I would be astounded by the idiocy on proud display these days, if I were any longer capable of having anything but the lowest expectations for the mass of humanity. I consider it a good day when you people don’t set something important on fire. And yet, even so, the foolishness presently on offer is something quite nearly in a class all its own.
I am not a Libertarian. I have never been a Libertarian. I will never be a Libertarian.
It is not that I am insufficiently familiar with Libertarian thought or that I am familiar only with the antics of such unserious actors as the US Libertarian Party; rather, I am only too familiar with Libertarian thought, as it has become more or less, the only (supposedly) right-of-center thought that may be allowed some hearing on campuses (among other places), although typically only when the topic is (a lack of) morality. If I never again hear ‘the conservative case for [immoral or anarchic policy proposal here]’, it will still be too soon. However, I am not setting out here to offer a comprehensive critique of Libertarian thought (I believe that contact with reality has already done a sufficient job of that); instead, I wish to argue that Libertarian thought is incompatible with Christianity.
Continue readingOkay, fine: The title of this article is (a little) hyperbolic, but hear me out. Do you know how many died in the Mongol conquests? How many fell at the Siege of Vienna? How many lives did the Battle of Gettysburg Claim? Sure, some will object that these are rather old events1. Fine: How many died in the Korean War?
Continue readingThere are many critiques I could advance against That All Shall Be Saved (hereafter, “TASBS”) — perhaps a dozen or so, at least if my audience were wholly Protestant (and at least a dozen more if my audience were Lutheran) — but I have found, in contemplating the book, that I believe a better approach is to work within the framework constructed by Hart and advance — at least here and now — one critique. Like Wittgenstein in the Tractatus and Hart in TASBS, I am fully convinced of the soundness of what I am about to advance, and I do not believe that a refutation exists — or is even possible. I have selected this one critique for three reasons: 1) it operates within the bounds of the system Hart has construed; 2) I believe it will be convincing for all orthodox Christians, regardless of tradition or denomination; and 3) if sound, it works a total destruction of Hart’s argument. So, let us begin.
Now, of course, democracy is a fool’s errand and it inevitably empowers precisely those types of men who should never be anywhere near the levers of power, and, yet, seldom are those of us who have misgivings about democracy — directed both toward those who rule and those who theoretically select the members of the former class — presented with confirmation of so much of what we believe in a form so perfect as the ‘mandatory mask’ ‘laws’ now being enacted across the country (and even enforced in some places). At the very best, masks of the sort now in widespread use will somewhat slow transmission of various viruses (but, notably, not stop transmission of them); if the true goal were, as originally advanced, to ‘flatten the curse’, then, perhaps, masks would be a reasonable measure, but the current purpose of the masks, whether enforced by informal methods (e.g., peer pressure and shame [more accurately: harassment]) or formal methods (e.g., laws and fines), is removed far afield from any considerations of preventing the medical system from becoming overwhelmed. The present purpose of the masks is simply control, and I could scarcely think of a more appropriate symbolism.
Let us get right down to the point: There is going to be a disparate impact of COVID-19 on the poor (and on small business owners, but that is a separate consideration). Some will undoubtedly find it difficult to pay their bills. We should absolutely not have any who go hungry because they have had their hours cut or their place of employment is closed due to the pandemic. Thankfully, there are many charities that will help to take up some of the slack; however, I would like to make a minor legal proposal to help address this and future pandemics:
You will never see me place an Iranian flag in my name on Twitter, in any of my social media profiles, or any other such nonsense. I find such ‘irony’ to be too close to virtue signaling for my tastes. I do not support and will not defend Iran; I have repeatedly and publicly made clear my stance on Islam — I have even called for a Tenth Crusade. I am no friend of Islam or of the Muslim world, and yet I cannot support this (actual and escalating) war against Iran.
International trade is built upon a simple premise: Just as it makes sense to go to the butcher instead of the baker when purchasing sausages, so, too, certain countries will prove better at producing certain goods and services. This central premise is, of course, true, but in only the most trivial sense; by this, I mean that it is true in the same way that it would be true to claim that a Greyhound with all his limbs will almost certainly outrun a Dachshund with only three legs. This is, of course, true, but so what?
Continue readingAs Christ is the Head of the Church, so man is the head of woman. As one should not be ruled by one’s stomach or other baser urges, so man should not be ruled by woman. It is not a matter of domineering on the part of men over women; rather, it is a matter of overruling attempts by women to domineer men.
Continue readingFor nearly fifty years now, opponents of abortion have been making increasingly weak claims. I do not mean to say that the central argument on the anti-abortion1 side (i.e., that a fetus is a human being worthy of protection) has been watered down or adulterated; rather, I mean to contend that the anti-abortion side has been decreasingly forceful in condemning abortion and often all but silent when it comes to the necessary, logical consequences of what anti-abortionists believe. I intend to address both of these issues with this article.
Continue reading