“Educate Yourself”: Seattle Human Rights Commission Dismisses Complaint Over Requiring Whites To Pay “Reparations Fees” For Pride Event

There is a controversy in Seattle over plans for a pride event to charge people more based on their race. The Seattle Human Rights Commission is under fire this week after sending a letter dismissing a complaint over the announcement that the Taking B(l)ack Pride on June 26th would charge White entrants a “reparations” fee. The Commission told Charlette LeFevre and Philip Lipson of Capitol Hill Pride that they needed to “educate” themselves and consider the harm that they would cause by being participants in the event.  Update: While the response of the Commission caused outrage from many, Lipson and LeFevre quickly apologized for even raising the issue.

Promotional material for Taking B(l)ack Pride was posted on Facebook as a “BLACK AND BROWN QUEER TRANS CENTERED, PRIORITIZED, VALUED, EVENT.” The Facebook page adds: “White allies and accomplices are welcome to attend but will be charged a $10 to $50 reparations fee that will be used to keep this event free of cost for BLACK AND BROWN Trans and Queer COMMUNITY.”

Capitol Hill Pride organizers Philip Lipson and Charlette LeFevre  took offense and wrote to the Commission that “We consider this reverse discrimination in its worse (sic) form and we feel we are being attacked for not supporting due to disparaging and hostile e-mails. Please review this event’s stated admission policy as we feel this event is violating Seattle, King County, State and Federal equality laws.”

It would seem a fair complaint since the event was engaging in open racial discrimination. After all, the Seattle Human Rights Commission advises the city “in order to educate them on methods to prevent and eliminate discrimination city-wide.”  Lipson and LeFevre however received a letter that shamed them for even raising a racially discriminatory practice.

The Commission not only shamed them but posted the response so others could read.  The Commission advised them if possible, to “educate yourself on the harm it may cause Seattle’s BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, People of Color) in your pursuit of a free ticket to an event that is not expressly meant for you and your entertainment.”

The Commission stressed that charging people more based on race does not violate Take B(l)ack Pride “does not in fact violate any of your human rights as stated in the UN Declaration of Human Rights.” The Commission justified the discriminatory policy on the basis of past discrimination against these groups:

“They often face shame not only from the cis-heteronormative community, but within the queer community at large as well. In making the event free for the Black Queer Community, the organizers of this event are extending a courtesy so rarely extended; by providing a free and safe space to express joy, share story, and be in community.

…Furthermore, we would urge you to examine the very real social dynamics and ramifications of this issue.”

We recently discussed how the Biden Administration has been held to be discriminating in different programs giving preferences based on race and gender. What is interesting is that the Commission only considers itself as operating under the United Nations Declaration and makes no reference to the United States Constitution which prohibits such discrimination. Indeed, racist organizations once justified excluding minorities from lunch counters and events based on the claim that such spaces are not set aside for such individual or their entertainment.

Nevertheless, such “justice pricing” is in vogue. Groups are now increasing asserting that they should be allowed to engage in raw discrimination as victims of past discrimination.

This is a private group but it appears to be selling tickets and may require a city permit. The city anti-discrimination laws cover all public accommodations and prohibit discrimination based on race.  The Seattle Office for Civil Rights enforces Seattle’s civil rights laws which include protections against discrimination in employment, public places, housing, and contracting.

Notably, this sensitive subject has led to some sharp words even on the Supreme Court. Chief Justice John Roberts famously wrote in 2007 that “The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.”  In 2014, the Court ruled 6-2 in Schuette v. Bamn, that Michigan’s constitutional amendment banning affirmative action was constitutional.  Justice Sotomayor chided Roberts with a reframing of his famous line by saying: “The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to speak openly and candidly on the subject of race, and to apply the Constitution with eyes open to the unfortunate effects of centuries of racial discrimination.” She went on to write in dissent:

“Race matters. Race matters in part because of the long history of racial minorities being denied access to the political process. … Race also matters because of persistent racial inequality in society — inequality that cannot be ignored and that has produced stark socioeconomic disparities.

And race matters for reasons that really are only skin deep, that cannot be discussed any other way, and that cannot be wished away…Race matters because of the slights, the snickers, the silent judgments that reinforce that most crippling of thoughts: ‘I do not belong here.'”

“The dissent states that ‘[t]he way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to speak openly and candidly on the subject of race.’ And it urges that ‘[r]ace matters because of the slights, the snickers, the silent judgments that reinforce that most crippling of thoughts: ‘I do not belong here.’

But it is not ‘out of touch with reality’ to conclude that racial preferences may themselves have the debilitating effect of reinforcing precisely that doubt, and — if so — that the preferences do more harm than good. To disagree with the dissent’s views on the costs and benefits of racial preferences is not to ‘wish away, rather than confront’ racial inequality. People can disagree in good faith on this issue, but it similarly does more harm than good to question the openness and candor of those on either side of the debate.”

What is disconcerting is not just the dismissive attitude of the Commission but how it views discriminatory policies as secondary or irrelevant to human rights if it favors particular groups.  It does not matter that people are treated differently solely on the basis of their race. Indeed, it does not even warrant a consideration of countervailing constitutional and legal authorities. It is done in the name of equity and thus it is treated as not just correct but beyond question. Indeed, an objection to the policy is treated as a lack of understanding and sensitivity, requiring further education.

The question is now what the City of Seattle will do and whether a court will give this matter more thought than did the Seattle Human Rights Commission.  However, Lipson and LeFevre are not likely to raise the matter. They apologized for even raising the issue after a torrent of criticism and cancellations of their own event. They declared themselves educated and regretful as the Commission suggested.



199 thoughts on ““Educate Yourself”: Seattle Human Rights Commission Dismisses Complaint Over Requiring Whites To Pay “Reparations Fees” For Pride Event”

  1. “I’ve taken doctoral courses in math, so you need not wonder.”

    But, Anonymous the Stupid, you didn’t get your PhD. We all know why.

    1. Allanonymous doesn’t understand that his attempted insult only demonstrates his own reasoning errors.

      1. Anonymous the Stupid, it was a deserved remark. You used a logical fallacy in argument (appeal to authority), but it turns out you are not even an authority. Listening to your remarks tells us a lot about you and lets us know more about the reason.

        1. LOL, Allan, appeals to authority generally aren’t fallacious (I even gave you an explanation from a philosopher about this previously), and you don’t need a Ph.D. to know what “solved” means for grade school math.

          You have such a strong desire to denigrate, and every time you just make yourself look worse.

          1. “appeals to authority generally aren’t fallacious”

            Anonymous the Stupid, you are so dumb. The appeal to authority was directed to comments made on this blog. Expertise cannot be transferred from the expert to a commenter. Close proximity of a commenter to an expert doesn’t make him an expert.

            Examples: I was a lab tech at Yale. I worked for the most famous nuclear scientist, therefore I know what I am talking about. I live in Malibu in an expensive house therefore I am the expert on all things or your claim of taking some doctoral courses but not having a PhD.

            As usual you are changing the subject matter, but that doesn’t work. Your dishonest attempts to distract and deceive are well known on the blog.

            1. For ATS via SM (since I don’t talk to her):
              Appeals to authority are only informal fallacies when the authority isn’t an authority on the issue after all even if he/she appear to be in some context. it’s like citing Santa Claus for weather at the North Pole. Make it a meteorologist and you’re fine.

  2. A great response from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Mark Milley, when asked about Critical Race Theory –
    twitter.com/RanttMedia/status/1407753160760889351 (video embedded in the tweet)

    1. Math isn’t racist.

      But people (math teachers, math textbook authors, …) can be racist.

      Your article claims “‘Dismantling Racism in Mathematics’ … tells teachers not to push students to find the correct answers to math problems because doing so promotes white supremacy.”

      But Dismantling Racism in Mathematics doesn’t tell teachers that. Here’s what it actually says: “white supremacy culture in the mathematics classroom can show up when:
      • There is a greater focus on getting the “right” answer than understanding concepts and reasoning …”

      As for your claim that “black kids can’t get the right answer,” some kids (and adults) of all races have difficulty with math, and some kids (and adults) of all races do well in math.

      “It is insane to lower standards to the point where even a snail can get an ‘A’ in math.”

      Is anyone suggesting that?

      1. “It is insane to lower standards to the point where even a snail can get an ‘A’ in math.”

        Is anyone suggesting that?”

        Yes. Pretty much that is the result when students are given diplomas instead of knowledge. Graduates of schools in Baltimore and Washington, DC are functionally illiterate and innumerate.

      2. “understanding concepts and reasoning …”

        Great. But how do you know if a child is “understanding concepts and reasoning …” if he doesn’t come up with the right answer once in awhile? Helluva way to design a bridge or airplane. When a wing falls off because of not getting the right answer is it enough to say you understood concepts and reasoning?

        It is just an excuse for teachers who fail to teach because too many of them have trouble “understanding concepts and reasoning …” themselves.

        1. On the contrary, you know if a child is “understanding concepts and reasoning …” by how they explain their thinking, how they respond if you ask whether there’s another way to solve the problem, how they respond if you ask whether different approaches to solving the problem have different strengths or provide different insights, etc. You can also get at their understanding of concepts by asking conceptual questions in addition to asking computational questions.

          Do you have a conceptual understanding of math? Do you recognize that many math problems can be solved in more than one way?

          Just what is your concern about having an equal emphasis on getting the right answer and on understanding concepts and reasoning?

          1. “Do you recognize that many math problems can be solved in more than one way?”

            Of course.

            But I am wondering if you know what “solved” means.

            HINT: It has something to do with the answer.

            1. I’m wondering whether you’re afraid to answer: Just what is your concern about having an equal emphasis on getting the right answer and on understanding concepts and reasoning?

          1. Appropriate video. Looks like Korean script. The Koreans know how to add 2+2 and they clearly are mocking us as idiots. Sadly, I agree with them.

            1. It is so bad that in some districts thst the student equivalent of Lieutenant Kiji could graduate with honors.

      3. A pedestrian bridge in DC collapsed injuring several people. More understanding concepts and reasoning but avoiding racist correct answers? What are the chances that the bridge was built by a minority firm under a government contract set aside?

  3. In the 70’s my black stepfather and my black boyfriend and my mom and I would be yelled at in the streets of Seattle…Ni&&er lover! I’d rather be called a Ni&&er lover than to be woke by these racist asses. Because I found all races have their racist feelings toward other tribes. No matter what they say. The proof is not what they say, but how they treat you, regardless of your color.

  4. Progressive policies including political congruence (“=”) and diversity [dogma] normalize corruption and dysfunction (e g. AIDS pandemic in the socially liberal trans/homo male community). That said, social justice anywhere is injustice everywhere. People really need to lose their Pro-Choice religion (e.g. wicked solution, denial of women and men’s dignity and agency) and genderphobia to mitigate social progress and collateral damage. Think of the cubs playing in gay revelry.

  5. The Civil War was far and away the bloodiest war in American history. Nearly 600,000 Union soldiers perished or were maimed in the war. Why, exactly, is our new Juneteenth holiday, which celebrates the emancipation of Southern slaves by the Union army, promoted as a symbol of Black victimhood and solidarity?

    In point of fact, today’s Blacks owe an immense debt of gratitude to the Union soldiers, the vast majority of them poor White males who gave their lives in the struggle to end slavery. When they are remembered at all, it is through faded inscriptions on battered old memorials that are far too often treated with scorn and ridicule. Taking it one step further, shouldn’t the descendants of these brave men be entitled to reparations from those who gained so much from their sacrifice? Want to celebrate Juneteenth? Go thank a White guy.

    These are the logical conclusions that arise from the divisive racial politics championed by today’s Progressive Democrats. Most Whites don’t think of themselves as a distinct political group. If this keeps up, they will, and history shows that situations like this don’t end well for the minority. Glen Loury over on Substack raises these issues in thought provoking way.

    The way to unity requires change and a new way of thinking. Stop defining people by arbitrary, politically expedient groups. Start defining them as people.

    1. Yes, reparations to Americans who stood and defeated slavery in its many forms.

      Loury is right. Americans are, in principle, Pro-Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness, for the People and our Posterity, without indulgence for diversity [dogma], not limited to racism, sexism, ageism, and other class-based bigotry.

    2. My great great Grandfather and immigrant from Spain was a Union soldier at Gettysburg. Her survived to have 3 more American children. He flew the USA flag daily. He did not teach them Spanish, as he said they were Americans and should speak English. He married an Irish immigrant and they had a long and happy marriage. Their children became business owners and one a Fire Chief from hard work ethic, in a time when their surname was met with prejudice. That old prejudice died about 50 years ago and with the rise in interracial marriages this one would also if they would stop resurrecting the ills of those who are long dead.

  6. Slavery in the south did not end after the civil war but continued with the implementation of the sharecropper. The sharecropper farmer was forced by coercion to accept the conditions put forth by the land owner. These conditions kept them on the farms and assured their living in poverty. Sharecropping continued for another 70 years. The ancestors of these share croppers could deserve reparations. It probably won’t happen because seventy five percent of these sharecroppers were white. Whites were kept in financial slavery along with blacks. They might have had the freedom to leave but with no money and no place to go they were just as enslaved as the blacks of the era. The modern day lineages of these farmers have not blamed their enslavement for their conditions today. There are no white race baiters today organizing on their behalf and there is no calling for reparations due to their enslavement. They were just as uneducated as the blacks. Without the blame game they were forced to make their own way in life. The result of accepting the blame game are what we see in the plight of the black community today. They have actually been hurt by people of their own race and whites eager to get their votes. Alas, an enlightenment seems far in the future. https://www.pbs.org/tpt/slavery-by-another-name/themes/sharecropping/

    1. The wrong color. Social deplorables were denied the right to arms, the right to capital (i.e. retained earnings), enjoyed the progressive margins of redistributive change, under the affirmative discimination policies of diversity, inequity, and exclusion.

    2. Allow me to summarize, clarify and resolve all the loose ends for you.

      Descendants of slaves are illegal aliens requiring deportation.

      Citizens must have been white on the date of “Crazy Abe” Lincoln’s wholly unconstitutional emancipation in 1863.

      Illegal aliens must be deported.

      Crime does not pay.

      Illegal aliens were ever only, and will always be, criminals.

      There were legal means to end slavery.

    3. The issue of reparations is a complete mess.

      Most of the slaves taken to the territorial US were imported from sub-Saharan west and central Africa. They were captured by Africans and either kept as slaves in Africa held by other Africans or sold into the slave trade. Do the African nations owe Black Americans reparations for this? Do the nations whose nationals participated in the slave trade? About 14 million African slaves captured by other Africans were sent across the Sahara to Islamic lands. Many died as they crossed the Sahara, and those who made it have no descendants in those lands today. The 11 million captured by Africans and sold into the Atlantic slave trade at least had descendants. Of the two terrible paths their African enslavers had for them, the Atlantic route was the better one from an historical perspective. And the per capita income of Black Americans today is many multiples higher than that of Africans in west and central Africa. So a terrible historical fate suffered by their ancestors left Black Americans better off materially than they would have been had their ancestors never suffered that fate. Shouldn’t any theory of reparations take this reality into account?

      Most White Americans, even in the south, did not own Black slaves. Some free Blacks owned Black slaves. Some Native Americans owned Black slaves. In fact, the last Black slaves freed in the US were the 10,000 or so held in the Indian Territories; neither the Emancipation Proclamation nor the 13th Amendment applied there, so the slaves were not freed there until the US insisted upon it in the Treaties of the summer of 1866. Even then, the Tribes dishonoured the Treaties by not admitting the former slaves into their Tribes, a violation that was not redressed until 2013, by US courts. As others have noted, many northern Whites fought and died in the Civil War, which became a war of liberation at least from the beginning of 1863when the Emancipation Proclamation came into effect. Many Whites today are descendants of immigrants who came to the US after the Civil War. Many Blacks, from Africa and the West Indies, also came to the US after the Civil War. On average, many of these Black immigrant groups have done better economically than Whites. No slave or slave owner is alive today, and none has been alive for generations. Who is to pay whom, and why?

      Nor is it clear that slavery on balance contributed to US capital accumulation or economic development. The states where slavery was most prevalent were the least economically developed; and the states where slavery was outlawed were far more advanced. Southern plantation owners spent their resources on a lavish lifestyle rather than investing in enterprises that could develop the economy; they were often in debt. The war to free the slaves was enormously costly, in lives and treasure, as adumbrated in Lincoln’s second inaugural. The balance sheet of slavery from the standpoint of US economic development may have been negative.

      Nor is it clear that disparities seen today are linked to slavery. Thomas Sowell and others have argued that high Black youth unemployment levels relative to Whites emerged only after minimum wage laws, adopted first nationally in the early 1930s, began to have effect after inflation slowed in the 1950s; that the sky high percentage of Black children growing up without two parents today is a legacy not of slavery but of the Great Society Programs of the 1960s; that the alien and hostile attitude toward education of many Black youth today also arose after the 1960s; and that the rise in the Black crime rate relative to the White crime rate emerged in the 1960s as well. June O’Neil showed long ago that when you control for age, region and years of education (without even taking its nature or quality into account) income disparities between Blacks and Whites are reduced considerably if not all but eliminated.

      Finally, since the 1960s, massive resources have in effect been transferred to the Black community through anti-poverty programs and affirmative action. These were explicitly conceived of as efforts to remedy the consequences of past discrimination and in that sense are a form of reparations.

      So, the idea of further reparations appears to me incoherent, impracticable and unjust.

      1. Daniel, you made an excellent case for you position. The problem now is that no one will dare go point by point against you but they will keep repeating themselves without adequate reflection of the history.

  7. George,

    No evidence exists in Archeology, Anthropology, History or other sciences to support the Hebrew mythologist writings that the so-called “Biblical Hebrews” ever set foot on the land of Egypt.
    For a short, popular, but scholarly understanding, you might want to read:

    The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology’s New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts, a book published in 2001, discusses the archaeology of Israel and its relationship to the origins and content of the Hebrew Bible. The authors are Israel Finkelstein, Professor of Archaeology at Tel Aviv University, and Neil Asher Silberman, an archaeologist, historian and contributing editor to Archaeology Magazine.

    There is nothing “new” or newly discovered in Messrs. Finklestein and Silberman’s book, which they make perfectly clear. What is new is that the authors direct correlate or attempt to correlate archeological evidence with the Hebrew mythologists claims.

    Worst than having no evidence to support the mythography of the Hebrew mythologists, as the authors point out countless times, is for the claims of the Hebrew mythologists to be patently violative of reason, logic and common sense. One example, is the Hebrew mythologists claim of Ancient Hebrews spending 40 years in the desert. (Frankly, my favorite is the one of a Moses parting the Red Sea to allow how many Ancient Hebrews to escape Egypt!?)

    If you were interested in “learning” who might want to take a course in Egyptology, let alone Archeology. You would “learn” the evidence exists and has existed for many, many, many, many many years that the pyramids were not built by slaves, or even Ancient Hebrew slaves, but by labors, craftsman, engineers and designers, i.e., modern day architects.

    But, wait!, the pyramids were by the Ancient Hebrew, “Joseph,” to store grain, according to the politician and neurosurgeon, Benjamin Solomon Carson Sr.

    No wait, the pyramids were built by aliens. Please most recently, Elon Musk or earlier Erich Anton Paul von Däniken

    dennis hanna

    1. dennis:

      “No evidence exists in Archeology, Anthropology, History or other sciences to support the Hebrew mythologist writings that the so-called “Biblical Hebrews” ever set foot on the land of Egypt.”
      Well, there’s is the Torah/Bible which is about as reliable as any other ancient text. So saying there is no evidence of the Exodus is like saying there is no evidence of the Gettysburg Address except … you know … the Gettysburg Address. Maybe you mean there’s no corroboration of the Biblical account in archeology (history and anthropology is a “yes” because it’s in the Hebrew versions of both) but anytime you talk archeology you get to add the qualified “yet.” Dead Sea Scrolls proved that.

    2. Moral of the Story:

      The Israelite slaves released by “Egypt” (metaphor) were so happy to be free (i.e. not consumed by covetousness and parasitism) that they got outta Dodge before sundown (metaphor again) out of self-respect, self-esteem, self-confidence, innate capability, acumen and sufficient intellectual capacity.

      The Israelite slaves were not even compelled by law (i.e. the U.S. Naturalization Act of 1802 requiring citizens to be “…free white person(s)…”) which changed their status from “slave” to “illegal alien” and which required them to be immediately deported.

      Their Exodus was desired, voluntary and intentional.

      How ’bout them Israelite slaves?

    3. “. . . the pyramids were not built by slaves . . .”


      Ancient Egypt was a dictatorial caste system, in which slavery was common. There were foreign and domestic slaves, and slaves of various ethnicities. It was a *feudal* system — a system with slavery built into it. It beggars belief to hold that such a system would *not* use slaves to build the pyramids.

      Those attempting to whitewash Egypt’s bloody history cite modern archeological “evidence” to reach the fantastic conclusion that slaves did not build the pyramids. What is that “evidence?” Tombstones found near the pyramids with official titles on them. What do those prove? Nothing — other than that some individuals who worked on the pyramids — i.e.. the Pharaoh-sanctioned officials — were buried there, and that those individuals may or may not have been slaves. The other “evidence?” The unearthing of large villages near the pyramids. What do those villages prove? That people lived there.

      To illustrate how utterly absurd this “evidence” is: There are slave burial sites, with tombstones, all over the South, near the plantations the slaves worked on. Would you conclude: Such a proximity proves that there was no slavery in the South? There are remnants of slave housing, within walking distance of the plantations they worked on. Would you conclude: Since the slaves were housed and fed, in such close proximity to the plantations, there was no slavery in the South?

      Modern “history” is like modern politics: The ends — in this case, romanticize ancient Egypt — justifies the means.

      1. Sam, I think there may be an argument that the pyramids were not chiefly built by slaves. instead they may have been public works projects. If you can find it watch Romer’s “Ancient Lives” series.

        Slavery was common throughout the world, probably even in hunter gatherer societies. North American Indians even had slaves. Egypt is no outstanding evil exception.

  8. Whites not welcomed? No problem, time to stop paying taxes. Interesting to see how long the sponging, free loading liberals/leftists/loonies last without homophobic, white supremacists to support them.

    1. Homophobia is a displacement of genderphobia exhibited by some, many individuals in the transgender spectrum and their domain enablers. A tale, a handmade tale, full of judgments, labels, and speaking truth(s) to power.

      Color supremacism (e.g. Nazis’ declaration of Jew privilege, neo-Nazis’ declaration of White privilege) is a subset of rabid diversity [dogma] (i.e. color judgment) with secular benefits.

      While bias is intrinsic, prejudice is progressive (i.e. unqualified, monotonic change): one step forward, two steps backward.

  9. They white gays who are discriminated against are paying the black gays who are discriminated against. They white gays say, “please hit me again for my great great grand daddy was a bad bad man”. I understand, sadomasochism is just a part of the accepted lifestyles. If it floats your boat on Lake What Ever Feels Good just do it.

    1. Trans/homos, sex, drugs, and abortions. Trans/bis excluded from trans/homo socials. Trans/homo superiority complex over all others in the transgender spectrum. The Rainbow banner of inclusive exclusion (black, brown, and white) appears more weathered and faded than ever. Unfortunately, it’s predictable, that political congruence (“=”), and handmade tales, will normalize progressive corruption and dysfunction.

      Meanwhile, there are parades of lions, lionesses, and their [unPlanned] cubs playing in gay revelry.

      1. n.n.:

        Amazing how the Biblical descriptions of the ancient Romans in decline mimic our own society. Lacking of martial vigor, effeminate in outlook and given over to every human lust, Paul just lays it on them:

        21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

        22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

        23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

        24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:

        25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

        26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

        27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

        28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

        29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,

        30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,

        31 Without understanding, covenant breakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:

        32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

        ~Paul’s Letter to the Romans 1

        Romans 1:22 is likely the most prescient verse of the entire KJV Bible.

        1. Yes, God is said to acknowledge the range of our freewill, and the philosopher handed us a religion (i.e. behavioral protocol) that, if followed with faith, will optimize functional or fit (“good”) outcomes. Where once there was direct oversight, now there are rules to live by, warnings from our ancestors, processes of reconciliation (e.g. consensus), and a terrestrial proving ground. The Judeo-Christian line is further enabled through an advisory to recognize a separation of logical domains (e.g. scientific or near).

        2. But it was a very long time after Paul before Rome fell, even longer if you include the eastern half of the empire in 1453. Still, the criticism is just.

  10. I’ll bet Egypt is ecstatic that the Israelite slaves were out of Egypt before the ink was dry on their release papers.

    Egypt hasn’t suffered for millennia, and doesn’t suffer now, a caterwauling, ineffectual and dependent minority which is relentlessly begging for “free stuff,” in all its multitudinous forms, including compulsory free social acceptance, free money, free food, free housing, free matriculation, free grade inflation, free hiring, free mortgage assistance, free healthcare insurance, free immunity from culpability, etc.

    The communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs) in America have made Karl Marx proud.

    No freedom and self-reliance for them;

    simply class “untouchability,” dependence and entitlement.

    1. “Egypt hasn’t suffered for millennia, and doesn’t suffer now, a caterwauling, ineffectual and dependent minority which is relentlessly begging for “free stuff,””

      George, take note. Nominal GNP per capita.

      Israel #21

      Egypt #118

Comments are closed.