The Musings Of The Consensus

 Recently, an alliance of gays, lesbians, and bisexuals have come out in opposition to what they see as the excesses and depravity of the transgender movement lobby, specifically, against the "grooming" by the transgender lobby of impressionable minors into getting body-altering drugs and surgery to become transgender themselves. Given said lobby advocates against parental consent and often want to separate children from proper supervision by their legal guardians to involve children in discussions of sexual activity and the permanent alteration of their minds and bodies with surgeries and hormones as an apparent panacea for the stresses and rigors of adolescence, this alliance of the LGB have come to view the transgender lobby as a threat and believes such things should be legally barred from anyone who is not a consenting adult or at least such activities should only take place with the active knowledge and participation of parents, with the parents having veto power over t...

 This post will be half a historical lesson and half biblical commentary. The reason is because of the fact this post will draw from a historical source and the historical background is both interesting on its own merits and ties into the biblical content. This commentary will draw on the scholarship of Henry Wager Halleck, Major-General in the Union Army during the American Civil War, from a book on military history, tactics, and strategy he wrote while he was still a 1st Lieutenant called  Elements of Military Art and Science.  While most of the text is concerned with matters utterly unrelated to the Bible, the very first section examines the reasons and justification for war and draws on moral precedent offered by the Christian faith for his arguments on the topic. It's worth noting Halleck was never much of a battlefield general, his record in that regard being, on the whole, uninspiring and mediocre at best. His credentials as a scholar and military bureaucrat, howev...

For those not aware of American history, about a dozen or so Southern states decided to try breaking away from the United States in 1860 to form the Confederacy, basically their own version of the US, simply because they weren't going to accept living under the legit US because they felt they weren't going to get their way anymore. Their temper tantrum written with the blood of over half a million souls on both sides was an illegal attempt to start their own nation that imploded as soon as the gloves were completely off known as the American Civil War. History repeated on a smaller yet no less pathetic scale in Seattle,Washington last month with what they called the Capital Hill Autonomous Zone/Capital Hill Occupied Protest (either way, it was a clear attempt at separating themselves from all lawful authority) which they tried to turn into a mini nation-state, complete with its own economy, laws, and even a standing militia, just like the Confederacy. However, in fairness t...

One of my loves is reading history, and I've been binging on history books for quite a while now. While doing so, I've been rereading a few books on the American Revolution, and to be honest, both sides did some really dumb things, and since some of them are kinda hilarious, I thought I'd share some of the more galaxy brained things both sides did. 1. The only reason the war started was, quite simply, the British (King George especially) were too arrogant to not kill the golden goose. Up until the end of the Seven Years War, since the turn of the century (meaning from 1700-1763), the British had ruled their American colonies with a pretty light hand, to the point it had become "normal". Afterward, they started clamping down and demanding strict enforcement of tax laws they had otherwise been content to let off easy for several generations as well as dreaming up new ones that could only make their American subjects angrier. Then, they had the temerity to wonder w...

I recently finished "The Wages of Destruction" by Adam Tooze , and being a history fan, I thought it was a great book. Unlike many books that examine Nazi Germany, this one examines it from a primarily economic lens, and while it does not discount the political and social aspects of the Nazi regime, it argues that while they were key elements, they all had a cooperative effect with economic motives and vice versa. One of the main points it argues is that economics was key to setting the stage for Hitler's rise to power, the impetus of his platform while in power, and had a sizable degree of influence on his fall from it, and the Third Reich was also far more in pawn to its economic limitations than most give it credit. The author spends a fair majority of the time going into profound detail at every stage of the interwar and WWII period covering all the economic factors that underpinned the German economic backdrop and how that influenced Nazi policies, which, as th...

As I write this, Iran is retaliating against the US for taking their head cloak and dagger man, who provably incited terrorists to attack one of our embassies. As to taking down said inciter, they brought blood on their own head by hurting Americans and he paid the price for it. It's regrettable either side shed blood, but it is what it is. But now it looks like there might be even more conflict that becomes a war over this, and I find nothing to be happy about. It was likely inevitable, and I doubt it could have been avoided, but killing people is nothing no one should be cheering for, at least not if you aren't a murderous animal. If US troops have to fight this out, they have my support as an American citizen, but I hope their deaths are as few as possible and it ends as quickly as possible. As for the Iranians, I hope common sense breaks out and they decided to put down the sword before too many of them die by it. Enough have died already. As for me, I'm going t...