The ignorant atheist

This is why atheists remain so furiously ignorant. Once they are apprised of the relevant history and statistics, their arguments vanish into thin air:

The article, by Phil Zuckerman of Pitzer College, is entitled “Atheism, Secularity, and Well-Being: How the Findings of Social Science Counter Negative Stereotypes and Assumptions” and, unlike Plante’s article, it cites detailed studies of the areas in question.
Advertisement

Zuckerman analyzed a wide array of data comparing religious nations to less religious nations and also, interestingly, religious states within the United States (i.e. “Bible-belt” states) to less religious states. While I encourage readers to examine the article directly through the link above, here are just a few of the highlights:
Criminal Behavior:

Citing four different studies, Zuckerman states: “Murder rates are actually lower in more secular nations and higher in more religious nations where belief in God is widespread.” He also states: “Of the top 50 safest cities in the world, nearly all are in relatively non-religious countries.”

Within the United States, we see the same pattern. Citing census data, he writes: “And within America, the states with the highest murder rates tend to be the highly religious, such as Louisiana and Alabama, but the states with the lowest murder rates tend to be the among the least religious in the country, such as Vermont and Oregon.”

And these findings are not limited to murder rates, as rates of all violent crime tend to be higher in “religious” states. Zuckerman also points out that atheists are very much under-represented in the American prison population (only 0.2%).

Zuckerman cites a 1999 Barna study that finds that atheists and agnostics actually have lower divorce rates than religious Americans.

I’ve dealt with most of these in The Irrational Atheist.

  1. The more secular vs more religious nation argument reflects on race, not religion.
  2. The 50 safest cities are also a racial argument, not a religious one.
  3. This is a variant of Sam Harris’s Red State argument. It’s also wrong at both the city and county level.
  4. Again, a racial argument.
  5. Atheists are actually overrepresented in prison if “No religion” is counted as atheist, as it usually is by atheists when they’re not trying to downplay the number of atheists.
  6. It appears Zuckerman failed to correctly understand the relevant data or was not privy to it. While it is true that 3 percent more Baptists – who along with
    Episcopals have the highest rate of Christian divorce – are divorced
    than atheists, only 34 percent of atheists are married in the first
    place. In other words, 26.4 percent of atheist marriages fail compared
    to 15.7 percent of Baptist marriages, even though a much lower
    percentage of atheists ever get married.

Closed Brainstorm tomorrow night

This is just an FYI. We’re having the May Members Only Brainstorm event tomorrow night from 7 PM to 8:30 PM EST. This is going to be a general strategy session; there is a lot to discuss as we’re rapidly moving towards the next stage on one major front and poised for a lot of activity on another one. Bring your thinking cap and keep your mind open. I’ll also be providing information on Castalia’s upcoming releases, including at least one that will surprise you.

I’ll be sending out the invites later today, so keep an eye on your email if you’re a member. The Keen transcript is still being cleaned up, but I’m hoping to get the Cernovich one out with the invite. It’s remarkably good; practically a mini-mindset book in itself.

Mailvox: how to eject the Cult of Nice

JB asks how to go about restoring the worship of Jesus Christ to the nominally Christian church where the Cult of Nice has taken root:

My own church is not infested by SJWs, but it is solidly in the Church of Nice camp.  There have never been any horror story sermons such as those described by Dalrock on his blog, but the big ministry push is to send as many people to Mexico on “mission trips” as possible… and sometimes they bring natives back with them.  Also, the pastor expressly avoids “politics” in his teachings but routinely uses examples such as Jackie Robinson and Holocaustianity in his sermons.  I’ve never heard anything outrageous from the pulpit, but neither have I heard anything truly inspiring.  The best word I can think to describe my church and its leadership is “lukewarm.”

I used to think my congregation was fully Churchian, but in a weekly class on Christian Ethics I decided to stop being “Nice” myself.  We talked about standard political issues like economics, abortion, environmentalism, etc.  The leader was a well-meaning man but in his research prior to our discussion on immigration he apparently could find little Biblical support for immigration restrictionism.  At the beginning of the immigration class, he explained to everyone that he was originally anti-immigration but his research forced him to conclude that the Bible mandated open borders.  Fortunately, I reread Cuckservative the night before and (thanks in large part to you and John Red Eagle) systematically demolished his argument and built a Christian case in favor of immigration restrictionism.  My case was not “Nice” by any stretch.

However, rather than being excommunicated from the class because I dared say that Christians can morally support borders (a heresy in the Churchian mindset), I was invited to explain my position in more depth the next class and many people congratulated me and wished to learn more after the class was over.  Even the class leader seemed relieved to hear that a Christian case for immigration restrictionism was possible.  If there had been an SJW in the class, I would have been ejected.  Instead, I became a thought leader for the rest of the course and the class as a whole became less “Nice” and more “Christian” in the true sense.

This event led me to conclude that my congregation wants to be Christian but is Churchian out of ignorance and timidity.  This ignorance is shared at the top of our leadership.  No one appears to be fully SJW, but many do seem to believe that Churchianity is Christianity whether they like its repercussions or not.

I’ve been asked to help teach a discussion course next semester on why children raised in the church tend to leave it as they get older.  Of course, I believe the “Christian alt-right” explanation that modern Churchianity is poison and that a true Christian church would draw everyone back into the pews.  But I’m not sure using pure red meat such as Cuckservative immediately as a main text is as solid a strategy as using some softer stuff to build the students’ tolerance for alt-right theology.

How would you bring an ignorant, but apparently receptive, congregation back into the Christian fold from a surface-level Churchianity?

 Alt-right theology, now there is a simply terrifying term! Anyhow, I would start with a private meeting with the pastor first, and if he is supportive, with the elders next. It’s important to determine if you have an amenable authority or a hostile one before taking action, as that will significantly effect the way in which your campaign proceeds.

The next step would be to develop a program called “Back to the Biblical Basics” which the pastor could draw upon for his sermons and the Sunday School teachers and Bible Study leaders could utilize for their weekly activities. These subjects should be selected for undermining the various Churchian and Cult of Nice concepts that have gradually crept in over the years. Each topic should be based around a single Bible verse that contradicts or otherwise destroys the Churchian narrative, such as the way Matthew 15:25-28 destroys both the equalitarian and the immigrationist aspects of that narrative.

The woman came and knelt before him. “Lord, help me!” she said.
 
But Jesus replied, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs.”

“Yes, Lord,” she said, “even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table.”

“O woman,” Jesus answered, “your faith is great! Let it be done for you as you desire.” And her daughter was healed from that very hour.

I would welcome similar suggestions in the comments; I expect 10-12 would be the minimum to provide a foundation for the “Back to the Biblical Basics” program.

And JB’s instincts are correct. Christians steeped in the Cult of Nice should not be encouraged to read SJWAL or Cuckservative, much less the relevant Alt-Right sites. They are not ready for it. Instead, they should be asked, relentlessly, if the narrative position they are upholding is one of which the world approves or not, and if worldly approval of its positions is the primary objective of a Christian Church. For every argument they make, from “we must be welcoming” to “everyone is equal”, have a verse to hand that demonstrates it to be the extra-Biblical, non-Christian nonsense that it is.

The third step is to embrace the consequences. Some church members will acknowledge Scriptural authority. Help them grow in understanding, conviction, and courage. Other members will reject Scriptural authority, cling to the Cult of Nice, and will probably threaten to leave the church. Don’t try to talk them out of it, but rather, help them go, as per the example of Gideon. If church members are more of the world than of the Church, then they belong in the former, and not the latter. The Church has no need of numbers; just 12 Apostles were all that was required to shake the world.

Anti-semitism debate, part two

Louise Mensch and I continue to debate anti-semitism, Ann Coulter, and the #AltRight on Heat Street:

Louise Mensch:     So you don’t care that the left was correct about your racism and sexism? 

Vox Day:     We don’t care what they say or what they think, at all.

Louise Mensch:     You obviously do care because you’re employing tactics against this, you’ve just described.

Vox Day:     No, we don’t care what they do or what they think, but we are certainly engaged in a cultural rhetorical war against them, but we don’t care what they think about us. We’re their enemy, they’re our enemy, and that’s fine.

Louise Mensch:     But you’re not employing this against the enemy. I never see these memes employed against the left, ever. I only see them employed against people on the right. John Podhoretz, Ben Shapiro, Cathy Young, people who are 100% on the right. You don’t seem to bother with anyone of the left. Not that … By the way, God forbid that should be taken as an encouragement to go off to burn Hillary supporters with this stuff, but it’s red on red fire.

Vox Day:     I’m pretty sure they get sent to anyone who attacks them.

Louise Mensch:     You’ve put Ann Coulter in a difficult position, because she has said, not convincingly at all, that she isn’t anti-Semitic. And you’ve just described how …

Vox Day:     I don’t believe she is anti-Semitic.

Louise Mensch:     Right …

Vox Day:     She’s not anti-Semitic.

Louise Mensch:     … but then a whole bunch of anti-Semites are running to her defense by tweeting Holocaust cartoons at Jews?

Vox Day:     That’s what you’re not understanding is that the fact that one is not anti-Semitic does not mean that you have any obligation whatsoever to disavow anyone.

Louise Mensch:     Ann Coulter though, is being defended by a bunch of anti-Semites who as their weapon use anti-Semitism. In order to try and prove she’s not anti-Semitic, that’s not very helpful, is it?

Vox Day:     Well, but again I don’t think that that’s the objective or the concern.

Louise Mensch:     Do you guys even have an objective?

Vox Day:     Absolutely.

Louise Mensch:     What is it?

Vox Day:     The chief objective for … I probably … I don’t speak for the entire alt-right because the alt-right doesn’t have leaders, but I am alt-right, and my objective is the preservation of Western civilization.

Read the whole thing there. Jerry Pournelle did, although he’s been finding the whole thing a little hard to follow:

I’m afraid I wasted my time in trying to follow yet another debate about anti-Semitism, but I never did understand what they were debating about. While America has a small number of genuine anti-Semites (under any definition of the term), they are pretty well irrelevant. As Irving Kristol once said, America is a safer and generally more pleasant place for Jews than Israel is ever likely to be. Now of course there are organizations, mostly but not all Jewish, that equate any criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism, but serious people, including Kristol, found that absurd.

There are of course places where there is real anti-Semitism, but most of them are Semitic now that the National Socialists no longer rule Germany. Fascism isn’t even anti-Semitic although the Nazi’s (who weren’t really Fascists) were. Mussolini had many high ranking Jews in his Fascist regime right up until he gave up trying to prevent the Anschluss with Austria and made alliance with Hitler. At Hitler’s insistence he began persecuting Jews, but it was not part of the Fascist – rods and axe – agenda until imposed by Germany.

But Islam certainly is anti-Jewish, right down to their Holy Koran; since many Islamic nations are Semitic – certainly not all, since neither Persians nor Kurds nor Turks are Semitic – the term anti-Semitic has more political meaning than descriptive accuracy, and is rather useless in rational debate – but on a practical level anti-Semitic in the Middle East means anti-Jewish, and at least to those who believe the Koran, means war to the knife. After the end of days, the rocks will cry out, O Muslim, there is a Jew hiding behind me, come and kill him. Now that’s anti-Semitic. Only of course the Muslim who is to do the killing is likely to be a Semite.

Adding to the confusion is the very real problem I mentioned in the debate, which is that the only thing as potential dangerous to the Jewish population in the United States as 1940s-era German-style anti-semitism is insufficient anti-semitism. After all, DNA is destiny.

Surviving the cultural war

Everyday Joe interviews Pax Dickinson, whose job was one of the early casualties of a confirmed SJW attack in technology.

EJ: Was it hard for you to re-enter business after what happened?

Dickinson: I eventually managed to find work at below-market rates through friends and former co-workers, after promising to conceal my identity. I knew I wanted to launch another startup though, and the resultant notoriety from the blacklisting ended up putting me in contact with Chuck Johnson and he had this great idea for a journalism crowdfunding site, I couldn’t possibly turn down that kind of adventure.

Ultimately being blacklisted and fired is the best thing that ever happened to me, due to the high-profile nature I was able to use it somewhat to my advantage. I’ve met so many amazing people because of what happened to me and while it did close a lot of doors for me, it opened some others and the ones it opened are far more interesting anyway.

I think it’s important for me to keep my profile high and make sure everyone sees a guy who has been put through that social justice shaming ordeal come out the other side of it unbowed and refusing to slink away in disgrace. They’ve taken their shot at me and I’m still standing, and now they’re out of ammo and all it accomplished was pissing me off.

EJ: Any advice for surviving an attack like you suffered?

Dickinson: Vox Day’s book SJWs Always Lie is essential and he gets it right. Never apologize. I eventually let myself get talked into giving an apology of sorts, it was a mistake. I shouldn’t have bothered.

I think now that it’s been publicized, there are people who want to help. I’ve talked to a few people who have been fired for their opinions and given them advice. I think those of us who have lost our jobs due to this kind of censorship need to stand together and support each other whenever possible.

The only thing you can ultimately do is try to engineer a career for yourself that is as anti-fragile as possible. People like Mike Cernovich and Vox Day are leading the way and WeSearchr is an attempt to follow in that vein. When we get attacked by social justice warriors it only makes us stronger.

EJ: What’s your opinion of Donald Trump’s presidential run? Do you think he’ll make a difference in fighting Political Correctness in America?

Dickinson: I think Trump is great, and it has nothing to do with his policies. He represents the regular guy standing up and telling the PC gang that we’re not gonna take it anymore.

Win or lose, he’s setting an example to the men of America how to respond to bullshit shaming tactics. The guy is an inspiration, frankly. I hope to see some other billionaires following the example that Trump and Thiel are setting. I get the sense that a lot of the Silicon Valley top CEOs are quietly sympathetic and I hope they find their balls and start pushing back as well before it’s too late. Trump is doing even more important work as a national life coach right now than he would probably be able to do as President.

WeSearchr is very interesting and might have some serious potential in light of the way the culture war is developing. I’m still trying to get my head around the most effective way to make use of it.

Anti-semitism debate, part one

Louise Mensch and I debate anti-semitism on Heat Street:

Louise Mensch:     This may surprise the people that have been following our debate thus far, but, I feel like those were all small, little, light-hearted warm up debates, because now we’re going to get into it. Because we’re going to debate anti-Semitism. I want to get a bit granular, because I was surprised and disappointed to see you flaming a very good friend of mine, Cathy Young – who is an equity-based feminist, for those of you that don’t know her, reading this debate – and a long time ally of Gamergate and has worked extremely hard to separate genuine feminism from the kind of “fauxminism” that bullies men for no good reason.

I can’t remember the exact tweet so you can correct me if I’ve got this wrong, but: “…as she would know if she were a real American,” as though she were not an American, or she were less American that you are, which I think is a) racist; b) completely ridiculous; c) unbecoming of an alpha-male who ought to show some loyalty to a tried and tested ally. What I don’t like about this, apart from racism in general, and I say it with reverence, because you of all people know that I’ve been #notyourshield forever, is that it seems to give quite a lot of comfort to those fauxminist harridans, who’ve always said that Gamergate is just about abuse etc … This is a woman who stood strongly with movement forever, and the first sign of disagreement on anti-Semitism and you guys throw her under the bus. So I’ll let you come back, what do you have to say?

Vox Day:     Well, I’m perfectly prepared for things to get hardcore, I’ve been listening to Ministry all afternoon in preparation for this. By the way, I did not know Cathy’s work on Gamergate. We are loyal; until now I did not know.

Louise Mensch:     (Laughs) OK, now I’m scared. Go on.

Vox Day:     First of all, let me point out that, in terms of feminism, Cathy Young committed something that is, in the eyes of the alt-right a … A significant error of the sort that removes any right to avoid criticism. She, very very publicly, and very very vehemently, attacked Ann Coulter. The response that she got was a direct result of that, from me and from others. You can even, if you wish to, portray it as the alt-right white knighting for Ann Coulter. I don’t think that would be accurate but you certainly could do that if you wanted to.

Louise Mensch:     Well Ann Coulter’s been … I mean, you know, please, she attacks herself. She’s been attacked by me and others. She’s said some rabidly anti-Semitic things, about the Jews etc. So …

Vox Day:     I don’t think Ann Coulter’s reasonably said anything that can be considered anti-Semitic. 

Louise Mensch:     How many goddamn Jews do they think there are in America, that kind of thing.

Vox Day:     There’s a difference between … Anti-Semitism, in its historic form, means hatred of Jews.

Louise Mensch:     Yes.

Vox Day:     And there’s a huge difference between hating Jews and wondering why the hell everyone is babbling about them, again, when the subject really has nothing to do with them.

Louise Mensch:     Well in this case Ann Coulter used the words “Jews.” “How many goddamn Jews does he think there are in America,” quote unquote.

Vox Day:     Well yeah, because ..polls show Americans think that 33% of Americans are gay, and certainly there … I don’t know what the exact figure is, I don’t recall a similar study being performed with regards to what percentage of Americans other Americans believe are Jews. I don’t know. But I would guess that the perceived percentage is seriously overestimated, due to the constant discussion of Jews, by American Jews, in the media, because American Jews in the media are prone to navel-gazing.

Louise Mensch:     Vox, Vox, this was Ann Coulter who brought it up herself, who made the remark, herself. Really, as an “Ayn Randian radical,” don’t you recognize this is entirely Ann Coulter’s own fault? She brought it up, nobody else did, she ranted on about the Jews. She outed herself! Nobody else was talking to her about the Jews. On the left it’s people like Ken Livingston in London. He doesn’t seem to be able to go into any interview in London without mentioning the word ‘Hitler’ five times a second. And it was Coulter’s own fault. No one was talking to her about the Jews in Israel. She was commenting on the first Republican debate, and she brought it up, herself, entirely herself, unprompted.

Vox Day:     Correct me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t she discussing the fact that the candidates were discussing Israel, or Jews or something like that?

Read the whole thing there, and discuss it here.

Still not past it

So, the season is at an end, and it felt as if it went by remarkably fast. We started with a bang, defeating the new team 7-1, but we ended it by not only losing to them 3-2, but also finishing in second place behind them.

This was actually a better result than it sounds, since after that first game, they brought in reinforcements consisting of not one, but two, former Serie A players. Now, if you’ve ever competed against a world class athlete, you know that they are not merely better than the good ones, they are as much better than the good ones as the really good players are better than the bad ones. I’ve run track against Olympians and played basketball with an NCAA D1 power forward who made the Elite Eight, and it is just as hopeless going up against professional European soccer players.

They literally scythe through defenders, and pretty good defenders at that. Their technical skill is incredible, and had us back on our heels and defending desperately right from the start.The rest of their team is strong too, with a number of former second and third league players, four or five of whom played with us at one point or another.

I started at right wing, but was moved over to the left to shore up the defense after we went down 2-0, and in the midst of one attack, I could have sworn that we had their attack thwarted with myself and the left defender marking their right wing, and one central defender plus our defensive midfielder tightly marking the attacker with the ball.

He was one of the retired pros; I happen to be friendly acquaintances with him since we played together on an ad hoc tournament team two years ago, and while I didn’t know he was a pro then, I knew he was really freaking good. He wanted to pass to the wing, but I’d closed that option off, so somehow, he managed to create just enough space outside the box to rip off a shot that hit the bottom of the crossbar just inside the right post, then bounced down just inside the line. There was nothing the goalie could have done about it; there was nothing anyone could have done about it. The goalie and I just looked at each other and shrugged. Va bene cosi.

I am proud of our team, though. Even down 3-0, we fought back, with one beautiful 40-meter cross getting headed just over the post before we caught a break when their goalie failed to hold onto a shot and our center mid, following it, tapped in the rebound. The captain moved me up to attacker after that, and about two minutes later, the center mid put a through ball past the defense, I ran onto it, and sent it left as the goalie went right. 3-2.

We almost had a shot at tying it when a long ball went past their defense and I beat their defenders to the ball, except the ball bounced just a little too high and I just missed being able to head it over the onrushing goalie. I was furious with myself, because if I’d slowed down just a little, or trusted our other attacker, who is 6’3″, to beat the defenders, we probably would have scored the equalizer.

Even though I started nearly every game this season, I’m a utility player now, only good enough to fill whatever hole we might have that week, or to come in as a sub when one of the better players runs out of steam. I can only control my wing against perhaps one-third of the opposing wings these days now that many of them are 10 to 15 years younger, but the captain trusts me to have the sense to stay back and help out the defender on my side if I can’t. In 20 games, I don’t think they’ve scored more than three goals attacking up my side all season.

After the game, I was congratulating two of their players on winning the championship when the former pro came over. I told him what a great goal he’d scored, he laughed, agreed, then put his arm around my shoulders and pointed accusingly to one of the defenders, with whom I was also acquainted. “I TOLD you to keep an eye on this guy,” he said. As I am ancient by veteran soccer standards, it’s reassuring to know that I’m not done yet. After all, the mark of a really dangerous team is one where even the lesser players are capable of hurting you.

So, it’s good to know that I can still contribute to the team from time to time. Six goals plus a few assists isn’t a bad finish, although it’s a little disappointing after having scored five of them in the fall half. And second place in the league is a very satisfactory result, if you consider that we finished ahead of all four teams that have been our rivals for the title over the last five seasons. Even though it is not our third title in five years, it very nearly feels like it.

Diversity, discovered

White American left-liberals at the Washington Post belatedly discover that the Indians and the Chinese aren’t exactly fond of Africans, despite them all being “minorities”:

China and India have a huge problem with racism toward black people

Just minutes before his birthday, Masonda Ketanda Olivier was beaten to death. The Congolese national was confronted by a mob of men late at night last Friday in New Delhi and killed. Police said the incident was a dispute over the hiring of an autorickshaw; Olivier’s friend, an Ivorian national, said it was a clear hate crime, with racial epithets repeatedly invoked.

This week, irate African diplomats in the Indian capital pointed to Olivier’s murder as evidence of wider discrimination and bigotry against black people who visit and live in India. Olivier, who reports indicate was about to turn 24, was teaching French.

“The Indian government is strongly enjoined to take urgent steps to guarantee the safety of Africans in India including appropriate programmes of public awareness that will address the problem of racism and Afro-phobia in India,” Alem Tsehage, the Eritrean ambassador and the diplomat representing other African envoys in New Delhi, said in a statement. They also warned against new batches of African students enrolling in Indian universities.

On the same day, on the other side of the Himalayas, an ad for a Chinese laundry detergent went viral. It is shockingly racist: The video, which you can watch above, shows a fetching Chinese woman lure a paint-stained, lascivious African man toward her. She briefly toys with him before shoving a detergent capsule into his mouth and him into the machine. Out emerges a fresh-faced Chinese man, looking sparkling white and clean.

I’m looking forward to the American Left’s reaction when they finally discover that Hispanics in general, and Mexicans in particular, despise blacks more than the KKK ever did. White progressives really are that stupid, and that ignorant, about the minorities they love to champion.

When I lived in Japan, the Japanese openly referred to blacks as “monkeys” and made it clear that they were not even “gaijin”. And the Chinese superiority complex is considerably more entrenched than any of the European ones ever were; they still consider Europeans to be technologically advanced barbarians. Remember, both Japanese and Chinese cultures knowingly turned their backs on technological advancement in the name of societal stability, and there are certainly some increasingly strong arguments on that score.

In light of the observably deleterious consequences of the US and European wars on racism, I’d be very surprised if the Indians and Chinese didn’t come to the conclusions that even the most virulent racism is considerably better than having your nation invaded by Africans.

What society do you think functions better, a racist, ethnically homogeneous society with intact families or a diverse, ethnically heterogeneous society with the vast majority children being born illegitimate and raised without fathers? Which society do you prefer?

Those are the options presently on offer.

Book review: Cuckservative

The Essential Malady reviews Cuckservative: How “Conservatives” Betrayed America:

One of the most ferociously written (and critical) broadsides hits
what Day often calls “Churchianity”. It is well known by those who care
to find out that church groups have a huge hand in assisting mass
immigration – often absurdly of non-Christians that have no intention of
converting. This is facilitated by the state and as I understand it,
quite lucrative for all involved except the native population. This
chapter deals more with the perversion of Christianity towards earthly
ends than with this fraud though and the generally touchy, feely and
ultimately suicidal niceness of committed Christians especially of the
Evangelical persuasion. This has hopefully reached peak insanity with this couple but I’m not so sure. Christ wants us to bring other nations to him not other nations to us.

On a personal level, I can relate to the term and I would say that
for a long time I was myself a “cuckservative”. I knew deep down in my
gut that what I wanted to preserve as a conservative was white Christian
society but knew that openly stating such would get me called a racist
and worse. Part of the reason for this is I was cultured to think so and
the only mainstream voices available tripped over themselves often
embarrassingly to avoid being called racist. Yet, if they’re honest with
themselves, that’s where the conservative instinct should lead.

The racial equalitarians, particularly in the Christian churches, need to be called out and held accountable for their treason. If you’re going to claim “there is neither Greek nor Jew, neither American nor Chinese, in Jesus Christ” means that no one has any more right to live in the magic dirt of the United States than anyone else, that’s fine from a free speech perspective, but you should probably also be considered an open and avowed enemy of America and of the Christian church.

You’re also a liar. The Churchians who sell that line are perfectly happy to welcome the immigration of animists, Muslims, demon worshippers, Hindus, and every other form of religion under the guise of Christian equality. Like all deceivers, they rely on bait-and-switches, they hide behind rhetorical fogs, and they deny the obvious consequences of their actions.

If you are an elder in a Christian church, you must expel the churchians and cuckservatives from your midst whenever they reveal themselves. They are deceivers and destroyers, and they do not serve that which they claim to serve.