Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


 

I hope all my dear readers had a lovely mid-June weekend.

So if you did, today’s headline will not “trigger” you.

And yes, they really, really hate us.

But more about that later.

So back to the subject at hand…

Given that we have been hitting the philosophical aspects of His creation’s existence quite hard lately, today we will turn to the practical. In the video above, you will observe a self proclaimed “nominal atheist” giving one of his best “homiletics” to date, one of a supernatural character at that, about the necessity to fight EVIL.

Yes, Stefan Molyneux has hit another one out of the ball park.

One reason why I bring this video to your attention, is to make amends for an older Molyneux video that I linked to in the previous post, one in which Stefan derided some dogmatic aspects of Catholicism. Now, as I noted in a comment to that post, this earlier video that I posted was made in mid 2015. If we look at and compare the Stefan of 2015 and the Stefan of literally yesterday, we see a CONVERGENCE PROCESS taking place.

The second reason I am brining this to your attention is to begin the discussion about RESOURCES.

Why RESOURCES you might ask?

Well, because of something that God told us when he cast out our original parents from the Garden of Eden. Here is what He said: (Genesis 3: 17-19)

“And to Adam he said, Thou hast listened to thy wife’s counsel, and hast eaten the fruit I forbade thee to eat; and now, through thy act, the ground is under a curse. All the days of thy life thou shalt win food from it with toil;  

thorns and thistles it shall yield thee, this ground from which thou dost win thy food.

Still thou shalt earn thy bread with the sweat of thy brow, until thou goest back into the ground from which thou wast taken; dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.”

Now to translate this into contemporary terms, what God told Adam was that he and his descendents would have to continuously acquire their RESOURCES through hard work.

Or as Milton Freidman would say: there is no such thing as a free lunch.

Note bene: Notice how nicely this concept works itself into the r/K Selection Theory?

Which brings us to our practical advice on how to fight EVIL.

One sure way to fight EVIL is to deprive EVIL of their RESOURCES.

Going one step further, the manner in which one can deprive EVIL of their RESOURCES is to STOP patronizing those businesses that promulgate EVIL, whether intentionally or not.

To this end, you humble blogger has created a new page titled “They Hate Us!” On this page, a list of businesses will be named (and shamed) that are promulgating EVIL. EVIL is defined as per Catechism of the Catholic Church. Therefore, if one patronizes these businesses, one is effectively promulgating EVIL.

And just to demonstrate that we will not be the only ones who have adopted this strategy of FIGHTING EVIL, I re-publish a Zero Hedge post that has some interesting information. (see here)

It would appear that approximately 25% of adults already boycott selective brands.

And finally, a few words about hatred.

Over at the Catechism of the Catholic Church, we can read the following:

1755 A morally good act requires the goodness of the object, of the end, and of the circumstances together. An evil end corrupts the action, even if the object is good in itself (such as praying and fasting “in order to be seen by men”).

The object of the choice can by itself vitiate an act in its entirety. There are some concrete acts – such as fornication – that it is always wrong to choose, because choosing them entails a disorder of the will, that is, a moral evil.

1756 It is therefore an error to judge the morality of human acts by considering only the intention that inspires them or the circumstances (environment, social pressure, duress or emergency, etc.) which supply their context. There are acts which, in and of themselves, independently of circumstances and intentions, are always gravely illicit by reason of their object; such as blasphemy and perjury, murder and adultery. One may not do evil so that good may result from it.

And Canon 1756 is subject to Canon 1789 which reads as follows:

1789 Some rules apply in every case:

– One may never do evil so that good may result from it;

– the Golden Rule: “Whatever you wish that men would do to you, do so to them.”56

– charity always proceeds by way of respect for one’s neighbor and his conscience: “Thus sinning against your brethren and wounding their conscience . . . you sin against Christ.”57 Therefore “it is right not to . . . do anything that makes your brother stumble.”58

And Canon 1789 is the best answer against sophist arguments about “an adolescent spirituality” as promoted by certain FrancisCardinals, and is being allowed by the bishop of Rome himself.

And pointing out these inconvenient inconsistencies is why they literally hate us.

So the moral of the story is, as per the LEX ARMATICUS: 

6th Principle:

Stop giving these leftists money!

*****

25% Of Americans Admit Partisan Politics Drove Them To Boycott Brands

Amid the increasingly divided electorate, it appears the most important part of America – the consumer – is now caught up in the political partisanship like never before.

Think there’s more hoopla about brand boycotts than actual boycotting? Maybe not. As Adage.com reports, a new Ipsos survey found that 25% of Americans said they had stopped using a brand’s goods or services in the previous three months because of protests, boycotts or the brand’s perceived political leanings.

A quarter of the U.S. population amounts to around 80 million people according to US Census data.

“That’s a lot of people that are saying politics are driving their purchasing behavior,” said Chris Jackson, VP and strategic communication research lead at Ipsos Public Affairs.

“Socially conscientious consumerism has been on the rise for years,” said Ronn Torossian, CEO of 5W Public Relations.

“Given the combination of that trend and the current politically charged climate, it’s not surprising to see that such a significant number of Americans have changed their shopping habits due to politics.”

The big takeaway according to Ipsos: Marketers can’t always avoid the political fray any more, and are well-advised to at least know their consumers’ political leanings.

“It’s really important to understand are your customers liberal or conservative, or do they cross the line or are they both,” Jackson said.

Daniel O’Connell, managing director and Brand Definition, a agency that works primarily with tech clients including Hitachi and Philips, was not convinced, arguing that brands shouldn’t worry about political biases of consumers and should refrain from getting caught up in politics.

“Swaying one way versus another to mollify or pander maybe to one part of the group — that makes no sense whatsoever,” he said.

“As a brand, you’ve got to stand for something yourselves and it’s got to be your values.”

Just ask Starbucks, Nordstrom, or Uber…