Over In Ireland ...
Okay, so this is not the United States, but we've seen it here, too. A Christian baker was asked to bake a cake in support of "gay marriage". Mind you, this was not simply a cake for such a thing -- a wedding cake -- but a cake for a pro-redefine-marriage event. The baker, this week, lost in the Court of Appeals in Northern Ireland. The really confusing statement came from Michael Wardlow from the Equality Commission for Northern Ireland. He said that this "will give people the confidence to not worry if the views they hold will conflict with an organization." I suppose he meant those with views "we approve". I suppose he wasn't saying that "Christian views" were safe and wouldn't conflict with his organization. I think the ruling made it quite clear that only approved views can have confidence and that Christians need to have no confidence that their views will not be recognized when they conflict with others. How glad I am that our confidence is not in the courts or culture.
Make Up Your Minds
I can't seem to keep up. "It's made by God," they all used to be sure. Then, "Oh, no, it's made by Evolution." Then, "Well, now, hang on ... sure, it's made by Evolution, but we don't really know how to work out the kinks, which are massive." The eminent Stephen Hawking assured us that it couldn't have been made by God because it's too complicated. (Sorry, the logic eludes me.) So university professors have assured their students, "Just because it looks like it has been designed doesn't mean it has been." By which they mean to say, "It has not been designed." And now we have this from Scientific American, a story about the "Qubit", apparently the smallest possible amount of information, which, apparently, science says makes up the entire universe. "The idea suggests the universe is built up from some underlying code, and that by cracking this code, physicists will finally have a way to understand the quantum nature of large-scale events in the cosmos."
Now, come on, Science! Which is it? If we're talking a code -- information (like DNA that contains the code that makes up all living things, for instance) -- then, there must be intelligence. "Code" requires intelligence above and beyond the code. You can't have it both ways. You can't say, "All the evidence points to intelligent design ... but we're going to deny intelligent design because we only follow the evidence." Make up your minds!
Merely Curious
I'm just wondering, here. A few years ago when someone in New Jersey purposely caused a traffic jam by closing a lane on the George Washington Bridge (AKA, Bridgegate), there was outrage, federal investigation, criminal charges, all that good stuff. So when an immigration protest shuts down the entire upper deck at rush hour, do you suppose there is going to be outrage, federal prosecution, and the like? Or will we tend to pat the culprits on the back and encourage them to continue?
Follow Up
Recently I gave you the story about the professor in Canada who refused to use the wrong gender pronouns for transgendered people. I asked, "I wonder how long that will last?" The same guy has written this piece in The Hill warning Americans that it's likely coming our way. The bill in Canada makes it a legal requirement that you refer to people using the pronoun of their choice, whether it is "him" for a "her" or "her" for a "him" or "they" for either one, or even "zie" or some other newly constructed obfuscation. Don't like it? Doesn't matter. It will be law in Canada. Mind you, Dr. Peterson isn't as much concerned about the insanity of "transgender" as he is the loss of the freedom of speech, but he is concerned. And why is it a threat for America? Because it has already been passed in New York City. Coming soon to a neighborhood (or nation) near you. Oh, and in answer to my question, there have been protests, violence, and calls for his removal over it.
6 comments:
I imagine those protestors will get prosecuted, but it will be more of a slap on the wrist compared to the other group. Which is ridiculous since they shut down the entire deck while the politicians only shut down two-thirds. I mean, at least the immigrants had a better reason to do it, but endangering the public and inciting rage in the people that got caught up in that traffic isn't the brightest way to get your word out there.
This week there was a brief article online, and while I admit I didn't really understand what it was talking about in any detail, I gathered Leftists in Berkeley were for a time preventing Caucasians from walking on some stretch of public property. What their point was, I don't know.
This country has a double standard, David, sure enough.
Anonymous, haven't heard the story you offered, but you must realize that in this country only white people can be racist. New rules; new definition.
Just another "You are racist but we aren't" story.
Doctor King is rolling in his grave. There are people still alive that had to deal with legal racial segregation, and now we have people fighting for segregation? I won't be suggesting Berkeley to anyone, since the education there is apparently nonexistent. How do minorities look at history and say, "We want what was going on then, only in reverse"? People really don't make sense to me. What is it about the mob mentality that causes reason to be abandoned.
Remember, we live in the Age of Empathy where "I feel" defines truth, and the standard human being "feels" like "I am #1".
Post a Comment