All roads lead back to “classic liberalism”

“Classic liberalism” has variously been defined but mainly means living with others in a spirit of freedom respectful of others … unmolested, hygienic, inc. low noise pollution.  On our floor of our house, thank the Lord, we have that at this time … there are two or three who don’t abide but they’re at the far extremities, away from us.

What triggered this was DAD’s news item:

The Spanish government has been accused of violating basic religious rights after a group of peaceful protesters were fined for praying the rosary outside a church near the headquarters of the governing Socialist Party.

It all depends, does it not, on what that “religion” allows and exhorts you to do.  Frankly speaking, as non-Catholic, what effect does a whole lot of rosary bead handling do to me? Not a lot, might even help in the other dimension. What do extreme Jewish people in those outfits do? Again, to me, not a lot unless they’re into Netting Yahoo stuff, killing the infidel and there’s a fair bit of that in the OT.

Buddhists? Bahai? In terms of my opening paragraph … no issue. Death cult? Needs to be expunged from the shores, simply that, given the violence which is integral to it, similar to that thug thing from Mexico. Also the rise again of the weoponised, chip on the shoulder black. See that Melanie and VDH vlog again … methinks that’s an important vlog overall.

So yes, I judge by that opening paragraph for sure and others forcing things upon us … but what about globopaedo and rainbow perversion, which involves molesting and perverting children?  We’re not directly molested and trafficked but we’re sure abetting it in other ways. It’s underground but your child is in huge danger, if only from really twisted ideas and from us refusing to speak out on it.

Christian charity? It’s the one faith … the whole thing being about letting others be and supporting, if necessary, a neighbour having hard times, not through fecklessness. And other cults are trying to destroy this Christianity. Why? We know why. It’s the polar opposite of dog-eat-dog, of the seven deadly sins. It reproaches.

I’d argue that my opening paragraph in this item is very much a result of Christianisation. Yes, charitable feelings are not exclusive to that faith … were there no charitable feelings 2070 years ago, say? Of course there were … but not coded in quite the same way.

But there’s if there existed live-and-let-live “westernism” … if that was a thang, a former reality, then its ebbing certainly corresponded to the ending of Christian charity as well, the end of that underpinning faith and its principles.

The trouble comes when puritans take it upon themselves to police others. On the other hand … that lot who disrupted an abortion clinic inside the building … what of that? Preventing how many babies murdered that day, parts sold off? Is there a point when a practice becomes diabolical and stopping it is a duty?

“Westernism” is a mix of many things, never forgetting the bloody side of it … wars, public executions, putting people in stocks in public squares, the rise of an obscene priestly class to rival an obscene aristocratic class … it was no picnic in days gone by.

Nuff for now.  Just thoughts.