Musings on Religion, New Age & Atheism

In this day and age, there can be no question that religion is dying out. People can no longer blindly believe in doctrine that on the surface appears to go against science, logic and reason. The fading importance of religion might be a good or bad thing depending on your perspective; I propose that it could potentially be a good thing, but in and of itself it is not positive. Here I want to challenge some of the common criticisms of religion and weigh up the pros & cons of both traditional religion and the modern New Age spiritual movement.

In defence of religion

There is so much vitriol directed against religion these days that I just have to speak out about it - I will mainly refer to Christianity as it is the dominant religion in the Western world and is the one I know best. Look, Christianity in its current form may be part of the control system and a tool of the elite to keep the people in their place, but Jesus/Yeshua did not come to start a new religion. He CHALLENGED the religious leaders of his day, as anyone who took even a superficial glance at the scriptures would see. He was the ultimate revolutionary - a threat to the power elite of his day and to the status quo, and he was killed because of it. Is that clear? There is a widespread view in conspiracy circles that religion is solely a creation of the elite to control people’s minds; I disagree. Why go to the lengths of inventing all those different religions, the doctrines, the prophesies and the prophets, when there are better and easier ways to control the masses? Why are there profound truths scattered throughout the scriptures like "the kingdom of God is within you"? The logical answer is that the elite did not invent religion but rather infiltrated and subverted every true spiritual movement that ever emerged (and yes, they’ve done the same to New Age today). A character like Jesus was indeed very dangerous to them. Early Christians were killed, and then Christianity was suddenly adopted as the official state religion; books were taken out of the Bible, the wording of scriptures was altered to fit the orthodox view... Why?

Perhaps I would find religion more of an oppressive force if I lived somewhere other than the UK and came into contact with a wider variety of people in my daily life. But I can honestly say that amongst my peers in school, at university, and at work, religious belief or spirituality in any form is completely absent. Spiritual belief is generally not something that can be discussed openly without being mocked - "God? You might as well believe in the tooth fairy" - it's like groupthink. And I can both understand that point of view, having grown up in this society in the 21st century, and yet at the same time despair of it because it is based on such a shallow understanding of life.

Science and spiritual belief are not incompatible

The theory of Darwinian evolution is taught pretty much as fact everywhere these days, and it’s presented in the context of a worldview that has no need for a creator. Believers are painted as irrational, and if only they just understood science a bit better, they’d ditch their groundless belief in God (this appears to be the message of atheist guru Richard Dawkins). But I have some doubts as far as the official evolution theory goes. I can accept that some sort of evolutionary/growth process makes sense, but what DRIVES that process? Natural selection? So whatever traits favour the survival of a species will be propagated whilst unfavourable characteristics die out, leading to changes within a given species...that's known as "microevolution", and is basically common sense - but whether microevolution (evolutionary changes within a species) leads to macroevolution (development of new species altogether) is not proven, perhaps not provable. Personally I don’t think the current theory of evolution, based on random mutations, is sufficient to explain how life as we know it got here. How did tortoises get a shell? Why are polar bears white? Why do zebras look like they do? How did mammals come to reproduce the way they do and grow their babies and produce milk to feed them? Why did there come to be males and females who balance each other perfectly? Why are there so many different and beautiful species of animal? The richness and diversity of life is quite amazing. If evolution happens the way it is said to - surely there is an intelligent force driving it? Natural selection obviously occurs, but it does not explain how all of *this* originated from a single-celled organism via a random process.

Besides that: WHY is there *something* instead of *nothing*? Why does life exist at all? Why are we *us* - complex, multidimensional beings - when on a physical level we appear to be just a bunch of cells? What is the cohesive force that brings together cells and organs and makes a sentient being? What is consciousness? Why hasn’t the fossil record provided more convincing support to the evolution theory?

As you see, I am all "why why why" and it annoys a lot of people. I just want people to question their beliefs and see that existence is not as simple as the "Big Bang, evolution, natural selection" science theories imply (nor the absurd "God created the world in 7 days" theory). It's dangerous to think you've solved life's mysteries and you now know everything there is to know. Always keep an open mind.... Belief in something higher does not have to be foolish, irrational and unscientific.

Religion not the cause of all evil

A common argument against religion (and against faith in God) is that it has brought us nothing but suffering: witch hunts, religious wars, and September 11th are often cited. Yes much evil has been done in the name of religion, but does that mean God doesn’t exist? The typical atheist argument that "God can’t exist because there is evil in the world" can be refuted by the concept of human free will and the law of cause & effect AKA karma. Humans are free to make their own choices, but they can’t escape the consequences of those choices (note that although free will exists, dark forces subvert it by trying to limit the options people have or by convincing them that there ARE no consequences to their actions).

As for religious wars, this video puts forth a cogent argument that I had not heard before: that war is never waged by the common people (they are the ones who suffer most from war), but by a small powerful elite who have their OWN agenda, and who will use RELIGIOUS PRETEXTS to make the masses compliant. Case in point: the Iraq war. If you think George W Bush decided to invade Iraq on some religious crusade, WAKE UP. If you think George W Bush is a Christian at all, WAKE UP. It’s a facade designed to make Christians look like idiots, part of an agenda to make religious belief synonymous with insanity.

Religion CAN be a force for good. Beyond the hypocrisy, apostasy, deceit, arrogance amongst many religious believers, there are even more who are decent, committed, good-hearted and living by their beliefs. You just don’t hear about them. Remember the mass media only tell you the BAD stuff that’s going on in the world. Religion can (and is supposed to) stand for social justice, helping others, being kind, selfless etc.

Orthodox religion misrepresents God & otherwise valid esoteric concepts

I can understand why people struggle with the concept of God as a man in the sky, judging people and sending them to heaven or hell based on their obedience, or lack of, to his almighty will. But that’s projecting human qualities onto God, which I think is fundamentally wrong. To me what we call "God" is a very high and powerful force/energy that, while ineffable and beyond earthly comprehension, could be described as the embodiment of all that is good, true, righteous, pure, powerful, and just; a true loving father/mother/parent figure without the human flaws that earthly parents have. Of course there is more to God, like the personal and impersonal aspects of it...but that’s beyond the scope of this piece.

Many rational people also reject religion because it places seemingly pointless restrictions on behaviour, for example, sexual behaviour. Sex is bad because it’s a sin" is not exactly going to sit well with people in this liberal age. But there is an esoteric basis behind many such religious doctrines - for example, when you understand/perceive the flow of spiritual energy in the body and the chakra system, you see that excessive sexual activity keeps the energy concentrated in the base chakra (located in the genital area) and prevents it flowing as it should upward to the crown chakra (top of the head) which is a prerequisite to spiritual enlightenment. Thus instead of being channelled into positive spiritual evolution, the powerful sexual energy is dissipated, and probably goes to feed some parasitic entities in the astral realm. So how does our culture of unlimited sexual indulgence affect people’s spiritual growth, hmm? How does it contribute to keeping the masses unenlightened? Could that be why sexual stimuli are pushed on us from all angles? Interesting considerations. Of course, sexual repression and hatred of the body as seen in many strict religious believers is not right either, and that’s why balance is crucial as I will discuss later on.

Religion as part of an evolutionary process

Religion might not be the highest form of spirituality, but perhaps in the past it was the best thing we had - the simplistic and highly metaphorical/mythological stories (like the fall of Adam and Eve) were adapted to humanity's level of consciousness back then. Spiritually immature souls needed the black-and-white rules of religion (like the Ten Commandments) to keep their behaviour in check, but as we evolve spiritually we won't need to be told what is right and wrong but will intuit it for ourselves. When you are in harmony with divine law, doing "right" is natural; doing "wrong" is inconceivable.

Is New Age the new Religion?

In the age gone by, black and white rules of religion (do right and go to heaven, do wrong and go to hell) were the biggest obstacles to true spiritual enlightenment. Now, the most dangerous lie is the polar opposite, that "anything goes" and nothing is really right or wrong. This core belief is at the heart of the New Age movement: Everything beyond the material world is benevolent and spiritual, channelling couldn’t possibly be harmful, dark entities don’t exist, aliens couldn’t be bad, hallucinogens raise your consciousness and carry no risks, etc etc. I also dislike the feminist/earth-worship overtones of some New Age stuff - it’s too intertwined with the environmentalist movement (this is the kind of pseudo-religion that the United Nations promotes). In fact I’m so sick of the vapid, touchy-feely, head-in-the-clouds watered-down New Age material that the word "spirituality" makes me cringe sometimes. I suppose it’s just the opposite polarity of the black-and-white, patriarchal form of religion, but truth is above and beyond both polarities.

Now seems like a good time to mention this important point. There’s a belief circulating that there are two valid paths back to the Source and that both lead to the exact same place: you can follow the Left-Hand Path of ego indulgence (service to self) as taught by the likes of Aleister Crowley, or you can follow the Right-Hand Path of self-transcendence & service to others, and it doesn’t matter which one you choose because it’s all "experience" and God doesn't mind either way. This has got to be THE most deceptive lie out there. And I see this concept expressed all the time on New Age forums and in low-level channelled material.

Of course New Age has some positive aspects, like the open-mindedness of many New Agers in comparison with orthodox religious people (although it’s best not to be so open-minded that your brains fall out). There’s more potential for positive transformation in the New Age movement than in stagnant religions that are unwilling to let go of outdated doctrines. There is also some worthwhile material in the New Age category, like Eckhart Tolle whose books really had a lasting positive impact on me - he’s often been lumped in with "New Age BS" because of his association with Oprah Winfrey, which is unfortunate. As with everything, you’ve just got to discern for yourself what is useful and true and what isn’t, and not always judge by appearances or first impressions.

A problem common to both New Age and religion is the fact that many followers want to reap the benefits without putting in any real effort. New Agers can spend their lives dabbling in channelling, tarot, aura reading and God knows what else without ever really getting anywhere or evolving spiritually. Mainstream Christianity teaches that you only have to believe in the doctrines and in Jesus, and you’ve got a free ticket to heaven. Either way, you’re missing the whole point of the spiritual path: self-transformation.

In Conclusion...

Sooo what’s happening here? If religion goes, what will be left? Atheism? Despite atheists in general claiming they don’t need God to be moral, it still degrades us to the level of animals, and engenders the idea that nothing is really right or wrong. Nothing is true, everything is permitted. Each man for himself. No - replacing God with the human ego is not the way to an enlightened society. If religion is to die out, a new form of spirituality must take its place.

Is New Age the answer to the impending spiritual vacuum, then? Potentially, but not in its current state of naïveté. Discernment is crucial. The world is not all love ‘n’ light, unfortunately. And "we are all one" does not mean we are meant to become blissed-out New Age zombies with no individuality or independent thought. We’ve got to find the middle way which is indicated in the following extract from this site, which I think serves as an articulate and fitting conclusion to my essay:

"...You must begin to embrace paradoxical thought in order to embrace this higher reality. While on one hand it can be said that the Church is satanic, on the other hand the Church is necessary for the greater good of man. The prodigal sons and daughters who are lost in this, the "far country... outer darkness", are incapable of knowing the Truth and walking in TheWay -- so it is necessary to fragment and corrupt that Truth in order for carnal man to grasp important teachings and principles, and begin the process of making change and seeking the Knowledge of self and the Inner Kingdom. So while for the masses the Church is a good and positive force, in a forum such as this the Church is the embodiment of evil and spiritual depravity. And both realities are not only true, but are necessary in the experience of mankind. At present the Religious Right in many respects is the epitome of ignorance and evil -- but they are a force for Good that is Ordained by the Laws and the Hand of God, in order to oppose the secular Marxist Left that is attempting to wipe out the belief and knowledge of God. In the same way, while Islam has become diabolical in its murder of innocent people in the name of their satanic god, the evil force of Islam is being used by the (Left Hand of) God in order to balance and oppose the Sodom and Gomorrah of the secular Marxist un-liberal left. And if it weren't for the Sodom and Gomorrah left, I would not be able to publish these web sites that offend the Religious Right. ... And this is why the answer and higher reality of all paradoxes, are always in the third-force that exists on a higher plane in the manner of the point of the triangle that exists on a higher plane than the opposite points which oppose each other."

_____________________________________________

Recommended Reading:

The Sinister Side of the New Age

New Age Love and Light Fallacies

Standards of Channelling

Existence of Evil

The Illuminati Effect

http://www.askrealjesus.com/D_KnowJesus/unloving.html

Is Love All You Need?

Left-Handed Path

Comments on the New Age Movement

The limitations of words

Sometimes I tire of words. They're so subjective, so dualistic. Someone can present a clever and cogent argument based on their own perspective, but that argument can be so easily countered by someone else with an equally sophisticated argument based on THEIR point of view, and so it goes on, ad infinitum. This must be one of the major sources of conflict in the world. Everyone's got their own point of view, and everyone thinks they're right. Even truthseekers can fall prey to this - visit any conspiracy-oriented forums and witness some of the futile debates going on there.

Any words you say can be misinterpreted or skewed or refuted by the human mind. I'm starting to realise that it's not the words per se that are important but the spirit behind them. When I'm arguing a point, I often feel like I'm not conveying the nuances of what I really mean. Apparently, before the fall into duality, beings could telepathically communicate in direct concepts rather than subjective and ambiguous words; wouldn't that just be so much simpler?

It seems every true concept gets perverted in this fallen world: the obvious truth that women and men are of equal value was skewed to mean that women and men are the same and should act as such, and became the ideology that is today known as feminism. The revelation of higher spiritual truths than offered by orthodox religion got distorted into the deceptive, naive and impotent New Age movement. We always get tricked into arguing for one polarity or another rather than seeing through the false dichotomy and finding the hidden solution that is not merely a compromise between the two extremes, but a higher truth altogether. My next post will examine the false dichotomy of "New Age versus orthodox religion"; in the meantime, you could read this pertinent article from Carissa's In2Worlds.

First post of 2010

Something cool happened yesterday: my best friend described me as "revolutionary". I had to smile, because she doesn't even know the title of this blog or anything. I told her it was the best compliment I'd ever received!

Happy New Year everyone. I have high hopes for 2010. Let's make it a good year.

Spiritual Renewal

I just returned from a 3-day visit to a Christian community who live a simple lifestyle out on a farm in the countryside. There are about 30 people, mostly couples with children, and the doors are open (literally - there are no locks on the doors) for anyone to stay, anytime. I met them at the local farmers' market where they sell bread and baked goods, had a few interesting conversations with them, and decided I'd go and visit to see what it's all about. Now seemed like a good time to get away from civilization after all the madness of Christmas.

There's a lot of hostility towards Christianity today, which is to some extent justified, given the well-publicised conflict and hypocrisy that permeates orthodox religion. But these aren't your typical Christians. They're very aware, many of them having come to the community via New Age or Theosophical backgrounds, and they know all about the subversion of Christianity, the Council of Nicea, the pagan elements that have infiltrated cultural Christianity (not hard to spot - what do Christmas trees and Easter bunnies have to do with Jesus?!). They stay true to the original Christian principles, referring to Yahshua instead of Jesus, and having the Sabbath on Saturdays instead of Sundays. They think the idea that all non-believers go to hell is a dangerous and terrible perversion of Christianity, and they condemn the alliance between church and state. To many Christians, they'd be heretics. But their religion is pure and simple: overcome selfishness through love and humility, and change the world by first changing yourself.

The typical day on their farm includes an early-morning gathering for music, prayers and discussion, three meals which are eaten together, and work for the adults or school for the children (they are home-educated - I couldn't help noticing right away how well-spoken and bright the kids seemed). The men are usually in the bakery or doing maintenance work on the house, whilst the women cook and look after the children who are too young to be in school. There's always something going on, and especially with the children around, there never seems to be a dull moment.

As I said, I was only there a short time, but I feel like I've come away a bit different from when I arrived. My ego has been diminished a little bit. It's quite humbling to be around people who are so committed to purifying their minds and hearts, and so open in sharing their defects as well as their insights. They literally don't want anything from you except to love you. I don't consider myself a Christian but I was still welcomed by and felt at home in this community, and I really feel they've got something special, like they're true followers of Christ. You can't say that about many Christians these days.

Would I choose to join them? Probably not, at least not yet - though I could certainly be happy living that life. We need forward-thinking and enlightened communities like theirs to set an example and act as a safe haven outside of society, but we also need spiritual people IN society, changing things from within. That's where I see my work - on the inside. At least for the time being. But I feel I've been spiritually renewed in some small yet important way by visiting this community. It's given me fresh hope and quietened the agitation I was feeling about all the negative shit going on in the world. It's faded into the background somewhat. I hope I can preserve this state of mind into the New Year and beyond.

A little update

So I've been thinking about stuff lately (what's new?!). Namely, where I'm going, where my site is going, and what my purpose is in all this. Do I want to target the mass consciousness and keep unravelling media lies? Should this be yet another conspiracy website reporting on the latest alternative news headlines, or should I take things in a different direction? At the moment I'm not sure, so I'm sort of stuck in the middle. But I'm thinking I would like to start veering away from hardcore conspiracy stuff in the New Year. I've had this debate with myself so many times - am I striking the right balance between being aware of what's going on, and yet still staying sane? Am I simply buying into another illusion by what I'm doing? I always tell myself I can handle all this conspiracy research, but then I keep reading shit like this and getting really upset/agitated..... and this agitation filters through into my day-to-day consciousness. It can't be healthy. I read a profound quote the other day that went: "You can be right in the outer things you criticize but not be right in your motives and vibration". That hit me hard, and it's something I will bear in mind when thinking about a possible new direction for my website. So watch this space!

Besides doing too much introspection, I also just spent two hectic but wonderful weeks at a little Steiner school doing observation and a little bit of teaching practice. All the children's activities are imbued with a sense of fun and personal development, rather than just pumping facts into their heads. It was lovely to watch. On the last day they made me a Christmas card and sang me some carols, which was very sweet. I must say though, I would love to just cancel Christmas this year. I keep trying to make myself buy cards and things for people, so as not to disappoint anyone, but as soon as I set foot in the shops I'm like "NOOO!" and want to run out again. The atmosphere is oppressive; going to the local shopping mall is like stepping into the inner circle of hell. Yeah, I'm becoming increasingly cynical in my old age. Until next time!....

Book Review: Ron Paul's "Revolution"

I just finished Ron Paul's eye-opening book "The Revolution: A Manifesto", and had to do a quick post on it to basically say YOU NEED TO READ THIS. Prior to reading it, I already knew the political establishment was corrupt as hell, I knew the media keeps us in the dark about everything, I knew America and the rest of the Western world was descending a slippery slope into a New World Order dystopia - yet this book still managed to impress upon me just how much we're being screwed over, every day of our lives. Paul goes into detail about American foreign policy, and how meddling in the rest of the world's affairs does the US no good at all (no shit); the real motivations behind terrorism and 9/11, i.e. protests against perpetual Western military presence in the Middle East (personally I find this more plausible than most of the "9/11 was an inside job" conspiracy theories, although I'm sure neither theory has the 100% truth); how America is surreptitiously straying ever farther from the sound ideals for a restrained government laid out in the Constitution; how the Federal Reserve creates inflation by printing money out of thin air and thus imposes a hidden tax on the people; and plenty more besides that. His solution, in a nutshell, is a return to the principles of the Constitution and a far more limited, decentralized form of government, which is the opposite of what America has got now. As Paul rightly points out, the people are only ever presented with false dichotomies by the media and politicians, so the debate is limited to "would you prefer an oppressive, highly centralized left-wing government or an oppressive, highly centralized right-wing government?" with no one ever asking the question: Does it have to be this way? Or was it always this way? And Ron Paul is basically saying no to both!

Now apparently this book is a #1 New York Times bestseller, so presumably that means a lot of Americans have been exposed to these ideas.... so the question I'm asking is, why is Barack "change = more of the same" Obama now President, and not Ron Paul?!?!?! (That is, of course, assuming the whole voting thing isn't a fix, which to my mind is quite possible - even likely.) Paul blows Obama's vapid hope-and-change bullshit out of the water. His ideas seem so on-target, in fact, that I'm actually slightly suspicious at the fact that this book was allowed to get as big as it has - and that Dr. Paul is even still alive. Would it simply raise too many eyebrows if he were to suddenly disappear? Is that why they haven't "got rid of him"? Or is he actually one of them? I've seen a few other conspiracy-heads suggest just that. The jury's out I guess. Either way, I still appreciate his ideas, and like the way he delivers them. READ THE BOOK!

...In other news, this is super lame, and this is scary.

This is why I'm not a feminist

Firstly, oh my God - are they for real????

This seems like a good opportunity to repost my write-up on feminism that was formerly hosted at my Dare.nu site. This, ladies and gentlemen, sums up why I will never call myself a feminist.














Thoughts on Feminism

Feminism masquerades as a grassroots movement promoting equality, women’s rights, progress, freedom and choice. But did it really arise as a spontaneous reaction to women’s oppression? Or could there be a hidden agenda behind the whole thing that most people are oblivious to? As with most "revolutions", I suspect this one was carefully orchestrated and engineered from the very beginning. I would like to take a critical look at some of the tenets (and implications) of feminism here, as well as the possible agendas behind the movement that have little to do with women’s rights and more to do with advancing the New World Order (NWO).

Abortion

Abortion being "a woman’s right to choice" is one of those memes that most people never really think deeply about (I didn’t at one time, either). I would like to shake people out of their apathy and get them to just question their beliefs for a moment. "Women should choose what they do with their own bodies." Maybe in most circumstances, but when it comes to pregnancy, they made the choice when they had sex. People want casual sex without the responsibility or consequences that follow...but you can't escape the consequences of your actions forever. Hello, is anybody listening - pregnancy is a natural consequence of sex! I'm not saying that is all sex is about, but it is a major part of it. But we are conditioned to trivialise that.

Yes, conditioning is what divorces sex from reproduction. And if you want to see where that divide leads to in society, read Brave New World by Aldous Huxley. That book (which everyone should read, by the way) takes this perspective on sex - i.e. as being divorced from reproduction - to its logical conclusion...and the resulting dystopian society doesn't look too pretty. One of the consequences of having sex is pregnancy; if you aren’t willing to face that, then perhaps you shouldn’t be having sex at all, much less unprotected sex.

And yes, rape is a separate issue, but all too many proponents of abortion mention worst-case scenarios ("WHAT IF YOUR DAUGHTER WERE GANG-RAPED BY 15 MEN AND GOT PREGNANT??? OMG, WOULD YOU MAKE HER KEEP THE BABY??!!?") in an illogical attempt to legitimise abortion in the majority of cases, i.e. healthy and happy women who just find the pregnancy "inconvenient".

People don’t want to admit that abortion is an INDUSTRY. It comes down to big money. Who’s going to put a stop to that? And don’t forget the other major factor - population control. It’s evident that the elite want to keep the population down (understatement, they actually want a 90% reduction in population and numerous high-level public figures have said so explicitly) and if abortion weren’t commonplace (something like 1 in 3 babies being aborted in the US) then the population would eventually grow to the extent that the elite couldn’t survive; either a new elite would rise up and replace them, or the masses would be so sick of poverty due to unfair distribution of wealth (i.e. most of the world’s wealth and resources concentrated in the hands of a few) that they would revolt. Do you really think the elite want that kind of hassle? Do you think they could withstand it? No, it’d spell the end of the current order and the system as we know it. The Elite want just enough people to serve as slaves or cogs in the machine, and any more than that is surplus. Indeed a huge population is actually a threat to their survival. More people are harder to control after all.

Besides all that, I think the spiritual consequences of abortion are of primary importance, and the most overlooked factor in the debate. I believe in reincarnation and karma as legitimate spiritual laws. I believe that certain souls are meant to be born to certain women under certain conditions. There is now extensive screening available for serious physical handicaps like Down’s syndrome and even non-serious ones (e.g. cleft palate). Increasingly, parents are choosing not to keep their babies under such circumstances. But what if these conditions are present to help the child’s soul pay back severe karma from a past life? What if the parents are meant to pay back karma by raising a child under difficult circumstances? I challenge the prevalent view that embryos are just a bunch of cells. If that’s the case, why are many women so distraught following an abortion or a miscarriage? Look at this powerful series of photos of a developing foetus. Amazing, isn't it? I also love Ron Paul's argument in his excellent book, The Revolution: A Manifesto (p59) - why didn't I think of this one?!: "People ask an expectant mother how her baby is doing. They do not ask how her fetus is doing, or her blob of tissue, or her parasite. But that is what her baby becomes as soon as the child is declared to be unwanted. [...] we try to make human life into something less than human, simply according to our will."

Look, I’m not interested in getting involved in the circular, futile abortion debates that I've seen on the internet and elsewhere, and I understand why many people are closed to spiritual/religious arguments when it comes to a sensitive topic like this one. But let me just say this. The human mind can justify absolutely anything. All I know is that when I am most spiritually connected, high-vibe, feeling Godly and filled up with such a pure energy that I cannot even describe, certain things just seem abhorrent to me. I get a strong intuitive feeling for what is right and wrong (what is of God and what is not of God). I just know. And abortion is not of God. It is a sin in the sense that it carries karmic consequences.

Gender a fabricated concept?

Feminists claim that "natural gender roles" are a myth, that men and women are fundamentally the same and should act as such. I see them as having equal value and equal rights; that I can support 100%. However, that women and men have different and complementary qualities (like the yin and yang) is plainly obvious to me, and their roles should be adapted and suited to those qualities. (Not that all women should be forced to wear dresses and like flowers if that’s not their personality - but feminists fight against the natural order just for the sake of it, that’s what I object to.) So women are generally more feeling-oriented, more intuitive, more nurturing, whereas men are protective, providers, go-getters.

Also, it strikes me that some of the implications of feminism are only possible due to the nature of fast-paced consumer-driven modern society. Feminists would balk at the idea of cooking or knitting or sewing or any of those stereotypically feminine tasks. But if we couldn’t buy pre-packaged meals from the supermarket shelves and cheap clothes off the rack and pay for childcare services, what would we eat? What would we wear? Who would look after our children? Has anyone thought this through?

Feminism and the family

Feminism has brainwashed women to believe that having a career is the ultimate source of fulfilment in life, whereas staying home to look after the family while your husband works is parasitical, worthless and degrading. The other day one of my friends said in conversation, "I know it's terrible to say this, but in some ways it is better for mothers to stay at home to look after their children...". I was like, NO! It's not terrible to say it! It's flipping SENSIBLE, once you strip away the layers of brainwashing. Also, I've chatted to so many women of older generations who lament the fact that their grandchildren are being shoved in daycare or stuck in front of the TV by their career-driven mums, showered with fancy toys but deprived of true nurturing. But then they'll try to negate their feelings by saying, "Of course, I'm probably just old-fashioned..." and once again I'm like NO! You're not old-fashioned - your generation got it right, or at least they were more on target in many ways than we are now.

The whole welfare state we have in the UK also serves to undermine the traditional family and engenders total dependence on the state. Government childcare centres, government schools and government nursing homes...children and the elderly, the most vulnerable citizens, are increasingly in the care of the state instead of being looked after by their families as used to be the case. The family unit as a support system is losing relevance. Hmm...how very communistic. I don’t have a utopian vision of what family life is like, I know they can be dysfunctional, but really...a strong, close-knit, healthy family probably has the best defence against the NWO. Could this be a key hidden agenda behind the feminist movement: weakening of the family in preparation for a totalitarian state?

Feminism, Sex & Relationships

Feminists believe women should be allowed to be as sexually promiscuous as men, without being stigmatized. Well I say: why should women stoop to their level, just to prove a point? Who gets the most out of no-strings sex? Men. Women generally just get screwed over. When sex is freely available, men have no motivation to settle down, whereas women are more likely to get emotionally attached and seek a long-term relationship. And men are unlikely to consider an easy girl as long-term relationship material. Sad but true. Men used to work hard to court women, now they can get sex easily - where’s the fun in going from one-night stand to one-night stand, never really finding true satisfaction? Of course this links in with the destruction of the traditional family and with increasing political control (see links below). In the foreword to the aforementioned book "Brave New World" (did I mention that you should READ IT?!), Aldous Huxley tellingly writes: "As political and economic freedom decreases, sexual freedom tends compensatingly to increase. And the dictator...will do well to encourage that freedom. In conjunction with the freedom to daydream under the influence of dope and movies and the radio, it will help reconcile his subjects to the servitude which is their fate." I think what he's getting at is that sex is a powerful distraction tool. When the masses are out getting drunk and hooking up or watching porn 24/7, who’s going to notice as our civil liberties are being whisked away? Who's going to take enough time out from pleasure-seeking to figure out that they are slaves to an evil system? And that’s not even to mention the spiritual aspects of sex like the squandering of sexual energy... that could be a whole other essay.

What’s more enslaving: motherhood or the rat race?

In addition to taking women away from babymaking duties (thus reducing the population) and destabilizing the family unit, feminism also helped double the workforce by driving women to seek careers first and foremost. I’m all for women having choices and equal rights and being innovative and having ambitions - but when I think of what is usually meant by "career", I think of "upholding the system". I think of "cog in the machine". And I think of this backwards ego-based society that judges people by their job title and annual income. Men AND women do the rat race thing and chase that high-profile career that will validate them and make them "somebody", and I have rarely seen it bring true happiness or fulfilment. I’ve met so-called career women through my work and they are NOT people to aspire to at all. If being a career woman means being a self-important, money-driven corporate robot, I’d rather stay out of that world and raise a healthy and happy family, thanks.

UPDATE: Feminism has its own agenda and it’s not women’s rights (some more about abortion)

Feminists harp on about women’s rights - but only when it suits their overall agenda. What about the rights of the women in China who are forced to have abortions by the government? Why isn’t this issue getting more attention from feminists? Because feminism has its own anti-life, anti-motherhood agenda, that’s why. Some have even branded pregnancy "unnatural" and "a disease". Please - if creating a life and nurturing it in your womb for nine months isn't an integral and beautiful part of being a woman, then I don't know what is.

Along the same lines, I read a great quote recently that illustrates how the feminist stance on abortion allows for more serious violations of women’s rights to be overlooked. It was something like: "If a woman is raped and becomes pregnant, the problem is that she was raped, not that she is pregnant. If a starving woman gets pregnant, the problem is that she is starving, not that she is pregnant. If a woman in an abusive relationship gets pregnant, the problem is that she’s in an abusive relationship, not that she is pregnant." I also read about family planning clinics in the US performing abortions on young girls who were victims of (ongoing) sexual abuse - and they did not report the abuse, thus allowing it to continue. Essentially abortion makes it all too easy to tackle the EFFECT of societal problems without dealing with the ROOT CAUSE. So these serious issues get swept under the rug, yet feminists continue to rant and rave about the "right" to abortion as if it would be the biggest crime against women EVER if they were NOT allowed to kill their babies.

Rethinking feminism

Of course women should have options in life and not be subjugated and treated as objects or slaves by men (a phenomenon which has arguably become worse since the sexual revolution anyway!), but they also shouldn’t be programmed to believe that being a full-time mother & wife is worthless and unfulfilling while being a corporate slave is respectable and the path to happiness. What would the next generation be like if young children were cared for at home instead of being stuck in a nursery 8 hours a day? What if children learned values from their parents instead of being programmed by government schools and the Disney Channel? What if children were given love and attention instead of toys and television? People are taught that kids are a financial burden, that they tie you down, put a strain on your relationship, cry all the time, keep you up all night, throw tantrums...some of which may be true, but what about the positives of having a family? Children are not little brats unless they are brought up to be that way, or they’re not getting what they really want: genuine love and attention.

In conclusion: in a sane, non-corrupt society, women would not be brainwashed to act like men or look androgynous (see high-fashion models) OR commended for imitating the worst of male behaviour, being "emancipated" and sleeping around, but would be celebrated for their femininity, their ability to nurture and give life. Mothers and wives would be honoured and respected for the work they do in upholding a happy family, not likened to parasites and concentration camp victims (as mentioned in this article). Men/"patriarchy" would not be used as a scapegoat for all society’s ills. And dubious political/philosophical movements like feminism would not be used as a front for social engineering and political control. I can dream...
_________________________________________

Further Reading:

http://www.abortionfacts.com

http://www.henrymakow.com/obama_planned_parents_negro_pr.html

http://www.savethemales.ca/the_real_patriarchy_is_plutocr.html

http://www.henrymakow.com/the_decline_of_western_women.html

http://www.savethemales.ca/000817.html

http://www.savethemales.ca/180302.html

http://www.savethemales.ca/000950.html

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-topics/abortion-4260.htm [Planned Parenthood was founded by eugenics advocate Margaret Sanger, and makes a lot of money from performing abortions as well as receiving government funding. Note that on the above page they state: "Abortions are very common. In fact, more than 1 out of 3 women in the U.S. have an abortion by the time they are 45 years old." In other words, "it’s OK because everyone’s doing it!" On their "Pregnant - now what?" page, it also says: "If you are pregnant, you have three options to think about - abortion, adoption, and parenting" as if abortion is the top priority and parenting is an afterthought?! Just 2 things I spotted on a quick critical analysis.]

________________________________________________

Whew! That was a long one. But in case you haven't noticed, this is a topic I feel very deeply and strongly about.