Category Archives: Philosophy

Atheism, Bogus Science, Christian Libertarianism, Easy Listening, Faith, Gospel music, Hope, King James Bible, Kingdom of Heaven, Laws of Nature, New Testament, Paul, Philosophy, Revelation, Salvation, Theism

The Rock of Divine Revelation.

13 Comments

jesus-christ
“Oh Fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken!”

As a King James AV believer it amazes me how many Christians don’t believe we have the perfect preserved and inspired word of God today.
The vast majority of ‘educated’ Christians have bought into all the rationalism and textual criticism of Infidels whom teach that the Bible is not a supernatural book, and that it suffers from the same human failings as every other ancient text and ought to be treated the same way.
My Theistic belief is looked upon as Batshit crazy.
Yet these Christians whom have abandoned faith in the inerrancy of the word of God turn instead to modern scholarship for their final authority… which is a patently unchristian/ non-theistic basis of faith. They are Deists.

This is a reversal of the Biblical doctrine of ‘Let God be true but every man a liar’.
‘Trust in the Lord with all thine heart and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge him and he shall direct thy Paths”.
“The words of the Lord are pure words. As silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
Thou shalt keep them O Lord. Thou shalt preserve them from this generation forever.”

We now have the situation where the veracity of verses like when Christ said “Let he who is without sin caste the first stone” are disputed upon the most flimsy of grounds and the most poor evaluation of the so-called evidence.
All it takes is for a single piece of evidence to be dated by some ‘expert’ as ‘the earliest’ and for it to not contain the said verse, and that is enough to undermine the faith of millions as to its integrity!

sand-house
The foolish man builds his house upon the vain sands of Human rationalism and ‘schollarship’.

These Christians whom have abandoned the faith in God’s supernatural preservation of the scriptures are actually endorsing the Atheist evaluation of the bible, ie that it cant be trusted!
They also tend to be Anti-super naturalism/ pro naturalism types whom also embrace things like the theory of evolution, and say stories like Noah’s flood and Balaam’s talking ass are merely fables.
Again they side with atheistic Rationalism against faith in the scriptures.
This Naturalism insulates them from the derision of their School peers which is the burden of those of us whom maintain faith in the supernatural.
This infidelity is what passes as a ‘Bold stand for Christ’
lighthouse
“Thy word is Truth… It is a lamp unto my feet and a light unto my Path… I will fear no Evil”

I ask how they can have boldness in preaching the Gospel when they themselves do not have faith in the reliability of the Bible in which their gospel is found?
For me faith in the Revelation of God as the Rock on which my faith is built and is absolutely not negotiable.
It was the realization that the Bible was true which converted me to Christianity in the first place 25 years ago, and I have walked with Christ ever since with my eyes open… ie facing every challenge which claimed to be able to prove my bible was full of errors, yet Gods word has weathered that storm and every time an infidels argument has been defeated, my faith has grown stronger.
The King James Bible is my Rock.
I preach with full assurance from a conviction of it’s absolute trustworthyness.
I will go to my grave believing Jesus has saved me from my sins because it is written in those blessed pages… not because of the wisdom of men.
Tim Wikiriwhi
Christian Libertarian.
Dispensationalist.
1611 King James Bible believer.
Sinner saved by St Pauls preaching of Christ according to the gospel of grace.

Portions of 1Corinthians1+2

1 Paul, called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ through the will of God, and Sosthenes our brother,
2 Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours:
3 Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.
4 I thank my God always on your behalf, for the grace of God which is given you by Jesus Christ;
5 That in every thing ye are enriched by him, in all utterance, and in all knowledge;….
10 Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.
11 For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.
12 Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.
13 Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?
14 I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius;
15 Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name.
16 And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other.
17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.
18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.
20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?
21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.
22 For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:
23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;
24 But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.
25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
26 For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:
27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;
28 And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:
29 That no flesh should glory in his presence.
30 But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption:
31 That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.

Chapter 2
1 And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God.
2 For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.
3 And I was with you in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling.
4 And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man’s wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power:
5 That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.
6 Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought:
7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory:
8 Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
9 But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.
10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.
11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.
12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
15 But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.
16 For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.

Ayn Rand, Meta-ethics, Philosophy

‘Tis not contrary to reason

14 Comments

Elsewhere, my co-blogger Tim is arguing with commenter Terry about Objectivist ethics.

The key to their dispute is the following brief remark by commenter Matt (quoting Terry).

“It’s not rational to accept a value from another without giving a value in return” why not, on standard means ends accounts of rationality that’s perfectly rational, some argument for this conclusion is needed.

Matt refers to “standard means ends accounts of rationality”. David Hume, the greatest philosopher who ever lived, gives such a standard account in the following passage.

toyhume

[P]assions can be contrary to reason only so far as they are accompany’d with some judgment or opinion. According to this principle, which is so obvious and natural, ’tis only in two senses, that any affection can be call’d unreasonable. First, when a passion, such as hope or fear, grief or joy, despair or security, is founded on the supposition or the existence of objects, which really do not exist. Secondly, When in exerting any passion in action, we chuse means insufficient for the design’d end, and deceive ourselves in our judgment of causes and effects. Where a passion is neither founded on false suppositions, nor chuses means insufficient for the end, the understanding can neither justify nor condemn it. ‘Tis not contrary to reason to prefer the destruction of the whole world to the scratching of my finger. ‘Tis not contrary to reason for me to choose my total ruin, to prevent the least uneasiness of an Indian or person wholly unknown to me. ‘Tis as little contrary to reason to prefer even my own acknowledge’d lesser good to my greater, and have a more ardent affection for the former than the latter.

— David Hume, A Treatise of Human Nature

Let’s be clear. The Objectivist account of rationality is not a standard means-ends account.

Rand stuffs all manner of rabbits into the Objectivist rationality hat. This enables her to pull all manner of rabbits out of the Objectivist rationality hat. It’s sleight of hand! Here‘s an example.

“The Objectivist ethics holds that human good does not require human sacrifices and cannot be achieved by the sacrifice of anyone to anyone. It holds that the rational interests of men do not clash—that there is no conflict of interests among men who do not desire the unearned, who do not make sacrifices nor accept them, who deal with one another as traders, giving VALUE FOR VALUE. [ Ayn Rand, “The Objectivist Ethics,”The Virtue of Selfishness, 31] (emphasis mine)

“It is only with (other men’s) mind that I can deal and only for my own self-interest, when they see that my interest COINCIDES WITH THEIRS. WHEN THEY DON’T, I ENTER NO RELATIONSHIP” [Galt’s speech, Atlas Shrugged] (emphasis mine)

How much more explicitly could Miss Rand state the case?

The above supports without contradiction the fact that a rational man who identifies that it is not in his customer’s interests to deal with him (regardless of his customer’s protestations to the contrary), he will not deal with him. Why? Because it is not rational to accept a value from another man without giving a value in return.

If you define ‘reason’ as being such that the rational interests of men do not clash, then you may conclude that when the interests of men do clash, the interests of one or more parties are not rational. But this is just pulling a rabbit out of a hat. If your account of rationality is such that it is not rational to accept a value from another man without giving a value in return, then you may conclude that it is not rational to accept a value from another man without giving a value in return. But this is just arguing in a circle.

The Objectivist’s code of ethics is fine insofar as it goes. An Objectivist will not take from his fellow man without giving in return. But none of the injunctions of Objectivist ethics, such as “Thou shalt not steal,” flow from a standard means-end account of rationality. Rand simply incorporates such injunctions into her own account of rationality and then claims that it is irrational to steal!

Objectivist ethics is contrary to reason.

Christian Libertarianism, Compulsion, Free will, Freedom, Libertarianz, Live Like It's Legal, Nanny State, Sheeple, Slavery, Socialism, Totalitarianism, Tyranny

The Census. Are you really free?

7 Comments

Copy of Copy of census 004
A friend Andrew, My Wife Joy and I burning our Census forms 2001.

My Wife has told me the Census Nazis have dropped off our papers for 2013.
They demand that we fill them out.
It’s compulsory.
Yet don’t I have the right to privacy?
What business is it of theirs what religion I am?
What ethnicities are in my family tree?, or where I happen to be on census night?

Now my life is an open book.
You can find out all these things simply by looking at my face book page.
Yet I intend to refuse to fill this form out…. For the sake of the principles that I have the right to privacy and the State has no legitimate rights to demand such information from me!
They work for Me!
I am not their subject!
The census is a violation of my rights.
After I have made a point for resisting their tyranny…for several visits, I will probably simply sign my name and address and they will go away.
I have done this for the past two census.
I burned my papers once!
The look on the Little Nazi’s face when I handed her a bag of ashes was priceless!
She went away and called in her more threatening Superior.
Blar! blar! Unless you fill out this form you will be summoned to appear in court, and will be fined.
And should you still refuse you will appear again, and fined… until you comply!
Most people submit to this tyranny without so much as a peep!

Yet the reality is folks that the only information you must give is your Name and address.
That’s all they will ever get from me… after I have exposed them as the nasty little Nazi’s that they are!
So I hope some of you appreciate the gravity of this situation and join me in my resistance to Bully Government powers.

Some of you may be thinking that the Government uses this information for their Social Planning.
That’s Good enough reason for me Not to fill them out!
You see I totally despise their ‘Social planning!’
Ie they intend to use this information to assist their Political machinations!
Give me Liberty, or give me Death!
Tim Wikiriwhi
Christian Libertarian.

“Party Rebels over ‘Intrusive’ Census” Story Here:
perigo
Objectivist Strong Man, Libertarian Mentor of Tim Wikiriwhi, Co-founder of the Libertarianz Party of New Zealand, Broadcaster Lindsay Perigo.

Tim Wikiriwhi wins The Free Radical Award Monday March 12 2001
Lindsay Perigo’s Politically Incorrect Show.
Radio Pacific.

“Good afternoon, Kaya Oraaa & welcome to the Politically Incorrect Show on the free speech network, Radio Pacific, for Monday March 12, proudly sponsored by Neanderton Nicotine Ltd., the show that says bugger the politicians & bureaucrats & all the other bossyboot busybodies who try to run our lives with our money; that stands tall for free enterprise, achievement, profit, & excellence, against the state-worshippers in our midst; that stands above all for the most sacred thing in the universe, the liberty of the human individual.

[Music up, music down!]

A couple of Libertyloopers have reported taking great delight in handing census-collectors the charred remains of their census forms. One of them, Tim Wikiriwhi, organised a ceremonial burning in the Waikato region on census night. Here’s part of the speech he gave consigning the form to the flames:

“Why are we doing this? Is this a childish act of rebellion? An act of lawlessness? Many New Zealanders honestly believe that we are fools and even criminals for doing this, Are they right? No! …

“Two very important truths are in question here. First, what is the legitimate role of government, and where do the liberties of the individual rightly begin and end, defining what is truly legitimate
and what is truly a crime?

“To quote Thomas Jefferson and the American Declaration of Independence: ‘We hold these truths to be self evident – that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights: that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government …

“Thus there exists a limit to government. A government that keeps within its boundaries is just. But a government that does not recognise its legitimate function and crosses into domains in which it has no business immediately becomes the violator of the rights it was instituted to protect.

“The government is not a law unto itself and has no right to violate you any more than a thief, rapist or murderer… Demanding that you fill out this form under threat, the state is committing a crime against you.

“Burning this document can never be constituted to be a crime because you are perpetrating no injustice upon anyone! And so your actions fall completely within the boundaries of legitimate liberties.

“Burning this document is the act of free men standing up and saying I’m not your property! My life is my own. So let us light us a fire tonight and raise our glasses for freedom!”

These portions of Tim’s speech will be posted on my web site later today, under Latest PI Show editorial: www.freeradical.co.nz

And right now I’d like to bestow upon him the Free Radical Award, for his guts & spirit. To Tim Wikiriwhi:

[FreeRad Award]

From The Free Rad website… http://www.freeradical.co.nz/content/pishow/pi010312.php

Free will, Martin Luther

Luther on bondage

17 Comments

2543241-martin_luther

Some concluding remarks from Martin Luther’s The Bondage of the Will.

Sect. CLXVII.

I SHALL here draw this book to a conclusion: prepared if it were necessary to pursue this Discussion still farther. Though I consider that I have now abundantly satisfied the godly man, who wishes to believe the truth without making resistance. For if we believe it to be true, that God fore-knows and fore-ordains all things; that He can be neither deceived nor hindered in His Prescience and Predestination; and that nothing can take place but according to His Will, (which reason herself is compelled to confess;) then, even according to the testimony of reason herself, there can be no “Free-will” — in man, — in angel, — or in any creature!

Hence: — If we believe that Satan is the prince of this world, ever ensnaring and fighting against the kingdom of Christ with all his powers; and that he does not let go his captives without being forced by the Divine Power of the Spirit; it is manifest, that there can be no such thing as — “Free-will!”

Again: — If we believe that original sin has so destroyed us, that even in the godly who are led by the Spirit, it causes the utmost molestation by striving against that which is good; it is manifest, that there can be nothing left in a man devoid of the Spirit, which can turn itself towards good, but which must turn towards evil!

Again: — If the Jews, who followed after righteousness with all their powers, ran rather into unrighteousness, while the Gentiles who followed after unrighteousness attained unto a free righteousness which they never hoped for; it is equally manifest, from their very works, and from experience, that man, without grace, can do nothing but will evil!

Finally: — If we believe that Christ redeemed men by His blood, we are compelled to confess, that the whole man was lost: otherwise, we shall make Christ superfluous, or a Redeemer of the grossest part of man only, — which is blasphemy and sacrilege!

Ayn Rand, Black Sabbath, Free will, Genesis, Keep it Metal!, Old Testament

Original sin. What is it good for?

12 Comments

Blaming you, that’s what. It’s your fault!

I’m fast coming around to the view that the Socialist Salvation Army expresses like this.

our first parents were created in a state of innocency, but by their disobedience they lost their purity and happiness, and that in consequence of their fall all men have become sinners, totally depraved, and as such are justly exposed to the wrath of God.

This is the doctrine of original sin. It was Adam (and Eve) who committed the orginal sin, but you have inherited that sin. You were born bad. Free will is commonly believed to be a precondition of moral agency and moral responsibility, but it’s not. Just as well, since we don’t have free will!

Contrary to popular opinion, moral responsibility is not consequent upon our actions (whether freely chosen or otherwise). Moral responsibility is not gotten through acts of commission or omission. In fact, it’s a matter of give and take. You are morally responsible if you are justly held accountable by other people (including God) or if you rightly take responsibility yourself for your own (or other people’s) actions.

The view I have just expressed is not a popular one. It gets intransigent atheists, in particular, in a real lather. Here‘s Ayn Rand.

The name of this monstrous absurdity is Original Sin.

A sin without volition is a slap at morality and an insolent contradiction in terms: that which is outside the possibility of choice is outside the province of morality. If man is evil by birth, he has no will, no power to change it; if he has no will, he can be neither good nor evil; a robot is amoral. To hold, as man’s sin, a fact not open to his choice is a mockery of morality. To hold man’s nature as his sin is a mockery of nature. To punish him for a crime he committed before he was born is a mockery of justice. To hold him guilty in a matter where no innocence exists is a mockery of reason. To destroy morality, nature, justice and reason by means of a single concept is a feat of evil hardly to be matched. Yet that is the root of your code.

The doctrine of original sin squares the existence of morality with the non-existence of free will.

The doctrine of original sin is Biblically sound, whereas the doctrine of free will is not (notwithstanding that it’s a very popular theodicy).

Surely I was sinful at birth,
        sinful from the time my mother conceived me. (NIV)

black_sabbath_born_bad

Ayn Rand, Daniel, Free will, Old Testament

Free will. What is it good for?

24 Comments

Absolutely nothing!

I’m fast coming around to the view that the concept of free will is what Ayn Rand called an anti-concept.

An anti-concept is an unnecessary and rationally unusable term designed to replace and obliterate some legitimate concept. The use of anti-concepts gives the listeners a sense of approximate understanding. But in the realm of cognition, nothing is as bad as the approximate …

Free will is designed to obliterate human decision-making.

It’s simple. We make decisions.

Other people (including God) hold us accountable (i.e., deserving of moral praise or blame) for our decisions. That’s all there is to it, and all you need to know.

The Singularity – the technological creation of smarter-than-human intelligence – is coming, as early as 2030 according to some estimates. The first smarter-than-human AI will make decisions, like we do, only better. Will it have free will? That depends on whether other people (including God) hold it accountable for its decisions.

“The first was like a lion, and it had the wings of an eagle. I watched until its wings were torn off and it was lifted from the ground so that it stood on two feet like a human being, and the mind of a human was given to it. (NIV)

daniel_7_lion_sm

Apartheid, Christian Libertarianism, Easy Listening, Faith, Heroism, Hope, Islam, King James Bible, Love, Martin Luther, New Testament, Personal Identity, Philosophy, Propaganda, Psychology, Uncategorized

Where Haters come from.

8 Comments

osama-bin-laden

Where do Haters come from?

This is an important subject I have been wanting to blog for some time.
It has to do with the Nature vs Nurture debate.
It’s a very big topic which will only lightly be touched upon in this post.
I would like to talk about a few examples which prove the importance of how Parents nurture their children.

While it may not be strictly true to say We start our ideological/ mental lives ‘Tabular Rasa’ (with an empty slate) we… like Birds who don’t need to be taught to build nests…We humans too possess some ‘instincts’/ innate knowledge, and despite the latest controversial/ absurd claims by Evolutionary biologists that try and assert that we are born politically Left, or Right, or Libertarian….the reality is how we end up ideologically speaking as adults has a hell of a lot to do with the environment in which we live and the external influences we imbibe.

It is patently obvious to me that both Nature and Nurture work together in producing Human personalities, yet for now let put aside the discussion of Nature and focus on Nurture.
I raise this subject for discussion to highlight just how important our behavior as parents is in respect to effecting our Children’s perspective of the world and how they learn to deal with life, and how vitally important the Ideas and values we embody and teach them are to our children’s future well being.

Just two examples will suffice to get this discussion going…

The first is an article which appeared in the NZ herald
‘Hate-filled Family made monster’ read it Here:
Now in this article the brother of a Terrorist… the French Scooter Killer Mohamed Merah whom Murdered 7 people (including 3 Jewish children) and died in a hail of Bullets resisting arrest.

Yet Mohamed was not born in a vacuume.
In a book he has written this Terrorist’s brother dis-owns and condemns his own family members for filling his brothers head with hatred.
I would suggest that this is a very common thread within the Lions share of Radical Islamic extremists whom end up with a Rabid Race hatred for the Jews and others, and go on to become Terrorists, suicide bombers, etc.
Not having read the book I must ask why it is that this other brother did not become a terrorist too?
What saved him?
In what way was his individual nature and Nurturing different to that of his fanatical Brother?

hone
Racist radical and Mana Party Leader and MP Hone Harawera.

The Next example I would like to raise is closer to home (for Kiwis)….that of the Racist Radical MP and Leader of The Mana Party John (Hone) Harawera son of the Rabid Racist… the Evil Titiwhi Harawera.
Now it is obvious to all what sort of upbringing Titiwhi gave her son!
She filled his head with stories of how the Pakeha (European invaders) executed a ‘Holocaust’ against the Maori people, and robbed them of their land, and have left them destitute. She has taught him that ever since the establishment of ‘White rule’ Maori people have been trodden underfoot and suffered vile Race oppressions.

The end result has been to produce one of the countries most militantly hateful and racist personalities… Hone Harawera.
Mummy must be proud!
This tale would be common to many of our worst Maori Radical… like Tame Iti.
Thus from these two examples we can easily see that Haters do in fact grow on trees… They are carefully propagated… nurtured… Indoctrinated.
We can be sure that had Hone been adopted out as a child to a Pakeha family (like my uncle was) that he would not be the same person today.
That many of the most vile Haters are born from Hate filled environments surely means we ought to mitigate our condemnation of Hone’s current attitudes and activities.
Putting it bluntly… he’s been brainwashed from a very early age, and his attitude is almost to be expected.
We can see that his hatred for Pakeha, and his desire for UTU has less to do with factual history, and more to do with the vile racism of his mother.
It’s like an moral virus he picked up.
I suspect Titiwhi herself had a similar upbringing.

Of course depending upon how solid a moral foundation we ourselves have been taught by our parents, (and others) will determine how resilient we are against the hatred and prejudices of others throughout our lives. Ie if we have been taught enlightened values as a child, and wisdom about how the world really works, we will be able to fend off the vile lies and hate filled Bigotry of others rather than assimilating it.
This points to just how vital it is that we as parents take pains to instill enlightened and humane values in our children to fortify them when they go to school, and eventually out into the world.
So many evils are taught in school!
Today from primary school to University our politically corrupted Education system since the late 70’s has actually taught our nations children many of the lies that Titiwhi taught her son!
And due to a serious lack of wisdom on the part of the average parent today we have an indoctrinated society of sheeple whom accept a heinously distorted view of the history of New Zealand, and embrace an apartheid system of Government!

Copy of bt
The Great Booker T Washington.

I do not suggest that All haters result from hateful upbringings, or indoctrination. I know horrible events in peoples lives can also generate hatered.
Nor am a saying Hone’s upbringing renders him morally blameless for his prejudices and activities as an MP. I have said what I have said with hope of understanding how such a bigot came to be… where many haters come from.
As an adult he is morally culpable.
If we look at such Moral exemplars as ex slaves, Frederick Douglas, Booker T Washington, or Equal rights activist Martin Luther King, we learn from them that oppression and prejudice does not justify reciprocation.
These Humanitarians were followers of the teachings of Jesus Christ… “Render no man evil for evil but overcome evil with good” .
They broke their chains… not only the legal chains which kept their peoples under, but most importantly, the Chains that link intergenerational Race hate.
So I ask Parents here … esp to Maori parents…” What values are you teaching your children?”
“What example do you set?”
Are You holding up a torch to lighten their paths, or are you filling their hearts with malice against their white friends and neighbors?
Will the values you have instilled help them to succeed in the world or will they hobble their ability to make good judgments… free of malice?
Tim Wikiriwhi
Christian Libertarian.

love thyir kids

Update: 28-4-13 Who Radicalised Boston BomberTamerlan Tsarnaev?