Treowth In Times Of Madness

Who Is 'Queering" America And Why?

2005-02-20T02:46:00.000-08:00

"The heart of the sons of men is full of evil, and madness is in their heart..." ......Eccl. 9:3

In the "American Dictionary Of The English Language, 1878," Noah Webster defined buggery as "a crime against nature; the unnatural and detestable crime of carnal intercourse of man or woman with a beast or of human beings unnaturally with each other; sodomy." And up until approximately 40 years ago all Americans believed that sodomy was unnatural and destestable and our society was such that it required people who engaged in it to keep that behavior out of 'sight,' and most importantly, away from our children. So how is it that in a relatively short time span Americans have not only come to accept sodomy as something 'natural, normal, and healthy' but are allowing their children to be instructed on how to become, in effect, 'buggerers'?
The subversion and perversion of American social mores didn't occur either naturally or honestly. It was slyly contrived at by morally insane intellectuals and their acolytes.

Moral insanity is not to be confused with intellectual insanity, which is caused by chemical imbalances and such.
Morally insane people retain their intellectual powers but set their will toward evil. They refuse to yield to the demands of their consciences and they discard their obligations of moral responsibiity towards everyone but themselves and the selfish ends they are in pursuit of. They follow dreams of their own fancy. They act as if truth were lies and lies were truth. Reality is redefined and redescribed to suit their pleasures and ungodly desires.

America's morally insane prevaricaters are the souless progeny of Lenin, who said, "(we) repudiate all morality that proceeds from supernatural ideas (religion).....everything is moral that is necessary for the annihilation of the old, exploiting social order..." (end quote) In other words, Natural Law, moral standards, truth, wisdom handed down through the ages, commonsense.....all are swept aside or perverted in favor of the evil whims, fancies, and lies conceived of in the corrupted minds of Lenin's maddened sons and daughters in order that they can annihilate America's traditional social order.

We know these blackhearted schemers in general terms like Leftists or Liberals. But more specifically, they are, for instance, neo-Marxist professors, activist judges, Hollywood actors/actresses, and the Dem. Progressive Caucus of the US House of Representatives. Read what the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) say with regards to the Progressive Caucus:

(quote) "The DSA is the largest socialist organization in the US and a principle affilliate of the Socialist Internationalist. DSA's members are building progressive movements for social change while establishing an openly socialist presence in American communities and politics. DSA is working in conjunction with the Congressional Progressive Caucus, a network of more than 50 progressive members in the US House of Rep." (end quote) Among the Dem. Progressive Caucus members are Bernie Sanders, Pelosi, DeFazio, Waxman, and Lewis. Go here to see a complete list: http://www.rfcnet.org/archives/socialists.htm

The strategic goals being implemented within America by America's communist subversives were articulated in 1963 by the Hon. A.S. Herlong, Jr. of the Fla House of Representatives and are in the Congressional Record, Vol 109, 88th Congress, 1st Session. http://www.restoringamerica.org/documents/45_goals_of_communism.html Among other things, they conspired to get control of our schools; to debase our culture by degrading all artistic expression {ie.dung art, vomit art, crosses upside-down in urine, shapeless sculpture, etc);to take control of media (entertainment and news sources); eliminate obscenity laws on the contrivance that they infringe on free speech; capture one or both political parties; break down cultural standards of morality by promoting porn and obscenity; present homosexuality, degeneracy, and promiscuity as 'normal, natural, and healthy" (note that homosexuality is bracketed with degeneracy); infiltrate churches and replace revealed religion with 'social religion'; discredit the Bible; eliminate prayer and all religious expression in schools on the ground that it violates 'separation of church and state" (which does not exist in our Constitution); discredit traditional family; encourage promiscuity and easy divorce."

The preceeding list is a damning indictment against America's blackhearted sons of destruction. It clearly evidences their cruel hypocrisy, gross deceptions, lies, and their outright evil. It also demonstrates how very successful they've been in underrmining and perverting our culture. In fact, they've been so sccessful that our culture has been turned into a sewer.
We are not only a promiscuous, porn-saturated, fornicating, diseased culture of divorce, but one that celebrates 'buggery' and teaches it to its children. Ours has become a 'culture of death" wherein we mindlessly celebrate killing our unborn as a 'liberating right' while simultaneously celebrating the destruction of the traditional family via divorce. But we also celebrate with 'pride' the extinguishing of life through the depositing of it in the human bodies' 'repository for waste matter".

Further evidence of their heinous 'culture of death' victories over America's traditional culture can be seen in the mind-boggling statistics regarding the plague of STDs sweeping our nation. The ASHA (http://www.ashastd.org/stdfaqs/statistics.html ) reported these statistics for 1998: approx. 65,000,000 cases of STDS, with relatively few curable at a cost of 8 billion a year to treat; 15,000,000 new cases every year;
two thirds of all STDs are in the 25 or younger category; 1 in 4 occur in teens" (end quote) The CDC reported that it costs approximately $100,000 to treat just one AIDs patient, with an additional $20,000 yearly for drugs. Disease is not the only consequence of the bizarre social engineering that America's communists are subjecting our culture to. A growing contagion of sex crimes is another. Go here: http://www.obscenitycrimes.org/news/Porn-Crime-Link-RWP.cfm to read about the links between porn and sex crime.

Looking at these deadly statistics, can we believe anything other than that the Left are insane monsters? They've knowingly unleashed the destructive forces of sexual license upon America knowing in advance what the deadly outcome would be. These are the maddened offspring of past and present genocidal murderers, butchers who are responsible for exterminating 100,000,000 plus people and counting: Mao, Lenin, Stalin, Hitler (was a socialist), Pol Pot, Kim Jung II, and Castro.

And to promote and enforce their agenda of moral degeneracy, death, and destruction, America's communists formed up an army of organizations to do their bidding. Among just a fraction of these are the ACLU, GLAAD (Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation); PFLAG (Parents, Families, & Friends of Lesbians & Gays), Lambda Legal, AFT (Am. Federation of Teachers), NEA (Nat'l Educators Assoc.); NOW; NARAL; Gay Straight Alliance Network; and GLSEN (Gay, Lesbian, & Straight Educators Network). All of these, plus many more are boldly listed on the Communist Party USA website: http://www.cpusa.org/ The Human Rights Campaign, yet another 'gay' activist group, is found on various progressive websites, and it actively works against the appointment of strict Constitutionalist judges.

Americans,these evil people are teaching your children to become fornicating sodomites (buggerers). They don't care that your children are becoming diseased in the process. Keep in mind what Lenin, one of their "fathers" said to them: ".....everything becomes moral in pursuit of the annihilation of their (our) culture." Everything becomes 'moral', even turning children into diseased degenerates.

Our Founders knew well the dangers posed to societies in which sexual license, including sodomy florished. So feared was the corrupting influence of sodomy, that many states imposed the death penalty upon any man or woman who engaged in it (go to link at bottom of page for info). In 1814, legal author John David Michaelis wrote:

(quote) "If we reflect on the dreadful consequences of sodomy to a state, and...the extent to which this abominable vice may be secretly carried on and spread, we cannot, on the principles of sound policy, consider the punishment as too severe. For if it once begins to prevail, not only will boys be easily corrupted by adults, but also by other boys; nor will it ever cease; more especially as it must thus soon lose all its shamefulness and infamy and become fashionable and the national taste; and then . . . national weakness, for which all remedies are ineffectual, most inevitably follow; not perhaps in the very first generation, but certainly in the course of the third or fourth. . . . To these evils may be added yet another, viz. that the constitutions of those men who submit to this degradation are, if not always, yet very often, totally destroyed, though in a different way from what is the result of whoredom.
Whoever, therefore, wishes to ruin a nation, has only to get this vice introduced; for it is extremely difficult to extirpate it where it has once taken root because it can be propagated with much more secrecy . . . and when we perceive that it has once got a footing in any country, however powerful and flourishing, we may venture...to predict that the foundation of its future decline is laid and that after some hundred years it will no longer be the same . . . powerful country it is at present." (end quote)

This bears repeating: "Whoever, therefore, wishes to ruin a nation, has only to get this vice introduced...."

We now know who is responsible for purposely introducing sodomy, promiscuity, obscenity, porn, and moral degeneracy in general into our culture, and to what ends they've done so. And now we must, with grim determination purge our culture of it, eject socialists from public office, and do everything that lies within our power to replace moral degeneracy with moral virtues.......honor, honesty, dignity, fortitude, personal responsibility and accountability, diligence, valor, integrity, fidelity, and self-sacrifice. We must return to America's founding moral anchor... our Christian based worldview.

"The general principles on which the fathers achieved independance were...the general principles of Christianity."
---John Adams

"The religion which has introduced civil liberty is the religion of Christ and His Apostles.....This is genuine Christianity and to this we owe our free constitution of government."
---Noah Webster

If we do not, our fate and the fate of our great nation will be to continue free-falling into an abyss of dementia, debauchery, disease, and impotency.

Shall this be us?
"Our parents, worse than our grandparents, gave birth to us who are worse than they, and we shall in our turn bear offspring still more evil.'
---Horace (BS 65-8)

William Penn said, "If we will not be governed by God, we must be governed by tyrants." We have two choices:
God our Creator, or godless man with his infernal social engineering.

note: John David Michaelis and founders quotes taken from Wallbuilders: http://www.wallbuilders.com/resources/search/detail.php?ResourceID=8

"But what is 'Orientation'?" Asked Alice

2005-01-21T13:03:00.000-08:00

"But I'm not a serpent, I tell you!" said Alice......."Well! What are you?" said the Pigeon, "I can see you're trying to invent something!"
----Advice From A Caterpillar

Noah Webster defined 'orient' and its' derivative 'orientation' thusly:

"orient: the east; East Asia; to cause to face the east; to set as a map; to adjust to a particular situation.

"orientation: oriented; recognition of and adaptation to a situation or environment."

Primarily then, orientation speaks to direction and/or adjusting or adapting to a situation or environment. Implicit in this definition is 'choice,' as one must make a decision as to whether one will choose to adjust and/or adapt or choose not to do either thing. And finally, it speaks of free will, because where there is 'choice' there is always free will.

We are humankind and we have but two genders, male and female. History tells us that without exception, we have always been this way. Yet now, there are those amongst our kind who claim to be 'different' from us. They claim to be the result of something called 'orientation'. They are like us in every biological and physiological respect. Their genitalia are either male or female and they come in every known skin color, body type, hair color, and eye color; yet they insist they are 'something else'...... this strange thing they refer to as 'orientation'.

"Curiouser and curiouser!" cried Alice

So what is this mysterious 'orientation'? We have eliminated skin, hair, body type, and eye coloration along with genital differences, so that leaves us with one other thing.....'behavior.' Sexual behavior, to be exact. They engage in sexual behavior that deviates from what is normal for our kind and they've 'adjusted and/or adapted' to it. Now in this way, by understanding it as a 'behavior' we can finally make sense out of this thing they call 'orientation' although we must suspend belief in all that is normal and natural in order to accept it as true.

But they require yet further suspension of belief in truth and reality. This time, they demand that we believe they have no 'choice' in whether they adapt or adjust to this thing they call 'orientation.' That in fact, their 'adaptions and/or adjustments' are innately caused, like hair, skin, and eye color. Simply put, they adjust and adapt on the one hand, but on the other hand they have no free will to do so or not to do so; they would have us believe they have no choice whatsoever over the entire affair. They are they claim, literally forced to adjust and adapt to this odd sexual behavior. In other words, they have an 'innately' caused 'inabiity' to not make choices that would lead them to not engage in aberrant sexual behavior. And that is what they would have us believe 'orientation' is. Does this make sense? No it doesn't. It's nonsensical. It sounds like something the Mad Hatter would say. It's delusional wishful thinking, and it's birthed a panoply of corrupted reasoning as its rationale.

"What is his sorrow?' she asked the Gryphon.....the Gryphon responded, "It's all his fancy, that: he hasn't got no sorrow, you know."
---The Mock Turtle's Story

Just as the Mock Turtle pretended to feel a sorrow he did not have, there are males and females among us who are pretending to be something which they are not: 'oriented' beings. And based upon this fairytale, we're expected to graciously endow these 'oriented' beings with civil rights and with marriage.

OK, but does every 'being' who steps forward and claims to have an 'orientation' automatically become a candidate for 'civil rights'? To find out, I posted the definition of a 'human pup' (taken from a 'gay pup and trainer' website: a human pup is a person who possesses or expresses the traits and characteristics of a dog) in a strongly 'pro-gay' discuss forum where a heated debate over 'gay marriage' rights was underway. I asked if whether "human pups" should also have the right to marry. Although this was a logical question, they vehemently disagreed. One of them explosively responded:

(quote) "What the f___ is the POINT of your post? If your point is that there are people out there with kinky or unusual notions of sex then you are simply stating the OBVIOUS. That is the nature of the Human condition.
What that has to do with Gay people marrying is beyond me." (end quote)

It should be noted that the respondant is a male being who is also 'female' being and refers to him/herself as a "queen and goddess" among other things.

So we are to infer from this male oriented 'queen' being that not all 'orientations' are equal and deserving of rights? But why not? And who says so? The Mad Hatter? Either 'orientations' are something true and should be equally endowed with rights or they are false and should not be endowed with rights. And if they are true, then 'fully consenting' puppy oriented beings, bear oriented beings, vampire oriented beings, necrophilia oriented beings, and pedophilia and pederast oriented beings should not be discriminated against and denied their civil rights......whatever those might entail, and one shudders to contemplate them.

So exactly what then, is 'orientation'? Augustine accurately defined it. He said it begins in the mind as an impulse which then moves to the senses for approval. The consequences are considered, the will makes a decision to act, and the mind rationalizes the behavior. So in reality, we are being required to legitimize behavior born of dark sexual impulses and to reward all 'beings' who engage in those behaviors with 'civil rights.'

Under the aegis of political correctness, our nation has been eradicating social stigmas in order that the 'dark impulses' of those who claim to have an 'orientation' can be given free rein so as to act upon them. But in legitimizing this imaginary thing called 'orientation,' it has had the effect of opening Pandoras' Box. And out of it are rushing the maddened sons of destruction......deceit, disrespect for life, plagues of sexually transmitted diseases, dementia, lewdness, paranoia, chaos, anarchy, and tyannical 'hate crime' laws.

In the final analysis, this thing called 'orientation' is a deceptive facade behind which lurks a political agenda motivated by lust for power, control, and the destruction of America's existing social order so that another order may be created.

Multiculturalism is a neo-Marxist theory, and it's the engine driving our social order to ruin. And it's from multiculturalism that political correctness and the insanity producing notion of 'orientation' arose.

Multiculturalism has the disasterous consequence of dividing and categorizing mankind into classes by 'orientation', gender, economic status, religious belief, and ethnicity. Each of these classes are then locked in constant warfare over rights.

Multiculturalism has no legitimate business being in a system of government wherein "all men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights....." and where as a result, all are equal and not unequal before the law and all have equal, and not unequal Constitutional rights.

If we wish to remain free and equal people under our Constitution and before our law, we must rid our Constitutional Republic of neo-Marxist notions. And we must, for the sake of clarity, truth, and rational discourse likewise purge our language of purposely corrupted 'politically correct' language with its' meaningless and cofusion causing terms like 'orientation.'

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

"Once," said the Mock Turtle with a deep sigh, "I was a real turtle." To which I can imagine the common sense Alice asking in response, "But if you're not a real turtle, then what are you?" And the turtle would sigh and say, "An orientation."

Quotes from "Alice's Adventures In Wonderland" and "Orwell: Politics And The English Language"

A Call To Arms

2005-01-14T06:39:00.000-08:00

A Call To Arms

Why do so many sit aside, holding their anger inside, as activist secular organizations such as the ACLU assault our religious expression? Why do so many do nothing, as activist secular judges rule in favor of these anti-Christian organizations? Why do we stay uninvolved?

We have a constitutional right to express our religion. Don’t allow these groups to take that right away under the disguise of a fictional “Seperation of Church and State” clause, that does not even exist. The answer to the question posed above may lie in the fact that many people don’t know what they can do in order to fight this anti-Christian agenda.

To begin with you can contribute to groups that are already fighting the agenda of these activist organizations. Some of these groups include the ACLJ (www.aclj.org), The Thomas More Law Center (www.thomasmore.org ) , The Alliance Defense Fund (www.alliancedefensefund.org), The Rutherford Institute (www.rutherford.org), and The Stop the ACLU Coalition (www.stoptheaclu.org).

These groups actively fight the ACLU in the court systems. Many think this isn’t enough, because of the activist judges legislating new laws instead of interpreting them. Some want to sue the ACLU for violating their rights, and some want to lobby Congress to amend a now existing law (42 U.S.C., Section 1988, of the United States Code) which allows judges to award attorney fees to plaintiffs in civil-rights cases brought against local governments, thereby putting the taxpayers on the hook and oftentimes funneling public money to the ACLU. They want the law changed so cases involving the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment would not apply. Some want to form an organization to promote the awareness of the already existing organizations fighting the ACLU agenda. And others want to form an organization to counter the ACLU.

The truth is that all of these things need to be done. What it takes is organization, funds, and skills. It needs volunteers. The cause needs lawyers willing to work pro-bono towards suing the ACLU and defending religious liberty against them. It needs people with computer skills to set up websites to promote the cause. It needs people with funds to back the cause. It needs leadership skills and organization from people who care.

In summary, the fight to preserve religious liberty needs to be centralized and focused. We need to make everyone aware of the assault that is taking place around them, and what they can do to stop it. It needs a united front of people who care. It needs a call to arms. I call on all those who care about religious freedom to unite and fight….before its too late. John Stephenson

Contact info: john.stephenson@rs.af.mil

On 'Socially Enlightened Zombies" and Necessary Conflict

2005-01-12T05:55:00.000-08:00

In "The Theme Is Freedom," M. Stanton Evans said relativist value theory is integral to totalitarian movements. "....the effect of relativist theory (is) in 'devaluing the individual,' in denying all grounds for considering the human person worthy of respect..... 'This', continued Evans, 'is the most terrible of the totalitarian doctrines..." (end quote)

Moral relativism and the devaluing of human beings are communistic doctrines given life to by Darwin's theory of evolution. They were imported into America from Western Europe, most particularly from France and Germany, where they were ideated by philosophers like Comte, Nietzsche, Saint-Simon, Marx, and Engels. And where they exist, religion and liberty cannot, since by their nature, they are hostile to both.

M. Stanton Evans, "In (Nietzsche's) view, the only reason our society thought human beings entitled to dignity and freedom was that Christian morality had taught this weak-kneed doctrine down through the ages. Take away Christian morality....and the presumption of dignity, freedom, or equality would collapse; men would simply be phenomena in the realm of nature...." (end quote)

Existentialist evolutionary theory {God is dead} provides the foundation upon which the doctrinal beliefs of secular humanism and all variants of todays' socialism rest.

Nietzsche: "(Christian morality) granted man an absolute value, as opposed to his smallness and accidental occurance in the flux of being......Morality guarded the underprivileged by assigning to each an infinite value......Supposing that the faith in this morality would perish, then the underprivileged.....would perish......nihilism is a symptom that the underprivileged have no comfort left." Stanton Evans said Nietzsche translated this (his existentialism and nihilism) into ideas of eugenics, population control, and euthanasia....all based on a denial of Christian ethics and his brand of Social Darwinism." (end quote)

Contrast Nietzsche's brutal disregard for humanity with the respect for the innate dignity of man in our Declaration's preamble: "We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed, by their CREATOR, with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.--" Our Founders reasoning arose from their acknowledgement of a Creator and their understanding of His laws and the underlyng purposes of those laws. According to their reasoning, since we were created by God, then mankind has no right to take away our God-endowed right to life. Nor to redefine human life as a 'thing.' as in the case of abortion, which denies the unborn their inalienable right to life.

Noah Webster defined inalienable as: "that cannot be justly or legally alienated or transferred to another. All men have certain natural rights which are inalienable." In other words, our rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are gifts from our Creator and not from man. Therefore, man cannot 'justly' take those rights away.

Marx, yet another Darwinian atheist cut from Nietzschen cloth, said: "For the creation on a mass scale of the communist consciousness, it is necessary for men themselves to be changed on a large scale, and this change can only occur......in a revolution."

In America, Nietzschean/Marxist thieves have been silently conducting a social revolution for years, the purpose of which is to alienate us from our God-given rights. These thieves have infiltrated every institution that exists for the purpose of learning, of law-making, for information dissemination such as mainstream news, and for entertainment purposes. Wherever they can corrupt and condition the minds of Americans, Nietzschean/Marxist thieves can be found. And by virtue of sly stealth tactics, they've been successfully stealing our God-given inalienable rights.

And how have they managed their victories against almost 200 years of Christian-based tradition and philosophy? By psychologically conditioning Americans into cannibalizing their own "tree of liberty".......the Christian-Judao worldview that made possible the Declaration, Constitution, and Rule of Law. Just as they manipulated would-be mothers into condemning their own unborn to death, they've slyly manipulated Americans into rejecting the one and only worldview that successfully freed mankind from being in bondage to self-ordained elites throughout the worlds' history.

Through 'dumbing down' our youth, prevarications, trickery, and pretenses, these charlatans have deprived Americans of the truth that comes with knowledge of our nations historic founding. And by appeals to vanity, they've seduced others into rejecting their traditional morality on the grounds that belief in it is the mark of ignorance and superstition, while belief in Nietzschean/Marxist human secularism is the mark of excellence...of socially enlightened progress.

Americans have been gulled into believing that each person can author his or her own moral code, which has led to increasing levels of social discord, suspicion, crass rudeness, incoherence, delusion, hatred, and paranoia.

They taught Americans to reject their Creator and instead to believe that "matter" is all there is, so there exists no created order,and no purpose or reason for mankind to exist {nihilism}.

"If we ever forget that we're one nation under God, then we will be a nation gone under."
- Ronald Reagan

Our Christian-based worldview calls on us to respect each other (the Golden Rule), but deceptive Nietzschean/Marxist manipulators have turned the Golden Rule upside-down by encouraging Americans to view "disrespect for others, for tradition, sovereignty, traditional social mores, etc" as both a 'value' and a 'right'. Actualization upon this 'value/right' has led to disrespect for and outright rejection of deceny and high standards in every sphere. For example, our language has become larded with scurrilously lewd cant; if there is a dress standard, it's 'slut and pedo-chic' with plunging necklines, saran-wrapped clothing that delineates every crevice, roll, and bulge, and barely-there tops and bottoms that display bellies and butt cheeks.

Like scurvy pied pipers of amorality, they've enticed Americans into the dark realm of porn, which dehumanizes and objectifies certain individuals for the sado-masochistically tainted dark sexual fantasies of the porn-users.

Herbert Marcuse, of the Marxist/Nietzschean Frankfurt School, which is credited with devising political correctness, extrapolated upon Marxism so as to include homosexuals among the "oppressed groups." The research findings of Alfred Kinsey, sadmasochistic- homosexual-pedophile were incorporated into a larger ideology which eventually came to be known as 'queer liberation' theory. Propounders of this insanity have been so successful in conditioning some Americans that they no longer believe there are but two genders...male and female. Instead, they've been cruely conditioned into accepting the queer fairytale claim that biology and physiology play no role in what an individual wishes to believe he is {sexually} at any given moment; that in fact, mankind is gender-neutral.

In "Intellectual Morons" Daniel J. Flynn wrote, at the end of the chapter entitled, "Therefore we will be incoherent'...."Like Critical Theory of the Frankfurt School, postmodernism seeks to institutionalize dishonesty as a legitimate school of thought. The idea of truth as the ultimate goal of the intellectual is discarded. In its place, scholars are asked to pursue political objectives----so long as those political objectives are the 'correct' ones. Postmodernism is not fringe......Its central." (end quote)

If you hate the philosophical worldview of a place and you want to destroy it from within but without there being violence, how do you accomplish this?
You infiltrate all positions of influence, decision-making, and power and then you begin to condition the minds of the citizens to accept that there is no such thing as 'right or wrong, normal or abnormal, natural or unnatural, that no empirical truths and objective realities exist..... these things are illusions." You place mumbo-jumbo spouting 'intellectual morons' such as Herbert Marcuse, Jacques Derrida and Foucault into academia where they can corrupt the reasoning faculties of the youth, ........you intentionally cause Americans to become incoherent. In "Writing and Difference," Derrida exhultantly proclaimed to his student-dupes: "Therefore we will be incoherent but without systematically resigning ourselves to incoherence."

Nietzschean thieves have succeeded in creating an army of incoherent, America-hating, socialist-enslavement worshipping zombies who've been programmed to destroy America.

Leo Tolstoi said...."In former days the free-thinker was a man who had been brought up in ideas of religion, law, and morality, and only through conflict and struggle came to free-thought; but now there has sprung up a new type of born free-thinkers who grow up without even having heard of principles of morality or of religion, of the existence of authorities, who grow up directly in ideas of negation in everything, that is to say, savages." (end quote)

Angry, rebellious, amoral savages and zombies......the end-product of "socially enlightened" Nietzschean/Marxist conditioning and liberation theologies.

So have they won? Is it over? No.....it's not over......

"The whole world is becoming divided against itself for the sake of faith in Christ. A necessary conflict has been sent to break a peace that is evil."
...........Jerome

Secular Liberalism's 'Brave New World'

2005-01-04T13:33:00.000-08:00

In "Better Answers: The Case For Judao-Christian Values," Dennis Prager said....."There is an epic battle taking place in the world over what value system humanity will embrace. There are essentially three competitors: European secularism, American Judeo-Christianity and Islam. I have described this battle in previous columns." (end quote)

Under the aegis of European secularism, known to Americans as secular Liberalism and/or humanism, Americans have been lured and seduced into liberating themselves from the social constraints of America's traditional Judao-Christian moral ethics, which served as both eternally unchanging moral anchor and as the anchor to objective reality. "This much needed liberation," we were told, "is a sign of socially enlightened progress." Thus an appeal to vanity and to false hope began our civilization's descent into a man-created madhouse wherein selfcentered fancies and whims began replacing objective reality, empirical truths, and common sense.

Our formerly well ordered child and family oriented civilization, which had promoted the sanctity of life, moral virtues, clean-living, high standards, purpose, and reason began to decay into a cancerous sore oozing socially destructive poisons such as that mankind is but an animal with no higher purpose nor reason for his existence; concupiscence, narcissism, lewdness, and scurviness became faddish and replaced respect for order, law, decency, and human life . Where once we had a culture of life, we now have a culture of death that has given life to the Holocaust of the Unborn, wherein 40,000,000 plus unborn children have been denied their humanity and inalienable right to life by being redefined as nonhuman objects so as to facillitate their disposal in state sanctioned killing centers.

The unbridled ego and pride of sexual hedonists also gained control,and their unconstrained dark sexual fantasies incubated an insane conceit which claimed that fixed gender doesn't exist, and that in fact, mankind is gender neutral. In this sexual libertines utopia, females can also be males, and males who are also females refer to themselves as 'queens, goddesses, bitches, sluts, and whores." These pseudo-females 'bitch slap' each other, wear female wigs, make-up, and dresses and refer to other males as 'husbands," who in turn refer to the pseudo-females as 'she' and 'her'. Other gender-liberated beings are having inconveniant body parts surgically removed even as they happily forsee the day when public restrooms and public documents will also be liberated from gender. Sado-masochistic porn flows like a river of filth throughout our culture, bringing its' pollution and corruption even into our homes. And children, ever the targets of sexual hedonists, have been denied their childhood innocence. They've been sexualized and homosexualized while simultaneously undergoing a sly social 'liberation' process the purpose of which is to liberate them from their parents with the future aim of giving them the 'right' to have sex with the libertines who lust after them. And not coincidentally, the depraved adults who lust after sex with children are redefining sexual predation and abuse as 'love' and seeking not only the 'right' to rut upon children, but also society's approval and understanding.

In this incubator of insanity, man takes perverse pleasure in seeing other's of his kind humiliated, debased, and obscenely degraded as evidenced by the proliferation of porn and by so much of what passes for prime time entertainment. Reality shows in which humans willingly allow themselves to be publicly humiliated and debased (masochism) in a variety of ways encourages viewers to feel sadistic pleasure in debasement and degradation of other human beings. Much of what passes for popular music is nothing but ugly discordant noise that promotes hatred, racism, sadism, rape, the killing of women and babies, and other types of social chaos.

Liberal humanism is mindlessly killing our traditional culture. Sexually transmitted diseases are running rampant, even among our youth; the traditional family is under continuous assault; motherless and/or fatherless homes have become normal; children of divorce spend inordinate amounts of their time being shuttled from one house to the next; our sexualized and homosexualized children can't think or read, but they can put condoms onto bananas; suicide rates among our youth are rising; strange beings who seem not to know what gender they are haunt our malls; Disneyland is now infamous for celebrating "gay pride day; 'hooking up' for casual sex is todays' version of a date on many campuses; some fast-food restaurants are accused of committing genocide against chickens; Richard Dawkins opines that worms should have rights; a cross upside-down in a jar of urine is oohed and ahhhed over by imbeciles who believe it to be high art; SUVs, gas grills, pvc pipes, and Bush are guilty of causing nonexistant global warming; being bad is good, but being obscene is better.

Welcome to Secular Liberalisms 'Brave New World'.....the utopia of obscene genderless neo-man.

Sodomites Co-Opting Abe Lincoln

2004-12-26T03:52:00.000-08:00

In the latest effort by sodomites to validate their behavior, they've co-opted Abraham Lincoln and his historic prominance. Read story here: http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/artsandhumanities/story/0,12241,1377024,00.html

If engaging in anal penetration is such a wonderful thing, then why is it that sodomites have no upstanding 'heros' in the here and now? Why is it they feel constrained to 'steal' historic figures from times gone by? Common sense tells us the answer... people who engage in anal penetration, who urinate and defecate onto the faces of and into the mouths of each other, who engage in lewd public sex, who engage in torture, humiliation, and other assorted disgusting behaviors have NOTHING to be proud about. So they resort to STEALING the good names and reputations of long-dead historic figures because it would be hard to prove one way or another that the sodomite thieves are also liars.

Response to - Ellen Goodmans' commentary, "Should Gay Rights Wait

2004-12-23T17:47:00.000-08:00

Libertarian response: "They have rights based on the fact that they are people."

Amendment VIII: Thomas Jefferson, A Bill for Proportioning Crimes ... Whosoever shall be guilty of Rape, Polygamy, or Sodomy with man or woman shall be punished, if a man, by castration, if a woman, by cutting thro' the cartilage of her nose a hole of one half inch diameter at the least. [1778 Papers 2:492--504, The Founders' Constitution, Volume 5, Amendment VIII, Document 10, The University of Chicago Press, The Papers of Thomas Jefferson. Edited by Julian P. Boyd et al. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1950--.]

Why did the same Jefferson who wrote the Declaration write that about sodomy?

"….which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them…."We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men and women are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator and Nature with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Is there any doubt about the source of rights? Is there any doubt that sodomy is contrary to the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God? The Torah condemns sodomy in the strongest possible terms - to'ebah" in the NKJ - "abomination" or "detestable" in English. It is self-evident that the pursuit of sodomy is the pursuit of misery and not Happiness; for, the pursuit of Happiness is rooted in marriage when a man and a woman join in marriage, they form a household, and that’s the basis for economic productivity. These assumptions were in place in 1776.

The only source for unalienable Rights is the God of Genesis 1 and 2. Apart from this source you will search in vain for a society in history where these right were inviolable.

A Libertarian Supports Ellen Goodmans' Take On 'Gay' Rights

2004-12-20T13:21:00.000-08:00

Ellen Goodmans' commentary, "Should Gay Rights Wait For Our Comfort?" can be found here: http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2004/12/16/must_gay_rights_wait_for_our_comfort?mode=PF

In response to the Libertarian, I said:

Biologically and physiologically, there are and always have been, just two sorts of human beings........male and female. And throughout the entirety of the animal kingdom, there are likewise just two genders.....male and female. Not even once throughout recorded history has there ever been a time when a third or fourth gender existed among any of the hundreds of animal categories, including manknd. NEVER, that is........except in the fertile imagination of mankind could such an aberration exist.

So tell me, why should male and female human beings who have, for whatever their personal reasons, decided that they are not male or female but something else, be accorded rights based on what they wish to be and the sexual behaviors they engage in as a result? And how is it that people who consider themselves to be sane and reasonable, will nevertheless toss aside common sense and empirical historic experience and buy into what amounts to a superstious-based fairytale? Superstition is the corruption of our rational faculties and is characterized by (a) denial of truth and reality, and (b) redescription of those things.

Goodman is hawking the sodomites superstitiion-based fairytale.

Libertarian response: "They have rights based on the fact that they are people."

To which I said: "Human beings who like to have sex with babies and children are also people who fit the Libertarian criterian for 'rights". The German homosexual cannibal and his willing 'dinner' likewise fit today's morally relevant criterian for 'rights'. They too are 'people', but because our laws are being created on a case-by-case basis according to how the judge personally 'feels' about the issue at hand, our laws no longer have any logical flow. No common sense. They're disconnected from reality. As is your reasoning in this situation.

Constitutional Truths For Life

2004-12-19T11:17:00.000-08:00

Combining scientific & medical facts with Biblical & ethical principals to form arguments which save lives by persuasion with or without legal enforcement is of inestimable value - however - these victories for life haven't succeeded in terminating the unconstitutional opinions commencing with Roe v Wade which have broken the rule of law.

#1 The President of the United States has no Constitutional, legal, or ethical mandate to enforce unconstitutional majority opinions from the U.S. Supreme Court, anymore than the U.S. Supreme Court has to uphold laws passed by Congress or State legislatures that are unconstitutional. It emphatically the prerogative of the President, by virtue of Article. II. Clause 8, to review bills presented by Congress for Constitutionality, and majority opinion of federal courts, which are currently being enforced. Bills failing Constitutional muster must be vetoed and federal judicial opinions contrary to the Constitution must not be enforced.

#2 The U.S. Congress has no Constitutional, legal, or ethical mandate to agree with unconstitutional majority opinions from the U.S. Supreme Court, anymore than the U.S. Supreme Court has to uphold laws passed by Congress or State legislatures that are unconstitutional. It emphatically the prerogative of the Congress, by virtue of Article. VI. Clause 3, to review actions of the President and majority opinions of the federal judiciary for Constitutionality. Congress must exercise the power of impeachment & removal of any President violating the Constitution. Federal judges who routinely issue opinions contrary to the Constitution must impeached & removed. Federal courts that routinely issue majority opinions on certain issues contrary to the Constitution must have their jurisdiction removed and in the case of the U.S. Supreme Court, must have appellate jurisdiction removed allowing each state to decide the issue.

#3 Article. VI. Clause 2 & 3 forces the States to follow the Constitution and not the dictates of an Unlawful order from any federal court or judge. The States, by the Constitutional doctrine of Interposition, and Amendments IX & X are empowered to ignore any federal judicial doctrine that results in an unconstitutional majority opinion.

#4 Article. V. Describes the procedure for changing the Constitution which includes the States and Congress and excludes all federal courts and the President. Article. VI. Clause 3 compels the federal courts to comply with the Constitution and Article. V. Prohibits them from even participating in permissible alteration. The Constitution and Federalist Papers make it abundantly clear that the federal courts have only the power of opinion and nothing more! The people through the States, Congress and President need to focus on and fix the problematic federal courts which have been broken for decades and leave the unbroken Constitution alone.

References

William J. Quirk on how to end the "gay marriage" debate--today

Limiting Federal Court Jurisdiction to Protect Marriage for the ...

Hearing Before The Subcommittee On The Constitution Of The Committee On The Judiciary ^ June 24, 2004 Testimony Of Martin H. Redish, Professor Of Law And Public Policy, Northwestern Law School

Hearing Before The Subcommittee On The Constitution Of The Committee On The Judiciary ^ June 24, 2004 Prepared Statement of Professor Charles E. Rice, Professor Emeritus of Law, Notre Dame Law School

Hearing Before The Subcommittee On The Constitution Of The Committee On The Judiciary ^ June 24, 2004 Testimony Of Phyllis Schlafly, Founder And President, Eagle Forum

The Irrepressible Myth Of Marbury

The Avalon Project : President Jackson's Veto Message Regarding ...

If the opinion of the Supreme Court covered the whole ground of this act, it ought not to control the coordinate authorities of this Government. The Congress, the Executive, and the Court must each for itself be guided by its own opinion of the Constitution. Each public officer who takes an oath to support the Constitution swears that he will support it as he understands it, and not as it is understood by others. It is as much the duty of the House of Representatives, of the Senate, and of the President to decide upon the constitutionality of any bill or resolution which may be presented to them for passage or approval as it is of the supreme judges when it may be brought before them for judicial decision. The opinion of the judges has no more authority over Congress than the opinion of Congress has over the judges, and on that point the President is independent of both. The authority of the Supreme Court must not, therefore, be permitted to control the Congress or the Executive when acting in their legislative capacities, but to have only such influence as the force of their reasoning may deserve.

The Doctrine of Interposition

Black's Law Dictionary, Fourth Edition offers the following definition:

The doctrine that a state, in the exercise of its sovereignty, may reject a mandate of the federal government deemed to be unconstitutional or to exceed the powers delegated to the federal government. The concept is based on the 10th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States reserving to the states powers not delegated to the United States. Historically, the doctrine emanated from Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 Dallas 419, wherein the state of Georgia, when sued in the Supreme Court by a private citizen of another state, entered a remonstrance and declined to recognize the court's jurisdiction. Amendment 11 validated Georgia's position. Implementation of the doctrine may be peaceable, as by resolution, remonstrance or legislation, or may proceed ultimately to nullification with forcible resistance.

Standing Between the Butcher and the Baby

"Interposition is an official act on the part of a State government to question the constitutionality of a policy established by the central government." Our federal government is one of checks and balances; the Executive veto and the Court check the legislature's actions for constitutionality. Likewise, the Legislature and the Court check the President's actions. But who checks the Court? "The right to challenge any usurpation of power on the part of the Supreme Court must by lack of alternative, if for no other reason, devolve upon the States." What does the Tenth Amendment mean if not that a State can interpose itself as a legitimate determiner of the Constitution to which it is a consenting party?

When is a living human being not fully human?

2004-12-19T06:31:00.000-08:00

Science and rational demonstration prove that a human being exist from the moment of conception. The ethic of reciprocity compels one to consider others, as he desires to be considered by others. The combined effect of science and ethics indicates that the only way a living human being can’t be fully human is by broken law.

Roe v Wade and progeny are broken law; for, among the fundamental purposes of government is the security of the right to life.

Gianna Jessen, a survivor of a saline abortion, testified before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, July 20, 2000 and closed with: "Today's slogans are: "'a woman's right to choose"' and ""freedom of choice,"" etcetera." Those slogans replaced the law with broken law, which should be discarded in favor of the law by those who enforce, make, and apply law. To do otherwise is to share guilt with those who break it.

Thou shall not murder can be considered religious and moral, but it is law which has governed civil society through out history. A woman by virtue of her sex, and a man by virtue of his profession are above the law only in the jungle of the lawless barbarian.

There is no neutrality in the fundamental purposes of government. It either secures rights, or takes them as it has done with abortion. When government fails in those fundamental tasks, it is no more worthy of support than the criminal is, who operates without its restraint.

There are many in government who claim that Roe v Wade and progeny are ‘settled law,’ where the criminal in society is granted liberty to break the law by fellow criminals in government. This is contrary to Paul in Romans 13:4 For it is God's servant to do you good, but if you do evil, then fear, for it does not bear the sword in vain . For it is God's servant, an avenger to bring wrath on the one who practices evil. Scripture makes it clear that God hates ‘hands that shed innocent blood’ (Prov. 6:20)"

Jefferson, in the Declaration of Indpendence, stated the appropiate response to government which prohibits execution of its fundamental purpose.

"--That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

Why The Grinch Is Stealing Christmas

2004-12-19T03:55:00.000-08:00

Edward Gene Veith said in his commentary, http://www.leaderu.com/popculture/secularchristmas.html there is a new sort of antagonism driving today's anti-Christmas agenda. And while that's true, the source of the emnity and the type of people in whose hearts and minds it resides aren't anything new. Todays' hateful, antagonistic Grinches have always been around. Many of us may have one or more of this sort in our families or among our acquaintances. They are hardhearted, nitpicking, malice inspired, joy-destroying, whiners whose sadistic brand of maliciously twisted 'joy' comes only when they see others deprived of joy, love, happiness, goodwill, etc.

They are the eternal sufferers whose selfcentered minds are so focused upon themselves that they cannot see that everyone else suffers too; that suffering is a universally manifest human condition that calls for us to rise above....to overcome, but not to wallow in and self-pityingly cover ourselves in victimhood. So in their hardened, joyless, arid-hearts, they condemn the rest of us to suffer as they believe only they suffer. And then they act as judge and executioner by both handing down the sentence and carrying it out.

If the Grinch cannot feel joy, then like the selfish curmudgeon he is, he wants no one to feel joy. He is saying in effect, "If I don't or can't have it, then it's not fair for anyone else to have it, so you will not." And this really, is why the hardhearted, selfcentered Grinches among us are trying to destroy Christmas.

On Whether Homosexuality Is A Race Or Gender

2004-12-17T15:45:00.000-08:00

Radical homosexuals would have us believe that homosexuality is both a race and a gender. This is nothing but wishful-thinking. But based upon this fanciful stance, they've been forcing their social-change-making agenda down the throat of America.

Homosexuals are not a hither-to unheard of "race of people," contrary to what they want us to believe, nor are they some strange new 'gender'. There is no genetic reason for what they do. Even homosexual researchers Hamer, LaVey,et al, have admitted to this.

What they are, are human beings born with heterosexual genitalia who want us to believe that they were meant to be something else......this previously unknown 'race' and 'gender'. And based upon this farcical fairytale, they're trying to overthrow our culture, radically redefine marriage and family, have children as young as 5 indoctrinated with the 'homosexual fairytale', and have communistic hate crime laws enacted so as to stifle dissent and disllow common sense, reality, and sanity to intrude themselves into their fairytale.

Unless sanity and common sense prevail in America, we will find ourselves living in a grotesque comic book world wherein up is down, down is up, abnormal is normal, and Mad Hatterism is considered the new 'norm' for being mentally healthy.

On Ducks And Homosexuality

2004-12-17T15:40:00.000-08:00

In a contentious debate between myself and some radical 'gays' who support the teaching of the 'gay' lifestyle to children, one of them asked me if and when I had 'chosen' to be heterosexual. "Was it at age 3, 6, 13, 19?" he asked, "Or did you (a female) just 'naturally' gravitate towards boys or men without any outside pressure or force?" This question, laden with implied meaning, is a favorite tactical 'trap' set by 'gays' for unsuspecting and unprepared heterosexuals. It plays upon and manipulates our consciences so as to cause us to feel guilty; it lures us into setting aside logic and reason and calls upon us to be led by emotion; it purposefully lends itself to creating confusion. Its' underlying premise is that 'gay' behavior is the result of 'orientation', a meaningless, nonsensical term meant to fool us into believing in the existence of a hitherto unheard of third gender or race. Thus we are coaxed into concluding that 'gayness' and heterosexuality must be the same and therefore 'gayness' is deserving of 'inclusion, sensitivity, and rights.' This is nothing but a cleverly crafted fable, but to dissent against it is to be guilty of hate, 'homophobia,' bigotry, and racism.

My response, just below, disarmed them and after calling me a few obligatory names, they quit the debate.

"There was no 'choice'........there was never any question........my gravitation towards the opposite sex occured as naturally as breathing air. Now for yourself, 'something' occured that interfered with your natural 'gravitational' process towards the opposite sex and manhood that, in effect, stunted it in much the same way as a baby duck can have its natural progression towards becoming a mature duck interfered with and stunted. This usually occurs when a human causes the chick to imprint upon the human rather than upon an adult duck.

So does the 'interference' with natural progression make the baby duck into something other than a duck? That the chick seems to believe itself to be, and even tries to be human make it human in fact? Of course not. It's still a duck in every sense of what it means to be a duck. Just as you are still a heterosexual despite that you believe you are 'something else'.

Should duck society and the laws of nature by which that society exists be overturned and forced to become upside-down in order to accomodate improperly imprinted ducks? Of course not. That would be insane. Just as it is dangerously insane for "improperly imprinted" human beings to demand that heterosexual society and the laws of nature by which it needs to exist should be turned upside-down in order to accomodate them.

What happened to the duck was wrong. What happened to you was not just wrong, but horribly tragic. However, for the greater good of our civilization, you and others like you should not be advocating that society, the innocence of childhood and the traditional family be swept aside and made to accept that "improper imprintation" is somehow a 'good' thing. Although you ardently wish to pretend otherwise, you do know deep down inside yourself that it isn't 'good', that it's incredibly morally wrong.

What you should be doing.......for the GOOD of all mankind and most especially for children........is learning {gaining wisdom} from your suffering in order that you can PREVENT what happened to you from happening to other children. That would be not just love, but agape, the highest form of love........love that calls for self-denial and self-sacrifice for the good of others.

Pro-Choice....Superstitious Denial Of Reality

2004-12-16T11:25:00.000-08:00

The following quote from Patrick Gray, in 'Aborton Rhetoric & Common Sense," appeared in 'Touchtstone,' Apr. 2004

"...anyone who defends the practice of abortion must posit a state of limbo, a literal no-man's land somewhere between life and death, between human and nonhuman, inhabited exclusively by embryos and fetuses." (end quote)

Superstition is the rejection of common sense and the corruption of reality. It's belief in the absurd....in whimsy, and wishful thinking. It's redescription of reality in order to allow for belief in fanciful conceits.

Because adherents of abortion must redescribe and deny reality in order to allow themselves to support and to engage in a practice that ends human life , by definition then, their corrupted reasoning falls into the category of superstition.

Since they cannot admit that abortion kills a human life during any stage of its' development, they must deny reality by redescribing life in terms that dehumanize it. The unborn becomes an 'it' called an embryo,a collection of cells, uterine content, a zygote, or a fetus. Death and killing are redescribed as termination. At no time can this 'thing' be thought of as being alive, for to do so is to admit that 'something' dies......that a life has been put to death. And at all times, we are encouraged to think of the ongoing development of this nonhuman 'thing' as something that may or may not become 'viable', which seems to suggest that at some mystical moment the 'it' has magically become humanlike.

Some pro-death types wish to believe that even after birth and up until one year of age, that the 'collection of cells' given birth to lacks something called 'personhood' and as a result, is still not a bona fide human being. Of course what they're really saying by way of mumbo-jumbo, is that if the personhoodless 'collection of cells' is displeasing or unwanted for whatever reason, then 'it' can still be 'terminated'. And we are not to ask....."Where does this 'thing' called personhood come from if it is not already existing within the baby....er,uh.. "thing"? Was it perhaps floating around in some unseen dimension while waiting for a personhoodless body to be born?"

In listening to Court TV's feminist talking heads voicing their outrage towards Scott Peterson, I wondered at their inability to see their own disattachment from reality. Had Laci not been murdered, and rather than anxiously looking forward to Connor's birth had she decided instead to exercise her pro-death 'choice' option and have Connor 'terminated' at a state sanctioned killing center, Court TV"s feminist talking-heads would have given her their full support. So what was the real source of their outrage?

In the final analysis, 'choice' is an innocuous sounding but deceptive facade behind which lurks a malignant disregard and vulgar disrespect for human life. By denying the intrinsic value, inherent dignity, and unique spirituality of human life, it lowers human life to the level of an animal of no particular worth.

Thus, just as we choose to own a pet or choose not to own one; choose to have it 'put down'; choose to abuse it; or choose to welcome it and love it, we've been seduced into believing that we can make similar choices with regards to unborn human beings. "After all", we are told, "are we not the creators of life? Yes...so the choice is ours to make." But, in order for us to be able to believe in this corrupt fairytale, we must not allow truth to intrude upon our consciences. Therefore we must deny reality and truth and accept the grossly absurd and distorted in their place. And just as we are not to question whether 'stepping on a crack will break our mother's back,' we dare not question the murderous reality of 'choice.' We must consciously blind ourselves to reality and believe the fairytale without question.....without thought.....and in a perpetual state of readiness to fend off our guilt.