Thursday, 15 December 2016

Who Or What Are We To Believe

Interesting constellations of mail I receive sometimes, relating to each other though seeming individual in nature.

1) Got a letter today from the ACLU.  Somehow I have gotten on the liberals' mail 'page,' though most of my incomings are of the conservative kind, as is my main interest.  However, and for the same reason that I take some liberal-side emails - to see what the other side is thinking, and up to - I am okay with receiving such tracts.  But this one threw me.

It was a request for me to fill out their year-end Survey.  Which was full of doublespeak.  Over and over again in it, they talked about "liberty" and "liberties" and "freedom," and was I 'Highly Supportive' of such-and-such an example - to their minds - of such a state of affairs or through a gradation over to 'Not Supportive At All'.  But what they really meant was - well, I'll put it in the words that I 'delivered' at the end, in a space where I was asked for my thoughts on my main concerns, regarding the theme of 'individual freedom':

"My 'individual freedom' to associate with and deal with whomsoever I choose to is being terribly violated."1

Which was decidedly NOT in line with their party line.  But there you go.  Send out a survey, and see what you get back.

And then, as I was about to seal the envelope back to them, I glanced through their covering letter, and saw that one of their support points - among a litany of liberal causes - was for "voter suppression" matters.  I scrawled in beneath it:

"You mean Voter Integrity measures, don't you.

"Don't insult my intelligence."

And included that response as well before sealing the return envelope.  And not putting a stamp on it, over their 'No Postage Necessary' notification, as I often do, as additional support to the various - multitude of - worthy causes that I make contributions to.  So there.

And then, as if in relation to the above piece of my daily mail, I opened:

2) a letter from the wife of the Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice, Roy Moore - who was removed from his position for insisting that a replica of the Ten Commandments had a place in relation to the Alabama Court House - who runs an organization called the Foundation For Moral Law, soliciting my support for their worthy cause.

Both this Foundation and the ACLU cite the Constitution as supportive of their positions.

They can't both be right.

Who is right??

I think that the best answer is:



The ACLU failing because the Constitution is all about individual rights free from government interference;2 and the Foundation For Moral Law failing because Christianity itself is an untruth.

Yes, we should live our lives in alignment with moral law.  But at some point, Christians are going to have to wake up to the fact that they have bought into a lie.3 And just as Christmas is based on older mythic traditions.4 so are we going to have to update our understanding of many things.

And live closer to Truth in the process.

P.S. And as if to round off the day's synchronicities, I also got a letter from an outfit called the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund (LELDF), sharing with me yet another story of a police officer  purportedly unfairly hounded by the authorities for a shooting that was in the line of duty.  But with the pressure that such outfits as the ACLU are putting on our law enforcement officers - and including the Usurper's own Department of 'Justice' - he may well end up with up to thirty years in prison for his honest efforts to do his job.

So this stuff can be very serious, indeed.  Not just theoretical.

And at a time as well when the 'Left' is going to attempt to undo the Trump election.  By hook or by crook.

Things seem to be coming to a head.

And I notice that a full moon seems to be involved in all this human drama stuff as well...

Interesting times we live in.

P.P.S. And as for the Usurper; another piece of this evening's constellation of note:

from ‘Obama Confesses Illegal Presidency Cost Dems Election’ - Andrew Hodges, M.D. - December 14
(This psychiatrist thinks that Obama has been talking about himself via projection in recent interviews.)

SGTSTEDENKO2 11 hours ago (December 14)

This worthless muslim fraud must pay for his treason and sedition.


         gwwilliams SGTSTEDENKO2 9 hours ago 
  • Death is normally the penalty for treason, I believe! :)

  • 27
  • Reply

To easy I would rather see him in -prison for the rest of his life


         gwwilliams Angry American 7 hours ago 
  • I personally do NOT want to pay for his room & board!

  • 14
  • Reply
  • ..

  •          Herbert Woodbury gwwilliams 2 hours ago (December 14)

    • It would cost us less than his pension.
    • The Former Presidents Act, enacted in 1958, provides living former presidents with a pension, office staff and support, funds for travel, Secret Service protection, and mailing privileges. It also provides benefits for presidential spouses. Currently, former presidents are awarded a pension equal to the salary of cabinet secretaries, which totaled $203,700 for the 2015 calendar year and was boosted by $2,000 for the current calendar year.
    • My preference would be that he have a stroke and be a drooling idiot the rest of his life.
    • Reply
  •                   kibitzer3 Herbert Woodbury a few seconds ago (December 15)

      • One would have had to be a legally sitting president to draw an ex-president's pension.

      • He should by rights get nothing but prison time, for perpetrating such a foul crime on the American public.

      • But the American public needs to look at its own role in the crime. It failed to call him on his ineligibility. Not good enough, for a supposed self-governing people. So perhaps he should be cut some slack, in the sentencing stage.

      • Fair's fair.


1 What I didn't add, but hoped they would get the sense of from my responses to their survey, was:
   'By the likes of you folks.'

2 As opposed to the 'Progressive' attitude that the Constitution was - or at least, should be considered as; in their considered opinion - a 'living document,' subject to the 'changing environment,' and thus 'Darwinian' rather than 'Newtonian'.  As the professor giving the Seventh in a series of Online Lectures on 'Constitution 101' from Hillsdale College outlined in today's-now-yesterday's online lecture.  Another piece of synchronicity in my day.

3 See, for god example: Joseph Atwills' 'Caesar's Messiah: The Roman Conspiracy To Invent Jesus,' and the various works by D.M. Murdock, aka Acharya S.  Especially her book 'Christ In Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection'.

4 As a video, whose YouTube link was sent me on this very same day, points out in its case for a Norse background to many of the pieces of the Christmas story...
   (Google 'Red Ice - Yuletide' for the link, if interested.)

No comments: