Let the Stoning Begin

Even while standing on the bedrock of Absolute Truth, I find the black fortress that is my heart under siege from time to time. To be sure, I am never wrong; however, that doesn't mean I don't discover new things to be right about. I was recently besieged by the inexplicable conclusion that all Christians seem to be missing a key element of their faith. I speak, of course, of Old Testament Laws long forgotten and in need of resurrection. 

Let me begin by halting naysayers in their tracks. The New Covenant in Jesus Christ did not abolish the Jewish Law, it only modified it [more on those modifications later]. I've chosen a few laws in particular to unpack. Hopefully, in observing my methodology, the reader will be equipped to do the same with others.

"You shall not permit a female sorcerer to live."[Exodus 22:18] The clear implication of this verse is undeniable: God wills the witch hunt. The vitality of this command is all the more apparent in Modern America. Literary examples from the many blasphemies of J.K. Rowling abound; and, invite our young women to follow Lucifer.

"Whoever lies with an animal shall be put to death."[Exodus 22:19] Need I explain? Most State legislatures ban this act. The obvious ethical dilemma lies in the fact that a Goat cannot express consent. State Law need only amend their penal codes to include Bestiality under capital offenses.

"You shall not boil a kid in its mother's milk."[Exodus 23:19] I agree.

"...nor shall you put on a garment made of two different materials."[Leviticus 19:19] I must admit that I have been guilty of this in the past, some of my garments do read "95% Cotton, 5% Elastane". But henceforth I shall burn them, as should the reader.

[Do you see the family resemblance?]

"You may eat any clean birds."[Deuteronomy 14:11] This particular line of Law has tested The Houn. Under the list of unclean birds lies the mighty Bald Eagle, the glorious representation of this great nation. I am offended to say the least. Under Christ's New Covenant, we are absolved of this command. For no animal is unclean. However, is this divine permission to consume eagles? I should hope not, since he who ingests a Bald Eagle gains knowledge of America's nuclear launch codes as long as the raptor remains in his insides.

Friends, let us begin with these resurrections of old laws, increasing their number gradually so America can adjust. Surely we do the work of God, reminding our countrymen of his commands. I understand the hardship incurred upon the reader. It is not always convenient to stop and stone every witch that should pass you by. Be strong, for The Houn has faith in you.

Calhoun out.

Hope is Hilarious

In course of reading and considering 1 Peter, it becomes easy to resign oneself to suffering "in the name of Christ". Several select verses suggest that as God-fearing men, we are to suffer for our savior [in particular, 1 Peter 4:13-16]. I write today with the solemn intention of ridding the reader of this laughable notion.

Resolved and Proclaimed: Hope is a hilarious indulgence that America has neither the time nor the patience to entertain.

Let us first stack the enemy's rhetorical house of cards [with the full intention of obliterating it with a gust of Absolute Truth]. Naysayers build their stance on the suffering of Christ. They say that just as Christ suffered, we are to suffer. They say that Christianity is, by nature, a way of life that exposes one to suffering. They say that in some sense, Christians are called to suffer because Christianity itself is not an easy way of life. They say that the Christian may endure this suffering with the hope [Bah!] that they will be rewarded in the afterlife. [You may pause to laugh before I continue.]

Only one notion from the above series of fallacies can be confirmed: Christ suffered. Indeed, our Lord and Savior did die by crucifixion at the hands of Roman officials and Pharisee accusers. But, one cannot interpret this historical and spiritual fact as the beginning of perpetual Christian suffering. Imagine: a religion who's single goal is to condemn its believers to a life of suffering based on an overall benefit to humanity. Bah! Herein lies the hilarious conclusion: in Christianity, life is suffering and hope is death.

Christians are not called to suffer, nor can they expect even an ounce of suffering in their lifetimes. Christ obviously suffered so that Christians wouldn't have to. We need not hope because as Christians, we live in the best of all possible worlds. We laugh at hope because it implies that we are unhappy. And, after all, what is there to be unhappy about? This is America under God. We are a fortress of perfect humanity.

So take those 'calls to serve' in the lesser regions of the world with a fist full of salt. Obviously, if they're not happy, they're not Christian enough. Clearly, our Christianity is more powerful than their Christianity. We need not lower ourselves in the name of 'compassion' and 'philanthropy' because that would risk suffering on our part. After all, what is the purpose of Christianity if not to make our lives better?

Surely you see my side [the correct side] of the argument. I suggest you too adjust your life accordingly, reminding yourself on a daily basis of the former. Free yourself with the knowledge that you already reside in the world's beacon of light. Moreover, you will undoubtedly be overcome with a feeling of disgust for those who think differently. They attempt to reign on our collective, perpetual parade of happiness. Discard them, and discard their dogma. Embrace the truth. And all the patriots in the room said: "Amen."

Calhoun out.

"T. Hobbes is a Friend of Mine"

Flourish. The Houn stands atop a soapbox labeled "Liberty" at the intersection of War and Peace. With hands raised his voice shaketh the ground.


"Ladies and Gentlemen, I will not bore you with petty quips at Chilton the Lesser. I will not tease you with hints at things to come. I will not insult you with history lessons from the schoolhouse. I will not tickle you with the feather-duster of post-modernism. No, instead I will free you from the chains of indecision. I will rescue you from the peril of contemplative thought. I will snatch you with the talons of Liberty.

I speak today in response to a certain blind Frenchman, one Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Though long dead some two hundred and fifty years, he haunts classrooms and libraries alike. It is this man who enslaves future generations to ideas both silly and dangerous. Namely, that man is more than the sum total of his desires. Bah!

He claims further, that a child only need be taught to live a better life, that with knowledge they can return to the Garden of Eden. He says we were once peaceable, once pristine as a species, and uncorrupted by our present reality. He says that we are all at heart compassionate, altruistic, and it is only our possessions that corrupt us.

Has he no sense? Has he never observed the world in all its terrifying splendor? Has he not seen the unending cyclic carnage of the earth? Education is not a tool of personal reformation, it is a weapon. A man's personal might only grows stronger with knowledge. With knowledge he is better able to harm his fellow man, not help him.

Should Rousseau have ever traveled anywhere outside the West, he would have discovered this readily enough. And, indeed he had no need to, since examples were present. His own civilization was built on educated people enslaving uneducated people. The wheel is the same over the whole earth. So it goes.

Should any man ever march up to you and cry "Rousseau knows best," you need only obtain your copy of Hobbes' Leviathan and throw it forcefully, aiming right between the eyes...for only severe cranial trauma is sufficient to break the Frenchman's spell. So, I will give you the truth, the absolute truth [see Dictums]:

The mind is simple, the heart is fiction, we love ourselves like no other. There is no other end, nor other beginning. You cannot fix the brokenness of all mankind: their interests. You cannot change a man; you can only take care to stay out of his way, or to fight him. And as for me, I will opt for a fight...as should all of you.

So, I pray you burn the pages of his discourse and discard them at your leisure, for they will lead you only to ruin. Think of his work as a storybook of human history. For, a storybook, it can only be. As for the rest of us, TO WAR."

Thunderous applause. 

Male and Female: All are Equal in their Inferiority to the Houn

Let us be clear, I will never write with the intention of resolving a problem. Conflict resolution is beneath me. Fights exist because fights are interesting and peace is boring. So to all ye who cry "world peace!" I say: "Grow up." However, if in the course of formal discourse I happen to make the world a better place, consider it a grudging donation. The following is one of those anomalies.

Proclamation: Men and Women are divinely equal, unique, and inferior to myself.

The question of equality arises from the pesky nature of the Jewish creation story. Namely, there are two of them. The simplest recommendation would be to simply tear out Gen. 2:4-4:26. Go ahead and do that. If you did so, you can stop reading.

Upon glancing over the two separate creation stories you'll notice that the first reads like a campfire chant, while the second is like something out of the Brothers Grimm. The key verse in question for the first tale is number 27:

"So God created Humankind in his image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them"

Now, that was a tad redundant, but granted, it is an important point to make. This verse makes no clear distinction between male and female. The structure is as follows: God > Humanity [Male and Female]. Now for the second tale:

"the the Lord God formed man from the dust of the ground..."[2:7]

"And the rib that the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman..."[2:22]

Again, there is no inequality in creation. The first woman was formed from a part of the first man, but the man was formed from dust. The building blocks of both are unflattering. So far, Male and Female are equal- then comes the fall. At this point, certain parties (namely, the writers of the Malleus Maleficarum) claim that since woman committed the first sin and subsequently tempted her husband to do the same, all women are condemned to be subordinate.

The pertinent verse is as follows:

"To the woman he said, 'I will greatly increase your pangs in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children, yet your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you.'"[3:16]

This verse is not as naysayers would read it. I know [See Dictum 1]. It is not a universal condemnation of all women from Eve until the end of time. The pain during childbirth is an image that mirrors males forced to work in the fields. The last sentence that seems to project male dominance is an intentional distortion of perfect communion with one another and with God. Male dominance is a distortion of God's original intention, it is a sin. Christianity claims to pursue a more perfect unity with God and fellow man; thus, Christians must pursue equality in relationships.

Furthermore, though male and female are equal, they are unique. Men can't do everything women can do, women can't do everything men can do. If the sexes had identical roles and skill sets this world would be as boring as world peace. If you don't believe that men and women are different, you're living in a dream world. Wake up.

If nothing else, male and female can find unity in their mutual inferiority to myself. I am John C. Calhoun, I am right, I am sexless. "There is no other tale to tell"

Calhoun out.