Followers

Followers

Wednesday 19 February 2014

Secularism Vs Religion:

Every time the media reports still another eruption of violence from the religious lunatic fringe, activists in the chaotic end of our social spectrum renew their vows to ban religions all together in favor of a purely secular society. They proceed to remove crosses from public institutions and demand an end to prayers.


This works for them because they are too ill informed or too young to remember Adolph Hitler's or Joseph Stalin's purely secular societies. It seems that schools today either don't teach history or the kids write it off in their minds as something of interest only to dead people or those about to die.


History of what happened in Hitler's Germany is everywhere, both in print as well as black-and-white film. It's not as though this information is unavailable.

Hitler's secular society slaughtered anyone who didn't measure up, and when they ran out of mental or physical cripples and the sexually indeterminate, they went after the Jews. 

Then they set out to enslave the Russian people after stealing their living space.


Of course, Stalin had his own secular agenda which made life quite hazardous for anyone who failed to show boundless enthusiasm for his brand of communism. There are entire highways in Siberia actually built on the bones of forced labor consisting of people who did not measure up. It is estimated that Stalin killed more Soviets than Hitler's invading legions.


It would be reckless for us to take for granted that the people who favor a purely secular society over one that includes religion understand what religion is and how it differs from secularism.

Of course, the opinions of these pro-active rabble-rousers are no doubt severely skewed by the antics of the Islamic lunatic fringe which our electronic media glorifies in gory detail in order to hold our attention for their advertisers.


There is little doubt that religion's main function, right from the beginning, was to promote a means for people to know the difference between what kind of behavior is acceptable within the community and what is not. The Ten Commandments attributed to Moses sums it up nicely. That was a good start.

When viewed in the cold light of reality, secularism shows little interest in what's right and what's wrong. It simply makes laws, rules and regulations and devises an extensive array of punishments for people who are caught breaking those laws.


Legal coercion quickly becomes the norm in a secular society and as time goes on, fewer and fewer decisions are left up to individual discretion. Less and less, we are expected to know what to do right. More and more, we are told what to do by the politicians who miss no opportunities to do things they think will get them elected.



In a secular society, priests and churches are replaced by judges, courthouses, police stations, prisons and penitentiaries to house all those people who disobey the laws. In Germany, the Nazis set up slave labor camps. The Soviets set up Gulags in Siberia. 

People living in a secular society break the laws because, with no religions, there are few effective provisions to program them for socially acceptable behavior. 


As the secular society ages, the legal system more and more tends to protect lawbreakers instead of their victims because law enforcement tends to become an industry and that's their bread and butter. 


This requires no research. Just look around you and take note of what's happening here.

Most of those lenient judges really aren't as inept as their sentencing records would lead us to believe. It could be they are simply buying insurance against future unemployment for themselves. On the other hand, they can be busily enhancing the importance of their jobs. Some of them are not even aware they are doing that. It's all cleverly written into legal procedures. 


That is how the father of a five-year-old gets arrested and strip searched when the child is reported to have scrawled a crayon version of a firearm on a scrap of paper in kindergarten. Everyone involved, from the neurotic teacher who allowed her imagination to cloud reality, to the unimaginative principal who did not hesitate to call the cops, to the cops playing heroic Swat Team games who jumped the father, to their superiors who defended this exercise in idiocy. 


Superiors? Hardly. They were probably promoted not because of their qualifications as police officers, but because they were either bilingual, or of the right sex, sexual inclinations, skin color or ethnic origins. 

It's all sanctioned under Trudeau's famous Charter of Rights legislation.

All hiring these days is done with the Human Rights tribunals looking over your shoulder. Actual qualifications tend to be pushed aside until those other conditions are met.

In the kindergarten dangerous weapons case, all the guilty parties involved claimed they were simply following procedure. 


See how easy it is? Nobody is responsible. It's all procedure.

That is quite close to what happened during the flooding in High River Alberta where our famous Royal Canadian Mounted Police kicked in doors of every private residence to get at the guns inside. Severely teed-off citizens are still looking for the guilty parties--the officials who ordered this abuse of democratic principles. What the RCMP did there would 
not have been out of place in Hitler's Nazi Germany. Last we heard, these citizens are still being stonewalled as the guilty parties pass the buck around like a hot potato.

That's the kind of thing that goes on in a society that is headed toward a purely secular system which favors political control and the guilty politicians scramble to insulate themselves from the anger of the citizenry.

Just remember: when a judge sentences a criminal to life in prison, what is actually happening there is he is sentencing the taxpayers to feed, clothe, shelter, and entertain this marginal human in a good state of health for that length of time. In many cases, they even supply him with conjugal visits with wife, girl friend or interested parties.


The criminal can take early retirement. It's easy. All he needs to do is go out and kill someone, get arrested and plead guilty.


Who is being punished here, the criminal, or the taxpayer? 


And is this okay with the people who would do away with religion in favor of a strictly secular society?

No comments:

Post a Comment