a marriage by a Christian priest, who presumes to preside over its creation, is, I think, an historical imposition on what was originally a sort of contractual undertaking between families.”
Bone of Contention: Unmmm, no.
“Have ye not heard, that, from the beginning, GOD made them male and female, and that a man shall leave his mother and father, and a woman shall leave her home, and they shall be joined together, that the two may become one?”
– Jesus Christ
You do need to go back and study history. Babylonian civil institutions were based soley on religion. Actually look at the top of Hammurabi’s code. It’s a carved picture of him receiving the laws from their god Marduk. Sheesh.
Yes, Maxx, I realize that the Code was understood–or, at least, presented–as god-given; it was, yes, religious, in some sense of the word. Do Christian priests preside over the proceedings in our criminal courts, or over the litigation of torts, or at legal disputes over property or inheritance? If I recall correctly, all of those things–crime, torts, property, inheritance–are treated in the Code of Hammurabi. Would Penn Jillette and Glenn Beck be arguing, accordingly, that the government should have nothing to do with those things, which are, after all, religious?
Conservatism Inc. is a big waste of time.
Gay marriage is kind of a time waster too. Generations differ a bit and a lot of younger people and some middle aged ones simply don’t care. Gayness matters little more than handedness since its not going to make things worse for anyone so why worry about it.
As you knew that John B. fershooorr you did.
Nice catch Maxx.
Maxx — I could be wrong, in that I don’t know what role, if any, priests played in weddings before Christianity. Whether priests were involved in weddings in the days of Hammurabi, I don’t know. Whether they were or not, the Code speaks of marriage in legal terms. Here’s Section 128, from a 1904 translation linked at Wikipedia:
“If a man take a wife and do not arrange with her the (proper) contracts, that woman is not a (legal) wife.”
I’m thinking, too, of the weddings mentioned by Homer, in his description of the images on the shield of Achilles. Here’s the passage from the Samuel Butler translation, also available via Wikipedia:
“In the one [depicted city] were weddings and wedding-feasts, and they were going about the city with brides whom they were escorting by torchlight from their chambers. Loud rose the cry of Hymen, and the youths danced to the music of flute and lyre, while the women stood each at her house door to see them.”
Whether priests played any role in wedding of those kinds or whether, instead, the weddings were merely contractual events, like, say, purchases of property, I will say again that I don’t know. I don’t know whether priests played a role in weddings in the ancient Roman world (before Christianity, that is). I also don’t know whether priests traditionally had a role in weddings outside the West–in, say, India or Japan.
By the way, I was wrong to say I realize the Code of Hammurabi was presented as god-given. Having just read the intro, in the translation available via Wikipedia, I get the impression that Hammurabi’s rule is treated as god-ordained, but I think Hammurabi takes credit himself for the law code.
What Glen Beck has done here, is what Respectable Conservatives ALWAYS do.
First they oppose the left’s newfangled policies for a couple of years. -> They “evolve” and start AGREEING with those policies. -> Finally, they become ENFORCERS of those policies.
Respectable Conservatives Inc. has been doing it since the 1960s.
What? You really thought this was a two party system? 🙂
As you knew that John B. fershooorr you did.
Ancient law, as far as I’m aware of it, John, tends generally to be intertwined with what we now call religion. My sense, for instance, is that the Greek poems about Dionysus were about the pleasures of wine, even though they were nominally about “the god of wine.” They were more like a modern-day rock song about, say, the pleasures of cocaine than they were like anything that goes on in a Christian church. That’s what I meant when I said marriage did not start out as anything religious.
PS In that Homeric passage, John, notice the following: “Loud rose the cry of Hymen ….” Yes, the “cry of Hymen,” the god of marriage ceremonies, is religious in that it involves an imagined supernatural entity; but at bottom, it’s simply a call for good luck in the marriage itself. Here’s a Shakespeare passage quoted at Wikipedia:
“‘Tis Hymen peoples every town;
High wedlock then be honoured.
Honour, high honour, and renown,
To Hymen, god of every town!”
Hymen is marriage itself–high wedlock–something holy in and of itself. That’s different from Jesus’s paying an invisible visit, on the wedding day.
PPS And the culmination, John–the culmination of the Christian denaturing of marriage, the culmination of Christianity’s stripping marriage of its own essential holiness–is exactly the conversation that Penn Jillette and Glenn Beck have in that video, namely, the conversation in which marriage, having been so long artificially united with Christianity, is treated as some sort of superstitious claptrap, with which we would do best to dispense altogether. The fool Beck is so intent on demonstrating he’s not a Christian bumpkin that he merely joins in with Jillette in dismissing the institution and in treating the meaningless uniting of it with homosexuality as of no importance.
‘Conservatism’ was ALWAYS a fraud promoted and designed to give liberalism a fulcrum against which to push. Linder was correct when he called Buckley “Truckley” and blasted the Respectable Conservative movement in all its manifestations. It’s too bad he’s a Jewaholic who cannot control his ranting about wiping them out. If it weren’t for Jews, we’d soon evolve other enemies, worse for their unpredictability.
I’ve always said Jews are primarily a catalyst: they made things we had a tendency to do anyway, over a long period of time, happen much faster. Normally, each of us is born into a time, and even if we are fairly well educated in history-real history-over our lifetime the trend happens so slowly we don’t see the trend. Jews make it happen so fast that even a middle aged person can see over their own lifetimes the radical and destructive effects these changes have.
When I moved to where I now lived, it was 100 percent White. I now see not only blacks, but mestizos, Indians, Pakistanis, Sikhs, Chinese, Koreans and Vietnamese every day.
You can’t go to the laundromat any more because they are all filthy, owned by Koreans with Supra-driving punk kids and packed full of the darkest and smelliest mestizas with their shit-smeared infants and bratty kids, un-airconditioned in summer and cold and drafty in the winter.
Even the Central and South American librarians that have replaced the American white ones in the library (because they didn’t speak Spanish) can’t understand their caca-di-caca Spanish, let alone the Mixtec and other indigenobabble half of them speak, and all the German and Russian and French and Latin books were secretly dumpstered overnight to be replaced by Spanish ones written at levels a third grader in Mexico is expected, at least officially to be able to read, but of course they don’t anyway. They go in there to hang out, surf porn on the computers and smoke pot in the bathrooms.
All the strip malls have carnicerias and check cashing joints and cell phone places. The fast food places are all staffed by illegals, and Spanish language signs are in front of every church. Disgusting ranchero music blasts out of lowered Japanese cars with fart cans and too-tall wheels-for a while, they had ones too short but twice as wide sticking out, but that trend has died out.
And this is a highly affluent suburb in the Midwest. Slowly, people are being outraged, but too few too slowly. I am planning to relocate to the Pac NW. I’d consider Dixie, but the heat and humidity would kill me. Still, I sure as hell hope a White Dixie survives.
” The fool Beck is so intent on demonstrating he’s not a Christian bumpkin that he merely joins in with Jillette in dismissing the institution and in treating the meaningless uniting of it with homosexuality as of no importance.”
Either way, Glenn is a real know-nothing, intellectual light-weight. The perfect useful fool.
But I thought Glenn Beck was a secret white nationalist?
I advise taking a slightly different path with gays/queers.
Suggest the idea that sexuality is a private matter and if these people lead productive lives and keep their sexuality private they will be left alone and they should be happy living in a more tolerant, White Western society than say:
Iran
Saudi Arabia
Taliban controlled parts of Pakistan or Muslim ghettos in France, Bradford England.
The West has always had some homosexuals, many were very talented like Oscar Wilde or Elton John. Gays/homosexuals can have some civil unions, just not join BRA in working to destroy White Western Christian Civilization.
If homosexuals/gays/queers want to join BRA, ZOG and be part of the Obama – Eric Holder – Tim Wise – Jew Media coalition that seeks to insult, destroy all things White, straight, Southern, traditional – than so be it.
These anti White homosexuals/queers should be turned over to the most extremist Muslims.
On the other hand, I’m still hoping for some American version of Pym Fortuyn and my gay neighbor is a very nice person, responsible property owner, who I much prefer to some Black welfare mother on Section 8.
The first inovation you begin to see in civilized societies is a priesthood of some sort. As opposed to a shaman or medicine man, which are more primitive versions of priests. Given the limited literacy that would have existed in that society almost everything would have been over seen by the first priests. Granaries, births, deaths, marriages, contracts, trials… We see it in Aztec and Incan societies which resemble the Ancient Egyptians in more ways than the architectural pyramidal temple and funeral structures.
The Priests ran things.
There have always been male homosexuals, who are in every place and time obsessed with sex, and female homosexuals, many of whom then usually never had sex at all and many today don’t do it either once past the randiness of youth. They were always a tiny minority, and in healthy societies they are very discreet about it. Often, male homosexuals (I refuse to call them “gays”) are very creative people and many have been very successful in the arts, and (though it pains adherents to hear it) in ecclesiastical circles both in celibate and married religious orders.
Female homosexuals were simply invisible as such, being considered simply old maids, who tended to find subordinate positions in large organizations and simply worked, got old and died unnoticed. A few would attempt to live more or less as men and tended to gather in particular places and occupations. Detroit was famous, until it went all Black and imploded, for its lesbian cab drivers.
So long as the strictures of society make open homosexuality a highly unattractive modus vivendi, they are only a threat to themselves. Kids grow up and never are exposed to it, and they don’t have political power as such.
When being openly homosexual becomes feasible for any but the most disaffected or already marginalized, major problems soon arise.
I don’t know what makes people this way, but I speculate it is a combination of genetics and fetal and early childhood development. It isn’t going to be eradicated since obviously homosexuals usually don’t reproduce and when they do there is little correlation in their children becoming homosexual. They do have other problems, but rarely are homosexual themselves.