Atheism Darwinist rhetorical tactics Evolutionary materialism's amorality FYI-FTR Intelligent Design Politics/policy and origins issues Science, worldview issues/foundations and society

FYI-FTR: But aren’t ‘marriage,’ ‘race’ and ‘rights’ just words . . . ?

Spread the love

As the WJM arguing thread continues, we can notice other concerns, here, extreme nominalism and its nihilistic consequences.

Yes, nihilistic: might and manipulation make ‘right,’ ‘truth,’ ‘meaning,’ ‘law,’ and so forth.

I responded to CF’s attempt to push principled objection to nihilistic, nominalistic, radically relativist, subjectivist homosexualisation of ‘marriage’ under false colour of law [cf Girgis et al here], with racism as follows, at 40:

>>wrenching a term like marriage out of its natural context and imposing a distortion under false colour of law has not created a new form of marriage. It only reveals that those who do it are in the grips of a nominalism that cannot recognise the manifestly evident core principles of the moral laws of our nature.

That extreme nominalism then leads to an attempt to impose the notion that might and manipulation make ‘right,’ ‘truth,’ ‘value,’ ‘meaning,’ ‘sex,’ etc under false colour of law. This is nihilistic lawfare.

The only limit for the moment to such a process in the minds of those caught up in this, is what they think they can get away with for the moment.

tapered divideThe watershed- wedge is at work, the divide, polarise and ruin dynamic is underway, and the end of this is a shatteringly hard impact with rock-bottom reality.

In the meanwhile, it is manifest that marriage does not mean what is being imposed at the point of the usurped sword of justice, but the corruption of society, media, education, courts and parliaments to achieve this points to the ruin of our civilisation. As the very simple fact that only yesterday, such was only whispered in the corners of radical advocacy itself indicates: this is nothing connected to the nature of persons [utterly unlike racial characteristics such as skin colour and hair texture or facial features], it is a matter of institutionalising corrupt behaviour under false colour of law.

This is the hijacking of a genuine reform based on manifest principles of the natural moral law, so that what cannot stand on its own two feet can domineer and ride in a bizarre piggyback that gives it a false colour of legitimacy.

Shameless, cynical and utterly disgraceful.

Heedless wrecking of our civilisation.

But then in the minds of those caught up in the red, double green de facto alliance, Western Civilisation is the problem. What is wrong with the world.

geostrat-pic

They do not realise the matches they are playing with, or the geostrategic consequences, nor do they care.

Reason is dead, rage running amok through lawfare is the engine, agit-prop manipulation is the driver.

The juggernaut is rolling.

Let us again hear cultural marxist strategic thinker and Harvard Law professor Mark Tushnet on where the agenda is going:

The culture wars are over; they lost, we won. Remember, they [= conservatives] were the ones who characterized constitutional disputes as culture wars

[–> lawfare, the usurpation of the sword of justice to impose a ruthless agenda, is an outright act of war]

. . . For liberals, the question now is how to deal with the losers in the culture wars. That’s mostly a question of tactics. My own judgment is that taking a hard line (“You lost, live with it”) is better than trying to accommodate the losers, who – remember – defended, and are defending, positions that liberals regard as having no normative pull at all. Trying to be nice to the losers didn’t work well after the Civil War, nor after Brown. (And taking a hard line seemed to work reasonably well in Germany and Japan after 1945.)

[–> notice, the revealing and sadly familiar pattern of invidious, tainting comparatives on offer: slavery, racism, nazism, aggressive imperialism . . . telling us a LOT about the hostility and slanderous projection we are dealing with, this professor needs to publicly apologise and retract with a serious mea culpa based explanation, starting with this point]

I should note that LGBT activists in particular seem to have settled on the hard-line approach, while some liberal academics defend more accommodating approaches. When specific battles in the culture wars were being fought, it might have made sense to try to be accommodating after a local victory, because other related fights were going on, and a hard line might have stiffened the opposition in those fights. But the war’s over, and we won.

Ruthless, nihilistic, abusive factionalism that does not hesitate before usurping the sword of justice.

Heedless, that such is headed for an awful crash.

Behind, lies the growing legacy of the manipulation of the same institutions and the same deadening of conscience — the guide and guard of reason — in order to effect a situation where under false colour of law upwards of 50 million unborn children are slaughtered every year, in the worst holocaust in history. To see, just multiply that number by 40 years, and then by 1/2 to account for growth. Of this some 60 millions are the American “contribution,” half a generation killed in the womb.

Ask yourself, why is it that such matters are almost totally absent from the headlines.

Think, about what that tells us on how our major media — eyes and ears of the community — are utterly riddled with corrupt, cynical agit prop agendas and tactics.

Then, ponder how bloodguilt is on massive evidence of history the most corrupting influence of all.

Ponder, how such bloodguilt is now widely pervasive across our whole civilisation.

Look, at how language is corrupted to carry it forward: ‘reproductive rights,’ ‘choice’ and more.

Ponder, how law has been corrupted and how lawfare has been let loose in defence of a gross evil against the first right of all, life.

Ponder, how corrupt our governments have necessarily become as a consequence.

Then, it is no wonder at all to see that other things are being subjected to the same conscience-benumbed cynical nihilistic nominalism under false colour of law.

Other points follow in the same vein.

This will not end well.>>

We are heading, heedlessly, for an awful crash.

Do you not see why it is evident that this will not end well?

For individuals and communities alike, then our civilisation as a whole?

I strongly suggest, think again:

Conscience, is a gift.

Guilt, is a mercy.

Repentance, is a grace.

Renewal and reformation, are hopes.

Perhaps, even at this late stage for a civilisation that has so obviously lost its way, something positive can be done before it is utterly too late. END

F/N: Discussion may continue in the still in progress thread. If you are new to the discussion or have not yet done so, please read the OP and skim through the thread of comments so far.