What’s Wrong with the World

The men signed of the cross of Christ go gaily in the dark.

About

What’s Wrong with the World is dedicated to the defense of what remains of Christendom, the civilization made by the men of the Cross of Christ. Athwart two hostile Powers we stand: the Jihad and Liberalism...read more

Recent Comments

You cannot escape harassment

Comment posted by Tony on Sep 4, 06:58:

What I have said is that civil disobedience is not, as you said it was, a winning _strategy_, because there are too many who will reluctantly go along with punishing those who engage in it, enforcing the court orders, etc. Allow me to clarify: Christians will win in the end. The final, final end game is God coming in, blowing the whistle, and saying to all the goats, "you who defied me, off to the fires prepared for you..." In this final result, we who stick with God are assured the victory. Sticking w ... [More]

On Kim Davis

Comment posted by Tony on Sep 4, 06:32:

My hunch is that Rod is right, that this will backfire and further de-legitimatize all religious liberty/free exercise claims. Well, Dreher is flat, dead wrong about this: Meaning that she doesn’t have a single legal argument left; she’s just defying the law, including the highest court in the land. How about the point that four Supreme Court justices think the decision is "lawless"? How about the point that "LAW" is an enactment passed by the legislature, not a decision OVERTURNING a law by a judge ... [More]

On Kim Davis

Comment posted by Bedarz Iliaci on Sep 4, 00:54:

Question is whether "Kim Davis defying Justice Kennedy’s revolutionary act with a revolutionary act of her own" (Kevin Williamson at NRO). Or is she she "not in fact presenting a withering argument against Obergefell; that she is not in fact attacking the concept of judicial supremacy; and that she is not in fact attempting to find a means by which Christians can co-exist with the recent changes in the law. Rather, she is unabashedly setting herself outside the law, and justifying it on entirely self-inte ... [More]

You cannot escape harassment

Comment posted by Bedarz Iliaci on Sep 4, 00:22:

Lydia, I think you are neglecting the broader political dimensions of the situation. Legal nitpicking is fine when the objective is to save a particular individual. But it is doubtful it could lead to political heightening of the sort that would be desirable. In particular, Kim Davis must be aware of the political implications of her stand. She is an elected public servant, if I am not mistaken. She could have just resigned and avoided the trouble. I am of the opinion that a political confrontation no ... [More]

On Kim Davis

Comment posted by Lydia on Sep 4, 00:21:

Leave it to Dreher to lack the imagination to recognize someone doing the right thing with courage or the generosity of mind to admire her for it. Yeah, that's all it's about. Stickin' it to the Man. I'm sure all my readers will recognize me very clearly in *that* description./sarc ... [More]

On Kim Davis

Comment posted by DR84 on Sep 4, 00:00:

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/kim-davis-political-prisoner-martyr/ From Rod Dreher: "Here’s what I think is going to happen after the dust settles: 1. Gay marriage will still be the law of the land. 2. A huge number of secular and/or liberal people in this country will be far less disposed to listen to anybody talk about religious liberty, and will be more willing to regard all religious liberty claims as Kim Davis-like special pleading. 3. A non-trivial number of conservatives will lose ... [More]

On Kim Davis

Comment posted by Mark Butterworth on Sep 3, 19:12:

What she should have done is call for armed volunteers to join her at her home and office, and as an escort. She should have asked for fifty to start (and organize a force to feed and house them when they are not on guard). If the judge wanted to meet that group with a larger force than a few US Marshals, she would then ask for 100 armed people to maintain her freedom. Also publishing the judges home address. Perhaps even having an armed force visit the judge and makes a citizen's arrest and hold him host ... [More]

You cannot escape harassment

Comment posted by John Krivak on Sep 3, 16:22:

Bedarz is right: Political power is achieved by a community acting as one. Not by a multitude even if it possesses guns. The evidence is before our eyes. The Christians do not act as if they are a community. The fact is, Christians are not a community. There are too many denominations and no reasonable agreement on how to define what a Christian is. You take your pick among the cults and among the unbiblical denominations and tell me among which of them you would consider yourself included in "community" ... [More]

On Kim Davis

Comment posted by GW on Sep 3, 14:48:

Lydia it certainly could be the best thing for her to be jailed, but only if others follow in her courage. They can't jail everyone, and the more local and state officials refuse to go along with the federal judiciary's tyranny the sooner the people will revolt and power will be restored to the states. If this causes more passivity on the part of local officials, then the tactic will have worked in silencing dissent. Also, and I certainly don't lay the blame at Kim Davis's feet for this, but conservatives ... [More]

On Kim Davis

Comment posted by GW on Sep 3, 14:31:

Well according to Drudge they just arrested her. A worthless excuse of a judge held her in contempt of court. Looks like she lost. Then again... Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. The Spirit of the Lord GOD is on Me, because the LORD has anointed Me to bring good news to the poor. He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives and freedom to the prisoners. Also remember it takes literally one stroke of a pen to reve ... [More]

On Kim Davis

Comment posted by Lydia on Sep 3, 14:25:

I wonder. Can she use the Thomas More defense? Yes, yes, of course everyone THINKS they know my motivation for refusing to issue licenses. But that's not the law. What everyone thinks they know of my motivation is hearsay or worse, not admissible. Until I tell someone my motivation, under the law YOU DON'T KNOW my motivation. So, for the law, all you can say is that I am not issuing licenses. Well, that ship has already sailed. She's told everybody and indeed made it a crucial part of her legal defense tha ... [More]

On Kim Davis

Comment posted by DR84 on Sep 3, 13:49:

"If that were not the case, civil "marriage" for homosexuals would have literally no meaning. It would exist only in their heads and impose no requirements upon anyone else. To the extent that civil marriage exists at all, it is a requirement of recognition by someone." ...and this exactly why every individual, organization, and church that refuses to recognize same sex relationships as marriages is now on notice. Are same sex "marriage" activists really going to settle for about 50% recognition? Doubtful ... [More]

On Kim Davis

Comment posted by Tony on Sep 3, 13:32:

--Is she right to issue no licenses? Presumably, she originally did this in the hopes of avoiding discrimination charges, as she never before had any objection to issuing licenses for normal marriages. At this point that part of it seems kind of pointless. However, that leads to... --Would she be in any more legal trouble if she issued marriage licenses for normal couples but "discriminated" against homsexual couples? I don't know. If not, then she should issue them to normal couples. Might as well be hu ... [More]

On Kim Davis

Comment posted by Lydia on Sep 3, 11:32:

Civil disobedience is *almost always* a matter of a judgement call, because usually one has some option--quitting a job, for example, or closing one's business--that does not directly affirm or abet evil but that is non-defiant. Again and again we see, and we will see many more, such situations. A Christian school _can_ close its doors if that is the alternative they are given to hiring homosexual professors. I certainly think they should close up shop _before_ hiring homosexual professors. But a third alte ... [More]

On Kim Davis

Comment posted by Reader John on Sep 3, 11:11:

"Kim Davis may have rightly recognized the call to action for herself, and we should support her." I disagree that we have an obligation to support anyone in following their private revelations. I will support her in that only if I get my own convincing private revelation that I should do so. Otherwise, we should support her only in refusing to render to Caesar the things that are God's, as that is decidedly a public revelation. Do you believe that Kentucky marriage licenses belong to God rather than Ca ... [More]

You cannot escape harassment

Comment posted by Mike T on Sep 3, 10:48:

There may _be_ no winning strategy. A winning strategy often incorporates multiple tactics. Civil disobedience should only be part of it. Everytime someone on the right uses the Alinsky playbook on them, they can't handle it. Part of the winning strategy is a rejection of the Bill Buckley idea that extremists are bad people and embrace the Alt Right view that extremists are actually our "shock troops" for attacking the other side. As we have seen time and again, more moderate folks that you call "decent ... [More]

You cannot escape harassment

Comment posted by Lydia on Sep 3, 08:51:

Do you think that a strategy of devising and exploiting loop-holes is a winning strategy, given that the law as it stands is basically irrational? What makes you think that the judges will not arbitrarily rule out loop-holes? I try to pick loopholes that are unlikely to be ruled out. It's one of the boring things I do decently well. In fact, I think it_likely_ that Jack Phillips will be _allowed_ (oh, how gracious!) to continue to cripple his business by baking no wedding cakes. I'm still waiting to see if ... [More]

You cannot escape harassment

Comment posted by Bedarz Iliaci on Sep 3, 07:54:

Lydia, civil disobedience is not a winning _strategy_ Civil disobedience is not cost-free but no attempt at political power can be cost-free. Do you think that a strategy of devising and exploiting loop-holes is a winning strategy, given that the law as it stands is basically irrational? What makes you think that the judges will not arbitrarily rule out loop-holes? If you estimate 20% sympathy for traditional marriage, then it is HUGE. Acts of civil disobedience could do well. Far better than the legal n ... [More]

You cannot escape harassment

Comment posted by Bedarz Iliaci on Sep 3, 01:18:

Pete Spiliakos at First Things today makes an intriguing point that the business class is able to disproportionately influence the Republican policy because it acts like a community. More than the lobbyists and the campaign contributions, it might be the ability of the business community to act like . . . a community. That makes them visible to politicians, and this visibility influences the beliefs of those politicians as much by socialization as by direct pressure He compares this organizational strengt ... [More]

You cannot escape harassment

Comment posted by Lydia on Sep 2, 18:56:

What Judge Moore explained to me, which I found very interesting, was that you are not engaging in civil disobedience unless you are breaking a law or defying a court order, where a "court order" has to be addressed specifically *to you*. So if a court says, "We interpret the constitution as meaning that homosexuals have to receive marriage licenses" but no court order is directed specifically to any clerk to issue said licenses, then clerks who don't aren't engaging in civil disobedience, properly so calle ... [More]

You cannot escape harassment

Comment posted by Tony on Sep 2, 17:25:

GW also ignored my comment, in which I explicitly called for people not to comply. Go figure. That I, personally, would not consider it "civil disobedience" as that is properly understood, if the president or governor or legislature, acting in their _proper_ spheres, refused to treat the SC's words as binding is irrelevant - everyone else would. And certainly the clerks and bailiffs under threat of force would be engaging in civil disobedience. ... [More]

You cannot escape harassment

Comment posted by Mike T on Sep 2, 15:04:

I could be mistaken, but I think GW's idea is closer to "molon labe" than a sit-in. ... [More]

You cannot escape harassment

Comment posted by DR84 on Sep 2, 13:55:

Speaking of Kim Davis, werent there clerks who despite the law issued marriage licenses to homosexual couples? I vaguely remember this happening multiple times and these clerks being generally lauded for their courage. Not sure what the difference between them and Kim Davis is. ... [More]

You cannot escape harassment

Comment posted by Lydia on Sep 2, 13:14:

This spirit still lives on in the United States (although apparently not at this blog), Okay, maybe I'm just a little grumpy today (see my above comments to Mike), but y'know what? You're being a jerk, GW. Bag it. I have recommended civil disobedience again and again on this blog. In this very thread I have _explicitly_ stated that civil disobedience may sometimes be morally required, and I have clearly indicated disapproval of those who believe they are required by the "rule of law" to punish others who ... [More]

You cannot escape harassment

Comment posted by GW on Sep 2, 12:03:

Look at the lives of our founders, you won't find a single man there who would fit in with our modern upper classes. Exactly. This was Jefferson's adopted personal motto: Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God. This spirit still lives on in the United States (although apparently not at this blog), but it is almost wholly absent among the upper classes who become politicians. Not surprisingly, the most defiant candidate is the one poised to run away with the Republican nomination. There is a lesson to be ... [More]

You cannot escape harassment

Comment posted by Mike T on Sep 2, 10:46:

Anyway, there would have been no civil contempt charges against Pryor, and actually, I think he was sincere in believing that his actions were required by the rule of law. If he had actually stood with Moore, then who knows where it would have gone. Sure, there are also cowards, but there are also sincere people who think things are somehow morally required--like prosecuting someone for disobeying an outrageous court order or immoral law, and many other things--which are not in fact required. There is a d ... [More]

You cannot escape harassment

Comment posted by Lydia on Sep 2, 10:22:

You're incorrigible, Mike. You don't even know how to bag it without quite really bagging it. Anyway, there would have been no civil contempt charges against Pryor, and actually, I think he was sincere in believing that his actions were required by the rule of law. He was just wrong about that. And there are many like him. Sure, there are also cowards, but there are also sincere people who think things are somehow morally required--like prosecuting someone for disobeying an outrageous court order or immora ... [More]

You cannot escape harassment

Comment posted by Mike T on Sep 2, 10:05:

I will say that I probably should have worded my original comment better, as it was intended to highlight that he is a conformist and coward, not focus attention on his wife. ... [More]

You cannot escape harassment

Comment posted by Mike T on Sep 2, 10:04:

Lydia, my comment had nothing to do with what you are talking about it. It's an accurate reflection of the ethics of the country club set. I would sooner expect aliens to land and try Justice Kennedy for blasphemy than I would expect the country club set to actually rock the boat or stick through it if the boat is rocked. The country club set is overflowing with scumbags of both genders who are both highly ambitious and conformist. Change doesn't come from that sort. It just doesn't. Look at the lives of ou ... [More]

You cannot escape harassment

Comment posted by Lydia on Sep 2, 09:14:

Do you bet that his wife would have honored her vows if he had stood with Moore and ended up in a federal prison on contempt of court charges (which can last, I believe, as long as the judge lets them in some cases)? Probably not. Mike, for crying out loud, shut the heck up. Just shut up. I cannot tell you how weary I am of your idiotic, random misogyny. Leave it to you to manage to bring a slur on a woman neither you nor I know anything about into a discussion of political philosophy and civil disobedien ... [More]

You cannot escape harassment

Comment posted by Mike T on Sep 2, 08:49:

And it were not guns that kept liberty in England. England today is arguably the most policed, spied-on and regulated society in the Western world. The only rights you have in England today are the right to be drunk, promiscuous, gay, have an abortion and use welfare services. ... [More]

You cannot escape harassment

Comment posted by Mike T on Sep 2, 08:04:

The idea that we need a majority is part of the problem here. The Communist Party of the Soviet Union was 3% of the population and the Bolsheviks were nothing in terms of popularity when they took over. If we can't (relatively) peacefully accomplish with 20% with that they did with less than 5%, then shame on us. The civil rights movement started out as a minority and was willing to defy civil authority with impunity to make its point. Martin Luther King even reminded folks on occasion that they had a choi ... [More]

GUEST POST: REFLECTIONS ON KATRINA BY A SUFFICIENTLY TALENTED FOOL

Comment posted by Bedarz Iliaci on Sep 2, 02:09:

Tony, I agree with your point that it is rational to act on uncertain knowledge. Some incidental comments: What about the expectation that the same cause shall produce the same effect? Well, if you use the term "cause", then it is no longer expectation, is it, but a certain knowledge. It is like the proper usage of the terms "subsequent" and "consequent". When we use the later term, we affirm causal connection between the two things or events. Lewis's point, I suspect, is about INSTINCT. Not exactly ... [More]

You cannot escape harassment

Comment posted by Bedarz Iliaci on Sep 2, 01:22:

Mike T, The men with guns are only going to use them when the Govt will come for their guns. But then why should the Govt come for their guns? The gun-owners are going to accept whatever the Govt wants them to accept (except an order to relinquish the guns). It is a fallacy to think that private guns protect against tyranny. Russia was swimming in guns during and after Bolshevik coup and so was Saddam's Iraq. And it were not guns that kept liberty in England. ... [More]

You cannot escape harassment

Comment posted by Bedarz Iliaci on Sep 2, 01:13:

I have been belaboring the point that the Christian political philosophy is in shambles. The old directive "Obey authority" turned out to be catastrophic when the German bishops applied it to Nazis. There is still no certain or even probable opinion how to deal with an authority that is insane and has turned itself upon law-abiding people. So, when to resist, civilly or otherwise, how to resist, role of guns etc etc-there is no guidance from Christian political philosophers, theologians, bishops etc etc b ... [More]

You cannot escape harassment

Comment posted by GW on Sep 2, 00:11:

Tony, your prescription is mostly right--but movements always start out by someone just defying what is commonly held as reasonable/moral/just/the law. Rosa Parks was essentially a Communist plant who got arrested on purpose as a way of gaining sympathy for her cause. Lexington and Concord helped shape colonial opinion of a repressive crown, but this wasn't due to servile colonists. In order to move the 60% in the middle the other side has to go too far--or be seen as going too far. The other side has to be ... [More]

GUEST POST: REFLECTIONS ON KATRINA BY A SUFFICIENTLY TALENTED FOOL

Comment posted by Tony on Sep 1, 20:31:

What about the expectation that the same cause shall produce the same effect? Lewis's point, I suspect, is about INSTINCT. Animals don't think about causes and effects, and their responses to circumstances are molded not by thought but by instinct. Humans, though, even though we do HAVE instincts, also think about things and are able to respond in virtue of our thoughts as well as in virtue of our instincts. (We do have instincts, of course. Having instincts is not anti-human.) Nevertheless, in t ... [More]

You cannot escape harassment

Comment posted by Tony on Sep 1, 20:11:

I think you are right, Lydia, that the big problem with "just defy them" is all the people - decent, mostly upstanding people - who feel that they are required to follow "the law of the land as spoken by the Supreme Court". This probably represents the middle 60%, with 20% heartily in favor of gay "marriage" and willing to push it even had the decision gone the other way, and 20 % who would be willing to defy the former 20%. (But probably would not be willing to shoot the 60% in the middle "just doing the ... [More]

You cannot escape harassment

Comment posted by Lydia on Sep 1, 18:39:

It will be interesting to see what happens to this Kentucky clerk, Kim Davis. Bless her heart. I strongly suspect she's going to be harshly punished. And in the chain of command of those who levy fines against her, lock her up for contempt of court, garnishee her bank accounts, etc., there will be, mark my words, plenty of people who are unhappy about it and would not have made the court orders, even some Christians, and even some conservatives. They'll say they have to "uphold the rule of law." ... [More]

You cannot escape harassment

Comment posted by Lydia on Sep 1, 18:35:

Even if that is true, there are enough things (in the vicinity of what we are actually talking about) that would not evoke such a response. After all, the Ten Commandments _were_ removed from Judge Moore's courtroom, he _was_ removed from office, the Kleins _have_ had a 135K fine (or whatever it was) levied against them, Terri Schiavo _was_ killed by dehydration, and so on and so forth, all under the aegis of the rule of law, and not a shot fired. In fact, in the Schiavo case there was a very interesting ju ... [More]