Trump’s Focus on Christian Refugees and What this Atheist Thinks of that

syrian-refugees-unhcr-photo8

Syrian refugees escaping into Western world countries like the United States.

President Trump has announced a plan to make Christians priority number one in his Syrian refugee policy.

Alright, so forty-fifth president of the United States Donald J. Trump has recently announced a plan for his Syrian refugee policy, and he wants to lend total priority to Christian refugees among them. I don’t claim to know why that is but I suspect this may not exactly produce more good than harm. Whether he is trying to make us a Christian country or trying to keep out muslims, I am not going to talk about either of those notions here. Instead I am going to talk about what I predict, and I am going to propose an alternative.

My Prediction for this favoritism policy

I do not see the planned agenda of favoritism toward Christians among the Syrian refugees as leading us into a heartening future. Rather I predict that freedom of religion will very slowly disappear, because there is no freedom of religion in a nation that declares that only one organized religion can freely cross the nation’s borders.

But also as an atheist with my own secular morality, I very basically do have to ask a great many well crafted questions to our first orange president. What about all of the atheist and deist and other secular morality abiding refugees who are fleeing persecution by the Islamic Totalitarians, just like the many Syrian Christian refugees are?

Also what about all the Syria escapees that practice some other Non-muslim faith that’s also not Christianity, like Judaism for example? And lastly what about the muslims who are trying to escape to our nation to get away from Islamic Totalitarianism?

What could be a better solution to the Syrian refugee crisis?

Ellis Island spelled the solution to this current problem in the 1890’s when it was taking in immigrants from Europe, some of whom were the first of my fellow ethnically Irish Perkins to come to America. And the very first Irish American Perkins had to go through a legion of tough medical checks, and a legion of tough criminal checks, and that was all the border control they had to deal with. Then these immigrant ancestors of mine were free to apply for jobs and also for citizenship, which as one can tell by my titular self-descriptor above… my Perkins ancestors from Ireland did!

But anyway, the Syrian refugees should be processed the same way no matter their faith or non-faith. Disease check, Security check, then free to apply for jobs and citizenship. In other words, the never granted amnesty to any of the first Irish Americans of my family, and nowadays these Syrian refugees should have to formally apply for citizenship just like my Ireland immigrant ancestors had to do.

In closing, I must say that all of the escapees need to be processed Ellis Island style, so that we can add workers to our economy and build a free market in labor while filtering out any Islamic Totalitarians among them.

What do you guys think? Do you think we need Ellis Island immigrant policy? Or are you just loving the intellectual honesty here? Either way, please sign onto donating $1.75 per month to this humble journal, thank you all;
“Subscribe

~LDA

Islamic Nationalism is NOT Compatible with Libertarian Principles

coexist-foolish-infidels

Truth about the ‘coexist’ signs and how naive they all are.

Islamic Nationalism is Not a friend of Libertarianism, anyone who says otherwise at present is dangerously naive.

Opening disclaimer: this is mainly meant to rally the Liberty movement against the Islamic Nationalist threat, but to do this the Liberty movement needs to understand the source material of that brand of religious Nationalism. I fully support the right of muslims to exercise their freedom of religion and to abide by their religion’s rules all they want but this right does not include the right to force any specific organized religion onto other people.

And obviously there’s 12 libertarian principles but I had to pick 3.

What the Koran Teaches About the NAP

What, the Non-Aggression Principle? Yeah, that’s the idea that fraud and theft are inherently wrong and that force may only be used in self-defense or defense of others. Very simple idea, as far as I am concerned, some alternate names out there like the Anti-Coercion Law, for one. But what does the Islamic Faith teach about the initiation of force to achieve social and political goals?

That’s right, the faith teaches its followers, in reference to skeptics of the faith, to ‘kill them wherever you find them‘, and this is right there in the passage called Sura 191 to 193. Bill Maher, the only left-wing comedian in mainstream media who truthfully understands Islam for what it currently is, notes in debate with Ben Affleck (six minutes; thirty seconds into the video I linked to) that Islam is the ‘Only religion that acts like the mafia, in that it’ll —- kill you, if you speak the wrong opinion, draw the wrong picture or write the wrong book!‘ This Koranic teaching does not sit well with the NAP.

What the Koran Teaches of Free Enterprise

In his book The Failure of Political Islam, meaning on page 132, Oliver Roy explains how the recent Islamic Nationalist movement demands economic nationalism, which means a religiously fanatical hybrid of protectionism with mercantilism. Such a hybrid was and is intended by these religious fanatics to create a Mixed market economic system.

In other words, the Koran teaches that a mixed economy, meaning one that’s a middle ground between marxist leninism and free enterprise, is infallible. This Koranic teaching does not sit well with the principle of Free Enterprise.

What the Koran Teaches on LGBT Rights

Basically, the Koranic holy book does not just label LGBTQ orientations an abomination but also calls it a cancerous polyp to be punished with the meanest deaths one can inflict onto another.

I really don’t think I need to tell you this has no room whatsoever, this Koranic teaching, for Marriage Privatization, and I can guarantee that as someone who’s into the idea of Separation of Marriage and State.

What Do Unaltered Opinion Polls Say?

Polling on organized religion, when it comes to wanting Sharia to be the law of the planet, aka espousing Islamic Statism, unveils that whether the majority of a Muslim majority country is with us Libertarians or with the Islamic Statists varies on an individualistic, nation by nation basis.

In Southeast Europe and Central Asia the polling on Sharia being Law of the Planet goes something like this.

  1. Kosovo 80% Opposed to Sharia; 20% Supportive of Sharia; +60 Friend of Libertarianism of the United States
  2. Bosnia 85% Opposed; 15% Supportive; +70 Friend
  3. Albania 88% Opposed; 12% Supportive; +76 Friend
  4. Kyrgyzstan 65% Opposed; 35% Supportive; +30 Friend
  5. Tajikistan 73% Opposed; 27% Supportive; +46 Friend
  6. Turkey 88% Opposed; 12% Supportive; +76 Friend
  7. Kazakhstan 90% Opposed; 10% Supportive; +80 Friend
  8. Azerbaijan 92% Opposed; 8% Supportive; +84 Friend

But in muslim majority nations in Southeast Asia, South Asia, Middle East, and North Africa; the sway goes more like this.

  1. Malaysia 86% Supportive; 14% Opposed; +72 Enemy
  2. Indonesia 72% Supportive; 28% Opposed; +44 Enemy
  3. Afghanistan 99% Supportive; 1% Opposed; +98 Enemy
  4. Pakistan 84% Supportive; 16% Opposed; +68 Enemy
  5. Bangladesh 82% Supportive; 18% Opposed; +64 Enemy
  6. Iraq 91% Supportive; 9% Opposed; +82 Enemy
  7. Palestinian 89% Supportive; 11% Opposed; +78 Enemy
  8. Morocco 83% Supportive; 17% Opposed; +66 Enemy
  9. Egypt 74% Supportive; 26% Opposed; +48 Enemy
  10. Jordan 71% Supportive; 29% Opposed; +42 Enemy
  11. Tunisia 56% Supportive; 44% Opposed; +12 Enemy
  12. Lebanon 71% Opposed; 29% Supportive; +42 Friend

And with regards to supporting or opposing Koranic Law on LGBT people, on free markets and on Anti-Coercion Principle; the patterns go roughly similarly to this.

Is American Foreign Policy to Blame for this?

Absolutely not. Yes, it’s stupid of us to go on Wars of Democracy Promotion against secular tyrannies to feign a dependence on foreign oil! But that has nothing to do with why Islamic Nationalist regimes like Saudi Arabia sponsor terrorism against us, Sorry Blowback Theorists but blowback theory is inherently trashy lies.

Closing

Thanks everyone for reading this input of mine, and if you like intellectually honest content in general, then for you to sign onto donating $1.75 per month to my site would allow me, if I get 15 or more donors, to upgrade my website enough to start uploading podcasts & videos directly to this website. Thanks again;
“Subscribe

~LDA

How I became a libertarian, specifically republitarian and/or neolibertarian

james-madison

Yes, how did I arrive at choosing libertarianism and within that choosing neolibertarianism in particular?

I have decided to clarify what exactly brought me to engaging in politics as a libertarian.

Firstly, I want to give a brief one-paragraph summary of how I arrived at being an atheist with a secular morality. This is to foreshadow how notably similar these two processes were as the went along.

Okay here goes the atheism story. I was born in Derby CT on May 6 of 1994 and raised half the time in New Haven and half the time in Cheshire until my dad moved to Cheshire at some point in my very early life. Then I was being raised in Cheshire full time and growing up on a forested street by the name of Oak Avenue. When I was introduced to scientific facts such as those about dinosaurs at the age of 5 or 6, I became very easily amused and informed about science and doing what I only recently started calling “digging for facts”. This term I have taken from the idea ‘digging for dinosaurs’ and simply replaced the word dinosaurs with the word facts. And as I got more preoccupied with learning how to do my own research and jumping to conclusions uniquely my own, I began to grow skeptical of the Catholicism most of my ethnically Irish family, including me to some degree, was raised on. This lead me to read up on the works of atheism activists who shared my acceptance of and adoring of science and zoology. Applying the scientific method lead me to conclude my brain is best off with secular-morality atheism by roughly 2007 when I was thirteen.

My Journey to Neolibertarianism

Now… I want to tell my story of what brought me to neolibertarianism and I want you to pay attention to how similar it is to my atheism story.

While I was being raised, mostly by myself, to love to study and learn about prehistoric and modern zoologies; I was also being raised mostly by my parents on Center-Left social and cultural policy beliefs. This is what began my still-standing support for a permissive society wherein people are unbelievably free from any social norms that have nothing to do with deterring fraud, deterring coercion, or deterring property crime. However, I never accepted the economic or foreign policy beliefs of Center-Left doctrines. This is because my passionate interest in the Scientific Method has always lead me to be skeptical of anything that sounds intellectually or behaviorally as valid as creationism or as climate change denial. And so I looked around, digging for facts on my own, and asked myself “Who holds the facts economically and about foreign policy?” And I discovered some self-professed Center-Right people who I considered valid for sharing my adherence to atheism, my skepticism of religion, and my eagerness to champion any science from any century since the Age of Enlightenment. The first of these I came across, Mark Humprhys, made such scientific and logical cases for Free Market Economics, for American Cultural Imperialism, for US military admiration and for Preventive warfare that I had to take some self-assessment quizzes. And every single one of them followed a pattern. Not only is the word for people like myself who are socially and culturally Center-Left as well as Economically Center-Right a ‘libertarian’. But also libertarians like me who endorse US cultural imperialism, love the US military, and oppose pacifism are usually called republitarians and neolibertarians. This was all by December 2010.

Conclusion

Thanks for reading this everyone,

~LDA

The Vitality of Pragmatism to Libertarian Causes And Future

tumblr_static_tumblr_static__640

Pragmatism is a scientific way of observing and/or solving problems that is based on facts of life in place of ideals or theoretical thought process.

Libertarians Cannot Overthrow the Democrat-Republican Electoral Duopoly Without Using Pragmatism.

So… I debated someone I know on health care the evening before doing this page. The topic at hand was the Affordable Care Act, and I was unable to make a fiscally libertarian argument for replacing the ACA with something truly legit.

This I now know this is because I forgot a key component of neolibertarianism, my one of the ten types of libertarian. Even the article I just linked you to ignores this key component of neolibertarian thinking:

Pragmatism.

Emotionalism is not working well at all for the Libertarian Party and not for the wider liberty movement either. Factoids, Pragmatism and The Scientific Method will bring about far better political results for American and other Western-society libertarians than Passion, Emotionalism and Name-Calling Games. This is something I should have remembered for all my life as a neolibertarian and as an atheist. My preference for pragmatism over emotionalism is what drew me into secular humanism in 2007 and to neolibertarianism in 2010.

Healthcare Example of Pragmatic Libertarianism

Allow me to give an example of what’s the neolibertarian approach to American healthcare reform.

So I don’t buy into the LP’s rhetoric about how getting government out of healthcare entirely will make American healthcare the best it’s ever been. Pragmatism gets me checking out the world’s other Free Societies and say “Where are the Best healthcare systems at balancing pragmatism and constitutional libertarianism?”

And in my Googling and my Wikipedia research I find that my fellow libertarian Independent Craig Berlin (he’s classical liberal, of the ten different types) wrote this thing about how there are fiscally conservative models and policies of Universal Health Care.

Being no surprise to me, the three biggest success stories of win-win healthcare policy are Israel, Switzerland and Australia which are all astronomically free-market-leaning in their domestic economic policy norms. Australian, Swiss and Israeli healthcare are structured in such a way as for public and private insurance to both be options, for healthcare to not be a free handout, and for government to spend a third or less of what we spend on healthcare as percentage of government spending. The result of these and other factors is Australians, Israelis and Swiss are among the top ten healthiest peoples on Earth. Even British healthcare is such a joke as for them to only rank 21st Globally.

Conclusion

There are plenty more examples of this kind of pragmatic thinking that epitomize exactly how libertarianism needs to think. Thanks for the read,

~LDA

Reasons Every Non-religious American Should Vote For Evan McMullin

mcmullin

He is a religious person himself, but what matters is he’ll defend our right to be Secular Morality types ourselves.

Atheists & Deists in America need to vote for Evan McMullin, here is why that is

Welcome to an article explaining in detail why atheists like me should get together with other Non-religious, like deists, behind Evan McMullin.

Evan Wants to Defend the Rights Of Opinions He Personally Disagrees With

He may be a Mormon on a personal level, but he recently went on iSideWith candidate guide and directly clarified his positions, very often in his own words.

One example of a liberty he disagrees with but he will defend anyway is the Summer 2015 national legalization of gay marriage. He even believes, despite thinking children are best raised by one father and one mother, that every parent – LGBT or not – has the empathy to nurture and defend and raise their children. As a result if McMullin is president he will allow LGBT coupled to adopt children.

These are presidential commitments that polling from 2012 says will reside overwhelmingly well with Atheists and other Non-religious.

Evan Wants to Defend Atheists and Deists and others Across the Globe

This begins with his pledge to stand with Israel, a free society that is two-thirds Atheist. Evan also aspires to end the Iranian government for its violations of the Iran deal, an action that will easily set Iranian atheists and Iranian deists free.

He understands the role model America is supposed to be as of 1945 to all of its fellow Western countries, meaning all of its fellow free societies. He knows all too well America’s Purpose in the World is to protect our current and 71 year old global order of free trade and diplomatic friendship from the possibility of a Third World War.

Such aspirations will benefit atheists and deists and all manner of other secular morality types. Free trade is what liberated most of the world from monarchy during the 19th century. Free trade is almost all of how exponents of Thomas Jefferson’s ‘Empire of Liberty‘ during the 19th century made America fulfill its spreading of freedom across the globe.

Evan, like slightly over half of Irreligious, wants small government with few services

Polling from 2012 indicates that 50% of irreligious want small government with few services, and only two-fifths replace God with Government. As such, the Irreligion community will more often benefit under a McMullin presidency.

Evan’s platform includes Restoring government accountability for corrupt behaviors; returning educational power to parents, teachers, and in the case of college level education students; and respecting the right of Americans to defend themselves while keeping weapons out of corrupt hands.

Another relevant thing to limited government that is in the McMullin platform is his desire to modernize healthcare by replacing government mandates with creativity and competition.

Conclusion

I sincerely hope I have made a legit case to my fellow Secular moralists about why anyone of secular morality should vote Evan McMullin in November 8th of 2016. I know as an atheist of secular morality myself I am voting for him that day. Thanks everyone for reading this,

~Kyle P