The Masked Conservative

Columnist and blogger Frederick Meekins is announcing the publication Yuletide Terror & Other Holiday Horrors.

The work is a collection of essays chronicling from the early 1990’s onward the attempt to remove traditional holidays such as Christmas from the American civic calendar in the name of pluralism, inoffensiveness, and inclusion.

The book will be available through Lulu.com. Lulu.com is a print on demand company merging the synergy of the Internet content revolution and the classic appeal of the printed word.

Though it’s still a few months until Christmas, it’s never too early to consider a gift that will educate as well as entertain.

A comical reworking of "Happy Birthday To You" ends, "You look like a monkey and you act like one too."

If certain scientists have their way, that ditty might very well come to be seen as something akin to a racial slur.

It is reported that researchers from MIT and Harvard are contending that, millions of years ago, early humans and chimps got down and dirty with a little interspecies hanky-panky.

Such unions produced fecund offspring that introduced genes from both species into the respective genomes.

Some might dismiss such speculation as idle academic babbling, however, such theorizing will serve as the background of future policy and social thought.

To most of us, chimps and humans getting together seems so bizarre it sounds like eharmony meets Planet of the Apes. Yet for years rumors have circulated that mixed creatures known as "humanzees" have been engineered behind the closed doors of laboratories where the only standards adhered to are the twisted imaginations of the mad scientists that lurk in the shadows of such places.

It has been claimed that Stalin dreamed of an army of hybrid ape-men to impose Communism upon the world. In China during the Cultural Revolution it has been alleged one of these monstrosities was killed before it could be born.

However, such experiments are not confined to the godless Communists across the sea. It has been claimed one such hybrid was born at Yerkes National Primate Research Center but destroyed shortly after birth.

But whether or not these incidents have actually occurred, what there is no debate about is that there are those in scientific and philosophical circles bent on undermining the distinctions between man and beast.

Ethicist Peter Singer, who believes it is permissible for parents to kill their infant children, argues that the great apes should be granted what we currently call "human rights".

Though it is another issue entirely, already things have gotten to the point where a person reluctant to endorse courtship and marriage outside their respective race or ethnic group puts themselves in the position of social sanctions being imposed upon them such as when Bob Jones University stuck to the beliefs of its founders rather than change its position simply because the government told them to in the name of tolerance and diversity. Just imagine the condemnation that will be heaped upon those insisting upon the integrity of the species in a world where the very word "person" will be greeted with the same revulsion reserved today for the vilest of slurs and terms of superiority.

Won't take that little cute red-headed orang gal to the prom? Why you are so prejudiced, its off to the reeducation camp for cognitive reconditioning for you, you wretched conservative.

Many enjoy "The X-Men" as an allegory analyzing the ramifications of the acceptance of human beings and the dangers of ethnocentrism. Viewers might want to consider it more as a literal depiction of the horrors that await mankind if we continue to allow our technical advancement to take mankind into ethical realms best not trodden upon.

By Frederick Meekins

Thanks in part to sensational media reports, websites such as MySpace.com have gotten a reputation for attracting various kooks such as pedophiles and other nefarious miscreants

Now to make them look like they are doing something, the House of Representatives is considering a bill that would make it illegal to access networking sites such as MySpace.com from a school or library.

While it can be hard to counter the Mrs. Lovejoy from The Simpsons screech of, "But think of the children!", why is this any of Congress’ business?

Individual schools and library boards should be free to adopt policies as they see fit regarding these technologies; that is after all, one of the beauties of a little thing called federalism.

However, one cannot really get around that little clause in the First Amendment declaring, “Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech”. Should be rather self-explanatory.

Those already conditioned to enthusiastically embrace control of their lives by various government institutions and social elites will counter, “But this medium can still be accessed from private domiciles.”

But if one ends up molested, does it really matter from behind what electronic rock one was leapt upon by a predator? Therefore, once these mandated regulations have been accepted throughout schools and libraries, it won’t be long until do-gooder activists begin to insist that the Internet presents too much of a danger to allow common citizens access to sites produced by other average citizens; thus we will only be granted access to information made available by government licensed data providers.

From comments made by those in government and mainstream journalism about citizen media, one is given pause to wonder if the issue is really about protecting the innocence of children or rather about suppressing technologies having the potential to undermine the stranglehold on opinion these institutions once enjoyed. For they have certainly done very little to clean up television.

When it comes to public complaints about the filth broadcast over the airwaves or found in books, liberals admonish the concerned that it is up to individual parents to turn off the TV or to monitor what their children might be reading (though interestingly, they do not have the right according to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to be the sole arbiter of what their offspring are taught about human procreation). So why is it Congress’ responsibility rather than the result of deficient parenting when an adolescent places every sordid detail of their lives on the Internet for the entire world to see?

Even a number of prominent Conservatives have come out against Internet media in the hands of private citizens. Cal Thomas, in a column titled “The Blog That Ate Real Journalism”, laments the rise of the blogosphere, claiming that a united people must all sup from the same news source (I wonder though if his concern is more that there are those of us that do for free something similar to what he is paid a handsome salary for) and that you are basically too stupid yourself to determine whether or not a particular story is credible.

Americans valuing liberty and freedom might be shocked to learn of the similarity of warnings as to why MySpace usage must be curbed not by personal restraint and individual discernment but rather through national legislation and those promulgated in Communist countries as to why information technology must be kept from the hands of common people. In the Soviet Union, typewriters had to be registered with the State so as to prevent their misuse in the spread of counterrevolutionary ideas. Likewise, here in our own time, the Red Chinese carefully monitor Internet use of the enslaved population living under the scrutiny of that dictatorship out of concern for “unhealthy” material.

Books can be used to spread porn and licentious ideas as well. Will Congress move next to shutdown libraries?

As with books, computers and software applications are morally neutral and simply take on the ethical characteristics of those utilizing them. If there are problems arising from the use of this technology, the fault lies with oversexualized youth and the aging perverts too eager to assist them in their slide into iniquity.

If Congress is so enthusiastic about protecting the American people from a bunch of old crooks, shysters, and deviants, perhaps they should put themselves out of business.

By Frederick Meekins

On the April 26, 2006 edition of Politics & Religion, prophecy scholar Irving Baxter " and Joseph Farah of WorldNetDaily.com discussed the implications of the National ID Act.

Interesting how, as barriers are being taken down to normalize illegals and allow any foreigner in that wants, that by 2008 actual Americans will be expected to "authenticate" themselves for the privilege of receiving an identification approved by the Department of Homeland Security.

According to CNet, your local MVA (that bastion of courtesy and service) will be the party to determine whether the proof of your existence you place upon the altar of the state will be deemed an acceptable libation unto the Beast.

This raises the concern of what of Americans who, for whatever reason, are unable to produce proper documentation? What is to stop government officials from using this as a means of removing disruptive elements from our population such as troublesome activists such as civil libertarians and principled Christians, those holding property deemed desirable the government would like to eminent domain for its corporatist masters, or even senior citizens who are no longer useful to the COMMUNITY and whose unprogressive outlooks hinder social progress?

What is to stop the government from snatching your house since you are not "properly documented" and handing it over to what was just a few years previous an illegal alien that isn't even an American?

It is argued these super-ID's are needed to prevent "terrorism" and will be checked before allowing passengers to board an airplane. Baxter and Farah mention these cards (at least for now anyway as ID chips loom ever closer on the horizon) might even be checked before allowing people to get on a bus.

What's to prevent regulators from enacting some kind of law or decree stipulating one must present this national ID before being allowed to purchase gasoline, food, or some other necessity? After all, after the September 11th attacks, the FBI thought it was a national security matter to investigate what supermarket discount card programs the Jihadists belonged to.

Americans had better wake up now or the National ID act might very well turn into the National Displacement and Relocation Act.

by Frederick Meekins