Europe Attacks the Internet


The European Union is in the process of revising copyright laws, and many people are alarmed about the impact that passage of the law as it is drafted at this point could have on the sharing of information online. The main focus of attention is Article 13 of the Copyright proposal of the European Commission which would seemingly drastically curtail fair use, which is the doctrine that certain copyrighted material can be used in limited ways without permission from copyright holders. I haven’t had time to dig deeply into all the legal ramifications, but what many observers are saying is that if the law is implemented it could drastically change the way the internet operates.

Here are some comments from Mozilla on the topic.

Despite several failed attempts in countries across Europe (e.g. in Spain and Germany), the Commission has proposed introducing a new pan-European copyright for press publications, sometimes referred to as “ancillary copyright” or a “neighbouring right”, which would create new copyright for snippets of online content. That would mean anyone sharing a link with text, like a news headline or a short blurb about the article, could be charged a license fee from the publisher responsible for the content.
Worst of all, these restrictions would last for 20 years! What’s the last piece of online content that you looked at that was 20 years old?!


This proposal throws the idea of balanced copyright out the window, as it would make all open platforms liable for the actions of their users, enforce a particular type of business model (e.g. licenses), and impose mandatory filters, all with no safeguards to preserve copyright exceptions, or the rights of users.

These measures would in practice require monitoring and filtering of everything that European citizens upload to content-sharing services from social media sites (like Twitter and Facebook), outlets for creative expression (like YouTube, DeviantArt, SoundCloud, and Tumblr), to informational sites (like Wikipedia and the Internet Archives), to open source software repositories (like GitHub). It would be the responsibility of these services to play judge, jury, and executioner for copyright enforcement — businesses large and small could be held liable for the content their users access and share.

There will be a meeting of MEPs on the Legal Affairs Committee (JURI) of the European Parliament on June 20/21 where they will vote about their opinion on the law. Whatever they agree on will go forward to negotiations with the European Council.

According to EDRi, a Europeian association of civil and human rights organisations, the JURI committee does not yet have enough members against the proposed changes to block their passage, with some members being still undecided.

Here’s a video that has been recently published that discusses the issue.

Sure, this European attempt to cripple or destroy the Internet must be fought.

Just know that this attempt at an immense power-grab is another attempt from hiding the future. A tyrant bureaucracy, flailing about as it dies.

King Canute, commanding the future to stop advancing, for history to stop.


It’s ‘Feminist Christmas’ in Ireland

From “The Nation”

It’s ‘Feminist Christmas’ in Ireland

“We’ll never go back,” say activists, as a vote to repeal the ban on abortion wins by an overwhelming margins.

A ‘Feminist Christmas’: the celebration of killing children, instead of their birth.

How typically secular.

Now, I suspect the activists are right, at least in the case of Ireland. The Holy Spirit is patient, but there is a tipping point.

Once someone – or a society – chooses death over life sufficiently, the Holy Spirit leaves, never to return. And that woman, man, or entire culture is handed to death and extinction in time and earth. And in the final judgement, that nation is counted with the goats.

“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’

“They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’

“He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’

“Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”
— Matthew 25:41-46, NIV

Now, the “least of these” here primarily to believers. But it is not too much of a stretch for it to be applied to others who represent God to a lesser but real extent, such as the poor, or the widows, or strangers.

Or children.

Of course, it should be noted that, unlike the judicial fiat of abortion in the United States, the Irish population collectively decided to kill the weak, just as they freely choose by referendum to endorse sodomy in an earlier vote.

And of course, the vast majority were educated in Catholic schools. And the products of these schools demonstrates the worth of these schools, in the eyes of Christ. “By their fruits ye shall know them.”

Americans — including American Christians — will not be held innocent, as they could have fairly easily – say, with twenty years of hard work – restricted the Supreme Court’s authority to only that spelled out in the Constitution, cutting off it’s limitless authority to do what it pleases today.

So divine vengeance is coming to America.

But the level of guilt is different than for Ireland.

For that nation, it wasn’t the Power Elite demonstrating that they could kill who they please, when they please, in direct defiance of God’s Holy Command to protect the lives of the innocent and shelter the weakest among us.

It was the general population which cried out, “Let His blood be upon us and on our children!

As they desire, so it shall be given unto them.

It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age and who have fallen away, to be brought back to repentance. To their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace. — Hebrews 6:4-6

In sum: better to be a murderous jihadi than a well-groomed Irish professional, as a rule of thumb.

There is greater hope of repentance and forgiveness for the first, than for the second.

Aggressive theonomic types may want to consider deepening their presence in Northern Ireland, and then expand into the southern half of the Irish island: then (in a few generations) using the entire island as a launch pad to enter the continent. Why should only the Muslims inherit the property of the walking dead?

And, as for the incoming Christians of Black Africa, I believe in giving them a hand. When God’s people bless God’s people in action as well as by words, nothing but good can result!

Patriarchy and Sodomy

From Marinov’s post at the Reconstructionist Radio Discussion Group

OK, folks, don’t fall prey to ignorant teachers. Egalitarianism has nothing to do with sodomy. To the contrary, sodomy only flourishes in stratified, patriarchal, hierarchical societies. Like Greece and Rome. Like feudal Europe in the 14th century. Like Victorian England. Like the Ottoman Empire. Like Prussian Germany. Etc.

Contrary to what some may try to tell you, patriarchy is not the antidote to either feminism or sodomy. It is their sister-doctrine. Patriarchy creates an unhealthy view of the female sex and of the relationships between the sexes, which leads to a twisted view of the relationship between men. Study how sodomy became prevalent among the aristocratic boys in the strongly patriarchal Victorian England.

And study modern sodomite communities. They are very far from egalitarian. They are, in fact, strongly hierarchical. And their “families” are strongly “patriarchal,” with one of the partners having superior “authority” as a “father” or a “husband.”

Don’t fall prey to false teachers. Patriarchy, when developed to its logical end, always results in the rise of sodomy.

On reflection, I agree. The facts speak for themselves (see: Islamic & Hindu cultures), and patriarchy does not work with the concept of the equality of all before the Law.

If it doesn’t work with the Commandments, it doesn’t work with me.

Presbyterians celebrating Dred Scott

A disgraceful display, as noted in American Vision:

Gracing the forefront place in the first Issue of the 26th Volume of the Southern Presbyterian Review (SPR), 1875, appeared a seemingly out-of-place contribution: a book review of a memoir of the late Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, Roger B. Taney (1777–1864). What this article says about the moral compass of the southern Presbyterian church at the time is not only instructive as history, but stands as a warning to check our own moral compass, as well as our courage to correct it.

It looks like the American Calvinist Christian leadership of old was about as worthless as a guide to righteousness as the august U.S. Supreme Court of the era.

Is it any different today?

Side Hustle

The five-day, 40-hour workweek is the creation of a bunch of slacker socialists in the late 19th century. God’s people are expected to work: and you have to put in more hours if you want a stronger financial foundation.

This does not mean that you should offer free hours to your employer: “the labourer deserves his wages.” Instead, work your 40 hours… and no more, except when you start out in a job, to create a good impression for a year or so.

But if you are meant to work for six days a week (and not five!), for 12 hours a day (and not eight!), then what do you do with the extra 32 hours of labour you should be putting in?

That’s where the side hustle comes in. Spend the time to get a separate stream of income coming in: this will probably take a year, but much more if the business is viable. (Having a blog that ties into the side hustle can help out.)

This turns your spare time to money: and if your main source of income fails, you have a backup cash flow to help tied you over. But I suggest that you make it your goal to build up the side business until it can be your main source of income, and you can drop having to work for someone else.

Stand up on your own two feet, like a Man of God should.

There is no shame, working well for an employer: but there is a higher goal we should be striving for.


Recent and Interesting UD posts

I love the work going on at Uncommon Descent!

Event though they are focused on Intelligent Design — and so, tolerate the billions and billions of years evolutionists demand —  they do more work and better work than many Creationists to. An example to follow!

A listing for your perusal:














“And They Call This Science”

From the very first post on American Vision:

AS A YOUNG BOY, I loved science. On standardized tests, I always scored highest in the science category….

To this day, science remains a fascinating area of study for me, if it’s science and not metaphysics. The scientific world is all atwitter over the discovery “of a rocky ‘super Earth-like object’ orbiting a nearby star much like our own sun.”[1] Reading this opening paragraph, one gets the distinct impression that these astronomers have found an “Earth-like object” orbiting a sun much like our own….

And what about this “super Earth-like object”? I know what the Earth looks like, and I have a pretty good idea what “Earth-like” should mean. This newly discovered planet has a surface temperature that exceeds 1,000 degrees. We are finally told ten paragraphs into the article and hundreds of words later that the planet “isn’t the Earth-like ‘blue marble’ and potential oasis for life that astronomers hope future telescopes will one day enable them to see.” So it’s not really “Earth-like” after all….

Endnote:[1] Mike Toner, “New world, more on horizon,” The Atlanta Journal-Constitution (August 27, 2004), A4.

When we have more scientists who are  interested in the evidence per se, rather than if the evidence can be jammed into the Official Narrative, we will waste less time and money, spend less time with transparent falsehoods, and get more useful knowledge.