Deconstructing a Radically Autonomous Box of Subjectivity Part II

treeThordaddy gave me a lot of material to work with in the comment section of my last blog post “Deconstructing a Radically Autonomous Box of Subjectivity.” A great deal of what he pontificates about there has to do with abortion and contraception and the impact he believes they are having on his “race.” The perpetuation of his race seems to be equated with Christianity in his mind even though there is no scriptural or any other basis to support this. Quite simply, no where in the New Testament does Christ, St. Paul or any other writer talk about the preservation of one’s race as a priority spiritual or otherwise. If fact, the great commandment to love one’s neighbor directly transcends the very idea of racial priorities.

One claim he has been harping on lately is his feeling that liberals claim or believe “abortion [to be] a reproductive right” and by making this claim they equate abortion with reproduction. I have tried to explain to him that if some liberals do say “abortion is a reproductive right” what they probably mean is that the legal right to have an abortion is related to the right to reproduce and not that they are equal. He, however, proceeds with his rants as if this most obvious point was never made. This ability of his to wear intellectual horse blinders is exactly what I am talking about when I say that he exists in his own box of subjectivity. Within this box he his free to believe what he wants and to ignore the most obvious facts or logic if they conflict with his subjective viewpoint.

Another claim of his is, “THE ISSUE at hand is the white race’s existential crisis (and with him a dying Christianity) and the SELF-ANNIHILATING ETHOS of the liberals AND mainstream liberal ‘Christians.’” What I find interesting here is that he equates the ultimate survival of one’s “race” with one’s self. Moreover he sees the survival of the “white race” as the primary goal of Christianity. He often accuses “liberals” of believing in “self-annihilation for salvation” to which I think he is saying that liberals believe they achieve spiritual salvation through the annihilation of their race. Given that he is so obsessed will race, I suppose it makes some sense that he would feel this way. However, I am pretty sure no one he labels as a liberal Christian thinks race and spiritual salvation have any real connection at all. They are apples and oranges. As such, his accusation although it probably makes sense inside his box of subjectivity makes no sense outside of it in objective reality.

When asked what his basis within Christian dogma is for his beliefs his response is that Christ was a perfect man. Based on this premise he feels that man can strive to imitate this perfection which he also refers to as supremacy. This seems to be his rational for his doctrine of racist white supremacy although the logical connection between Christ’s perfection and the white race he feels to exist is unclear to me. This is especially true when considering the fact that Jesus himself was not a white man. Either Jesus was perfect in all things but race (which would make him imperfect) or his Semitic race is the perfect race (which would make the white race incapable of becoming perfect). Obviously, his logic seems to break down when subjected to scrutiny but I suppose inside his box of subjectivity (where rational scrutiny does not exist) it makes perfect sense.

He does make a point that the use of contraception demonstrates a desire not to reproduce specifically as to the sex act during which the contraception is used. However, he mistakenly expands this concept universally, claiming that the use of contraception demonstrates a desire never to reproduce at all (and by extension to annihilate one’s race). Obviously his expansion ignores the fact that a couple who uses contraception in one instance can and do choose not to use it in order to procreate in another. (Again, his box of subjectivity allows for this). He then argues that this desire not to procreate is an act of “self-annihilation.” Now obviously I still exist after I have had sex using contraception. So I must assume he equates the passing of my genetic material on to the next generation keeps me existing in some way. The fact that he places such importance upon the perpetuation of a blood line is interesting in and of itself. However, the fact that he wants to attribute this perpetuation of a blood line as a Christian spiritual priority is a bit bizarre. It is more than obvious to probably every other self-identified Christian that the physical blood line and race are of zero importance to spiritual salvation. There is no scriptural basis to his argument. Nor does his strange argument carry water that Christ’s spiritual perfection advocates for a doctrine of white racism.

I did bring up the example of a celibate religious and asked if this was not an example of self-annihilation according to his unique viewpoint. He responded, “No… Because the truly celibate stands as empirical exemplar of immaculate spiritual, intellectual and physical discipline. His incredible discipline is neither the thought of nor an act of self-annihilation.” This seems to be a weakness in his argument that the primary goal of Christianity is the perpetuation of the “white” race. By leaving room for spiritual (i.e., non physical or racial) salvation and ignoring the fact that the consequences of a lifetime of celibacy are far more devastating than the occasional use of contraception in terms of perpetuating the white race seems inconsistent at best.

He goes on to say, “The intent of the truly celibate IS NOT TO self-annihilate or refuse to bring more of one’s Self into this world, but rather, a calling to bring the most spiritually, intellectually and physically disciplined SELF that one can muster into REALITY.” By this he seems to argue that intent is the metric by which one can be labeled a “self-annihilator”. In other words, in order for one to be a self-annihilator he must intend to be one. I am pretty sure, however, that if I suggested it is not my intent to self-annihilate when I use contraception that he would not concede the point.

Advertisements

96 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

96 responses to “Deconstructing a Radically Autonomous Box of Subjectivity Part II

  1. thordaddy

    wS…

    The first thing you must realize is that although one of us was raised Christian and one of us was raised non-religious, both of us were raised to be anti-white Supremacists and only YOU have failed to question such an upbringing.

    And now as a grown adult, YOU ARE FIGHTING HARD to never be a genuine white Supremacist.

    And the practical result is your own self-annihilation.

    • Maybe I don’t understand what you mean by “self annihilation.” Please define this term as you understand it.

      • thordaddy

        Annihilation of the Self… Spiritual, intellectual and physical… No Perfect God + No Perfect Man = infinite regress.

      • But how can a person annihilate themselves? Will we not all die some day? Will the earth not get swallowed up by the sun eventually? Are you talking about the annihilation of the soul?

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        A person can annihilate his Self with acts of self-annihilations. The most obvious acts of self-annihilation being suicide and abortion, but more subtle acts being homosexuality, miscegenation and contraception.

        And eventually dying just isn’t “speaking” about the subject of purposeful self-annihilation nor touching on the issue of interpreting Christ’s teachings as “self-annihilation for salvation.”

      • According to your belief system do these acts equate to the death of the soul?

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        No… But they could render the soul interned in a state of genuine radical autonomy, ie., Hell DUE a real desire to annihilate one’s own being.

      • Where does that idea come from?

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        Which idea is that? Indestructible soul? Hell per “soulful” desire? What idea are you inferring?

      • Surely if the preservation of one’s physical body and race were a Christian priority it would be mentioned somewhere in the Bible. I don’t see it in the 10 Commandments or the OT laws nor do I see it in the teachings of Christ in the NT. On what do you base your unique theory?

      • thordaddy

        wS

        The problem is that you possess no concept of “race” above and beyond mere skin color. Your race is your father(s) and so the preservation of your race in relation to Christianity takes on a whole new life once your conceptual range is broadened. You won’t go there though.

      • Where does Jesus address the idea of racial preservation? I can cite several examples in the Bible where he and others express ideas contrary to your theories racial preservation.

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        First, YOU DEFINE “racial preservation” since this is your phrase for what I imagine you conceive of as anti-self annihilation. Ergo, if one is against self-annihilation then he just is for “racial preservation,” ie., he just is “racist?”

        And then state clearly whether you believe the overall essence of Christ’s teaching is to self-annihilate… Christ’s teachings are “anti-racist?”

      • Christ taught love of neighbor. This does not speak one way or the other about racial preservation or annihilation.

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        I’ve not stated that Christ taught “racial preservation.” I have only countered that interpreting his teachings as a call to self-annihilate is erroneous if not diabolical. Furthermore, I have only asserted per Christian belief that Christ is The Perfect Man and thus empirical falsification of any and all claims to the totalitarian claim of “universal equality.”

        What are you actually disputing?

      • Who has interpreted Christ’s teachings as a call to self-annihilate? Race is irrelevant to Christ’s teachings.

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        This is the practical effect of claiming Christ’s teachings have no racial relevance. Which to you really means that you do not interpret Christianity through your father(s). But you just will not go here explicitly and fully assimilate this very suppressed belief of yours.

      • Love your neighbor (indeed love your enemies) is the key Christian message but just will not go there.

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        But we do seem to tentatively agree that Christ teaches neither “racial preservation” nor self-annihilation. And these understandings in no way undermine the legitimacy of white Supremacy, ie., white men striving towards objective Supremacy.

      • Christ’s teachings do undermine your notions of white supremacy to the extent it conflicts with the commandment to love your neighbor regardless of race.

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        You definition of “neighbor” is, in fact, the anti-neighbor necessary to the “truth” of your interpretation. In other words, neighbors ARE NOT de facto enemies for the purpose of practicing “Christian” self-annihilation where “enemy” is erroneously defined externally when it is truly within aimed at annihilating the SELF.

      • When you say “self annihilation” what you really mean is “racial annihilation.” Correct?

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        The commandment is “love thy neighbor AS thy self.”

        This is not racial because it is a universal call to choose good neighbors in the context of known Creation… Choose neighbors who are equivalent of a good and lovable self.

        What it is not is a call for totalitarian Liberalism to forcibly integrate hostile entities and then limp-wristed “Christians” arguing for a self-annihilating “neighborly” behavior only ever practiced by one noticeable side.

      • Matthew 5:46 directly contradicts your assertion.

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        It absolutely does not… It merely asks a question and insinuates an answer… One I can wholeheartedly agree with. But this is entirely separate from defining your neighbor as your enemy for the purpose of practicing racial self-annihilation.

      • I know of no one defines their neighbor as their enemy for the purpose of self annihilation. Who do you feel does this and how? Please be specific.

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        No… You just interpret “Iove thy neighbor as thyself” as a call for forcibly integrating races of men to what is NOW KNOWN to have deleterious consequences for all.

      • No… I interpret “love thy neighbor” as a command to “love thy neighbor.” That is Christianity. If you find that it conflicts with your personal beliefs maybe you should reconsider whether you are a Christian.

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        But that’s not the commandment…

        And the conflict IS MANUFACTURED for the purpose of breaking Christianity down INTO dank Liberalism.

        It’s as though you didn’t CHOOSE your neighbors and by implication harmoniously fused this choice within the definition of “neighbor?”

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        The COMMANDMENT in totality is “love thy neighbor AS thy self.”

        SO STEP ONE is take an assessment of the “love of thy self.”

        There is no commandment to “love thy self” wholly.

        So in step two, the commandment is an equivocation… To the degree one loves thy self is to the extent one should love thy neighbor. A civil reciprocation defining the nature of “neighborhood.” There is nothing in this interpretation that suggests “loving” unlovable hostile entities as “neighbors” which is inevitably where your extreme interpretation takes “us.”

      • Ok. So since you hate your neighbor according to your interpretation of this commandment you must then hate yourself. Isn’t this equivalent self-annihilation?

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        Lol… What? I don’t actually know my neighbors. Not even in acquaintance.

      • Then why such push back against the obvious plain meaning of the commandment to love thy neighbor?

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        Why do you keep chopping the phrase in half so that it does not appear a call for general reciprocation amongst neighbors rather than outright submission to hostile entities in direct proximity?

      • thordaddy

        And there is no “pushback.” The general thrust of the phrase is entirely sensible to me. Ergo, I agree with the demand. What is in dispute is your actual interpreting of this “command” which you keep distorting by leaving out “as thyself.”

      • There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. Gal 3:28

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        That quote is not a literal interpretation of Created reality as it wouid be senseless to give name to that which does not exist, rather, it is a testament to the truth that the path to Perfection is open to all willing souls.

      • You never answered my question. When you say “self annihilation” you really mean “racial annihilation.”

      • And that all worldly concerns such as race are irrelevant.

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        It makes no sense to claim “things” of the Created world as irrelevant. But to the degree to which your assert your own racial makeup as irrelevant is to the degree that you practice a form of racial self-annihilation.

      • When you say self annihilation you mean racial annihilation correct?

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        No… When I write of self-annihilation, I am referencing the totality of annihilating all aspects of the self including the spiritual, intellectual and physical self. When I speak of racial self-annihilation, I am speaking of the annihilation of one’s racial self WHICH may or may not have spiritual, intellectual and physical relevance to he who annihilates his racial being?

        IF… You possess no racial self then annihilating your racial self will not make any sense to you and will fail to register to you as a distinct phenomenon?

      • Then how does the use of contraception amount to self annihilation according to your theoretical construct?

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        Contraception JUST IS against conception. The intent and use of contraception JUST IS the intent and aim of contra-(ac)cepting one’s procreative act.

        BUT…

        If “conception” holds no conceptual substance to *you* beyond a mere “beginning” then you will be hardly expected to sense “contraception” as the actually “end of a beginning.”

      • But contraception is not SELF annihilation. You can at least agree to that.

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        It all depends on where the “contra” is in relation to a conception and to the degree to which one understands the link between the thought of self-annihilation and its instantly combustible actualization?

      • I use contraception. I still exist and I have reproduced twice. In what way have I annihilated myself?

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        That’s like saying, “I smoke a pack a day… I still exist and have two children. So how is smoking cigarettes really killing me?”

        There is the THOUGHT of self-annihilation IMPLICIT in the PURPOSEFUL ACT of using a contraceptive DEVICE and then there is the actualization of self-annihilation in the FACT of a real CONTRAception. With these understandings, one can be certain (and thus beguiling) in the former case and only uncertain (and thus blissfully
        ignorant) in the latter case.

      • So you are saying I should have as many children as I possibly can regardless of my ability to provide for them?

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        Let’s make this more obvious…

        IF you were to kill one of your children right now (God forbid), would you not being killing a part of your Self? Yes or no?

        Now, if you were to CONSENT to the killing of your child within the time of her conception until her birth, would you not being killing a part of yourself? Yes or no?

        So, if in using contraception your intent is to bring forth no more parts of your Self into this world then to this mindset is a fundamental tolerance for self-annihilation.

        The caveat, IN YOUR MIND, is that you use contraception for really no reason at all and especially not for the purpose of thwarting a greater projection of one’s Self into this world!!!

        What IS CONTRACEPTION in your mind IF “it” is not self-annihilation?

        Responsible family planning?

        Can you not put 1+1 together?

        Responsible family planning = self-annihilation!!!

        This IS THE Liberal screed and has NOTHING to do with Christianity and Christianity grants no leeway to contraception.

      • If true then you must say the same for someone who chooses a celebrate life or someone who simply decides not to have sex when they have the opportunity to do so. For they too are choosing to bring no more of themselves into the world. What about a rapist who decides not to go through with it? Is he too a self annihilation according to your way of thinking? Discipline aside the result is the same.

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        I am saying that if you will not strive towards objective Supremacy as a white man then AT LEAST reject all thoughts and acts of self-annihilation as an individual.

      • I have no idea what you mean by striving for objective supremacy or why it matters that I do so as a white man or what any of this has to do with Christianity.

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        The question is which is actually compatible with Christianity?

        You say liberalism is compatible with Christianity even though it leads to the physical annihilation of the Christian adherent per liberalism…

        And I say white Supremacy is compatible with Christianity BECAUSE wS faithfully agrees with Christianity that Christ is The Perfect Man and falsifies “universal equality,” ie., Redundancy as “highest truth.”

      • I have never said liberalism is compatible with Christianity. I have only ever said that white supremacy is incompatible with Christianity because it violates the Great Commandment to love thy neighbor.

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        How in the world does a white man striving towards objective Supremacy violate the Commandment to “love thy neighbor AS THY SELF?”

        You simply will not step out of the liberal frame even to protect the integrity of Christianity.

      • Define “white man striving for objective supremacy” and I will tell you how it violates the Great Commandment to Love thy Neighbor as Thyself.

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        A white man whose thoughts and actions are oriented towards Perfection, ie., objective Supremacy, is a white Supremacist. There is nothing more to define. All that is left is willing one’s thought and then action towards Perfection, necessarily invoking great faith. In this, there is no contradiction nor disagreement with “love thy neighbor as thy self.”

        You are the one mandating a total deracination and asking others to self-annihilate for the cause of welcoming an intimately hostile “neighbor.”

      • Your “definition” doesn’t clear anything up because I have no idea what you mean by perfection. Does perfection mean following the teachings of Christ?

        BTW – I feel like we’re going in circles so unless you plan on responding with something new we should probably end this.

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        How can I define another man’s path to Perfection? How could I define Perfection more succinctly than objective Supremacy? How are “we” Christians other than to say we have faith in Christ’s perfect will… Faith in His Will to do all right?

        Must I now define “right?” And then define “wrong?”

        Creating imaginary hurdles with heights of even conceptual inconceivability changes YOUR task not one iota.

        IF you are a true Christian THEN your thoughts and actions are oriented, BY DEFINITION, towards Perfection.

        BUT…

        If “we” are going around and around DEBATING the actual truth of Christ’s teachings THEN “we” are forced to find common ground SOMEWHERE ELSE. The common ground is Christ as The Perfect Man and falsification of “universal equality.” This is where white Christians and white Supremacists are exactly equal. This is where there is no schism amongst Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant or wS.

        Deny this and you deny reality as an anti-Christian.

      • Well you believe hatred of the black man simply because he is black as a moral right. That is not perusing perfection to me. Nor is it adhering to the great commandment to love thy neighbor as thy self.

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        Lol… Where did I say this* or is this JUST HOW you define “white supremacy” in a subtle ode to Liberalism?

        * I said I hate evil. Niggers are evil. Thus, I hate niggers. The trick is in you MAINTAINING no distinction between black man and nigger. “They” are one in the same per your ideological submission to “equality.” Christianity makes no claim on the legitimacy of the specific articulation in question, but does quite evidently “speak” a hatred for evil in a morally righteous voice.

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        A distinct subset of the radical “black” collective who are known to scare the sheeeeeeeeeet out of Jesse Jackson as he walk alone down Dark Ghetto Dr.

      • So you are talking about people who ACT badly, correct?

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        I’m talking about those who IF YOU WERE FORCED TO CALL YOUR “neighbor” would then cause you to self-annihilate… That’s a nigger.

      • Is it their behavior or is it the color of their skin that defines them according to your personal belief system?

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        In the nigger, dyscivic behavior and skin color are synonymous. So it’s all the above. But the REAL kicker is the totalitarian liberal forcing this “neighbor” upon the civilized and claiming it must by loved lest one be a bad Christian.

      • I know that’s how you feel but there is nothing in the teachings of Christ, St. Paul, the church fathers or doctors to support that feeling.

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        Is there a major malfunctioning going on with you? “Feel?” How does “feel” have anything to do with anything? What does Christ and the Bible have to do the existence of niggers, the totalitarian mob of liberals and crazy liberal “Christians” CLAIMING that niggers MUST BE “our” “neighbors” and MUST BE loved like “thy self?”

        This ^^^ is called MADNESS!

      • You claim that Christ taught hatred of neighbor. I am disputing this emotionally based assertion of yours.

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        I claimed no such thing. Quote or retract.

        What I said is that Christ taught the key to neighborhood is reciprocation… Love thy neighbor as thy self.

        This is something wholly different from the liberal’s mandate to forced integration.

      • You are shifting your view in the right direction. Before you claimed that because you did not love yourself (a self-annihilating quality btw) you are under no obligation to love your neighbor. Now you are saying the love of neighbor must be reciprocal (regardless of race). Good progress!

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        Man, you are playing dense.

        No… I didn’t claim to hate myself or love myself.

        I asked WHAT HAPPENS to your interpretation when the subject in question DOES NOT LOVE THY SELF? How does he then “love” his neighbor?

        The command is NEITHER “love thy self” nor “love thy neighbor.”

        The command is “love thy neighbor AS thy self.”

        BUT…

        What of those who do not love themselves AND ARE NOT COMMANDED by Scripture to do so? In fact, they are commanded TO GIVE ALL THEIR LOVE to God per The Greatest Commandment.

        So how do YOU reconcile these things?

      • The commandment is to love God will all your heart. This does not preclude you from loving something else with all your heart. It speaks to the intensity of love not to the percentage of love you are capable of doling out. Love does not work that way.

        Let me ask you this… Do you love yourself?

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        I take my existence as a unique blessing.

      • So you love yourself then?

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        I wouldn’t say that… I’ve never said that as far I recall.

        I will say that I do not hate my life. I hate evil though.

      • But isn’t that a self annihilating tendency to not love yourself? Why would you want to keep bringing more of yourself into the world if you don’t love yourself?

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        No… Not at all… Especially when The Greatest Commandment is give ALL THY LOVE to God.

        This leaves NO REAL ROOM to love thy self.

        But…

        Certainly, hating one’s self and one’s existence is a self-annihilating ethos.

        Yet… It’s not either/or…

        It is not love God with all thy heart or hate one’s self…

        And it is not love thy self or hate thy self…

        It is love God with all thy heart and hate self-annihilation.

      • The greatest commandment does not say to give all your love to God. It says to love God with all your heart and mind. This speaks to the intensity of love not the percentage of love one has to give. Your interpretation renders the second greatest commandment meaningless which was clearly not the intent.

        However, If you have no love for yourself why would you want to bring more of yourself into the world? What’s the point?

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        Because you love your children…

      • So my children are different than me? I thought you equated having children as bringing more of myself in the world.

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        What are you actually arguing for? Can you just not admit that you believe in loving all equally from Saint to devil to daughter and nigger to self and other?

        That part of your children which is “you” is you in your children… That part that is your wife’s is different than you.

        Is this really difficult to comprehend?

        And rather than rendering the second commandment meaningless as you do when you suffocate it with “equality,” I stated what is a straightforward interpretation towards a neighborly existence… A reciprocated love that can potentially grow… One not forced upon its participants… One not mandated by outsiders… One not under the cultural zeitgeist to turn “neighbor” and “neighborhood” on its head demanding it consist only of those deemed dyscivic, suspicious, angry and otherwise very unneighborly.

      • If you give all your love to God such that there is none left for self and neighbor how is there any left for children?

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        I never claimed to give all thy love to God… Only that I intend to strive towards objective Supremacy.

        But…

        I do agree to the soundness of The Greatest Commandment.

      • But didn’t you say that you don’t love yourself because you give all your love to God and so therefore you are under no obligation to love your neighbor?

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        No… I didn’t say that. I only said that I desire and intend to strive towards objective Supremacy and this desire does not contravene The Greatest Commandment nor the commandment “to love thy neighbor as thy self.” In fact, this desire seeks to run concordant with The Greatest Commandment.

      • You said you love your children but you also said that you must give all your love to God such that you have no love left over for self and neighbor. How is this possible?

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        No… That’s not what I wrote. I wrote that YOU love your children (and thus a reason to perpetuate A PART of your Self) and that The Greatest Commandment commands ALL love to God which then DOES NOT contradict the second commandment to neighborly reciprocity.

      • But you claim using contraception is an act of SELF-annihilation. Why then is the love of your children not an expression of SELF-love?

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        The belief is that with all one’s love to God, one can truly love his Self and his children and his neighbor… These “loves” are not equal per se nor would they seem to be more or less whole than one another. What seems to be is that they all grow in relation to how faithfully one embraces The Greatest Commandment. But even once there… Even when one has convinced himself that to love
        God with all thy heart and mind, he STILL DESIRES to KNOW what he loves?

        The Christian LOVES objective Supremacy… Perfection.

        If one is truly attempting to fulfill the totality of The Greatest Commandment… To love God with all thy heart and mind THEN he IS SEEKING Perfection.

        And from this seeking INSPIRES the chaos and evil-doers.

        Whose side are you actually on. wS?

  2. thordaddy

    White Supremacy is how *you* escape radical liberation. And you put your mind at ease KNOWING that your highest truth STILL IS Christ as The Perfect Man and indisputable falsification of “universal equality.”

    I KNOW these truths can be beaten into your head BECAUSE that is exactly what it will take.

  3. thordaddy

    wS…

    You are free to interpret Christ’s teachings as a call to self-annihilate, but it is YOUR INSISTENCE that those who “see” this interpretation as incredibly erroneous JUST BECAUSE “it” is an interpretation to annihilate the self as beyond-the-pale (pun intended?) that has you appear a most radical of translators.

  4. thordaddy

    wS…

    What do YOU call the phenomenon of equating Biblical celibacy to racial self-annihilation, ie., pathological deracination?

    With that absurdity only compounded when added to a previous argument insinuating that self-annihilation is not to be found in the acts of abortion and contraception…

  5. Pingback: The Zero Sum Game of White Supremacist Love | Winston Scrooge

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s