Category Archives: France

by - 0 comments

Religious freedom goes both ways

At times you’d think we were back in the year 1640 or 1780. It seems we’re revisiting the same religious debates again. Only this time we’re generally not settling them with swords and gunfire. Today it’s a war of ideas.

Yesterday, the US Supreme Court ruled, I think, that you cannot compel a mostly private corporation to provide a benefit that violates its religious beliefs. I say that ‘I think’ because honestly who knows what these rulings mean anymore. The law has become so convoluted and obscure that even talented and experienced Supreme Court lawyers can’t agree on what the ruling means.

So let’s just generally agree for our purposes here that a corporation is not required to provide benefit (x) if it goes against its religious belief (y). Also, please just presently ignore the for or against arguments about corporations being ‘people’. I’ll get to that topic many posts down the road. I guess.

Today, the European Court ruled, I think, that the French ban on face covering religious clothing is legal. I found this rather surprising as usually the European courts are all about enabling multiculturalism to the point of cultural suicide. It seems the court sided, I think, with the idea that the law’s intent was based upon the concealment of the face for security purposes vice the religious connotation.

Only a judge or a lawyer could make such a distinction with a straight face. I’m pretty sure if I wore an old white hockey mask in an elementary school somebody would call the police in about eight seconds. I’m not so sure you’d get such an instant reaction if you wore the hijab. Or maybe you would, it probably depends on where you are, and who sees you.

Now a number of folks will claim this ban is necessary because it protects these women from their husbands who will demand that they wear this garb. First off, that takes a fairly negative view of the confidence of Muslim women. Second, if somebody’s in a marriage where the husband can order what clothes the wife can wear, I’m pretty sure there are bigger problems in the marriage than a law on clothing can solve.

As much as folks may try, you cannot command all human behavior by legislation. We already have rules on unlawful imprisonment and spousal abuse. We also do not have laws that prohibit a spouse from being a dick to the other.

Another number of folks will claim that the future of all women is detonated by asking them to spend twelve bucks a week to buy their own morning-after-pill. I have no idea what it actually costs, I’ve never bought it, but I’m pretty sure its pennies on the dollar compared to how much cash people blow on smartphones, fancy coffee, and the zoo. This argument isn’t about women. It’s about winning elections, control, and demanding that one side agree with your beliefs. Or else.

Kindly observe however, the manner in which the world’s talking-face-hypocrites will hold up one ruling as:

a) Hobby Lobby’s a paragon defense of religious freedom; the anti-burka law is a sensible defense of Western values

OR

b) Hobby Lobby is against women’s rights; Muslim women should have the freedom to wear whatever they want

Neither argument is coherent.

Hobby Lobby does not want to hand out the morning-after-pill on its dime to their employees. It violates their religious beliefs. Okay. A Muslim woman desires to wear the full length nijab in public. It supports her religious beliefs. Okay.

Reasonable people will have very severe problems with both of these scenarios. But I challenge you to legitimately claim that both players aren’t exercising their own version of religious freedom. So when you try and ban one, or both, either way you are assaulting religious liberty. You either have both, or neither. Sorry.

And take your extreme scenarios elsewhere. Hobby Lobby is not about to produce a creepy black cloaked doctor to examine the genitals of its female, and male, employees. The hijab wearing woman’s husband is likely in fact not designing and building a nail bomb in his basement. Grow up or calm down. Or hopefully do both.

We’ve blogged extensively on the growing theft of freedom. Soon, the right to avoid being offended anywhere by anybody or anything will overpower your freedom of speech. Soon, the right to avoid being in any kind of danger anywhere from anybody or anything will overpower your freedom against unlawful search and seizure.

But for those who are about religious freedom, you’d better circle the wagons. As far as inalienable human rights go, religious freedom is the one that modern society can dispense with the easiest. Just look at today’s hyper-modern consumer cities. In Tokyo or London or Shanghai or New York I figure around 5% of people attend some kind of religious service on a weekly basis.

So those who support Hobby Lobby or the nijab had better become allies. They’re going to need each other to survive. Either it’s all okay, or none of it is. This blog and its degenerate author are hoping that all of it is.

burqa-eiffel

I personally desire to revoke this guy’s man card, but respect that this woman is an adult and deserves her choices in freedom of religion

by - 0 comments

Things are returning to normal, but they shouldn’t

Nobody wants to live in a state of perpetual crisis; to get pounded every single day in the head with awful reality.  So Uncle Vlad has sounded rather charitable lately.  And so do his Western counterparts.  Now that the drama’s subsided, everybody wants to get back to normal.  Vlad’s backed Ukrainian elections, pulled some troops away, and didn’t resort to screaming like the lunatic he is when Prince Charles called him exactly what he is.

By the way, you have to applaud Charles for speaking the truth and the not backing down.  When you see how the three big men of British politics responded, you affirm quite a lot of who they really are:

Cameron:  The Prince… “…everyone is entitled to their private opinions.”

Clegg:  The Prince… “…free to express himself.”

Miliband:  The Prince… “…has got a point.”

Which is to confirm that Cameron remains the hack-fraud everybody thinks he is; Clegg is still a vacuum-sealed-lifeform-in-a-suit; and Miliband, for all his many, many faults is still a democrat at heart and has the admirable quality of telling everybody what he really thinks.  Even if telling everybody what he thinks usually gets him in trouble.

But it’s okay you tart Brits.  You’re not the only ones led by a walking corpse.  Monsieur Hollande still can’t bring himself to not sell amphibious assault ships to Vladimir.  Apparently because he says that once you sign contracts, they are sacred.  Oh, I get it.  So Vlad can violate international law and multiple signed treaties but the French will be damned if they break a single contract.  This is to say that Vlad could invade Poland and burn Warsaw to the ground.  But as long as it doesn’t lead to the loss of five-hundred union jobs in Saint-Nazaire, Hollande would respond, “Meh, [French shrug] what can you do?”

Vlad is not happy with Charles.  For once he almost seems to whine just a little.  He doesn’t like being compared to one of history’s greatest monsters.  But they’re essentially the same kind of guy.  Except that Vlad has a much lower body count and is in the end rather less successful in achieving his goals up front.  But Charles is right and both Vlad and Hitler see Europe the same way.  Unfortunately for us all, there’s no Churchill or de Gaulle waiting in the wings to turn things around.  And so this will go on and on.

Everybody in our blessed Western establishment governments and businesses want things to go back to normal.  The West needs Russia for gas, for oil, for cash, on Syria, Iran, Afghanistan transport links, nuclear proliferation, and about sixteen other major actions.  But to push Ukraine to the side and get back to normal in the pursuit of these goals misses the gravity of the damage Putin has recently wrought to the West and the world order it claims to represent.  This one you can’t let slide.

In two weeks Vlad shows up to the Normandy commemorations of 06 June.  Oh, yeah, if you didn’t know, Hollande has not withdrawn the invitation.  So in two weeks all the “leaders” of the West are going to stand side-by-side with a leader who’s just recently gone against everything those who fought at Normandy stood for.

They’re going to let him get away with it because they think they need him.  They require his Russia so they can get back to normal.  They might as well kidnap five Ukrainians off the street, take them to Sword Beach, and urinate on them atop an old Nazi coastal gun box.  And while they’re at it, walk over to the cemetery and spit on the graves of the fallen.  It’s the same as standing next to Putin after what’s happened.  It’s a disgrace.

9862553

“Well Vlad, you have to know, you’re a filthy Hitler shit.”

“Yeah, and what are you going to do about it, pig?!”

by - 0 comments

Uncle Vladimir is a winner

We want to be led by a wise & just person right? Somebody who is smart, honest, and has a sense of duty? Maybe we’re on the wrong track. Maybe we need to vote for the asshole that has the power to get things done.

Vladimir Putin is a winner, which is not necessarily to say that his opponents are losers. But certainly Vlad’s adversaries are failures. But I also don’t mean winner in the sense that Vlad’s won a vodka-fueled-bar-brawl, although I’m sure he’d kick somebody ass. By winner, I mean somebody who has the power to enforce their will upon reality. A man who gets things done.

So in this context, you would call Hitler and Stalin winners too, even though they were deliciously-evil, disgusting-human-freaks who ultimately lost. And even when the winner is a Western good guy, don’t try and make them a saint. A true Abraham Lincoln is a once in a millennium occurrence. Think of a guy like Churchill. Churchill was a winner, but he also said and did some very dumb things in his day. But the point is that overall, he got things done.

Look at all of Vlad’s counterparts: Cameron, Merkel, Obama, & Hollande. Everybody’s got their opinion on these folks. In my mind, people have the broader impressions of them all wrong. Everybody wants to mark up Cameron over immigration, Merkel on the Euro crisis, Obama on health care, or Hollande on taxes. Folks, I think in general, you’re all missing the point. Any one issue obscures a singular core problem with all four of them:

They generally don’t get things done.

If you want to argue with me that any of them are getting things done, at least domestically, just comment below or e-mail me and I’ll demolish your argument. For the moment we’re just going to accept that I’m right, because I am, when I say all four of these folks just don’t have it. You could conceivably argue that all four of them are smart, honest, and are propelled by true duty. Yet, they don’t have it, they’re losers.

Vlad has it, he’s a winner. He wanted Crimea, he got it. He wanted a destabilized Ukraine, he got it. He wanted to end this crisis with him firmly in control of future events, and he most certainly has that. Friends, don’t be fooled by the empty suits in the West when they assure you they deflated this crisis via their meek actions. Ukraine does not belong to Russia this morning only because Vlad generally knows when to quit while he’s ahead.

We’ve said it before, we’ll say it again. Love Vlad or hate him (we hate him), you have to at least admire a guy who knows what he wants, generally speaks his mind, and then backs up every single word he says. When in doubt, you bet on the guy you can rely upon. Even if I was a pro-Russian separatist in Donetsk, and Vlad sold me out yesterday by somewhat endorsing national elections? Well, I’d still side with Russia. Because twenty years from now I’d still trust that Vlad, or his appointed successor, would be there for me. Whereas the West will not.

So the question then becomes why the others are such losers. Well, I have three thoughts that come to mind off the top of my head:

– The Media

Essentially, we need to destroy Western media as we know it and start over. Vlad barely cares what the media thinks, or manipulates the message to his own ends by beating the journalists at their own sick game. The era of the sound bite, twenty-four hour news, gotcha questions, and militantly partisan trash is not designed to increase voter awareness. It’s designed to sell advertising.

When one of the most basic arms of a functioning democracy is primarily focused not on keeping government honest, but on selling things, then we have a huge problem. Western leaders are trapped in this cycle. Every decision they make is funneled through the lens of how it will play in this tortured media environment. This does not make for healthy decision making. It does not encourage the kind of risk taking you occasionally require from leaders.

– Politics

More and more, the leaders of the West are professional politicians. They have never done anything else. Cameron, Merkel, Obama, & Hollande at one point did other things, but everything substantial they have ever done in life was a job for or about politics. This establishes a very narrow focus, a worldview that does not conform to reality. They can’t get things done in the real world because they’ve never lived in the real world.

If politics is a game, they are trying to lead as if they are in a game. But the world is not a game, it’s a cruel bitch and they don’t know how to play it. Vlad grew up strangling people in Dresden back alleys for a living. The other four grew up in classrooms or smoke-filled (no longer smoke filled) political back rooms. Vlad had to get things done or he’d get fired or executed. They had to please their political masters with some obscure, unknown political action that nobody cared about or got to see. Pit them against each other in the real world, and we shouldn’t have been surprised at the outcome.

– Apathy

You get the leader you vote for. Nothing about Cameron, Merkel, Obama, & Hollande is generally a surprise to the world. These four turned out roughly as anybody could have predicted if you knew who they were before they were elected. The voters make the call, they bought what they got. The public put four career politicians in charge of their lives. The public also lives with a dirty news media that they still watch and read. The results speak for themselves.

But look at who could replace these four? All four leaders (or big men) of the opposition are exactly the same. Miliband, Steinbruck, Boehner, and Cope are all cut from the same cloth. They all have their hard core supporters, but the overall problem is just apathy. Apathy as in the eight folks on offer to lead the West are all the same. They don’t get things done. And nobody seems to care. Put Miliband, Steinbruck, Boehner, or Cope in charge tomorrow, and nothing, I mean nothing truly changes.

As a reminder, Vlad is an elected leader. The election was rigged, but even if Russian elections were free and fair, he’d still win. The Russian people picked a winner, the West picked losers. Take that as your basis, and a lot of what’s happening in the world today really makes sense.

vlad_may_parade

One successful leader, aware of history, propelled by action, adored by his people