At the Trump campaign rally in Lititz, Pennsylvania, one could not help but notice two individuals appearing to be Amish standing behind the President. The individuals stood out because of their distinct hats and mustacheless beards which ranked among the very few countenances not concealed behind a mask. Will the conspicuously pious condemn the duo for exhibiting an “obstreperous spirit of rebellion” as one online theologian condemned his coreligionists that did no more than articulate a skeptical dislike while actually complying in venues where the garment was required under threat of law enforcement intervention. If these Amish were in touch enough with what their sect condemns as the Luciferian English to know that there was some sort of political hootenanny taking place, shouldn’t they have also known about the face covering mandate? More importantly, do Christians requiring their average fellow believers to obey these sorts of intrusions against their will possess the backbone to impose it upon those sects the majority have been conditioned to dare not question?
Given the number of Black Lives Matter as well as the Biden campaign yard signs lining the streets, I am reminded that, while I live in this town, I don’t really live in this town.
Should the Biden campaign succeed in seizing power, if the crime rates rise in light of leftwing policies, it is my sincere hope that if there must be victims that they will be from among those that erected BLM signs in their yards that will be brutalized or have their property violated. The resultant world, is after all, the inevitable outcome of their brand of activism.
A Dove Soap commercial declares that Black men care about Black women. So would an advertisement supposedly about soap but rather about propagandistic indoctrination as boldly proclaim White men care about White women? For if Black men can affirm a preference for their own sort or breed, why should White men remain silent as to their prefered mating preference?
So where is the rationality of compelling individuals against their will to intake into their bodies a substance likely to elicit in at least five percent of cases a negative response (some of them permanent) for the purposes of soliciting an immune response only about half of the time to a disease that nearly 99% of the population is not going to die from in the first place? Such a requirement has nothing to do with science. This is about the forced implementation of a technoshamnistic religion.
Quasi-senile coot Joe Biden, in one of the rare instances where he was allowed out of the convalescent ward, in Atlanta droned on that if Americans would wear a mask for just a few months, the nation would get the Coronavirus plague behind us. But the vast majority of Americans have been wearing masks in public for nearly half a year now, particularly in areas with significant concentrations of population. It is an historic or even fact of human nature that there is never 100% compliance with any law or government edict. So what exactly is Biden advocating? Are we to assume that he wants an all-pervasive surveillance state? And perhaps as important, so long as there is a single case of coronavirus will Americans be forced to shroud their most basic form of individuality through this form of intervention bordering on tyranny now through the close of the present Dispensation? For somewhere out there there will always be a concern regarding this microbe lurking and its looming resurgence.
According to senile coot Joe Biden in Atlanta during one of those rare instances where his Illuminist handlers likely deemed him sufficiently medicated to be allowed out of his sanitarium cell, a “season of protest” erupted over President Trump’s refusal to articulate the liturgical injunction “Black Lives Matter”. In the instances of his rare public pronouncements, Biden insists that his regime will be about bringing people together. So what will be done to those that refuse to vocalize ascent to this creedal formulation if Biden invokes such as the root cause for the violence and looting perpetrated by his most ardent co-belligerents if not outright supporters?
President Trump categorized Joe Biden as a “touchy and feely sort of guy.” That has got to be of the most explicit examples of “takes one to know one” to have ever transpired.
Virginia Military Institute is considering the removal of a statue of Stonewall Jackson on campus over that figure’s connection to the Confederacy. But to be consistent, shouldn’t that institute now vote to abolish itself out of existence?
Luxury New York apartment complexes have hired armed guards to protect the occupants in anticipation of post-election upheaval. Parts of Beverly Hills are being cordoned off beforehand for the very same reason. Mind you, these are the very same locations inhabited by those the foremost demanding that Trump denounce the Proud Boys for that movement’s vigorous defense of Western civilization. These elites now invoking the Second Amendment in the attempt to protect all that they have accumulated have for decades insisted that the right to the implements of self-defense exist nowhere in the text of that constitutional provision.
Joe Biden laments President Trump utilizing so-called loopholes in order to pay the minimum amount of tax possible. But having been in high elected office for well over forty years, weren’t many of these provisions by definition been promulgated under Biden’s tenure?
In an anti-Halloween sermon, a pastor instead suggested an alternative where congregants could come to church dressed as Bible characters. In the homily, the pastor fondly recalled one such occasion where he came costumed as Eglon. For those not familiar, Eglon was the obese King of Moab that was so fat that Ehud could not pull the dagger out of the abdomen of when the tyrant was assassinated as detailed in Judges 3. Following this logic, if one is free to adorn oneself as a villain of the Bible at these social events, on what grounds does one get bent out of shape if a participant came decked out as Satan, the Antichrist, the Witch of Endor, or the Loose Woman of the Book of Proverbs?
In an anti-Halloween sermon, a pastor said it is the Devil (not God) that likes blood and guts. Such was articulated in regards to a highly detailed hunting video game. But wasn’t it God that required a detailed system of blood sacrifices on behalf of the Israelites? So apparently the blood fascination comes from somewhere and it not apparently all bad.
DC Mayor Muriel Bowser has promulgated an edict that those entering the jurisdiction should submit to a mandatory Coronavirus test. However, the measure will not be enforced. Then why would anyone willingly submit to such an intrusion voluntarily? And does this stipulation apply to protesters coming to town to loot and riot?
If the Biden regime imposes a national mask mandate, states that value liberty should refuse to implement or enforce it.
Interesting how questioning the results of an election is being rhetorically categorized as a greater outrage than efforts to undermine the legal observational oversight of the process.
Those questioning the legitimacy of the election have still looted less property than Antifa or Black Lives Matter.
What part of the First Amendment does not allow a skeptic to question the legitimacy of election results?
Frederick Meekins is an independent theologian and social critic. Frederick holds a BS in Political Science/History, a MA in Apologetics/Christian Philosophy from Trinity Theological Seminary, and a PhD. in Christian Apologetics from Newburgh Theological Seminary.
Cover
•
Commentary
•
Books & Reviews
•
Climate Change
•
Site Links
•
Feedback
