I don’t quite know where to start, because there are so many interconnecting issues underlying my little brainstorm today. So no media-savvy introduction quite fits. So indulge me a little if I fire off a whole lot of kinda interconnected thoughts under the heading of ‘The fight for Truth’. OK, I know, I seem to have lost sight of the heading for this article (and I’ve only just started). I promise I’ll get back to it. Scout’s honour.
So, if I can tick of the point about ‘the fight for Truth’ and the fact that I’ve used an upper case letter for ‘Truth’. One of the major problems with the Enlightenment (what a misnomer) is that religion became a major casualty, when it was supplanted by ‘reason’ (no upper case lettering here). I’ll look into the arguments behind this in a future article.
Take it from me, for the time-being, that the attack on the church began, in all seriousness over the period of what we call the Enlightenment, going way back to Descarte, even before. It’s offspring is ‘moral relativism’. Central to the concept of ‘moral relativism’ is that there is no such thing as Absolute Truth. If you don’t have God to refer to how can you talk about ‘Truth’, because the next question is ‘whose truth’, in other words dragging it down to the level of the individual.
For anyone sufficiently antique to believe that there is that which is beyond human reasoning; that which is pretty well undiscoverable, then there is such a thing as Truth, but logic, or reasoning won’t convince anyone devoid of je ne sais quoi.
This gets me to the American current affairs bit. It seems to be that so many of the things that go on in the US have an effect on us. I mean, why else would so many Sky News followers be so entertained by Ross Cameron (one of my many heroes) and Janine Perrett debating the Donald’s decision to fire James Comey? Could it be that ‘the deep state’ seriously impacts our lives, at almost every level, here in Australia? This is why I follow InfoWars, Breitbart News, Blabber Buzz, and even Fox News. I’ll have a peek every now and then into the on-line version of The Wall Street Journal just to see what the other side are thinking, but I’m essentially interested in finding out what the Deplorables are doing to rid themselves of the scourge of Cultural Marxism, that permeates all the major institutions over there and here in Australia.
There was an article in Blabber Buzz alert amongst my emails this morning, which mentioned some dim-witted lawyer in Hawaii (a state where a good many constitutional challenges to Trumps ‘executive orders’ are coming from) who argues that any challenge to Islamic ‘honour killings’ is unconstitutional, Islam being a religion and Trump’s Executive Order 13780 contravenes the ‘Establishment Clause within the First Amendment.
My point is that this is a clear example of ‘moral relativism’, and here’s the danger. At the heart of the American legal system, and ours for that matter, is the Ten Commandments. And if we are to keep to the Ten Commandments, the seventh, in particular, then ‘Thou shalt not kill’ would seem to totally undermine the noodle-headed lawyer’s argument. But if he can somehow find a way of proving that Islamic honour killings are of equal, if not greater relevance’ to our non killing strictures, then we have a very serious problem indeed.