Nasty Dowries

Extracts from Covering a life-and-death issue: Muslims driving changes in India’s rapacious dowry custom by Julia Duin

—<Quote begins>—

In 2006, I was assigned a four-part series on the horrific gender discrimination against women in India and how the massive aborting of girls has resulted in skewed gender ratios (as low as 814 girls for every 1,000 boys resulting in a gap of 43 million when I was there). It ran in the Washington Times several months later.

Sabu George, an Indian activist who was passionately against the aborting of females, showed me where to go in India to report on this phenomenon. The first place he sent me was to a Sikh wedding (pictured above) several hours north of New Delhi.

There, I saw the stash of presents (a refrigerator, TV, clothes for the groom, DVD player and washing machine) for which the bride’s family had no doubt gone into debt to provide as a dowry for their daughter. More than one wedding can ruin a family financially and I began to see why Indians choose to abort a second daughter when they have the chance.

Medical clinics were very open about the practice, saying in their ads, “Better 500 rupees now (for an abortion) rather than 50,000 rupees later (for a dowry).”

Although dowry began as a Hindu custom, it’s evolved into something all religions take part in across India. And what happens if one family decides that the bride’s dowry wasn’t “good enough”? This has been known to turn into a life-and-death subject.

Which is why I was interested in Al Jazeera’s recent story about how Muslim Indians are finally saying “no.”


While in India, I asked someone if there were any religious groups that didn’t allow dowries for their followers’ weddings. I was told that Christians scored the best on this, followed by the Muslims. Hindus, Sikhs, Jains and everyone else had pretty much bought into the system.

However, according to this site and this (dated) Christianity Today piece, churches were just as complicit. Only this 2019 case study suggested that Christians were any different; in fact one group had reversed the dowry system into a “bride price,” which is what the groom’s family had to pay for the bride.

I’ll be interested to see how far the Muslims get with their guidelines, as it requires creating a new culture around simple weddings in a Hindu society where wedding bashes are a fixture.

The Indian government outlawed dowries in 1961, but that law is widely ignored. This article tells how the system popularizes child marriages because the younger the girl, the less dowry the bride’s family has to pay. Not surprisingly, India leads the world in child brides.

This 2017 piece in the Guardian also says that Indian Muslims are leading the way in disallowing dowries.

—<Quote ends>—

If Indian Muslims get rid of this hateful custom, they will most certainly be blessed, their unbelief in Christ notwithstanding.

Christian Indians need to get on the ball.

Note that, so far as Moses is concerned, the groom should pay the dowry to the bride’s family, a guarantee to protect the bride in case the marriage breaks up.

Also see from Gary North:

Daughters, Weddings, and Peer Pressure: How to Reform an Old, Rotten Tradition
Daughters are liabilities, compared to sons. They shouldn’t be. .

And check out Chapter 49: Bride Price, in Christian Economics: Scholar’s edition

Busing for Languages, Busing for Race


N.B. education minister angry after learning French and English students have been sharing a school bus

I know, I know:


Like Christians sharing a bus with Muslims, or Blacks sharing a bus with Whites.

It’s not so much the discrimination per se that bothers me: people should be free to include – or exclude – whoever they wish, on their own property. “My stuff, my rules.”

What annoys is the use of public funds to push a particular agenda that is desired by the local version of The Right Sort. People need to stop sticking their hands into their neighbours pocket in the name of whatever pious cause – supernatural or not – that Our Betters desire to push.

“Educate your own children, with your own beliefs – religious, racial, political, linguistic – on your own dime.”

Also: Canada is a fairly typical progressive society, with the usual shibboleths on race and sex that proves their superiority over the Inferiors. No discrimination allowed!

Except when it touches on something Our People value, of course.


Pagans don’t actually believe that Christian talk about “one law for all.”

Despite that opposition, Christians would be very wise to stick with the Commandments that God handed down to Moses, and whenever possible avoid the self-serving, highly selective ‘justice’ of the secularists.

When Christians get serious about extending God’s Justice into the public sphere — starting with the personal, and extending to the family, from the church to the business, and (after we have earned our stripes) from the county courts to the statehouses and local capitals — then we can start to see actual, predictable law; actual, equitable justice; and actual, far-ranging liberty.

It’s a long walk, from here to there. No less than 40 years, and more likely four generations.

We might as well get started now.

COVID: Homeschooling Doubles

I tend to be quite unhappy over most of the unnecessary lock-downs in the world.

But, one unnecessary lockdown cheers me up immensely: the school closings, which has opened the door to homeschooling in places where it never opened before.

I recommend that my readers check out Homeschooling doubled from pandemic’s start to last fall (AP) Lots of good stuff here, from the expansion of homeschooling in Massachusetts (!!) to it’s sharp growth among Black Americans, who are – at long last! – moving to take control of their children’s education from the uncaring – yet richly-rewarded – incompetents.

Grudgingly, I am forced to admit that the benefits of the lockdowns now outweigh the costs. And this is even more so when you consider how the costly and deeply unscientific lockdowns have pushed the welfare states of Europe (and elsewhere) a good bit closer to the brink of bankruptcy.

God knows what He is doing.

It just so happens that the plans of the ethics-free power-seekers can be made to work for His Kingdom.

COVID in Texas, Yet More Censorship on YouTube

Media Silence on Texas

It’s nice to see Texas (and Mississippi!) get on side with the free states, this time around.

(After some unnecessary wavering… but life is like that, sometimes.)

From Tom Woods, One photo from Texas shows it’s all over

—<Quote begins>—

The divergence between the two Americas is growing wider.

Remember Joe Biden’s promise that if we just followed the voodoo for a few more months, we might be able to gather in small groups by July 4?

Here’s a scene from Texas yesterday:

Texas and Mississippi opened fully a month ago. Here’s how it’s going:

Of course, you can imagine the screeching if those lines were reversed, and Texas and Mississippi were the ones rising.

But because the numbers look like this, total silence.

Incidentally, even if this were all to go away tomorrow, it would still be crucial to talk about these numbers. We have to do whatever we can to make sure people don’t think, “That sure was a tough year, but thanks to those of us who followed the mitigation measures, we got out of it.”

As it is, despite our best efforts — and my 2009 book Meltdown, which spent 10 happy weeks on the New York Times bestseller list — people still think “deregulation” caused the financial crisis of 2008, even though when you ask them which repealed regulation would have prevented the crisis, they can’t name one.

They still think laissez-faire capitalism caused the Great Depression. Those of us who have read Murray Rothbard’s America’s Great Depression, or know something about Austrian business cycle theory, know the truth. But that’s a tiny sliver of the public.

You’ll note what all of this has in common:

Freedom causes crises, and the alleged experts fix them.

You need us, citizen. We keep you safe. We clean up the messes caused by allowing you too much freedom. We are smart. You are dumb. Trust us.

Um, how about you go jump in a lake, and we’ll live our lives?

As I posted in response to the Ohio governor’s grandstanding during National Public Health Week, “The ‘public health’ establishment has disgraced itself with arbitrary decrees based on nothing. That anyone could still think any of these measures do the slightest bit of good after examining charts from other, less restrictive states is a testament to the power of belief over reason.”

Join me inside the Tom Woods Show Elite, which is filled with people who decline “expert” direction of their lives (and we’ve been off Facebook for months now, so don’t let that keep you away):

Tom Woods

—<Quote ends>—

My takeaways?

Of course, you can imagine the screeching if those lines were reversed, and Texas and Mississippi were the ones rising.

But because the numbers look like this, total silence.

The media is not about keeping you informed: it’s about keeping your compliant, obedient… and ignorant.

Freedom causes crises, and the alleged experts fix them.

You need us, citizen. We keep you safe. We clean up the messes caused by allowing you too much freedom. We are smart. You are dumb. Trust us.

The Voices of Authority dislike challengers.

The Missing Colbett Report

In the meantime, YouTube disposes of the Corbett Report due to it’s Incorrect reporting on Fauci.

The Forbidden Fauci video can be found here. (Also here.)

A fun video from the Corbett Report, admired by North, can also be seen here.

The off-YouTube Corbett Report can be found here.

The God Hypothesis

Assorted extracts from The God Hypothesis Versus Atheist Science Denial by Michael Egnor

—<Quote begins>—

My friend and colleague Stephen Meyer has a superb essay at The Federalist about the major scientific discoveries in the past century that clearly point to God. Dr. Meyer points out that a large percentage of young atheists today cite science as a reason for their disbelief in God, and that is because many atheist scientists have publicly misused modern scientific findings to discredit belief in God. The public square is replete with books and articles written by atheist scientists claiming that cosmology or genetics or evolution properly understood disproves the existence of God. These atheist scientists profoundly misunderstand the implications of their science; they couldn’t be more wrong. As in his new book, Return of the God Hypothesis, Dr. Meyer points to three particularly clear advances in modern science.

The Big Bang

The first is the discovery of the Big Bang, which was predicted by Einstein’s equations of gravitation and subsequently confirmed by the Belgian priest and physicist Georges Lemaître and Mount Wilson Observatory astronomer Edwin Hubble and many physicists and astronomers who worked with them. The existence of a moment of beginning of our universe in an almost incomprehensibly massive burst of light and energy is astonishingly consistent with beliefs about the creation of the universe from the Jewish, Christian, and Islamic traditions. As physicist and Nobel laureate Arno Penzias, who provided what many believe is the conclusive evidence for the Big Bang, observed 

the best data we have [concerning a beginning] are exactly what I would’ve predicted, had I nothing to go on but the first five books of Moses, the Psalms, the Bible as a whole.


Cosmic Fine-Tuning

Dr. Meyer also discusses the remarkable fine-tuning of the physical constants in the universe that is necessary for the existence of life. If any of these physical values were even slightly different, mankind would not have appeared. It is as if Someone were expecting us and rigged the physics of the universe to make sure we were created.


Biological Information

The third scientific discovery of the past century that unequivocally points to God is the discovery of the enormous information encoded in DNA. The genetic code is quite analogous to a computer code and even to a language — it has punctuation, for example. It is a blueprint for life, and every blueprint presupposes a designer. 

To understand the stranglehold that blind recalcitrant atheism has on many modern scientists, consider that with the discovery of the genetic code in DNA scientists didn’t immediately acknowledge the evidence for intelligent design. In any other scientific discovery — in the discovery of artifacts in space or meaningful linguistic signals or codes from other galaxies — the inference to design would be immediately acknowledged and universally accepted.


Science is replete with evidence for God, and scientific discovery in the 20th century in particular was a milestone in the long history of the accumulation of evidence for a creator. It is a scandal that atheism has such an emotional and intellectual hold on so many scientists that it corrupts their science and leads them to deny what is obvious to any objective scientist.

—<Quote ends>—

I assume that Our Betters won’t bother with debates and arguments anymore, and just move on straight to censorship and punishment.

No matter.

We Christians will still need to sort out what is true, and what is false, based on the facts – and not from the pronouncements of Accredited Professionals and Responsible Authorities. So, we will need to retain (and improve on!) logic, argument, and debate.

Experimental research will still be required, and integrity will still be demanded by God – and so, we must still demand it of each other, as small-scale, limited, flawed, but still notable representatives of the Kingdom of God.

There will come a time when the shrinking budgets and collapsing legitimacy of Our Betters will lead them to cocoon themselves in strongholds, with tall walls and mighty impregnable gates – you know, the kind of gates Jesus spoke about in Matthew 16:18.

But while they hide in frozen, unchanging shelters, we need to learn from the new environment, a world without a God-State with it’s endless fiat money and visions of total power. We need to see what is in front of our nose, and work with the world as it is, slowly reshaping it into the world as it should be.

To gain dominion over the outer world, we must actually listen to it, learn from it, understand what it really is.

That means ignoring the example of the atheists, and recognizing that we live in a lawful, rules-based, intelligently designed universe that rewards societies that fear and obey God, and honour and respect the lives, property, and liberty of our fellow man: male and female, young and old, healthy and crippled, believer and unbeliever, local and stranger.

A Good Speech for Leaders…

When we Christians naturally gravitate to such leaders — as opposed to jokers who promise more power and more stuff with less cost and less responsibility — then, and only then, will we start getting somewhere in this world.

The video is taken from Gary North’s final class in his course on starting up a Home-Based Business: Lesson 180: Course Wrap-Up, Part 5

Check out the entire course here.

There are reasons why the despised Jews were always entrepreneurs.

Despised Christians would be wise to pick up a few lessons from them… assuming they don’t care to starve due to updated flavours of Jim Crow, retargeted on today’s focus of Progressive malice from the People with Inferior Genetics, to the People with Inferior Beliefs.

“What’s the use of being Better, if you don’t have someone to demonstrate Superiority over?”

A Tin-God Demands Sacrifice

From Tom Woods: Coming: my dagger through the heart of COVID hysteria

Well, folks, I’m doing it.

I kept saying: we need a quiz, where people look at charts of deaths or hospitalizations and without knowing which state is which, choose which line they think corresponds with which state.

And every time, they’ll be wrong.

The point of the quiz is: none of these interventions seem to have done a bit of good, since it’s impossible to tell which state did what by looking at the charts — and if these disruptions of our lives were justified, we’d darn well better be able to see it on the charts.

For example, one of the quiz items might say something like this:

One of the lines on this chart represents a state that imposed the earliest mask mandate and had such-and-such policy on business closures and restrictions. The other line represents a state that had no mandate, and lighter restrictions. Can you tell which is which?

And so on, over and over.


We’re told that masks are very effective against the virus. So: can you pinpoint on this chart for country X when you think the mask mandate went into effect?

The results are all random, of course.

As soon as this is ready, I’ll let you know.

I bought the domain CovidChartQuiz dot com for this purpose.

Now let me address a recent critic, who wonders: why does Woods focus so much on the charts? Even if the charts showed the opposite, the principle is the same! Freedom! He should say that!

Well, here’s how I think: I favor using the argument that is most likely to work.

I am convinced that I am vastly more likely to get people to think by showing them that the sacrifices they have been asked to make haven’t made a whit of difference, and that the people recommending them are therefore not worth listening to, than I am in any other way.

The situation is precisely analogous to the arguments against the minimum wage. Sure, I could simply say that employers have the right to pay whatever wage people agree to and just leave it at that.

And I will make zero progress with anyone.

But if I say that the minimum wage was introduced to benefit certain preferred groups at the expense of despised groups, that it makes it difficult for people with no experience to get a start, that state regulation is not actually how wages rise, and that very few people earn the minimum wage anyway (especially over time), I am much more likely to be heard.


Our friend Dave Smith, the talented and heroic host of Part of the Problem, has been excellent on the issue of vaccine passports and how important it is for us to get this right.

I was so delighted to feature him on the Tom Woods Show last week that I made a rare video edition of the show (though of course most people listen via audio-only podcast apps).

One more thing: our good friends at Rocket Languages (one of the founders is in fact a friend of mine) are taking 60% off just the next 15 foreign language courses they sell. Our daughter Regina has their Japanese course, and I hear nothing but good things from my listeners. If you’re interested, grab one before that number hits zero:

Tom Woods

There is a demand for more sacrifice, and sacrifice, and sacrifice.

But there is no reduction in the spread of COVID, and no decline from the low death rates.

There is no predictable, actionable difference between massive restrictions and no restrictions in the spread of COVID.

(Well: arguably, there are strong benefits from not forcing public restrictions on the public. Benefits tied directly to health, as well as indirectly tied to health: i.e. receiving pay for work, human contact, liberty, etc.)

And when I say low death rate, I mean low. Do the foot work, and compare COVID death rates with cancer, or car accidents, or heart disease.

Take a look at the national fatality tables, and see if you can spot the additional deaths in the “plague year” of 2020, compared to 2019, or 2018, or 2017…

The plague is far more hype than reality: and to the extent it is real, it primarily is a danger for the old and the sickly, not the vast majority of the population.

And it would benefit the old and the sickly, as well as the majority, to end the cried for endless COVID sacrifices.

Pointless COVID sacrifices.

Keeping Your Distance from the Imperial Capital

From Government Property Is Sacred. Your Property? Not So Much by José Niño

—<Quote Begins>—

Pace the gatekeepers of political opinion, launching a coup requires strong organizational capacity. Rag-tag groups of disgruntled, working-class Americans, disenchanted soccer moms, and extremely online Trump supporters aren’t going to be pulling off a coup against the most powerful government in human history. The only venues the January 6 demonstrators were capable of taking over were online chat rooms.

Government Property Is Sacred. Your Property? Not So Much. 

The double standards the legacy media is using to rationalize its ongoing crusade against the specter of extremism are farcical, to say the least. Over the course of a year when small business owners had their livelihoods destroyed by arbitrary lockdowns and widespread rioting, the ruling class tipped their glasses to the rioters and scoffed at those who had to put up with last summer’s mayhem. These same media mouthpieces would likely be cheering on color revolutions and lively protests in the Middle East and post-Soviet countries as the maximal expression of democracy. But when a rowdy group of Trump supporters took it upon themselves to stand up to their overlords, that was simply a bridge too far.

Any attempt to try to point out the inconsistency of the media’s hyperventilation with regard to the January 6 incident was met with instant pushback. On Morning Joe, TV host Joe Scarborough did not pull any punches:

I know there are idiots on other cable news channels that will say, “Well, this mom-and-pop store that was vandalized during the summer riots and that’s just as bad as the United States Capitol being vandalized.” 

He then had some colorful language for those who hazarded to question the prevailing narrative:

No jackass it’s not. It’s the center of American democracy. No, jackass…. I’m not going to confuse a taco stand with the United States Capitol.

Only a detached member of the ruling class whose livelihood is sustained by some of America’s most powerful corporations can have the gall to downplay the trials and tribulations untold numbers of small business owners had to endure during last summer’s mayhem. Scarborough and his coterie would have us believe that paying respect to the hallowed institutions of mass democracy is the highest virtue while trying to defend the fundamental property rights of the common man is the province of buffoons and country bumpkins.

Private Property Is Critical for Civilization

For the adherents of the present political order, symbols of the state have a religious aura. Private property, on the other hand, is a sacrificial animal to be slaughtered as an offering to the state, though the whole conversation would likely change if the property of Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Mitch McConnell, Big Tech, or politically connected corporations were defiled. The media would instantly become situational capitalists and vigorously defend the sanctity of their fellow peers’ property. 

Heck, they might just throw some radical free market defenses here and there. But this is out of pure self-interest, not because political leaders and their corporate patrons hold private property in high esteem at a holistic level. As for the rest of the rubes in Middle America, they must put up with whatever political violence befalls them and their property. Simply raising their voices in opposition will have the legacy media branding them as “reactionary,” “racist,” or “bigoted.”

—<Quote Ends>—

The Empire cannot be saved.

It’s far better to dig in, grow roots locally, show love to family and friends, and build up the connections and mutual-support network with your neighbours, than to waste time and energy playing political games in the Imperial Core.

The rewards begin after the Great Default, when there is no more money to buy compliance.

The Empire cannot be saved… and it’s time for the Kingdom of God to grow.

And in the Kingdom, there is only one law, for the powerful and the powerless, for men and for women, for Christians and nonChristians, for priests and police and patriarchs and ordinary people alike.

That prize, justice for all and equality under the law, is worth the price.

Some Problems with the Benedict Option

As discussed by Nathan Conkey in his article, The Benedict Option: A Strategy for Christians in a Post-Christian Nation. A Kind of a Book Review.

When he maintains that Christianity emerged from the confluence of Hebrew Religion, Greek philosophy and Roman law he describes the history of unreformed syncretism which has given us this present flood, which he rightly laments. He incorporates Plato, tutor of the thirty tyrants of Greece, father of totalitarianism, into his Classical Christian curriculum, and complains of a malaise in politics.

Having once incorporated Hebrew religion, Greek philosophy and Roman law into his ‘christianity,’ any solution offered in terms of this faith will bear the disharmonious, qualities of these rival faiths.

We see this in his advocacy of monasticism on the one hand, and marriage and the family on the other. Eastern Orthodoxy, and Roman Catholicism advocate both institutions, but, since monasticism, the formal forbidding of marriage for religious reasons is of pagan, diabolical origins, it must of necessity be at odds with the Biblical institution of the family. The forbidding of marriage for religious reasons, along with other ascetic practices are roundly rejected by Scripture, and nowhere encouraged as an ideal. To aim to turn family homes into ‘domestic monasteries’ is to divide something by nothing, and can only result in a division by zero error, lots of heat, but sadly, no light.

Again, having once adopted paganism in the form of Plato and Aristotle, with their view of God as a limiting concept only, into his ‘Christianity’ a kind of Gresham’s law is seen to be at work, with bad doctrine driving out good. For the Greeks, evil was metaphysical, in things, whereas Christ locates the seat of evil in the human heart. Hence his rather curious superstition that technology-in-itself is not morally neutral. The use of technology is most certainly NOT morally neutral, but to ascribe moral qualities to things-in-themselves is, I submit, pagan, superstitious animism.

Rod Dreher is a man worth treating seriously.

Unfortunately, he – like the Roman Catholics and the Greek Orthodox – are still trapped in the Greco-Roman (and, thus, intensely anti-Christian) tar sands that got us into this mess in the first place.

Institutionally, Mr. Dreher points to Benedict as the example of a Christian response to the fall of Rome. But, it was far from the only response, and was, in fact, a departure from the norm, not to mention the fact that being a hermit is a pagan practice, not a Christian one. God has given us an institutional solution, the church! This is not to ex-post-facto justify all that present-day churches do, and hanker for the good-old-days of Christian meetings, and sing-songs. This is a call to reform in accordance with the Word of God. It was the Church in the Roman empire which was a ‘parallel polis’ ‘Imperium in Imperio.’ It judged disputes between believers, and functioned as a parallel legal system, even for many pagans. It provided welfare, jobs for the jobless, education, and more. Together with that was the Christian family. The need of the day is to return, not to some idealised ‘early church,’ but, to take Mr. Dreher’s advice, and educate ourselves in the faith, including the works of the early church fathers that we might once again govern through service, in Christ.

There is no doubt much wisdom in the Rule of Benedict, and likely much advice best avoided. We emphatically do not need to follow either Benedict’s book, or his Lectio Divina. What we desperately do need, as per the author’s complaint, need to become literate Christians, learn the faith, and work to pass it on. Our only rule of faith is the scripture contained in the Old and New Testaments. With all due respect to Mr. Dreher, we have the solution, all of scripture, for all of life.

This is, of course, an easy rhetorical out, with a wave of my hand I dismiss his treatise, and poof! the problems are still there. The challenge remains, however, are we wiling to subject ourselves to Christ as king? Are we willing to tithe to works seeking to build alternative curricula? Are we wiling to support Christian scholarship, or simply move five, ten, or five hundred miles down the road to be with like-minded Christians? I do recommend that the serious Christian read this book, take notes, and ignore everything tainted with the leprosy of paganism. Let’s even humbly accept his critique of evangelicalism, and humbly build new churches, new wineskins, for the new wine of God, by his grace and in his power alone.

New wine will not be contained in old wineskins.

Conkey is totally correct on the root solution to our root problems. Are we going to be serious about exalting – and obeying – Christ as our King, in all things? Is His Word our Law?

Or are we going to once again turn to “sophisticated anti-Christian thought”, forever grovelling before the statist, humanist, power-adoring tyrants of Greece and Rome?

Leave the dead slavers and defunct imperialists to rot on the ground where they have fallen.

The Three Presuppositions of Science

From the comments of Uncommon Descent’s Brian Keating on the problem with “Follow the Science”

(The bold of “Presupposition #” is mine)

—<Quote begins>—

38 bornagain77
April 7, 2021 at 5:10 pm

Via Stephen Meyer’s new book, here are the three necessary presuppositions that lay at the founding of modern science in Medieval Christian Europe.

“Science in its modern form arose in the Western civilization alone, among all the cultures of the world”, because only the Christian West possessed the necessary “intellectual presuppositions”.
– Ian Barbour
Presupposition 1: The contingency of nature
“In 1277, the Etienne Tempier, the bishop of Paris, writing with support of Pope John XXI, condemned “necessarian theology” and 219 theses separate theses influenced by Greek philosophy about what God could and couldn’t do.”,,
“The order in nature could have been otherwise (therefore) the job of the natural philosopher, (i.e. scientist), was not to ask what God must have done but (to ask) what God actually did.”
Presupposition 2: The intelligibility of nature
“Modern science was inspired by the conviction that the universe is the product of a rational mind who designed it to be understood and who (also) designed the human mind to understand it.” (i.e. human exceptionalism),
“God created us in his own image so that we could share in his own thoughts”
– Johannes Kepler
Presupposition 3: Human Fallibility
“Humans are vulnerable to self-deception, flights of fancy, and jumping to conclusions.”, (i.e. original sin), Scientists must therefore employ “systematic experimental methods.”
– Stephen Meyer on Intelligent Design and The Return of the God Hypothesis – Hoover Institution

—<Quote ends>—