Get PJ Media on your Apple

The Brave New World of the West

There is something horribly familiar about recent events in the land of the free.

by
Paul Diamond

Bio

May 6, 2014 - 12:05 am
Page 1 of 2  Next ->   View as Single Page

There is something horribly familiar about recent events in the land of the free. The resignation/ dismissal of Brendan Eich of Mozilla, the Elane Photography case, and the Julea Ward case have all given me a chilling sense of déjà vu.  These decisions — from corporations, universities, and courts — have set an ominous precedent for the coming price of citizenship for those who adhere to Judeo-Christian morality.

The reason why the current threat is so serious is that the calls for the denial of religious freedoms (as identified by the late Professor Dworkin) appear so reasonable. This time we are not hearing the voice of tyrants, but the siren call of equality, diversity, and freedom from sexual prejudice and discrimination.  What reasonable person would not want this?  Anyone who opposes this, so the argument goes, must be a bigot and should be denied their human dignity (because such a person denies dignity to others).

In the midst of these developments, the intrinsic value of free speech has been lost, and government and quasi-government institutions seek to tell us what we can say, and even what we can think. In the process, the rule of law is subverted to this cause. I ask myself the question: where have we seen this before?

In the near future, Americans will see the rapid growth of bodies like the New Mexico Human Rights Commission, with bureaucrats and public officials determining complex moral issues.  Uncle Sam will use the full panoply of state power to chilling effect, such as simply deciding which cases to take on and which to ignore.

Meanwhile, in England, the Equality and Human Rights Commission has never intervened in any controversial case to support a Christian adherent. They have, however, supported a whole range of cases in support of gay rights, transgendered individuals, and against Catholic adoption agencies. In one case where I acted as counsel for Christian foster parents, the state-sponsored commission spoke of the need to protect vulnerable children from being “infected”  with Judeo-Christian ethics of sexual morality.  You don’t have to think too hard to work out what would happen to anyone who used the word ‘infected’ to describe certain other groups, but the British legal system let it pass.

America is likely to see the introduction of something like a public sector equality duty; this places a responsibility on public bodies in England to have due regard to the need to eliminate discrimination, advance equality of opportunity and foster good relations. It’s a noble principle, but, of course, the definition of “discrimination” is wholly political.

The Law Society of England and Wales refused to host a Christian conference on marriage because that was discriminatory, but recently gave advice to solicitors on how to discriminate against women and non-Muslims in the drafting of sharia-compliant wills.  I wonder if a Jewish solicitor could draft such a sharia-compliant will?

My American friends tell me that they have the First Amendment; and it is still strong.  But we should not underestimate what judges can do.  In my cases on the wearing of crosses at British Airways and at Exeter Hospital, a total of 13 British judges denied that the Christian cross was a manifestation of religion.  In another case, a tribunal recently held that Sunday was not a core component of the Christian faith.  These decisions were reversed either in Europe or in national courts, but an appeal was required on these basic issues.

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
And the Lefties don't want to get _their_ hands dirty and would be very happy to have the Muslims do the killing for them.
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
Funny, that "keys" joke is parallel to my favorite political joke, and I never did see the parallel before.

My joke: Q: Why do PETA (animal rights) activists get so much more angry about people who wear fur than people who wear leather? A: Because rich, matronly old ladies have a very different reaction to them than motorcycle gangs.

Why do human rights activist spend their lives attacking Western civilization, and ignore modern-day red- and theo-Nazis like North Korea, Cuba, Taliban-ic rule? Because the former is a soft target, and gets them juicy write-ups in the NY Times and air on the BBC. The latter is a stone wall, so why bother?

In other words, genuine and real human rights crusading where it is most needed is just no fun. And look at the God-awful places you have to go - Pyongyang? the Indu Kush? Not quite Greenwich Village, Piccadilly, or Santa Monica, are they?

As seen with Condi Rice at Rutgers, I always think I have reached my limit of deepest possible loathing of leftist activists, and then the little scamps find yet one more level to drop the mineshaft.
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
You should know this as it seems so obvious. The difference between the so called Muslim moderates and the fundamentalists is that the fundies want us dead and are willing to kill for their beliefs. The moderates don't want to get their hands dirty and are very happy to have the fundies doing their dirty work for them.
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (29)
All Comments   (29)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
I would like to think that elections in 2014 and 2016 could turn all this back. Will people wake up and put an end to this crap? Will election fraud once again prevail? Obama is out in 2016 no matter what. Is there another one waiting in the wings? Will we last that long?
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
The Dancing Boys of Afghanistan exposes the horrific practice called Bacha Bazi, in which young Afghan boys are sold to warlords and powerful businessmen to be trained as dancers who perform for male audiences in women's clothing and are then used and traded for sex. The practice is sadly making a comeback in that country.

The "Dancing boys of Afghanistan" is a documentary you can find it just look. It documents the practice of training young boys to "perform" for older Afghan perverts. Pretty disgusting. But the left apparently has no problem with using young Afghan boys as sexual toys.
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
I think what's driving this is that the Enlightenment is dead. We now have two generations that have been conditioned by schools and the mass media to make decisions on an emotional basis rather than a rational one. One example of this is that the Greatest Generation confronted fascism as an objective evil in a way that subsequent, lesser generations would find impossible since we have neither the vocabulary nor the conceptual framework to see any moral judgment as anything beyond personal taste and preference. We have rejected principle in favor of coolness. "I disapprove of what you say, and so I will seek to have you silenced for the public good."

I have noticed that nobody is a moral relativist when it is their own ox being gored. Certain terms and concepts have gained currency because they have been repeated often enough and not because they stand up to scrutiny. We need to point this out, and hammer on it as often as these risible, transparent sophistries are spoken: Tolerance is not tolerance but a euphemism for the crushing of dissent. Rights aren't rights but merely things that rulers permit us to do (or don't). And rights are held to be a zero-sum game in which a member of a privileged group may silence a member of an uncool group lest their widdle feelings get hurt. This is not pluralism. It is hardly democracy, except as Oscar Wilde's "Bludgeoning of the people, by the people, for the people."

It is well past time to call BS on Godwin's Law and start calling fascism what it is.
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
Currently it's Vladimir Putin who's representing the agenda of traditional normalcy in the world. I hope he makes it all the way to Slovakia and Hungary and wipes out the fascists there. No one's going to stop him so it's likely he will do so over the next few years and al power to him.
Down with the evil mulatto and his American sodo-homo army.
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
The war against Christianity has never ceased to exist, modern times obviously no exception.
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
Neither will the war on the Jews cease. Why?

Same God.
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
No matter how much they want to, Leftist elites will never be able to Square the Circle between LGBTs and Muslims.

And when it comes time to choose who to side with, they will side with the Muslims.

Because the LGBTs aren't going to come after them with rusty scimitars and saw their heads off.
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
"The new liberal dogma says that a Jew or Christian is a bigot if they do not believe in the homosexual agenda."

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, "the UN" (you know, that crowd of self-serving bureaucrats that put Syria and Iran onto the "human rights" commission) is barking at the heels of the Catholic church...

"The U.N. Committee on the Rights of the Child rebuked the Vatican in February for its handling of the sexual abuse scandal and suggested that the Catholic Church update its canon to approve homosexuality, abortion, birth control and premarital sex."

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/may/4/un-torture-committee-probes-vatican-on-sex-abuse-s/
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
At the risk of blending unrelated issues and thereby muddying the waters...

It seems an unfortunate Progressive trait to see a problem they do not know how to solve, and to respond by solving something unrelated -- even if that makes the primary problem worse. As the old joke says, "Yes, I lost my keys over on THAT corner, but I'm looking for them here because the light is much better here".

We see this in the case of gun rights in America. What the progressives really want to do is to disarm criminals, but there's no way to do that with the law -- because criminals, by definition, don't follow the law -- so progressives seek to disarm law-abiding citizens instead. That's not where the problem is, but it's what they can reach.

Similarly, if we're afraid of global jihad, and of groups in our communities that saw people's heads off, then we should address that -- but people are afraid of lecturing Muslims about the need to be tolerant, and getting killed in response. So instead they lecture the ones they are not afraid of. But that doesn't solve the problem, does it?
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
Well, most Leftists believe in "population control" and the need for Hundreds of Millions, if not Billions of people to die in rapid succession.

And that's a fringe benefit of Global Islamic Jihad. Billions will die, as long as "our betters" remove our ability and our will to fight back.
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
Funny, that "keys" joke is parallel to my favorite political joke, and I never did see the parallel before.

My joke: Q: Why do PETA (animal rights) activists get so much more angry about people who wear fur than people who wear leather? A: Because rich, matronly old ladies have a very different reaction to them than motorcycle gangs.

Why do human rights activist spend their lives attacking Western civilization, and ignore modern-day red- and theo-Nazis like North Korea, Cuba, Taliban-ic rule? Because the former is a soft target, and gets them juicy write-ups in the NY Times and air on the BBC. The latter is a stone wall, so why bother?

In other words, genuine and real human rights crusading where it is most needed is just no fun. And look at the God-awful places you have to go - Pyongyang? the Indu Kush? Not quite Greenwich Village, Piccadilly, or Santa Monica, are they?

As seen with Condi Rice at Rutgers, I always think I have reached my limit of deepest possible loathing of leftist activists, and then the little scamps find yet one more level to drop the mineshaft.
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
Spot on.
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
"The new liberal dogma says that a Jew or Christian is a bigot if they do not believe in the homosexual agenda". How about Muslims? Do they believe in the "homosexual agenda"? If not, why aren't they "called out" for it?
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
"If not, why aren't they "called out" for it?"

Their protected-class status earned by their loathing of Jews & Christians.
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
Under Marxism there is a coalition of minority groups within the rubric of "proletariat class." Each proletarian minority is protected by Marxist government via superiority of rights and superiority before the law, whereas the "bourgeois" middle class majority is subjugated via inferiority of rights and inferiority before the law. Thus, Muslims are given a pass because they are "proletariat," whereas the American Judeo-Christian majority is not given a pass because they are "bourgeois."

Economic Marxism:
“The proletariat [lazy, non-disabled, government-dependents] will use its political [democratic] supremacy to wrest, by degree, all capital [property] from the bourgeoisie [laboring, tax-paying middle class], to centralize all instruments of production in the hands of the state [self-serving Marxist Government]… Of course, in the beginning, this cannot be effected except by means of despotic inroads on the rights of [middle class] property. You must, therefore, confess that by "individual" you mean no other person than the bourgeois, than the middle-class owner of property. This person must, indeed, be swept out of the way, and made impossible.” Karl Marx

Social Marxism:
“The proletariat [Homosexuals, Muslims…] will use its political [democratic] supremacy to wrest, by degree, all capital [free speech] from the [Judeo-Christian] bourgeoisie, to centralize all instruments of production [and "justice"] in the hands of the state [self-serving Marxist Government]… Of course, in the beginning, this cannot be effected except by means of despotic inroads on the rights of [Judeo-Christian] property [and liberty]. You must, therefore, confess that by "individual" you mean no other person than the bourgeois, than the middle-class owner of property [and liberty]. This person must, indeed, be swept out of the way, and made impossible.” Karl Marx


15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
"This person [Brendan Eich] must, indeed, be swept out of the way, and made impossible.” Karl Marx
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
Although the Koran advises that individuals of homosexual proclivities be thrown off a cliff or have a building fall on them, the dirty little secret is that homosexuality isn't all that uncommon in Muslim culture, notably Muslims like the Sunni Pashtun where grizzled old men literally buy male children from their impoverished parents.

And in Shiite Iran, or so I've read.
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
Yep. Read "The Arab Mind" by Raphael Patai.
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
Paul, just looked for it on Amazon...not there.
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
Take another peek: http://www.amazon.com/The-Arab-Mind-Raphael-Patai/dp/0967201551

Right now it says there are 11 in stock w/more on the way.
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
Muslims do not believe that homosexual sex with a prepubescent boy is homosexuality. And, the Koran, not the English translations, teaches such. We have been so deceived by Muslims.
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
Muslims are useful to the Left (for now) because they have a mutual hatred for western culture. However, it is a fragile alliance based solely on a shared enemy, and they will quickly turn on the Muslims once they've outlived their usefulness.
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
Exactly! History repeating itself. America's current administration is using every possible element of "Social justice" as a means of furthering its total agenda. That's what has escaped all Americans. Once this administration and its "fellow travelers" are satisfied certain goals have been achieved, all of those disparate "splinter groups" (it co-opted)will definitely be "thrown under the bus," "fed to the sharks," as happened in Germany's National Socialist movement, and Russia's "Bolshevik Revolution." Even SCOTUS and judicial activism, once stipulated goals have been met, will be swept off the face of Americas map. Funny how history repeats itself. Folks, its pretty simple: 1)greed, 2)power and 3)out-and-out corruption on a scale never, ever seen before. Very dangerous. This was tried in Europe's "Age of Enlightenment" where "Social Contract" was the reigning philosophical cornerstone to serfdom, abject poverty and degrading human existence. Pestilence, on a scale yet unseen, spread across all of Europe's face. Join a local Tea Party, urgently. God is all knowing, all loving. Pray. Amen. Today, there's news of a new mutant virus in the USA.
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
I don't think it's as fragile as you do.

Shari'ah is a system of Total Life Control with barbaric punishments for even the slightest offense.

The Left loves that.

Jihad is a war where "true believers" rape, enslave, and slaughter their enemies, and are seen as absolutely righteous for it.

The Left loves that.

They won't turn on each other until there's nobody else left.
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
Well said! That is, indeed, a crucial question.

Why is it that Jews and Christians are routinely lectured on the need to be tolerant, while Muslims are not? Why is this the case even when imagined dangers from Jews and Christians are dwarfed by the actions of Muslims?

(More specifically: when was the last time a Jew or a Christian hacked someone's head off, in broad daylight, in the name of their religion?)

Obligatory disclaimer: not all Muslims are violent. Perhaps the vast majority are not. But when those who claim to speak for Islam are violent, or incite others to violence, then the non-violent ones don't matter.
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
You should know this as it seems so obvious. The difference between the so called Muslim moderates and the fundamentalists is that the fundies want us dead and are willing to kill for their beliefs. The moderates don't want to get their hands dirty and are very happy to have the fundies doing their dirty work for them.
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
And the Lefties don't want to get _their_ hands dirty and would be very happy to have the Muslims do the killing for them.
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
Anti-oppression movements make powerful camouflage for bigots and supremacists. However, you have to be willfully stupid to be fooled by something like that.

The irony is that the existence of so many bigots and supremacists who have no respect or understanding for something like a Constitution confirms why there were "oppressions" in the first place. Nature itself becomes an "oppressor."

America was a far healthier place in the mid-'60s - so was the U.K.
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
1 2 Next View All