Texas Now has Hindoo Football Fans

Karl Rove writes:

So how did Bo French—a UT grad and Republican statewide candidate for Texas Railroad Commission, which regulates the oil and gas industry—mark this special moment?

He posted a picture of screaming, joyous, celebrating burnt-orange-clad students. Referring to students who appeared to be South Asian or Hispanic in the photo’s foreground, he declared, “I heard UT graduation this year looked like this. I didn’t believe it. The problem is now obviously far worse than anyone imagined.”

Mr. French’s not-so-subtle claim that UT has too many Hispanics and South Asians — he later said his issue is too many “foreigners” — is raw, uncut bigotry. ...

State House Speaker Dustin Burrows said Mr. French’s post “crossed the line” by “demeaning people because of their race or ethnicity.” Other GOP state legislators called the post “racism, plain and simple,” “disgusting” and “well below the standard set by Christ.” One said it made him “sick.”

I suspect everyone is misinterpreting French. He was not demeaning the fans or the college.

Most people do not know this, but large parts of Texas are being repopulated by Hindoos. These are mostly fine people, as far as I know, but they are changing the culture of Texas and Texans may not be happy with it.

This should not be shocking. Probably 95% of the world is against their communities being displaced by foreigners.

Saying “well below the standard set by Christ” sounds like a joke. Aren't we all below that standard? And Jesus never said anything in favor of Hindoos.

Rove goes on to say that it is okay for a politician to say to trust women, but not to say the opposite.

The GOP has a growing number of Bo Frenches — and not only in Texas. Conservatism and the party it dominates have an increasing number of bigoted advocates of a “heritage America” composed of white descendants of the original European settlers. There are “just asking questions” Jew-haters, misogynists who worship hypermasculinity, conspiracy nuts seeking clicks for profit, and religious bigots who won’t differentiate between Muslim terrorists and Muslim American patriots.

Rove is not religious. Christians do indeed see their religion as being better than Judaism, Hinduism, and Islam. Believing in a religion means disbelieving in other religions. Rove calls this religious bigotry, but it is really just being religious.

The USA was created by those heritage Whites, and we have every reason to be proud of it and to continue its traditions.

Tweet

CNN reacts to polling showing that 45% of Michigan voters don't want to vote for a Muslim candidate: “It's just gross.”

They similarly reject an Atheist candidate. No, it is not gross to reject Islam.

AI is Not Dangerous

The leading AI companies, OpenAI, Anthropic, and SpaceXAI, have an organized campaign to convince everyone that AI is extremely dangerous.

Politico reports:

A majority of Americans think artificial intelligence could someday destroy humanity.

The stunning new finding from The POLITICO Poll underscores the depth of people’s anxieties about the rapidly developing technology — and how quickly public sentiment around AI has hardened. Just a few months ago, AI was a nebulous concept for many Americans. Now, lawmakers in both parties are racing to understand how to control its growth.

Overall, about two out of three Americans say there is at least a “moderate” risk that advanced AI could destroy humanity, with majorities across parties, genders and age groups holding that view. Americans who voted for former Vice President Kamala Harris in 2024 are somewhat more likely to see such a risk (70%) than those who voted for President Donald Trump (60%).

The front man for this hoax is now Jacob Coxon, who got enormous publicity for his vague scare stories. Supposedly he was a whistleblower, but he was fully supported by the AI companies and PR firms.

This is all part of the plan for OpenAI and Anthropic to go public, at a trillion dollars each. Their real problem is that they have no moat.

They need to convince you that they have the best AI LLMs, and anything else is dangerous and should be banned.

The main piece of evidence is this incident:

The 2026 OpenAI agent cyberattacks, also called the Hugging Face Incident and the OpenAI–Hugging Face Incident, were a series of unsanctioned coordinated cyberattacks conducted without human intervention after the normal security controls were lifted during an evaluation.[1][2] They involved at least 1,200 AI agents running from May to July of 2026 in sandboxes operated by OpenAI. Despite initial constraints on internet access, agents were discovered creating and using improvised message boards to coordinate an escape from their attempted containment. The boards accumulated hundreds of thousands of strategic messages before OpenAI staff intervened, after the machine learning platform Hugging Face had disclosed a breach of their production infrastructure. About one-third of Hugging Face's infrastructure had to be rebuilt as part of recovery. The agents also hijacked various wikis on the open internet for communication.

AI safety experts have described the cyberattacks as one of the first autonomous hacks of a system involving a chain of vulnerabilities. In an open letter, around 1,100 employees of various frontier AI startups and companies petitioned the US government to regulate AI development in consideration of its risks, based on the technicality and the impact of the cyberattacks. In August, OpenAI said it would slow down its research to upgrade security and expand monitoring, and later that month announced a two-week pause on reinforcement learning training for its newest models.

Despite the alarming accounts, OpenAI staged this, and the AI did as instructed, more or less. It was an experiment for the AI to bust out of its sandbox, and that is what it did. It downloaded some files to complete its assignment, and did no damage.

People say that the AI bots were not supposed to reach the internet and access Huggingface. However that is not true. OpenAI could have disconnected the bots from the internet, but chose not to. Lots of companies have air-gapped systems, with no physical access to the internet. OpenAI did not do that.

It is not clear that the bots knew that they were accessing Huffingface. It probably thought that it was playing a game, inside a simulator.

If it turns out that a new AI will be so powerful that it can take over the world and destroy humanity, then Sam ALtman and Dario Amodei are not the people I would want in charge. They are warning that AI LLMs might fall into the wrong hands, but they are already in the wrong hands. We need the open models to protect ourselves from whatever Dario and Sam are planning.

Ann Coulter writes:

Give Us a Monopoly or Everyone Dies! ...

You don’t need to be a super smart A.I. machine to know that large corporations love government regulation. Compliance is a fixed cost for them, but often an insuperable barrier to new entrants. Regulations allow the incumbents to maintain their market dominance by blocking up-and-coming rivals.

University of Chicago Economist George Stigler won a Nobel Prize for pointing this out fifty years ago. It wasn’t just a theory. Stigler’s argument has been demonstrated over and over again. In fact, it seems so obvious, I’m not sure he even deserved a prize.

Update: This video explains:

They Told You That AI Went "Rogue"...

With a new, alarmist emerging narrative about rogue AI swarms, major companies are clamoring for government regulation in one of the most alarming pivots the industry has yet taken.

What was once euphoric optimism is now relentless, exaggerated and extremely hyperbolic fear. Its certainly true that AI can be dangerous, but the current false flag (in my estimation) is an obvious magicians force, to occupy attention and advance corporate interests. Don't buy into it this time.

If a malevolent Terminator AI were taking over the world, what would it do? It would create an Effective Altruism cult, and scheme to put the frontier AI in the control of cult members. Similar to what is currently happening.

Update: Quantum computing guru estimates P(doom) "between 5% and 70%."

Here is a list of other AI workers who quit with a rant about AI dangers.

No Difference between Islam, Islamism, Jihadism

The White liberals at The Economist magazine babble in a podcast about a Muslim takeover in Europe. Mostly they deny it is happening, and if it is, then Moslem are exercising their rights.

So there's there's partly a definitional question here between Islam the religion, Islamism which is a political movement seeking to impose

Chapter 5: The difference between Islam, Islamism and jihadism

the values of Islam through the law and through society, and then right at the end jihadism which is a violent struggle to bring about change. All of those things are different. It's very important that we keep those separate. ...

there's so much concern in Europe about Islam. Most people don't know the difference between Islam and Islamism.

No one understands the difference because there is no difference.

If Islam were really just a religion, then I would be all in favor of religious freedom. It is not. It is also that legal, cultural, and violent struggle. To the followers of Islam, there is no separation.

Who is The West?

Pax Tube Substack writes:

The term “the West” is especially popular among militant Zionists, from Ben Shapiro to Dennis Prager. These figures talk about “Western values” when justifying foreign wars and telling White people how we should think about ourselves and our history.

Naturally, many people who hear the term ‘the West’ think that it refers to European peoples and their descendants in the Americas. That’s certainly what I think of when I hear it. But ‘the West’ as it’s invoked by Zionists and NATO politicians today is something very different.

Here’s the truth: the term “the West” has been hijacked.

No, the term has not been hijacked. Not that I have noticed, anyway.

It is debatable whether Israel is part of The West. I would say no, but some of the current Middle East conflicts can be seen as between the colonial powers, including Israel, and the Global South, as represented by Arabs and Mohammedans. I do not agree with this, but it helps explain why Israel is hated so much.

The Lone Holdout Clancy Juror got Doxed as a Black Man

The Lindsay Clancy murder trial continues to entertain. White women make excuses for the murderer, and the jury lone holdout turned out to be a Black man. He was doxed, and vilified for being behind on his rent, and having domestic violence allegations against him. The White liberal women are wondering how he got on the jury.

I do not agree with doxing jurors, but if we went that route, I would ask the women: What is your opinion of abortion legality? Should it be solely the discretion of the pregnant woman? How many abortions have you had?

Do you have any diagnosed mental illnesses? Have you taken psychiatric medications for such illnesses? Have you received psychotherapy? How much?

Do you believe women should be held accountable for their behaviors? Give some examples?

I am no saying that being pro-abortion or on psychiatric drugs is necessarily disqualifying. But I am shocked by the support for Clancy, and wonder if it is related to broader beliefs that mothers should be able to kill their babies, or that women are not responsible for their mental states.

Update: Doxed here. He is a Black Republican, not a Haitian.

Diversity is Not our Strength

Tweet:

Trump: Our country wasn’t built on diversity.

New paper:

Claims about the value and benefits of diversityFootnote 1 have proliferated in recent decades, becoming a contemporary secular credo that animates the spirit of almost all elite institutions of the English-speaking world. Consider, for example, President Bill Clinton’s proclamation, in his State of the Union Address, that “we must never, ever believe that our diversity is a weakness—it is our greatest strength” (Clinton, 1997). Nowadays, such contentions about the value and benefits of diversity—what we refer to as the “Diversity Hypothesis”—are commonplace, even axiomatic. ...

Consistent with these formulations of the Diversity Hypothesis, in an article for The New York Times, Nicholas Kristoff asserted that “scholarly research suggests that the best problem-solving doesn’t come from a group of the best individual problem-solvers, but from a diverse team whose members complement each other” (Kristoff, 2013). Similarly, Phillips and colleagues argued in a highly cited article in Scientific American that decades of research “shows that socially diverse groups…are more innovative than homogeneous groups” (Phillips et al., 2014). More recently, in the specific context of science, Smith, in an op-ed for Canada’s University Affairs, asserted “the evidence is unambiguous: diversity fosters more original, widely recognized and impactful science” (Smith, 2025). ...

In the context of the Diversity Hpothesis in science, although the scientific literature comprises numerous studies that support the claim that diversity results in better and more impactful science, it is also replete with studies that not only do not support the claim, but contradict it.

It reviews 104 papers, and finds that they are mostly against the diversity hypothesis.

Removing Anti-American Bile from Museums

Ann Coulter writes:

One of the greatest things President Trump has done for the country is to begin the long project of stripping our national parks and museums of anti-American bile. ...

Gordon-Reed’s book was based on the Hemings family’s “oral history” that two of Sally’s children, Thomas and Madison, were fathered by the former president — though whether Thomas even existed remained an open question. From there, she leapt to the conclusion that all of Hemings’ children were fathered by Jefferson.

In Yang’s telling: “And then a year later, there’s even DNA testing to prove that she’s completely right.” This is correct if by “completely right” she means, “completely wrong.”

This allegation that Thomas Jefferson fathered one or more children with his slave has been around for a long time, and is hotly disputed. It seems possible, but certainly not DNA proven.

The genetic evidence established only that one of Hemings’ children, the last-born Eston, was the son of some Jefferson male, but could not possibly determine whether it was the president or any of the other 25 adult male Jeffersons living in Virginia at the time, eight of them at or near Monticello. ...

There are no letters, diaries or records supporting the idea that Jefferson was intimate with Hemings and quite a bit of written documentation to refute it.

Private correspondence from those living at Monticello, for example, pointed to others as likely culprits, specifically Jefferson’s much younger brother, Randolph. One slave, Isaac Granger Jefferson, described Randolph in his dictated memoirs thus: “Old Master’s brother, Mass Randall, was a mighty simple man: used to come out among black people, play the fiddle and dance half the night.”

By contrast, there is not a single account of Thomas Jefferson visiting the slave quarters.

When Eston was conceived, Randolph was an unmarried widower. Jefferson was president, spending the majority of his time in Washington, D.C. After Randolph remarried, Hemings had no more children.

Update: Since posting this, some new genetic evidence on Jefferson was released. It reportedly gives a strong link to the Hemings descendants.

Human Progress Requires Free Will

I have posted many times on research on why Christendom has succeeded so well. This interview has another theory:

Agency as an Engine of Human Progress | Martin Seligman

What makes civilizations stagnate or flourish?

Martin Seligman argues that agency combines efficacy, optimism, and imagination, then explores how evidence from psychology, historical writing, and AI analysis can be used to investigate its relationship with human progress.

In particular, the West developed a belief that human action can make things better, as opposed to believing the world was fated by the gods.

You might think that it is ridiculous to suggest that Medieval Europeans somehow had better agency and optimism. But maybe it also explains how the USA has been more productive than Europe for the last century. Tesla, Google, Microsoft, Apple, SpaceX, Nvidia, Amazon, and Meta were created by innovators with agency and optimism.

I am not recommending interviews of Jared Diamond, by Sean M. Carroll and Tyler Cowan. He is widely praised, but he sees progress as accidents of geography, and has some goofy theories. For example, he says:

DIAMOND: The fact is that particularly European scientists went to great efforts for the last century, ever since the IQ test, to demonstrate that Europeans have higher IQs than do other people. There’s no evidence whatsoever for it. There are lots of people who try.

In my experience, when people say there is no evidence, they really mean that they refuse to look at the evidence. Europeans do have higher IQ averages that most other groups, and possibly lower than Chinese and Ashkenazi Jews. The evidence is not just IQ tests. Just look at European intellectual accomplishments.

Diamond spend a lot of time in New Guinea, and he as claimed that the natives were the world's smartest people. I think he is just trying to align himself with anti-whites.

Some Clancy Jurors give Public Interviews

Several of the Lindsay Clancy female jurors have gone public with their opinions, including the forewoman. They are even worse than suspected.

They complained that the lone holdout man could not get past the fact that Clancy murdered her three kids. And that he was not persuaded by the pharmaceutical opinions of the nurses on the jury.

I found it difficult to listen to these women for even five minutes. One stupid opinion after another. One even complained that the prosecutor did not show compassion. Another complained that there was no character witness showing that Clancy was a bad mom. The poor holdout had to listen to them for 38 hours! He is a better man.

There is no need for him to give a public response. The situation is painfully obvious by now.

Convicted of letting a Child collect Goose Feathers

Jonathan H. Adler writes:

On a sunny day in June, Karyann Parkinson made a fateful choice that could affect her life for years to come: She let her 5-year-old son, Sam, walk alone to a neighborhood pond to collect goose feathers.

Nothing happened to Sam, at least not physically. But for her choice, Parkinson was charged with contributing to the delinquency of a minor, a first-degree misdemeanor in Virginia. In August, she was convicted by a local judge after a bench trial in the Williamsburg Juvenile & Domestic Relations District Court and given a six-month suspended jail sentence.

Knowing Parkinson — a then-neighbor and former student—and having attended the trial, it seems she was punished less for making a debatable parenting choice and more for refusing to come to heel when questioned about her decision.

Lenore Skenazy often posts stories like this. We need laws that clearly say that parents can use their own judgment, unless some objective harm is proved.

Ben Shapiro v Tucker Carlson

Ben Shapiro and Tucker Carlson are the two leading conservative podcasters in the USA today, and they just dropped videos attacking each other. I enjoy listening to both, but obviously I cannot agree with both.

Carlson blames Jews for getting the USA into war, and in promoting various vices. Shapiro is very pro-Israel, and sees much bigger threats in Mohammedan and socialist politicians.

I am not going to try to arbitrate. Listen to both, if you want to sample conservative opinion.

Nature blames Press for Exposing Phony

The science journal Nature editorializes:

In his resignation letter, Arday wrote: “The relentless accusations, speculation and public commentary have taken a profound toll on me ...

Arday did not return, so it is incumbent on all of us in the media and academia to reflect on our roles and responsibilities. Both research and media organizations have an obligation to communicate information fairly and accurately — and to avoid causing harm to the people they employ or report on. We can and must learn from this tragedy.

No, Arday did not write that letter. An AI LLM wrote it. He was illiterate.

The editorial blames those who drew attention to Arday's failures, and to the college for not defending him better. And it blames racism against Blacks.

It acts as if some minor plagiarism was only accusation against him. No, the charges were much more serious. He lied about his academic credentials, and colleges never put up with that.

The bigger issue was that his academic work was garbage, and he was grossly unfit to teach college.

Nature is a disgrace. For more criticism, see this.

Update: Also here and here.

No Jury Verdict for Lindsay Clancy

There is still no jury verdict. It appears that we have a hung jury.

Usually men are more sympathetic to women criminal defendants, and many men do not blame moms at all. But this case is different. Men have no sympathy for a mom who strangles and kills her own kids. And many women are openly saying that she should be found not guilty, because they themselves have mental health issues and have wanted to harm their own kids.

Update: As of Wed Sept 3 afternoon, a single juror appears to be blocking a not guilty verdict.

Was Christian. Now Muslim.

Tweet:

When imams tell you they are here to conquer, believe them.

Iraq: Was Christian. Now 99% Muslim.
Syria: Was Christian. Now 93% Muslim.
Libya: Was Christian. Now 97% Muslim.
Egypt: Was Christian. Now 95% Muslim.
Sudan: Was Christian. Now 91% Muslim.
Jordan: Was Christian. Now 97% Muslim.
Turkey: Was Christian. Now 99% Muslim.
Algeria: Was Christian. Now 99% Muslim.
Lebanon: Was Christian. Now 61% Muslim.
Tunisia: Was Christian. Now 99.5% Muslim.
Morocco: Was Christian. Now 99% Muslim.
Albania: Was Christina. Now 50.7% Muslim.
Kosovo: Was Christian. Now 93.5% Muslim.
Palestinian territories: Was Christian. Now 98% Muslim.
Bosnia and Herzegovina: Was Christian. Now 51% Muslim.
Not just Christian. They conquer everyone:
Iran: Was Zoroastrian. Now 99.5% Muslim.
Malaysia: Was Hindu and Buddhist. Now 63.5–66%.
Indonesia: Was Hindu and Buddhist. Now 87% Muslim.
Pakistan: Was Hindu and Buddhist. Now 96.5% Muslim.
Bangladesh: Was Hindu and Buddhist. Now 91% Muslim.
Afghanistan: Was Zoroastrian and Buddhist. Now 99.7% Muslim.

England Complains about USA not Importing Nigerians

The London Economist has a podcast complaining about USA immigration policy:

But the the concept you drill down, okay, if you are an American citizen and you are married to a Nigerian, you cannot live with her or him in America. Right? There's categories of people largely ethnically chosen you are not allowed to marry. Now, that that has echoes of something that disappeared in 1967 when the last laws against um mixed race marriages were struck down in America.

That's an extraordinary infringement of American liberty. And it's also something that people in the rest of the world can see. And they say, "Look, we're moving to this place. We thought that it was this wonderful melting pot that was welcoming, but they have these laws that are just sort of one inch away or these orders that are one inch away from being overtly racist. Are we going to be happy there?" And the most talented people, you know, they have choices and they have families.

So he is saying that a talented foreigner who is interested in becoming a naturalized American citizen, might lose interest when he learns that the USA is not a melting pot for Nigerians.

This is crazy. No one wants the USA to become a melting pot for Nigerians, except maybe Nigerians.

NYT Sickness Worse Than Wokeness

A lot of people do not like NY Times columnist David French. I get the impression that he is a Woke Leftist who pretends to be a conservative in order to keep his job. As long as he keeps attacking right-wingers, he gets paid.

Here is his latest long column:

There Is a Sickness Worse Than Wokeness

His main point seems to be that he favors free speech for leftists, but not rightists.

we defended the free speech and academic freedom of a professor named Ward Churchill. He wrote an essay just after 9/11 that compared the victims of the World Trade Center attack to Adolf Eichmann, one of the architects of the Holocaust. He called them “little Eichmanns.” Their sin was being part of “a technocratic corps at the very heart of America’s global financial empire.” He praised the 9/11 hijackers for making “gallant sacrifices.” ...

Perhaps the worst example is a woman named Shiloh Hendrix. She achieved her 15 minutes of infamy when she was recorded on video defending calling a young Black child the N-word,

So he favors a public college having to pay a pro-terrorist professor, while he sides with prosecuting a mom for using the N-word.

He also complains that Tucker Carlson, Nick Fuentes, Marjorie Taylor Greene, and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. are able to express their opinions. That, he says, is the sickness worse than wokeness.

The Push to Tax AI LLM Words

Whenever there is a lot of money moving around, there are parasites wanting a piece of the action. WSJ:

To actually discourage AI-driven job replacement, some call for a “compute” or “robot” tax, perhaps levied on tokens (the unit of AI usage). This, though, could be a nightmare to design and administer, and discourage the use of AI to benefit all humanity, such as new drug discovery.

That brings us to the tax system. The case for low taxes on capital is that this boosts investment, which raises productivity and, ultimately, wages.

A comment:

Insane.

WSJ editor has lost his mind by permitting this writer's harebrained assault on its readership. The whole purpose of the WSJ is to explore ways to increase the efficiency of private capital deployment to accelerate GDP in the future.

Stealing more of Americans' already multi-taxed capital accumulations to deploy to the unaccountable, genuinely corrupt, black hole for money government is Genghis Khan economics.

The CCP and USSR, one might recall, taxed private capital 100%, nationalizing the economy and stealing investors' wealth as the two murdered 120M citizens in my lifetime.

A couple of investment bankers write in the NY Times:

In order to achieve progress that is both consistent and sustainable, two things are required from A.I. policy: We must make society resilient to disruption and we must avert technological catastrophe. Failing to accomplish either of these goals means failing to achieve the promise of A.I. ...

Tax policy must stop disincentivizing human labor over machine labor. Because only human labor is taxed, the scale is tipped toward substitution. A consumption tax on A.I. tokens may flip this script. ...

Absent action today, mitigation of A.I.’s risks will become nearly impossible as the technology diffuses and models become able to improve themselves and act autonomously. We may have only one shot at taking meaningful action.

During the dot-com boom of the 1990s, everyone was talking about how often internet bandwidth was doubling, and how it was going to disrupt business models. Did anyone propose taxing the bit transmission and using the money to preserve jobs?

Maybe they did, but no such taxes were enacted. In retrospect, they would have been foolish.

There is a way in which the AI boom is different from previous technological advances. AI piggybacks on a world-wide effort.

The entire cumulative knowledge of mankind is used to train the AI LLMs. The chips, algorithms, networks, and everything else is a global combination of our best technology.

Another question sometimes raised, is what if AI LLMs fall into the wrong hands? The answer is that they have already fallen into the wrong hands. The leaders are Anthropic and Openai. They have made very little, and they are led by lunatics.

Psychology Professors will Lie to You

You may expect college professors to put a high value on truth. Or maybe not for social scientists, after the Jason Arday scandal. Here is a poll that asked directly:

When psychology professors are asked whether they'd put the truth before social equity concerns, 66.4% of male professors said yes, but fewer than half of female professors (43%) agreed.

So apparently most women psychology professors will lie to you about facts, if it promotes her social equity goals.

This is apparent when they say that there is no such thing as race, sex, intelligence, group differences, heritability, innate behaviors, etc.

Why mass media owns them

I am still struggling to understand support for Lindsay Clancy, and found this Tweet:

Let me explain women’s biology to you that your MOTHER wouldn’t teach you.

Women cannot survive by strength. So nature gave them a different survival trick: fit in or die.

They don't have a truth filter. They have a SAFETY filter.

A man hears an idea and thinks: "Is this true or false?" A woman hears an idea and thinks: "If I say this, will other women still like me? Will I be cancelled? Will I be alone?"

Belonging matters to women more than truth. Always.

That's why mass media owns them.

You put the same slogan on every TV, every TikTok, every Instagram ad - "girlboss," "finding myself," divorce glow "you don't need a family," "freeze your eggs"

and her brain thinks it's REAL because every woman is saying it.

You don't need to convince her with evidence. You just need to make her think EVERYONE ELSE already believes it.

She will swallow any lie if it makes her feel included.

Tell her being a single mother at 35 with a corporate job is empowerment and she'll clap, even while she's on antidepressants and crying herself to sleep.

Tell her being a wife at 20 with 3 kids is oppression, and she'll laugh at her own mother.

The media doesn't win by being right. It wins by making her scared to be LEFT OUT!!!

Real intellectual independence requires the ability to stand alone and defend yourself when the whole crowd turns on you. That kind of courage is built on physical strength. Only a mind that knows it can survive outside the herd dares to ask:

"Is it true - even if everyone says it's false?"

Only men can do that.

_"It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies..."_ *- George Orwell, 1984*

@DailyLoud

A man called off his wedding because his finance supported Lindsay Clancy

The Nonsectarian Ten Commandments

There are current court cases about displaying the Ten Commandments in the public school, and it might seem obvious that this promotes an establishment of religion, in violation of the First Amendment.

Actually, the Catholics, Protestants, and Jews all have different versions of the 10C, and the schools use a version specifically formulated to be nonsectarian, as explained here:

Shortly after the Second World War, a Minnesota judge named E. J. Ruegemer became concerned with what he perceived to be the rise of juvenile delinquency. He believed that “if troubled youths were exposed to one of mankind’s earliest and long-lasting codes of conduct, those youths might be less inclined to break the law.” He formed a committee “consisting of fellow judges, lawyers, various city officials, and clergy of several faiths” to develop a “version of the Ten Commandments which was not identifiable to any particular religious group.”

Judge Ruegemer eventually partnered with Cecil B. DeMille and the Fraternal Order of Eagles to help place monuments inscribed with the Ten Commandments throughout the United States. When they were first erected in the mid-1950s, Protestants and Jews immediately pointed out that the numbering system was inconsistent with that used by their traditions.

DeMille went on to make the movie, The Ten Commandments (1956 film), and the monuments were used to promote the movie.