I support free speech; don’t you? I will listen to the crazy ones when they speak about Biden not being in the early stages of dementia. I listen to those who push for defunding the police in spite of it being a fruity idea. But, you know what? These same people do not want to listen to those who do not fit their Marxist, Muslim, Leftist, Loony, Lovie thinking. So, here we are where ‘Marquette University has threatened to reconsider their admission acceptance of a recent high school graduate, citing a pro-Trump video the teen posted to social media.
Samantha Pfefferle, an 18-year-old girl, said in an interview with The College Fix that her admission to the university was no longer a guarantee and she was forced to undergo a series of morality questions in order to prove she still belonged in the school’s Class of 2024.
Pfefferle said she was asked how she would respond if a “Dreamer who lived down the hall” came up to her and said “she didn’t feel safe or comfortable” with the conservative views or her presence on campus.
“[He] had the heart to tell me I wasn’t a student,” Pfefferle said. “This means that my classification is still in limbo and is currently being decided by the administration.”
The video that Pfefferle posted to TikTok features the incoming freshman calling out the Trump haters and showing the world she does not care about what others think of her political beliefs.
She titled the video: “When the libs find their way to your page.”
Pfefferle has a series of captions sprawled in the video, as she dances and sings to 6ix9ine’s GOOBA.
The text sections read: “When people find out I support Trump, they try to hate on me…and change my views.”
People viciously attacked Pfefferle in the comments section of the video that has nearly 600,000 views.
A “Trump 2020: Keep America Great” banner is noticeable in the background as well as a Trump sticker on a car parked in the driveway of her home.
“Someone burn her house down,” wrote a TikTok user.
“I hope you get shot,” wrote one user.
“Congrats on outing yourself as a racist, homophobe, transphobe, and misogynist,” wrote another.
People quickly figured out what school Pfefferle was going to in the fall given the fact that she was wearing a Marquette sweatshirt and the “Marquette University 2024” sign behind her.
The trolls said they would report her actions to Marquette admissions. The recent high school grad welcomed the threats in subsequent videos and liberals made good on their promise as the school attempted to “reeducate” Pfefferle before she even stepped foot on campus.
Conservatives quickly took to Twitter to defend Pfefferle, and strongly encourage Marquette to reconsider their decision to give the incoming freshman an ultimatum.
‘I don’t know when it happened precisely, but Mark Latham has become one of the champions of religious freedom in the state of NSW. It’s strange, because by his own admission he doesn’t even consider himself ‘religious’. However, the NSW One Nation leader is taking on the thought police with a bill to protect free speech online.
For anyone keen to still be able to express their religious point of view online via social media, Latham’s proposed bill offers the much-needed protection. According to Latham’s Facebook post, the Bill will seek to do two main things:
Empower/Make further provisions for the President of the NSW Anti-Discrimination Board to decline certain complaints as frivolous or vexatious.
Remove the requirement for the President to refer declined complaints to NCAT (NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal).
In the light of everything that happened people such as Israel Folau last year, this is a welcome move. Because the Anti-Discrimination Act has been weaponised by certain activists to financially destroy those whom they disagree with. As Latham argued in the NSW Parliament:
Activists are using the legal system to try to score the political points they cannot achieve by democratic means, or even worse, they are using the legal system to try to destroy their opponents financially to break them with the cost of using lawyers and going through tribunals to defend themselves. This is not justice; it is a lawyer’s picnic.
In the four decades since the Anti-Discrimination Act was legislated the political environment has changed substantially. We now live in an era of heightened political activism, much of it driven by the intense polarised and at times obsessive nature of social media, and tactics such as ‘de-platforming’ and ‘cancelling culture’ have become common.
Bernard Gaynor, a former army major, is another example of someone who has had to engage in modern “law-fare” to financially defend himself against numerous defamation lawsuits. For example, over the past five years, Gaynor has had up to 37 complaints brought against him by just one individual.
Latham has asked the public to issue a long or short submission in support of the bill (you can do so by clicking here). But in response to the proposed legislation, Gaynor has said:
The NSW Anti-Discrimination Board … should be abolished and Mark Latham’s common-sense bill to force it to dismiss vexatious complaints is a good first step.
The Anti-Discrimination Board is a totalitarian, state-funded activist organisation that is hell-bent on using the coercive power of the state to silence mainstream conservative opinion.
These types of ‘Thought Police’ should have no place in Australia.
The Conversation is a Leftist Loony Lovies internet Journal that according to the Conversation itself supposedly gives the reader ‘Academic rigour, journalistic flair’. Whatever that means, it does give the reader a one sided Leftist Loony view. The following article is about the latest out of Victoria and the draconian lockdown due to more China virus cases. If this state had been run by any party other than China loving Labor the words would be burning on the page. Andrews and his cronies had no problem with thirty thousand BLM protestors recently on the streets in Melbourne but it is the average Victorian now that will pay for it. Oh, well what else would one expect from a Leftist Loony Lovie paper?
‘The Victorian government will lock down all metropolitan Melbourne for six weeks from Wednesday night, as a new wave of the coronavirus takes hold in the city.
Victoria’s Premier Daniel Andrews
The lockdown will also cover the Mitchell Shire, north of Melbourne, which includes the towns of Broadford, Seymour, Kilmore, Tallarook, Pyalong and Wallan.
Under the restrictions, people will only be able to leave their home to shop for essential goods and services, for care and compassionate reasons, exercise, and for work and study if it cannot be conducted from home.
‘Of all the sciences, the Holy Bible has more to say about astronomy than any other. The Scripture speaks of the sun, moon, stars, the host of heaven, planets, and constellations. It talks about the heavens, the firmament, and tells us that the lights in the sky were made for the earth, for man, to give light by day and by night, to serve as signs, and to determine the seasons. The ancients, particularly the Jews, claim Adam as the first astronomer. They number Seth, Enoch, Shem, and Abraham among the greatest ancient astronomers. Major astronomical themes occur in Genesis, Numbers, Joshua, Judges, Job, Psalms, Amos, Luke, Hebrews, 1 & 2 Peter, Jude, and Revelation.’ http://www.geocentricity.com/
‘IN presenting John Jasper’s celebrated sermon on “De Sun Do Move, “I beg to introduce it with several explanatory words. As intimated in a former chapter it is of a dual character. It includes an extended discussion, after his peculiar fashion, of the text, “The Lord God is a man of war; the Lord is His name.” Much that he said in that part of his sermon is omitted, only so much being retained as indicates his view of the rotation of the sun. It was really when he came into this part of his sermon that he showed to such great advantage, even though so manifestly in error as to the position which he tried so manfully to antagonize. It was of that combative type of public speech which always put him before the people at his best. I never heard this sermon but once, but I have been amply aided in reproducing it by an elaborate and altogether friendly report of the sermon published at the time by The Richmond Dispatch. Jasper opened his discourse with a tender reminiscence and quite an ingenious exordium.
“Low me ter say,” he spoke with an outward composure which revealed an inward but mastered swell of emotion, “dat when I wuz a young man and a slave, I knowed nuthin’ wuth talkin’ ’bout consarnin’ books. Dey wuz sealed mysteries ter me, but I tell yer I longed ter break de seal. I thusted fer de bread uv learnin’. When I seen books I ached ter git in ter um, fur I knowed dat dey had de stuff fer me, an’ I wanted ter taste dere contents, but most of de time dey wuz bar’d aginst me.
“By de mursy of de Lord a thing happened. I got er room-feller–he wuz a slave, too, an’ he had learn’d ter read. In de dead uv de night he giv me lessons outen de New York Spellin’ book. It wuz hard pullin’, I tell yer; harder on him, fur he know’d jes’ a leetle, an’ it made him sweat ter try ter beat sumthin’ inter my hard haid. It wuz wuss wid me. Up de hill ev’ry step, but when I got de light uv de less’n into my noodle I farly shouted, but I kno’d I wuz not a scholur. De consequens wuz I crep ‘long mighty tejus, gittin’ a crum here an’ dar untel I cud read de Bible by skippin’ de long words, tolerable well. Dat wuz de start uv my eddicashun–dat is, wat little I got. I mek menshun uv dat young man. De years hev fled erway sense den, but I ain’t furgot my teachur, an’ nevur shall. I thank mer Lord fur him, an’ I carries his mem’ry in my heart.
” ‘Bout seben months after my gittin’ ter readin’, Gord cunverted my soul, an’ I reckin ’bout de fust an’ main thing dat I begged de Lord ter give me wuz de power ter und’stan’ His Word. I ain’ braggin’, an’ I hates self-praise, but I boun’ ter speak de thankful word. I b’lieves in mer heart dat mer pra’r ter und’stand de Scripshur wuz heard. Sence dat time I ain’t keerd ’bout nuthin’ ‘cept ter study an’ preach de Word uv God.
“Not, my bruthrin, dat I’z de fool ter think I knows it all. Oh, mer Father, no! Fur frum it. I don’ hardly und’stan myse’f, nor ha’f uv de things roun’ me, an’ dar is milyuns uv things in de Bible too deep fur Jasper, an’ sum uv ’em too deep fur ev’rybody. I doan’t cerry de’ keys ter de Lord’s closet, an’ He ain’ tell me ter peep in, an’ ef I did I’m so stupid I wouldn’t know it when I see it. No, frens, I knows my place at de feet uv my Marster, an’ dar I stays.
“But I kin read de Bible and git de things whar lay on de top uv de soil. Out’n de Bible I knows nuthin’ extry ’bout de sun. I sees ‘is courses as he rides up dar so gran’ an’ mighty in de sky, but dar is heaps ’bout dat flamin’ orb dat is too much fer me. I know dat de sun shines powerfly an’ po’s down its light in floods, an’ yet dat is nuthin’ compared wid de light dat flashes in my min’ frum de pages of Gord’s book. But you knows all dat. I knows dat de sun burns–oh, how it did burn in dem July days. I tell yer he cooked de skin on my back many er day when I wuz hoein’ in de corn feil’. But you knows all dat, an’ yet dat is nuthin’ der to de divine fire dat burns in der souls uv Gord’s chil’n. Can’t yer feel it, bruthrin?
“But ’bout de courses uv de sun, I have got dat. I hev dun rang’d thru de whole blessed book an’ scode down de las’ thing de Bible has ter say ’bout de’ movements uv de sun. I got all dat pat an’ safe. An’ lemme say dat if I doan’t giv it ter you straight, if I gits one word crooked or wrong, you jes’ holler out, ‘Hol’ on dar, Jasper, yer ain’t got dat straight,’ an’ I’ll beg pardon. If I doan’t tell de truf, march up on dese steps here an’ tell me I’z a liar, an’ I’ll take it. I fears I do lie sometimes–I’m so sinful, I find it hard ter do right; but my Gord doan’t lie an’ He ain’ put no lie in de Book uv eternal truf, an’ if I giv you wat de Bible say, den I boun’ ter tell de truf.
“I got ter take yer all dis arternoon on er skershun ter a great bat’l feil’. Mos’ folks like ter see fights–some is mighty fon’ er gittin’ inter fights, an’ some is mighty quick ter run down de back alley when dar is a bat’l goin’ on, fer de right. Dis time I’ll ‘scort yer ter a scene whar you shall witness a curus bat’l. It tuk place soon arter Isrel got in de Promus Lan’. Yer ‘member de people uv Gibyun mak frens wid Gord’s people when dey fust entered Canum an’ dey wuz monsus smart ter do it. But, jes’ de same, it got ’em in ter an orful fuss. De cities roun’ ’bout dar flar’d up at dat, an’ dey all jined dere forces and say dey gwine ter mop de Gibyun people orf uv de groun’, an’ dey bunched all dar armies tergedder an’ went up fer ter do it. Wen dey kum up so bol’ an’ brave de Giby’nites wuz skeer’d out’n dere senses, an’ dey saunt word ter Joshwer dat dey wuz in troubl’ an’ he mus’ run up dar an’ git ’em out. Joshwer had de heart uv a lion an’ he wuz up dar d’reckly. Dey had an orful fight, sharp an’ bitter, but yer might know dat Ginr’l Joshwer wuz not up dar ter git whip’t. He prayed an’ he fought, an’ de hours got erway too peart fer him, an’ so he ask’d de Lord ter issure a speshul ordur dat de sun hol’ up erwhile an’ dat de moon furnish plenty uv moonshine down on de lowes’ part uv de fightin’ groun’s. As a fac’, Joshwer wuz so drunk wid de bat’l, so thursty fer de blood uv de en’mies uv de Lord, an’ so wild wid de vict’ry dat he tell de sun ter stan’ still tel he cud finish his job. Wat did de sun do? Did he glar down in fi’ry wrath an’ say, ‘What you talkin’ ’bout my stoppin’ for, Joshwer; I ain’t navur startid yit. Bin here all de time, an’ it wud smash up ev’rything if I wuz ter start’? Naw, he ain’ say dat. But wat de Bible say? Dat’s wat I ax ter know. It say dat it wuz at de voice uv Joshwer dat it stopped. I don’ say it stopt; tain’t fer Jasper ter say dat, but de Bible, de Book uv Gord, say so. But I say dis; nuthin’ kin stop untel it hez fust startid. So I knows wat I’m talkin’ ’bout. De sun wuz travlin’ long dar thru de sky wen de order come. He hitched his red ponies and made quite a call on de lan’ uv Gibyun. He purch up dar in de skies jes’ as frenly as a naibur whar comes ter borrer sumthin’, an’ he stan’ up dar an’ he look lak he enjoyed de way Joshwer waxes dem wicked armies. An’ de moon, she wait down in de low groun’s dar, an’ pours out her light and look jes’ as ca’m an’ happy as if she wuz waitin’ fer her ‘scort. Dey nevur budg’d, neither uv ’em, long as de Lord’s army needed er light to kerry on de bat’l.
“I doan’t read when it wuz dat Joshwer hitch up an’ drove on, but I ‘spose it wuz when de Lord toll him ter go. Ennybody knows dat de sun didn’ stay dar all de time. It stopt fur bizniz, an’ went on when it got thru. Dis is ’bout all dat I has ter do wid dis perticl’r case. I dun show’d yer dat dis part uv de Lord’s word teaches yer dat de sun stopt, which show dat he wuz movin’ befo’ dat, an’ dat he went on art’rwuds. I toll yer dat I wud prove dis an’ I’s dun it, an’ I derfies ennybody to say dat my p’int ain’t made.
“I tol’ yer in de fust part uv dis discose dat de Lord Gord is a man uv war. I ‘spec by now yer begin ter see it is so. Doan’t yer admit it?
When de Lord cum ter see Joshwer in de day uv his feers an’ warfar, an’ actu’ly mek de sun stop stone still in de heavuns, so de fight kin rage on tel all de foes is slain, yer bleeged ter und’rstan’ dat de Gord uv peace is also de man uv war. He kin use bofe peace an’ war ter hep de reichus, an’ ter scattur de host uv de ailyuns. A man talked ter me las’ week ’bout de laws uv nature, an’ he say dey carn’t poss’bly be upsot, an’ I had ter laugh right in his face. As if de laws uv ennythin’ wuz greater dan my Gord who is de lawgiver fer ev’rything. My Lord is great; He rules in de heavuns, in de earth, an’ doun und’r de groun’. He is great, an’ greatly ter be praised. Let all de people bow doun an’ wurship befo’ Him!
“But let us git erlong, for dar is quite a big lot mo’ comin’ on. Let us take nex’ de case of Hezekier. He wuz one of dem kings of Juder–er mighty sorry lot I mus’ say dem kings wuz, fur de mos’ part. I inclines ter think Hezekier wuz ’bout de highes’ in de gin’ral avrig, an’ he war no mighty man hisse’f. Well, Hezekier he got sick. I dar say dat a king when he gits his crown an’ fin’ry off, an’ when he is posterated wid mortal sickness, he gits ’bout es commun lookin’ an’ grunts an’ rolls, an’ is ’bout es skeery as de res’ of us po’ mortals. We know dat Hezekier wuz in er low state uv min’; full uv fears, an’ in a tur’ble trub’le. De fac’ is, de Lord strip him uv all his glory an’ landed him in de dust. He tol’ him dat his hour had come, an’ dat he had bettur squar up his affaars, fur death wuz at de do’. Den it wuz dat de king fell low befo’ Gord; he turn his face ter de wall; he cry, he moan, he beg’d de Lord not ter take him out’n de worl’ yit. Oh, how good is our Gord! De cry uv de king moved his heart, an’ he tell him he gwine ter give him anudder show. Tain’t only de kings dat de Lord hears. De cry uv de pris’nur, de wail uv de bondsman, de tears uv de dyin’ robber, de prars uv de backslider, de sobs uv de womun dat wuz a sinner, mighty apt to tech de heart uv de Lord. It look lik it’s hard fer de sinner ter git so fur orf or so fur down in de pit dat his cry can’t reach de yere uv de mussiful Saviour.
“But de Lord do evun better den dis fur Hezekier–He tell him He gwine ter give him a sign by which he’d know dat what He sed wuz cummin’ ter pars. I ain’t erquainted wid dem sun diuls dat de Lord toll Hezekier ’bout, but ennybody dat hes got a grain uv sense knows dat dey wuz de clocks uv dem ole times an’ dey marked de travuls uv de sun by dem diuls. When, darfo’ Gord tol’ de king dat He wud mek de shadder go backwud, it mus’ hev bin jes’ lak puttin’ de han’s uv de clock back, but, mark yer, Izaer ‘spressly say dat de sun return’d ten dergrees. Thar yer are! Ain’t dat de movement uv de sun? Bless my soul. Hezekier’s case beat Joshwer. Joshwer stop de sun, but heer de Lord mek de sun walk back ten dergrees; an’ yet dey say dat de sun stan’ stone still an’ nevur move er peg. It look ter me he move roun’ mighty brisk an’ is ready ter go ennyway dat de Lord ordurs him ter go. I wonder if enny uv dem furloserfers is roun’ here dis arternoon. I’d lik ter take a squar’ look at one uv dem an’ ax him to ‘splain dis mattur. He carn’t do it, my bruthr’n. He knows a heap ’bout books, maps, figgers an’ long distunces, but I derfy him ter take up Hezekier’s case an’ ‘splain it orf. He carn’t do’ it. De Word uv de Lord is my defense an’ bulwurk, an’ I fears not what men can say nor do; my Gord gives me de vict’ry.
” ‘Low me, my frens, ter put mysef squar ’bout dis movement uv de sun. It ain’t no bizniss uv mine wedder de sun move or stan’ still, or wedder it stop or go back or rise or set. All dat is out er my han’s ‘tirely, an’ I got nuthin’ ter say. I got no the-o-ry on de subjik. All I ax is dat we will take wat de Lord say ’bout it an’ let His will be dun ’bout ev’rything. Wat dat will is I karn’t know ‘cept He whisper inter my soul or write it in a book. Here’s de Book. Dis is ‘nough fer me, and wid it ter pilut me, I karn’t git fur erstray.
“But I ain’t dun wid yer yit. As de song says, dere’s mo’ ter foller. I envite yer ter heer de fust vers in de sev’nth chaptur uv de book uv Reverlashuns. What do John, und’r de pow’r uv de Spirit, say? He say he saw fo’ anguls standin’ on de fo’ corners uv de earth, holdin’ de fo’ win’s uv de earth, an’ so fo’th. ‘Low me ter ax ef de earth is roun’, whar do it keep its corners? Er flat, squar thing has corners, but tell me where is de cornur uv er appul, ur a marbul, ur a cannun ball, ur a silver dollar. Ef dar is enny one uv dem furloserfurs whar’s been takin’ so many cracks at my ole haid ’bout here, he is korjully envited ter step for’d an’ squar up dis vexin’ bizniss. I here tell you dat yer karn’t squar a circul, but it looks lak dese great scolurs dun learn how ter circul de squar. Ef dey kin do it, let ’em step ter de front an’ do de trick. But, mer brutherin, in my po’ judmint, dey karn’t do it; tain’t in ’em ter do it. Dey is on der wrong side of de Bible; dat’s on de outside of de Bible, an’ dar’s whar de trubbul comes in wid ’em. Dey dun got out uv de bres’wuks uv de truf, an’ ez long ez dey stay dar de light uv de Lord will not shine on der path. I ain’t keer’n so much ’bout de sun, tho’ it’s mighty kunveenyunt ter hav it, but my trus’ is in de Word uv de Lord. Long ez my feet is flat on de solid rock, no man kin move me. I’se gittin’ my order f’um de Gord of my salvashun.
“Tother day er man wid er hi coler and side whisk’rs cum ter my house. He was one nice North’rn gemman wat think a heap of us col’rd people in de Souf. Da ar luvly folks and I honours ’em very much. He seem from de start kinder strictly an’ cross wid me, and arter while, he brake out furi’us and frettid, an’ he say: ‘Erlow me Mister Jasper ter gib you sum plain advise. Dis nonsans ’bout de sun movin’ whar you ar gettin’ is disgracin’ yer race all ober de kuntry, an’ as a fren of yer peopul, I cum ter say it’s got ter stop.’ Ha! Ha! Ha! Mars’ Sam Hargrove nuvur hardly smash me dat way. It was equl to one ov dem ole overseurs way bac yondur. I tel him dat ef he’ll sho me I’se wrong, I giv it all up.
“My! My! Ha! Ha! He sail in on me an’ such er storm about science, nu ‘scuv’ries, an’ de Lord only knos wat all, I ner hur befo’, an’ den he tel me my race is ergin me an’ po ole Jasper mus shet up ‘is fule mouf.
“Wen he got thru–it look lak he nuvur wud, I tel him John Jasper ain’ set up to be no scholur, an’ doant kno de ferlosophiz, an’ ain’ tryin’ ter hurt his peopul, but is wurkin’ day an’ night ter lif ’em up, but his foot is on de rock uv eternal truff. Dar he stan’ and dar he is goin’ ter stan’ til Gabrul soun’s de judgment note. So er say to de gemman wat scol’d me up so dat I hur him mek his remarks, but I ain’ hur whar he get his Scriptu’ from, an’ dat ‘tween him an’ de wurd of de Lord I tek my stan’ by de Word of Gord ebery time. Jasper ain’ mad: he ain’ fightin’ nobody; he ain’ bin ‘pinted janitur to run de sun: he nothin’ but de servunt of Gord and a luver of de Everlasting Word. What I keer about de sun? De day comes on wen de sun will be called frum his race-trac, and his light squincked out foruvur; de moon shall turn ter blood, and this yearth be konsoomed wid fier. Let um go; dat wont skeer me nor trubble Gord’s erlect’d peopul, for de word uv de Lord shell aindu furivur, an’ on dat Solid Rock we stan’ an’ shall not be muved.
“Is I got yer satisfied yit? Has I prooven my p’int? Oh, ye whose hearts is full uv unberlief! Is yer still hol’in’ out? I reckun de reason yer say de sun don’ move is ’cause yer are so hard ter move yerse’f. You is a reel triul ter me, but, nevur min’; I ain’t gi’n yer up yit, an’ nevur will. Truf is mighty; it kin break de heart uv stone, an’ I mus’ fire anudder arrur uv truf out’n de quivur uv de Lord. If yer haz er copy uv God’s Word ’bout yer pussun, please tu’n ter dat miner profit, Malerki, wat writ der las’ book in der ole Bible, an’ look at chaptur de fust, vurs ‘leben; what do it say? I bet’r read it, fur I got er noshun yer critics doan’t kerry enny Bible in thar pockits ev’ry day in de week. Here is wat it says: ‘Fur from de risin’ uv de sun evun unter de goin’ doun uv de same My name shall be great ‘mong de Gentiles. . . My name shall be great ‘mong de heathun, sez de Lord uv hosts.’ How do dat suit yer? It look lak dat ort ter fix it. Dis time it is de Lord uv hosts Hisse’f dat is doin’ de talkin’, an’ He is talkin’ on er wonderful an’ glorious subjik. He is tellin’ uv de spredin’ uv His Gorspel, uv de kummin’ uv His larst vict’ry ovur de Gentiles, an’ de wurldwide glories dat at de las’ He is ter git. Oh, my bruddrin, wat er time dat will be. My soul teks wing es I erticipate wid joy dat merlenium day! De glories as dey shine befo’ my eyes blin’s me, an’ I furgits de sun an’ moon an’ stars. I jes’ ‘members dat ‘long ’bout dose las’ days dat de sun an moon will go out uv bizniss, fur dey won’ be needed no mo’. Den will King Jesus come back ter see His people, an’ He will be de suffishunt light uv de wurl’. Joshwer’s bat’ls will be ovur. Hezekier woan’t need no sun diul, an’ de sun an’ moon will fade out befo’ de glorius splendurs uv de New Jerruslem.
“But wat der mattur wid Jasper. I mos’ furgit my bizniss, an’ mos’ gon’ ter shoutin’ ovur de far away glories uv de secun’ cummin’ uv my Lord. I beg pardun, an’ will try ter git back ter my subjik. I hev ter do as de sun in Hezekier’s case–fall back er few dergrees. In dat part uv de Word dat I gin yer frum Malerki–dat de Lord Hisse’f spoke–He klars dat His glory is gwine ter spred. Spred? Whar? Frum de risin’ uv de sun ter de goin’ down uv de same. Wat? Doan’t say dat, duz it? Dat’s edzakly wat it sez. Ain’t dat cleer ’nuff fer yer? De Lord pity dese doubtin’ Tommusses. Here is ’nuff ter settul it all an’ kure de wuss cases. Walk up yere, wise folks, an’ git yer med’sin. Whar is dem high collar’d furloserfurs now? Wat dey skulkin’ roun’ in de brush fer? Why doan’t yer git out in der broad arternoon light an’ fight fer yer cullurs? Ah, I un’stans it; yer got no answer. De Bible is agin yer, an’ in yer konshunses yer are convictid.
“But I hears yer back dar. Wat yer wisprin’ ’bout? I know; yer say yer sont me sum papurs an’ I nevur answer dem. Ha, ha, ha! I got ’em. De differkulty ’bout dem papurs yer sont me is dat dey did not answer me. Dey nevur menshun de Bible one time. Yer think so much uv yoursef’s an’ so little uv de Lord Gord an’ thinks wat yer say is so smart dat yer karn’t even speak uv de Word uv de Lord. When yer ax me ter stop believin’ in de Lord’s Word an’ ter pin my faith ter yo words, I ain’t er gwine ter do it. I take my stan’ by de Bible an’ res’ my case on wat it says. I take wat de Lord says ’bout my sins, ’bout my Saviour, ’bout life, ’bout death, ’bout de wurl’ ter come, an’ I take wat de Lord say ’bout de sun an’ moon, an’ I cares little wat de haters of mer Gord chooses ter say. Think dat I will fursake de Bible? It is my only Book, my hope, de arsnel uv my soul’s surplies, an’ I wants nuthin’ else.
“But I got ernudder wurd fur yer yit. I done wuk ovur dem. papurs dat yer sont me widout date an’ widout yer name. Yer deals in figgurs an’ thinks yer are biggur dan de arkanjuls. Lemme see wat yer dun say. Yer set yerse’f up ter tell me how fur it is frum here ter de sun. Yer think yer got it down ter er nice p’int. Yer say it is 3,339,002 miles frum de earth ter de sun. Dat’s wat yer say. Nudder one say dat de distuns is 12,000,000; nudder got it ter 27,000,000. I hers dat de great Isuk Nutun wuk’t it up ter 28,000,000, an’ later on de furloserfurs gin ernudder rippin’ raze to 50,000,000. De las’ one gits it bigger’ dan all de yuthers, up to 90,000,000. Doan’t enny uv ’em ergree edzakly an’ so dey runs a guess game, an’ de las’ guess is always de bigges’. Now, wen dese guessers kin hav a kunvenshun in Richmun’ an’ all ergree ‘pun de same thing, I’d be glad ter hear frum yer ag’in, an’ I duz hope dat by dat time yer won’t be ershamed uv yer name.
“Heeps uv railroads hes bin built sense I saw de fust one wen I wuz fifteen yeers ole, but I ain’t hear tell uv er railroad built yit ter de sun. I doan’ see why ef dey kin meshur de distuns ter de sun, dey might not git up er railroad er a telurgraf an’ enabul us ter fin’ sumthin’ else ’bout it den merely how fur orf de sun is. Dey tell me dat a kannun ball cu’d mek de trep ter de sun in twelve years. Why doan’dey send it? It might be rig’d up wid quarturs fur a few furloserfers on de inside an’ fixed up fur er kumfurterble ride. Dey wud need twelve years’ rashuns an’ a heep uv changes uv ramint–mighty thick clo’es wen dey start and mighty thin uns wen dey git dar.
“Oh, mer bruthrin, dese things mek yer laugh, an’ I doan’ blem yer fer laughin’, ‘cept it’s always sad ter laugh at der follies uv fools. If we cu’d laugh ’em out’n kount’nens, we might well laugh day an’ night. Wat cuts inter my soul is, dat all dese men seem ter me dat dey is hittin’ at de Bible. Dat’s wat sturs my soul an’ fills me wid reichus wrath. Leetle keers I wat dey says ’bout de sun, purvided dey let de Word uv de Lord erlone. But nevur min’. Let de heethun rage an’ de people ‘madgin er vain thing. Our King shall break ’em in pieces an’ dash ’em down. But blessed be de name uv our Gord, de Word uv de Lord indurith furivur. Stars may fall, moons may turn ter blood, an’ de sun set ter rise no mo’, but Thy kingdom, oh, Lord, is frum evurlastin’ ter evurlastin’.
“But I has er word dis arternoon fer my own brutherin. Dey is de people fer whose souls I got ter watch–fur dem I got ter stan’ an’ report at de last–dey is my sheep an’ I’se der shepherd, an’ my soul is knit ter dem forever. ‘Tain fer me ter be troublin’ yer wid dese questions erbout dem heb’nly bodies. Our eyes goes far beyon’ desmaller stars; our home is clean outer sight uv dem twinklin’ orbs; de chariot dat will cum ter take us to our Father’s mansion will sweep out by dem flickerin’ lights an’ never halt till it brings us in clar view uv de throne uv de Lamb. Doan’t hitch yer hopes to no sun nor stars; yer home is got Jesus fer its light, an’ yer hopes mus’ trabel up dat way. I preach dis sermon jest fer ter settle de min’s uv my few brutherin, an’ repeats it ’cause kin’ frens wish ter hear it, an’ I hopes it will do honour ter de Lord’s Word. But nuthin’ short of de purly gates can satisfy me, an’ I charge, my people, fix yer feet on de solid Rock, yer hearts on Calv’ry, an’ yer eyes on de throne uv de Lamb. Dese strifes an’ griefs ‘ll soon git ober; we shall see de King in His glory an’ be at ease. Go on, go on, ye ransom uv de Lord; shout His praises as yer go, an’ I shall meet yer in de city uv de New Jeruserlum, whar we shan’t need the light uv de sun, fer de Lam’ uv de Lord is de light uv de saints.”‘ https://docsouth.unc.edu/church/hatcher/hatcher.html
In the land of the free and the brave BLM and other Marxist, Muslim, Leftist, Loony groups are making sure free speech and thought are a thing of the past. You may let Baptist Health know exactly what you think by emailing them https://www.baptisthealth.com/paducah/contact/send-us-an-e-mail/
‘In recent months, cancel culture has gone into overdrive with many people losing their livelihoods, reputations, or jobs for expressing their opinions online.
This usually happens after activists target individuals over their online posts, find out where they’re employed, and then bombard the employer with messages and phone calls until they’re terminated.
In many cases, just a single tweet, statement, or video is all it takes for an individual to be targeted and subject to a pressure campaign that results in them losing their job.
After licensed Hearing Instrument Specialist Tabitha Morris from Paducah, Kentucky posted a three minute Facebook video on June 9, where she stated that she doesn’t support the Black Lives Matter movement, she not only lost her job but continued to be targeted after being fired and ended up having her GoFundMe mass reported and taken down.
Morris told Reclaim The Net that she posted the video after feeling frustrated about the then-recent riots, lootings, and “the senseless murders of other innocent black Americans amid this chaos,” including the murder of black former Police Chief David Dorne who was shot and killed by looters while attempting to protect a pawn shop.
In the June 9 video, Morris said that she doesn’t support the Black Lives Matter movement and won’t apologize or bow down for being white.
“The problem is not white people, the problem is not police officers,” Morris said in the video.
She then cited crime statistics about police officers killing more white Americans than black Americans and the overall crime rates of black Americans compared with white Americans, a sentiment that has also since caused others to lose their jobs, and students to be expelled from colleges.
Morris told Reclaim The Net that after she had posted the video, many online users started sending her “death threats and vile messages of hate” and pressured her employer, Baptist Health Hospital, to terminate her.
“They found out where I was employed and made an organized effort to have me terminated. Over 1000 calls and emails were sent to the HR department, that either they fire me, or they would riot and protest,” Morris told Reclaim The Net.
Morris then made a second video on June 10 where she discussed the threats and organized efforts to get her fired and said that she doesn’t support Black Lives Matter because “they don’t care about all black lives” and instead, “the only thing they concentrate on is black lives that are killed by white people or white police officers.”
She added: “I have worked at that job for 20 years and I have treated white kids, black kids, Mexican kids, all different races, and I love each and every one of them. But it doesn’t matter what I say, it doesn’t matter what I do, you’re gonna spread this and you’re gonna call me a racist anyway, and you’re gonna ruin my life.”
On June 11, Morris said she was told by the HR department that she was terminated effective immediately because of the attention her Facebook video had received and the threats of protest.
“Our mission at Baptist Health is to provide high-quality, compassionate care to all our patients. Baptist Health does not tolerate disrespectful conduct or discrimination of any form. It has come to our attention that an employee recently made statements on social media which do not reflect the values of Baptist Health and have caused disruption to our ability to carry out our mission to our patients and employees. This individual is no longer employed by Baptist Health.”
But Morris’ firing and the public statement from Baptist Health Hospital didn’t stop some Black Lives Matter supporters from continuing to target her.
On June 12, Morris appeared on the Todd Starnes Radio Show to tell her side of the story and was advised by Starnes to set up a GoFundMe account for financial support.
But after setting up her GoFundMe, some of the Black Lives Matter supporters organized again, promoted a Change.org petition to have her fundraiser stopped, and succeeded in having her GoFundMe shut down and all of the money refunded.
“I was told that no matter what I did to financially support my family, they would stop it,” Morris told Reclaim The Net. “They will make sure that I never get another job in healthcare again.”
Before the GoFundMe was taken down, some Black Lives Matter supporters also continued targeting Morris through her campaign’s contact form and told her that they would be flagging the campaign until it was taken down.
Morris also told Reclaim The Net that the threats have extended to anyone who supports her and that people are “terrified to speak out against this organization, for fear of retribution, loss of business, termination from employment, or any other way this organization can destroy your life.”
Morris added that she’s contacted attorneys to defend her position but her search has been futile:
“What has happened to me and others, should never be allowed to happen to anyone else. I do not have a degree. I spent the last 20 years at this practice, starting at minimum wage, and worked my way up, with hard work, continued education, and dedication…All of that has been taken from me, over a 3-minute video, stating I did not support a movement, and would not apologize for being born white.”
The Marxist Muslim Leftist Lovies are dominating the news these days or so it seems. Therefore, you probably haven’t heard that the ‘Administrators at Michigan State University have forced Professor Stephen Hsu to resign from the graduate student union after he had the gall to share research that shows that police violence is not particularly related to the race of either the cop or the victim.
This research, which has been completely ignored by the activists in the streets shouting “Black Lives Matter” as loudly as they can, is peer-reviewed and thought to be extremely credible. For the most part, it’s been done by researchers and academics who thought their studies would come to the opposite conclusion. It’s exactly the kind of research that should be informing our current debate about racism and police brutality.
Unfortunately, the story of Hsu’s ousting illustrates exactly why it isn’t.
From the College Fix:
The union has criticized Hsu’s promotion of a study that found there is no racial bias in police shootings.
“We found that the race of the officer doesn’t matter when it comes to predicting whether black or white citizens are shot,” according to the Michigan State-based research Hsu had quoted that drew the ire of many.
Hsu said that the attacks against him are baseless.
“The GEU alleged that I am a racist because I interviewed MSU Psychology professor Joe Cesario, who studies police shootings,” he wrote in an email to The College Fix. “But Cesario’s work (along with similar work by others, such as Roland Fryer at Harvard) is essential to understanding deadly force and how to improve policing.”
It used to be that a university was a place that prized independent, thought-provoking research, championed free speech, and put all of their resources towards following the evidence to its logical conclusions – no matter how controversial those conclusions might be. This is the backbone of intellectual progress, it is the absolute standard by which science is conducted, and it is why we are further ahead as a species than we were in the Middle Ages.
Make no mistake: Going backwards on these central tenets isn’t an annoyance like political correctness or canceling Aunt Jemima – it is a devastating move that could, with no exaggeration whatsoever, plunge us into a new age of scientific darkness.
That’s why a story like this one is so disturbing. This is angering on a personal level, of course, because a good professor lost his standing in the union. But it’s so much more than that. This is a terrifying glimpse at our future – one where we will build policies and solutions based on anecdotal evidence and “lived experience.” In other words, a future based not on science but on identity politics. Ready to have unqualified, uneducated black transgender women take over science and academia and shape our future as our nation?
It could be said ‘God broke the mold when He made John Jasper.
Psalm 139: 1-3 …O LORD, thou hast searched me, and known me. 2 Thou knowest my downsitting and mine uprising, thou understandest my thought afar off. 3 Thou compassest my path and my lying down, and art acquainted with all my ways.
‘JASPER’S mother was near the century line when she died, and he attained unto the extraordinary age of eighty-nine. Truly there must have been rare endurance in the texture of the stock. Jasper’s thoughts did not turn to religion until he was twenty-seven and yet by reason of his longevity he was a preacher for sixty years. During twenty-five years of that time he was a slave, and he had about thirty-five years of personal civil freedom, during which he won the distinctions that will make him a figure slow to pass out of history.
Jasper can have no successor. Freedom did not change him. It came too late for him to be seriously affected by its transforming hand. It never dazzled him by its festive charms nor crooked him with prejudice against the white people. There was far more for him in the traditions, sentiments, and habits of his bondage-days than in the new things which emancipation offered. He never took up with gaudy displays which marked his race in the morning of their freedom. This was especially true as to his ministry. He clung without apology to the old ways. In preaching, he spurned the new pulpit manners, the new style of dress, and all newfangrled tricks, which so fascinated his race. He intoned his sermons,–at least, in their more tender passages–sang the old revival songs of the plantations and factories, and felt it a part of his religion to smash, with giant hand, the innovations which the new order was bringing in. Of all the men whom I have known this weird, indescribable man cared the least for opposition;–unless he believed it touched his personal honour or was likely to injure the cause of religion. Indeed, he liked it. He was a born fighter and a stranger to fear. There was a charm in his resentments: they were of a high order, and inevitably commanded manly sympathy. He instinctively identified himself with the Lord and felt that when he fought he was fighting the Lord’s battles. Satire and sarcasm were like Toledo blades in his hands. He often softened his attacks upon his enemies by such ludicrous hits and provoking jests that you felt that, after all, his hostility lacked the roots of hatred. He was far more prone to despise than to hate his enemies.
There is a curious fact in connection with Jasper’s language Evidently in his early days his speech was atrociously ungrammatical. His dialect, while possessing an element of fascination, was almost unspellable. During his long ministerial life his reading and contact with educated people rooted out many of his linguistic excrescences. There were times when he spoke with approximate accuracy, and even with elegance; and yet he delighted, if indeed he was conscious of it, in returning to his dialect and in pouring it forth unblushingly in its worst shape, and yet always with telling effect. But the wonder of his speaking was his practical independence of language. When he became thoroughly impassioned and his face lit with the orator’s glory, he seemed to mount above the bondage of words: his feet, his eyes, indeed every feature of his outer being became to him a new language. If he used words, you did not notice it. You were simply entranced and borne along on the mountain-tide of his passion. You saw nothing but him. You heard him; you felt him, and the glow of his soul was language enough to bring to you his message. It ought to be added that no man ever used the pause more eloquently or effectively than Jasper, and his smile was logic; it was rhetoric; it was blissful conviction.
Those who thought that Jasper was a mere raver did not know. Logic was his tower of strength. He never heard of a syllogism, but he had a way of marshalling his facts and texts which set forth his view as clear as the beaming sun. The Bible was to him the source of all authority, while his belief in the justice and truth of God was something unworldly. He understood well enough his frailties, his fallibility, and the tendency of the human soul towards unfairness and deceit. I heard him say once with irresistible effect: “Brutherin, Gord never lies; He can’t lie. Men lie. I lie sometimes, I am very sorry to say it. I oughtn’t to lie, and it hurts me when I do. I am tryin’ ter git ober it, and I think I will by Gord’s grace, but de Lord nevur lies.” His tone in saying this was so humble and candid that I am sure the people loved him and believed in him more for what he said. A hypocrite could never have said it. Jasper could never be put into words. As he could speak without words so it is true that words could never contain him,–never tell his matchless story, never make those who did not hear him and see him fully understand the man that he was.
A notable and pathetic episode in Jasper’s history was the fact that during the bitter days of the Confederacy when Richmond was crowded with hospitals,–hospitals themselves crowded with the suffering,–Jasper used to go in and preach to them. It was no idle entertainment provided by a grotesque player. He always had a message for the sorrowful. There is no extended record of his labours in the hospitals, but the simple fact is that he, a negro labourer with rude speech, was welcomed by these sufferers and heard with undying interest; no wonder they liked him. His songs were so mellow, so tender, so reminiscent of the southern plantation and of the homes from which these men came. His sermons had the ring of the old gospel preaching so common in the South. He had caught his manner of preaching from the white preachers and they too had been his only theological teachers. We can easily understand how his genius, seasoned with religious reverence, made him a winsome figure to the men who languished through the weary days on the cots. It cannot be said too often that Jasper was the white man’s preacher. Wherever he went, the Anglo-Saxon waived all racial prejudices and drank the truth in as it poured in crystal streams from his lips.
Quite a pretty story is told of Jasper at the beginnings of his ministry. It seems that he went down into the eastern part of his town one Sunday to preach and some boisterous ruffians interfered, declaring that a negro had no right to go into the pulpit and that they would not allow Jasper to preach. A sailor who chanced to be present and knew Jasper faced these disorderly men and declared to them that Jasper was the smartest man in Virginia and that if he could take him to the country from whence he had come he would be treated with honour and distinction. There was also a small white boy standing by, and touched by the sincerity and power of Jasper, he pluckily jumped into the scene and exclaimed, “Yes, let him go on; what he says is all right. I have read it all in the Bible, and why shouldn’t he speak?” The incipient mob was dispersed, and his audience was fringed with a multitude of white people who were attracted to the scene.
It is not intended by these things said, concerning Jasper’s favour with the white people, to indicate that Jasper, in the least degree, was not with his own, race. Far from that. He loved his own people and was thoroughly identified with them; but he was larger than his race. He loved all men. He had grown up with that pleasing pride that the coloured people who lived in prominent families had about white people. Then, too, he had always been a man who had won favour wherever he went, and the white race had always had a respect and affection for him. Jasper was never ungrateful.
There were sometimes hard passages in the road which Jasper travelled. At the end of the war he was left high and dry, like driftwood on the shore. He had no church; no place to preach; no occupation. His relations with the white race were shattered, and things were grim enough; but ill-fortune could not break him. A large part of Richmond was in ashes, and in some places at least the work of rebuilding commenced at once,–or rather a clearing off of the debris with a view to rebuilding. Jasper walked out and engaged himself to clean bricks. During the Egyptian bondage the Hebrews made bricks and thought they had a hard lot; but Jasper spent the first days of his freedom in the brick business,–a transient expedient for keeping soul and body together until he could get on his feet again. Little thought the eager men who were trying to lay the foundations for their future fortunes that in the tall serious negro who sat whacking hour after hour at the bricks was one of God’s intellectual noblemen. Born in bondage, lowly in his liberty and yet great in the gifts with which God had endowed him, it was Jasper’s nature to be almost as cheerful when squatted on a pile of bricks and tugging at their cleaning as if he had a seat in a palace and was feeding on royal dainties. He carried the contented spirit, and that too while he aspired after the highest. He did not uselessly kick against the inevitable, but he always strove for the best that was in his reach.
One of the most serious jars of Jasper’s life was his conflict with some of his brethren in connection with his notable and regrettable sermon on the motion of the sun. Intelligent people do not need to be told that Jasper knew nothing of natural science, and that his venture into the field of astronomy was a blunder. It was a matter that did not in the least involve his piety or his salvation, nor even his ministerial efficiency. His whole bearing in the matter was so evidently sincere, and his respect for the Bible, as he understood it, was so unmeasured that it set him off rather to an advantage than to a disadvantage. It is told in another place how he was drawn into the preaching of that sermon which gave him an odd, and yet a genuine, celebrity. It was no love for sensation and no attempt to show his learning, but simply an attempt to vindicate the Bible as he understood it. When the sermon was first delivered it created a wide-spread sensation. Some of the coloured ministers of Richmond were shocked out of their equanimity, and they felt that something must be done. It was a case of hysterics. In a fit of freakish courage some of them made an attack on Jasper. A letter was written to a Richmond paper and signed by several prominent negro Baptists, one of them being the pastor of a strong church. In this letter Jasper’s sermons were bitterly denounced, and they were spoken of as “a base fabrication,” out of time and place, and doing more harm than good. It was said further that these sermons had drawn such crowds that it had resulted in the injury of a number of persons, and that a better way for the author of these sermons would be for him to preach Jesus Christ and Him crucified.
Some time after this the Ebenezer Baptist Church called a conference to consider the situation and to see if matters could not be adjusted. Jasper was an ardent believer in the independence of the individual Baptist church, and he was summoned to appear before that conference. He refused to go, saying that he did not recognize the authority of the church to interfere with him. Thereupon they sent a committee to him inviting him to come and make any statement that he wished to make concerning the question at issue.
He went. The point in the published letter concerning Jasper that was most offensive to him was the statement as to “base fabrication.” That hit him between the joints of the harness. His soul was stirred with a furious resentment, and when he got before that council and fell afoul of the three men who had charged him with “a base fabrication” it was a day not to be forgotten. When he had got through it would be hard to say how many baskets would have been required to hold the fragments. The man who had really written the letter suddenly discovered that it had no reference on the earth to Brothel Jasper. It was intended to answer something that had been said in a paper in New York. Attempts were made to refresh his memory. Quite a respectable minister reminded this letter writer that they had talked together concerning this letter, and that the attention of the writer was called to the “base fabrication” part of it, but the memory of the brother could not be revived. No stimulant could reach the case. Other folks might charge Brother Jasper with base fabrication, but not this man. It was a lamentable and discreditable conclusion. He was crippled in both feet and respected by none. This ended the matter. Jasper strode away from the council with the marks of victory about him; and while bad feeling could not die at once, yet the attacks on Jasper went entirely out of fashion. Let it be added that there were multitudes who shared the prejudice against this old warrior, but little cared he. On he went his fine way, growing in nobleness, and loving the God in whom he believed.
Jasper’s pleasures were of the meditative sort. For a long time his church gave him an ample vacation in the summer. He retired to the country and courted its quiet. His only sport was fishing along the streams, and that suited his task. If the fish didn’t bite, his thoughts always did. Like the fish they ran in schools, but unlike the fish they ran in all weathers and in all seasons. But Jasper never achieved marked success in the art of recreation. Go where he might, his fame was there to confront and to entangle him.
Demands for him to preach always came in hot and thick, and there was hardly a Sunday when Jasper was in the country that he was not surrounded by a crowd and preaching with everglowing fervour and delight. Indeed, Jasper was sought after to dedicate churches, deliver lectures and to preach special sermons in every part of Virginia, and often beyond it. It was said that he preached in almost every county and city in Virginia. He was the one ever sought Virginia preacher, and in that respect he stood unmatched by any man of his race.
As a rule, Jasper did not preach very long sermons. His Sunday afternoon sermons very rarely exceeded fifty minutes in length, but on extraordinary occasions he took no note of time. Jasper was not a sermon-maker. He did not write them, and homiletics was a thing of which he had never heard. He was fond of pictorial preaching and often selected historical topics, such as “Joseph and His Brethren” or “Daniel in the Lion’s Den,” or “The Raising of Lazarus.” He had quite a large stock of special sermons,–sermons which had grown by special use, and which embodied the choicest creations of his mind. These he preached over and over again and in his own pulpit, and without apology to anybody. But after all the themes which interested him most profoundly and on which he preached with unsurpassed ardour and rapture were the fundamental doctrines of the Scriptures. The last sermon he ever preached was on Regeneration; and on many phases of the Christian system he preached with consummate ability. He believed fully in the doctrine of future punishment, and his description of the fate of the lost made the unbelieving quake with terror and consternation. His preaching was of that fervid, startling, and threatening sort, well suited to awaken religious anxieties and to bring the people to a public confession. He was his own evangelist,–did chiefly the work of bringing his congregation to repentance, and the growth of his church consisted almost entirely of the fruit of his own ministry. His church on the island began with nine members, and it was reported that there were over 2,000 at the time of his death. He had uncommon caution about receiving people into his church. He was not willing to take people to count, and he preached searchingly to those who were thinking of applying for membership.
Just two little and yet important things call for a place in this chapter. Jasper was an inexorable debt-payer. The only debt that he could tolerate was a church debt, and he could ill tolerate that. The unsettled account of his great new church building grappled him like a nightmare. It was his burden in the day and his torturing dream at night. Even during his dying days the church debt haunted and depressed him, and loud among his parting exhortations was his insistent plea that the church debt should be speedily paid.
In his early life Jasper contracted the use of tobacco,–as, indeed, almost his entire race did, and he was also quite free with the use of alcoholic drinks,–though never, so far as is known, to the extent of intoxication. No question as to his sobriety has ever ridden the air. But these habits lingered with him long after he entered the ministry, and even until he was winning enviable and far-spreading favour as a preacher. So far as known, these facts did not becloud his reputation nor interfere with his work. Of course, he never entered a barroom, and never drank convivially, but he kept liquor in his house, and took it as his choice dictated. But gradually it worked itself into his conscience that these things were not for the best, and without the least ostentation or even publicity he absolutely abandoned the use both of tobacco and alcoholic drinks. He made no parade about it, and took on no fanatical airs. Just as he thought it was wrong to owe money which he could not pay and therefore hated a debt, so he felt that these habits, useless at best, might really be harmful to him and to others, and therefore he gave them up.
His moral and religious ideals were very lofty, and he lived up to them to a degree not true of
MONUMENT OVER JOHN JASPER’S GRAVE
many. Not long after his death a really magnificent monument was erected over his grave. It was quite costly, and the money for it was raised by his church people and other lovers of whom he had legions. While he lived, legislators, judges, governors, and many men of eminent distinction, went to hear him preach. Many of the most distinguished white ministers of the country made it a point to go to his church on Sunday afternoon whenever they were in the city, and he was justly ranked as one of the attractions of Richmond.
Now that he has found his grave not far from the site of his church, and this stately shaft has been placed as a sentinel over his dust, multitudes as they come and go will visit the tomb of the most original, masterful, and powerful negro preacher of the old sort that this country has ever produced.’ https://docsouth.unc.edu/church/hatcher/hatcher.html
Australia’s Sky News’ Outsiders television programme is on Sunday mornings while we are in the Lord’s House so we video it to watch later in the day or the next. One of those Outsiders have interviewed is Michael Shellenberger. Shellenberger wrote an article that appeared in Forbes but was quickly deleted as the PC culture is quick to act on information they want to keep from you. It is easy to see ‘The debate on climate is conducted in a climate of fear coming from the bullying guardians of orthodoxy.’ https://climatediscussionnexus.com/2020/07/01/this-just-out/
However, here is that article in full.
‘On behalf of environmentalists everywhere, I would like to formally apologize for the climate scare we created over the last 30 years. Climate change is happening. It’s just not the end of the world. It’s not even our most serious environmental problem.
I may seem like a strange person to be saying all of this. I have been a climate activist for 20 years and an environmentalist for 30.
But as an energy expert asked by Congress to provide objective expert testimony, and invited by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to serve as Expert Reviewer of its next Assessment Report, I feel an obligation to apologize for how badly we environmentalists have misled the public.
Here are some facts few people know:
Humans are not causing a “sixth mass extinction”
The Amazon is not “the lungs of the world”
Climate change is not making natural disasters worse
Fires have declined 25% around the world since 2003
The amount of land we use for meat — humankind’s biggest use of land — has declinedby an area nearly as large as Alaska
The build-up of wood fuel and more houses near forests, not climate change, explain why there are more, and more dangerous, fires in Australia and California
Carbon emissions are declining in most rich nations and have been declining in Britain, Germany, and France since the mid-1970s
Netherlands became rich not poor while adapting to life below sea level
We produce 25% more food than we need and food surpluses will continue to rise as the world gets hotter
Habitat loss and the direct killing of wild animals are bigger threats to species than climate change
Wood fuel is far worse for people and wildlife than fossil fuels
Preventing future pandemics requires more not less “industrial” agriculture
I know that the above facts will sound like “climate denialism” to many people. But that just shows the power of climate alarmism.
In reality, the above facts come from the best-available scientific studies, including those conducted by or accepted by the IPCC, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and other leading scientific bodies.
Some people will, when they read this imagine that I’m some right-wing anti-environmentalist. I’m not. At 17, I lived in Nicaragua to show solidarity with the Sandinista socialist revolution. At 23 I raised money for Guatemalan women’s cooperatives. In my early 20s I lived in the semi-Amazon doing research with small farmers fighting land invasions. At 26 I helped expose poor conditions at Nike factories in Asia.
I became an environmentalist at 16 when I threw a fundraiser for Rainforest Action Network. At 27 I helped save the last unprotected ancient redwoods in California. In my 30s I advocated renewables and successfully helped persuade the Obama administration to invest $90 billion into them. Over the last few years I helped save enough nuclear plants from being replaced by fossil fuels to prevent a sharp increase in emissions
But until last year, I mostly avoided speaking out against the climate scare. Partly that’s because I was embarrassed. After all, I am as guilty of alarmism as any other environmentalist. For years, I referred to climate change as an “existential” threat to human civilization, and called it a “crisis.”
But mostly I was scared. I remained quiet about the climate disinformation campaign because I was afraid of losing friends and funding. The few times I summoned the courage to defend climate science from those who misrepresent it I suffered harsh consequences. And so I mostly stood by and did next to nothing as my fellow environmentalists terrified the public.
I even stood by as people in the White House and many in the news media tried to destroy the reputation and career of an outstanding scientist, good man, and friend of mine, Roger Pielke, Jr., a lifelong progressive Democrat and environmentalist who testified in favor of carbon regulations. Why did they do that? Because his research proves natural disasters aren’t getting worse.
But then, last year, things spiraled out of control.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said “The world is going to end in twelve years if we don’t address climate change.” Britain’s most high-profile environmental group claimed “Climate Change Kills Children.”
The world’s most influential green journalist, Bill McKibben, called climate change the “greatest challenge humans have ever faced” and said it would “wipe out civilizations.”
Mainstream journalists reported, repeatedly, that the Amazon was “the lungs of the world,” and that deforestation was like a nuclear bomb going off.
As a result, half of the people surveyed around the world last year said they thought climate change would make humanity extinct. And in January, one out of five British children told pollsters they were having nightmares about climate change.
Whether or not you have children you must see how wrong this is. I admit I may be sensitive because I have a teenage daughter. After we talked about the science she was reassured. But her friends are deeply misinformed and thus, understandably, frightened.
I thus decided I had to speak out. I knew that writing a few articles wouldn’t be enough. I needed a book to properly lay out all of the evidence.
It is based on two decades of research and three decades of environmental activism. At 400 pages, with 100 of them endnotes, Apocalypse Never covers climate change, deforestation, plastic waste, species extinction, industrialization, meat, nuclear energy, and renewables.
Some highlights from the book:
Factories and modern farming are the keys to human liberation and environmental progress
The most important thing for saving the environment is producing more food, particularly meat, on less land
The most important thing for reducing air pollution and carbon emissions is moving from wood to coal to petroleum to natural gas to uranium
100% renewables would require increasing the land used for energy from today’s 0.5% to 50%
We should want cities, farms, and power plants to have higher, not lower, power densities
Vegetarianism reduces one’s emissions by less than 4%
Greenpeace didn’t save the whales, switching from whale oil to petroleum and palm oil did
“Free-range” beef would require 20 times more land and produce 300% more emissions
Greenpeace dogmatism worsened forest fragmentation of the Amazon
The colonialist approach to gorilla conservation in the Congo produced a backlash that may have resulted in the killing of 250 elephants
Why were we all so misled?
In the final three chapters of Apocalypse Never I expose the financial, political, and ideological motivations. Environmental groups have accepted hundreds of millions of dollars from fossil fuel interests. Groups motivated by anti-humanist beliefs forced the World Bank to stop trying to end poverty and instead make poverty “sustainable.” And status anxiety, depression, and hostility to modern civilization are behind much of the alarmism
Once you realize just how badly misinformed we have been, often by people with plainly unsavory or unhealthy motivations, it is hard not to feel duped.
Will Apocalypse Never make any difference? There are certainly reasons to doubt it.
The news media have been making apocalyptic pronouncements about climate change since the late 1980s, and do not seem disposed to stop.
The ideology behind environmental alarmsim — Malthusianism — has been repeatedly debunked for 200 years and yet is more powerful than ever.
But there are also reasons to believe that environmental alarmism will, if not come to an end, have diminishing cultural power.
The coronavirus pandemic is an actual crisis that puts the climate “crisis” into perspective. Even if you think we have overreacted, Covid-19 has killed nearly 500,000 people and shattered economies around the globe.
Scientific institutions including WHO and IPCC have undermined their credibility through the repeated politicization of science. Their future existence and relevance depends on new leadership and serious reform.
Facts still matter, and social media is allowing for a wider range of new and independent voices to outcompete alarmist environmental journalists at legacy publications.
Nations are reverting openly to self-interest and away from Malthusianism and neoliberalism, which is good for nuclear and bad for renewables.
The evidence is overwhelming that our high-energy civilization is better for people and nature than the low-energy civilization that climate alarmists would return us to.
The invitations from IPCC and Congress are signs of a growing openness to new thinking about climate change and the environment. Another one has been to the response to my book from climate scientists, conservationists, and environmental scholars. “Apocalypse Never is an extremely important book,” writes Richard Rhodes, the Pulitzer-winning author of The Making of the Atomic Bomb. “This may be the most important book on the environment ever written,” says one of the fathers of modern climate science Tom Wigley.
“We environmentalists condemn those with antithetical views of being ignorant of science and susceptible to confirmation bias,” wrote the former head of The Nature Conservancy, Steve McCormick. “But too often we are guilty of the same. Shellenberger offers ‘tough love:’ a challenge to entrenched orthodoxies and rigid, self-defeating mindsets. Apocalypse Never serves up occasionally stinging, but always well-crafted, evidence-based points of view that will help develop the ‘mental muscle’ we need to envision and design not only a hopeful, but an attainable, future.”
That is all I hoped for in writing it. If you’ve made it this far, I hope you’ll agree that it’s perhaps not as strange as it seems that a lifelong environmentalist, progressive, and climate activist felt the need to speak out against the alarmism.
There is that slippery slope which the West is rushing down to its own demise. For instance, making so-called same-sex marriage legal was not the beginning down the slide but it certainly gave a BIG push! Therefore, ‘Let me totally clear at the outset. One of the purposes of this article is to say, “I told you so!” Or, more precisely, many of us have been predicting this moment for years. As reported in the New York Times, “A Massachusetts City Decides to Recognize Polyamorous Relationships.
The city of Somerville has broadened the definition of domestic partnership to include relationships between three or more adults, expanding access to health care. Is anyone really surprised?
After all, if the winning mantras of the same-sex “marriage” movement have been “Love is love” and “Love wins” and “I have the right to marry the one I love,” why limit that number to two? Isn’t that discriminating against love? Isn’t that simply carrying over the outdated, outmoded, limiting ways of the past?
To this day, in all my dialogue and debate with LGBTQ activists and their allies, I have yet to hear a reasonable explanation of why marriage should be limited to two people if any two people can marry. Why limit the union to two people? Based on what? All the solid arguments for limiting marriage to two people are, ultimately, arguments for marriage being the union of a male and a female. All other arguments fall short. Very short. (For a glaring illustration, see here.)
When it comes to polyamory, which can include virtually any combination or number of men and women, on what basis should the government not recognize such relationships? Is not love still love? Does not love still win? And is not love the only thing that matters? So the argument goes.
Today, we’re talking about just one city in Massachusetts extending health benefits to polyamorous families. But one city is all that is needed to begin a trend. That’s also why this is national news, even in the midst of an unrelenting, tumultuous news cycle.
As for warning about this for years, polyamory was mentioned frequently in my book A Queer Thing Happened to America, published in 2011, but with research for the book dating back to 2005.
In fact, in the book I drew attention to a polyamory seminar hosted by the Metropolitan Community Churches – obviously, pro-LGBT churches – back in 2005: “Yes, ‘polyamory’ – in other words, having multiple sexual partners (loving, of course!) – was also a topic of discussion at the MCC conference, and church members were encouraged to come out of the closets with their ongoing, multiple sexual relationships.”
Again, this was at a church conference in 2005. And even then, this trend had been building for years. We told you so!
In the book I also quoted polyamorous advocates who marched prominently in gay pride parades, stating, “We’re 30 years behind the gay activist movement.” They probably underestimated the timeline. (On a different but related front, I could point to articles like, “Here Come the Polygamists,” dating back to 2012.)
In my 2015 book, Outlasting the Gay Revolution, I wrote, “Perhaps we should change the wedding vows to sound more like this (with the man speaking here): ‘I take you as my wife, but probably not for life. I take you as my own, but not just you alone. I pledge myself to you, and perhaps to others too. I take you as my bride, although your name is Clyde.’
“Is this really so farfetched? If you can have a bride and a broom, if ‘husbands’ can be women and ‘wives’ can be men, if you can be married and dating and swinging and swapping, if you live together before marriage and end the marriage whenever it suits you best, then what does ‘marriage’ mean?”
Back in 2015, Stephen Colbert mocked the idea of a slippery moral slope when it came to redefining marriage. The reality of the matter, as he likely knew, was that the mocking predictions he made had already come to pass. I illustrated all that in this video. You can mock, but you can’t deny reality. (Take a minute to watch. You’ll be shocked.)
In saying all this, I am not saying that gay couples do not love each other or that gay couples will inevitably become polyamorous throuples and beyond. I’m simply stating the obvious: if two men or two women can “marry,” then there is nothing sacrosanct about the number two. Any potential number will do, as long as the relationships are based on “love.”
Already in March, 2016, Oliver Bateman wrote on Mic.com, “When it comes to marriage, three is still a crowd. But that might be changing sooner than we think. According to a 2015 Gallup poll, a small-yet-growing percentage of Americans report that they find the concept of plural marriage ‘morally acceptable,’ while polyamorous relationships are increasingly receiving mainstream media coverage. A 2014 Newsweek article even estimates that there are more than 500,000 openly polyamorous families living in the United States today.”
