Skip to content

Category: Culture

The best that has been thought and written and why these ideals are difficult to meet.

January 20, 2018 | 3 Comments

Insanity & Doom Update XIX

Item Iceland’s first pagan temple in 1000 years ready in late 2018 (first two sentences below) and A religion that speaks to people today (the rest)

The Asatru temple in Oskjuhlid in Reykjavik will be ready in the latter part of next year. There’s been a break in construction of the temple but construction will begin again in January. — [end first source]

A historic event will take place next year when the first main hof, or temple, of the Asatru religion in a thousand years will be completed…

Hilmarsson says that the Asatru religion speaks just as much to people today as it did one thousand years ago. The values upheld by the religion are the individual’s responsibility for his own words and actions. Honesty, tolerance, honour and respect for the earth and nature are also very important values.

Not only is it sayonara Christianity and welcome-home Ice gods, but it’s hello gmarriage, which other reports say is a driver for the growth in the old religion. Gay Iceland says “viking weddings” between two (or more?) men are popular.

“There has been a massive increase in demand for same-sex wedding ceremonies in the last year, an explosion really,” says Hilmar Orn Hilmarsson, Pagan high chieftain of The Old Nordic Pagan Association, Asatruarfelagid.

The same gentleman quoted here is responsible for the new pagan temple. He says, “The pagan believe is very inclusive and we are open to all opinions.” If anybody knows Hilmarsson ask him if they are willing to accept Christians and Muslims who hold to God-directed condemnations of homosexuality.

In 2013 in Iceland, the article continues to say, “many [Christian] priests refused to service gay couples…it only took three years to change the law and the church’s monopoly on religious weddings disintegrated, becoming a thing of a past best forgotten.”

Population of Iceland is 334,000, which is a 40,000 smaller than Cleveland, and a number which necessarily must decrease if men are pretending to marry men, and vice versa.

Item Children who say homosexuality is ‘wrong’ could be viewed as extremist threat — Education Secretary

Anti-gay comments could ‘trigger a thought’ in teachers’ minds about possible radicalisation says Nicky Morgan as she outlines anti-terror plans

Children who speak out in class against homosexuality could be viewed as potential extremists under Government guidelines intended to prevent Islamist terrorism, Nicky Morgan, the education secretary, has suggested.

Mrs Morgan said comments by children that they consider homosexuality to be “wrong” or “evil” could “trigger” concerns from teachers under guidance designed to help schools detect possible radicalisation.

Traditionalist Christians said Mrs Morgan’s remarks implied that anyone who raised their children in line with conservative religious teaching on sexuality would now be viewed with suspicion.

It follows moves to close two Christian schools after they were judged to have failed the Government’s new “British Values” tests introduced in the wake of the so-called “Trojan Horse” scandal in which hard-line Muslim groups attempted to infiltrate schools in Birmingham.

Sodomy is a “British Value”? If so, how odd Muslims would want to “infiltrate” schools and change that.

Item Gather round, class. Thomas the teddy wants to be a girl

Children as young as three are being read books in nurseries and schools that encourage them to question their gender.

While many stories challenge the traditional stereotypes, such as encouraging girls to think about being firefighters and boys to cook the family dinner, some focus on characters who believe they are the wrong gender.

The books are on reading lists for nurseries and primary schools provided by Educate and Celebrate, an organisation funded by the Department for Education (DfE) to help schools prevent homophobia and transphobia. The charity has already supported dozens of primary and secondary schools to adopt gender-neutral lavatories and uniforms.

Well what do you know. Sodomy is a British value! How they’re going to explain that to their Muslim guests is going to be interesting. Perhaps by a little infiltration of their own?


The evidentiary basis underlying Islam’s categorical prohibition of liwat (sodomy) and other same-sex behaviors lies in explicit proscriptive statements of the Qur’an and ?adith, the transmitted consensus of the Prophet’s Companions and Successors, and the documented unanimity of the Islamic legal tradition throughout the ages. Notwithstanding, the past decade and a half has witnessed the rise of Muslim reformist voices, primarily in the West, challenging Islam’s proscription of homosexual activity and calling for the religious affirmation of same-gender sexual expression, relationships, and identities. This challenge has consisted not only in a questioning of the probative value of the relevant ?adith evidence and a disregard for juristic and wider community consensus, but also in the assertion that the Qur’an itself does not prohibit same-sex relations per se, but only homosexual rape motivated by inhospitality with intent to dishonor.

Now where have we heard that before?

January 17, 2018 | 8 Comments

Fire and Fury: It’s False, That’s How We Know It’s True

Stream: The False-But-True Fallacy

There’s concern in the City of Others Riches (Washington D.C.) that Michael Wolff’s Fire and Fury book about the Trump White House contains as much truth as an advertisement for herbal male supplements.

Matt Labash at Weekly Standard read the book and told us of the author’s note

where Wolff states that many of the accounts in Fire and Fury are in conflict with one another and many, “in Trumpian fashion, are baldly untrue…and that looseness with the truth, if not with reality itself” is “an elemental thread of this book.” Or put another way: Despite him weighing the evidence and settling “on a version of events I believe to be true,” everything that follows might be a lie.

In spite of this sobering and cautionary warning that the book might better resemble one of Bill Clinton’s “explanations” than the truth, Labash concludes “what comes through loud and clear in Wolff’s telling is that no matter how bad you thought it was in Trump’s White House, it was actually much worse.”

Many are saying things like this. Sure, Wolff might have included stories like the one he heard from a guy, who himself got it “from a woman on the beach in Florida, who heard it in a carpool line”, but since these stories show Trump to be the moronic oaf we know him to be, they must be true. Even if they’re false.

Seeing What Isn’t There

The reception of Wolff’s book is thus a prime example of the False-But-True Fallacy.

The False-But-True Fallacy, which I sometimes call the Meta Fallacy because it is the mother of all fallacious arguments, is difficult to explain. So stick with me.

How it works is like this. A certain proposition is first conjectured to be true, like “President Trump is an idiot or incompetent”. Evidence for this belief is put forward, as in the case of Wolff’s book. This evidence, if accepted, confirms the belief.

But it is later discovered that the evidence is false, or likely false. Indeed, it is learned that the evidence might have been juiced, or even in part manufactured.

Since the evidence upon which people have been relying has been proved or judged faulty, it would seem that the strength of the belief in the proposition must diminish. But it doesn’t. If anything, it increases.

Logically Illogical

How could this happen when the rules of logic say it is impossible?

Because people argue like this. “The evidence would never have been juiced if the proposition wasn’t really true, because nobody would have bothered to make up stories unless there existed other stories like the made-up ones, but about which we never heard.”

Click here to confirm what you believe is true.

January 15, 2018 | 3 Comments

Professors Say Lack of Ideological Diversity is a Feature, not a Bug

Stream: Professors Say Lack of Ideological Diversity is a Feature, not a Bug

You know who the real champions of open debate on our beleaguered college campuses are? Social justice warriors.

Obvious, right?

It was obvious to tenured professor of classics and ancient history Matthew Sears at the University of New Brunswick.

He wrote “Why ‘social justice warriors’ are the true defenders of free speech and open debate” for the Washington Post. And they printed it. So it must be true.

Sears is one a growing rank of academics who see the enforced progressive monoculture at American universities not as a bug but as a feature.

He wrote “the social justice approach — which emphasizes the dynamics of power and oppression — that many fear has taken over the humanities and social sciences at its best is actually an improvement over the ‘disinterested pursuit of truth’.”

Reality is Judgmental

It sure is an improvement! Why use disinterested truth when we can speak our Oprah-blessed self truths by using the dynamics of power and oppression? Just like those SJWs at Evergreen State College did when they stalked through campus with bats daring people to disagree them.

And remember: Disinterested truth can be awfully harsh. You’re a man who wants to be a woman? That’s your truth. But the disinterested truth insists you’re still a man. Ouch.

Sears says “In fact, rather than constituting an attack on knowledge, the social justice lens reflects new ideas generated by academic disciplines and experts within them, and generally encourages expanding our knowledge and opening up subjects to new perspectives, much like Socrates advocated.”

Know What You Don’t Know

It’s not clear what Socrates Sears meant. Maybe the chef at The Pita Pit located in downtown Saint John. (Or perhaps Karl Popper’s cat?)

He can’t have meant Socrates the philosopher. Socrates the philosopher was all for the disinterested pursuit of truth. While in jail awaiting execution, Socrates congratulated his friend Crito on being well placed to consider a certain argument because Crito was “disinterested and not liable to be deceived by the circumstances in which [he was] placed.”

At that same time Socrates said that he would follow the path of reason “even if the power of the multitude could inflict many more imprisonments, confiscations, deaths, frightening us like children with hobgoblin terrors.”

We are therefore right to doubt that Socrates would have supported the path of Social Justice. Like that followed by SJWs at Middlebury College, who you might remember used the dynamics of power and oppression to shut down a speech by Charles Murray. SJWs hounded Murray of campus and tried to yank the head off of a professor accompanying Murray. Giving your debating opponent a concussion is not what is classically meant by the Socratic method.


If you are not on a campus that has blocked this (it’s happened before!), click here to read the rest.