In Which Mr Smith Introduces Himself
So, following on from the other new bloods' introductory posts, I thought it a good idea to say hello myself. Before David and Andrew decide they were misguided in inviting me at all. This will just be a quick bio and a mini-post to start me off here. More detailed and longer posts will turn up when I have more time.
Biographical, then:
Mid-20s, white lower middle class (insofar as class is still a useful label at all), good fun office job and a fondness for HTML (which sadly doesn't equate to great cleverness with it).
As I don't have a bonnet anywhere near as fetching as Mike Cunningham's, it hasn't attracted any bees. However, I do have some pet peeves:
- Moral relativism
- Cultural relativism
- Dhimmitude and similar attitudes
- The belief that sympathising with those who would 'wipe Israel off the map' is not anti-Semitism
- Anti-Semitism
- 'Christophobia', to misuse a PC term
- PC
- Moonbat liberalism (of the sort closely associated with the above factors)
- Religious adherence to 'tolerance' as a sort of panacea deity
I could probably go on, but I'm even boring myself with this list, so on to the mini-post.
It appears to be the case that nobody knows where this child is now, beyond the fact that she was flown to Lahore, Pakistan, with her biological father (from a previous marriage of her now unmarried mother). The biological father has, according to the girl's grandmother, previously attempted to take the girl.
It is, of course, hard to say anything particular about this without falling prey to unjustified stereotypes. However, there is at least one known fact which is, to put it mildly, worrying:
Violet Robertson, 67, the girl's grandmother, said her daughter and former son-in-law met when he was running a market stall in Glasgow when she was 16 and he was 23.
Hmmn.... and then we have a police officer declaring that
'suggestions that Molly would be forced into an arranged marriage were "speculation".'
Really? When a 23-year-old who has taken a 16-year-old into the kind of relationship that turned into a marriage suddenly and without warning removes her suddenly to Pakistan.
But of course! Such things are completely, utterly, alien to the Pakistani and moslem mind. It just couldn't happen.
For a mini-post, this story is ideal because it touches on so many areas. The concept of childhood, the idea of the family, the purpose and sanctity of marriage, relationships between adults (anyone above the age of 18) and children (anyone under the age of 18), cultural relativism, moral relativism, and so forth. At base, though, there is an Absolute right and an absolute wrong. This story is riddled with events falling into one of the two categories.
Hello Mr Smith and welcome
So ATW now has 5 male Right wing blogging crazies (and not even a female Right wing loon amongst them) :)
Posted by: Colm | August 30, 2006 at 05:21 PM
Welcome Mr Smith.
The moral of this story:
Never mess around with a mohammedan - ever. Especially never have any kids with a mohammedan.
I don't know how well your country does with getting these kids back but ours has a terrible record with it. It doesn't matter that American mothers have legal custody. It only matters that the State Department kisses muslim ass.
Posted by: Monica-Philadelphia | August 30, 2006 at 05:23 PM
"For a mini-post, this story is ideal because it touches on so many areas. The concept of childhood, the idea of the family, the purpose and sanctity of marriage, relationships between adults (anyone above the age of 18) and children (anyone under the age of 18), cultural relativism, moral relativism, and so forth. At base, though, there is an Absolute right and an absolute wrong. This story is riddled with events falling into one of the two categories."
bullshit all this story shows is what is in store for the future generations of dear old londanistan...
Posted by: The Troll | August 30, 2006 at 05:27 PM
Hey Troll,
Good to hear from you again! Hope you're keeping well.
Posted by: David Vance | August 30, 2006 at 05:29 PM
back amongst the living... How well I'm doing is a long story I'll commiserate on it sooner or later I'm sure...
Posted by: The Troll | August 30, 2006 at 05:32 PM
Monica - on the same grounds, never marry a German. Christopher Myers' book "DC Confidential" details the misbehaviour of the German courts as his wife tries to get a chance to see her children by her first husband. Though at least her boys aren't likely to be forced into marriage.
Posted by: dearieme | August 30, 2006 at 05:54 PM
Troll,
Trust me, I know. I live and work in London. I'll get into all this more, I promise, just didn't have the time right then. All good things in time.
Posted by: MrSmith | August 30, 2006 at 05:58 PM
*snip*
moral relativism, and so forth. At base, though, there is an Absolute right and an absolute wrong.
Often asserted, and never shown - despite thousands of years of trying. Oddly enough your post is no exception. :-)
Nice try, though, and points for appararently knowing what moral relativism actually means.
Posted by: That Damnable O'Dwyer! | August 30, 2006 at 06:05 PM
Welcome to the youngest member of the ATW wordsmiths.
Posted by: mahons | August 30, 2006 at 06:23 PM
Is he the biological miracle love child of the union between our David and our Andrew ?
Posted by: Colm | August 30, 2006 at 06:53 PM
Monica - on the same grounds, never marry a German. Christopher Myers' book "DC Confidential" details the misbehaviour of the German courts as his wife tries to get a chance to see her children by her first husband.
Those bastards.
You know - the Germans are just plumb crazy. (alright...a LOT of Germans are crazy, not all I am sure) Do you know they just put a father in jail because he and his wife are homeschooling their children?
Posted by: The Troll | August 30, 2006 at 07:01 PM
Sorry. That was me above - not Troll.
Posted by: Monica-Philadelphia | August 30, 2006 at 07:02 PM
Whatever has happened to her I hope she is soon home and unharmed both physically and psychologically.
Posted by: aileen | August 30, 2006 at 07:14 PM
Mr Smith, welcome from another of the new recruits.
O'Dwyer, re: moral relativism and Mr. Smith's "there is an Absolute right and an absolute wrong".
Are you prepared to countenance such a thing in the same way that Voltaire sees God, i.e. if He didn't exist, we'd have to create him (even if we can never know Him)?
Posted by: Richard Carey | August 30, 2006 at 07:36 PM
- Moral relativism - meaning any moral perspective you disagree with
- Cultural relativism - meaning any cultural perspective you disagree with
- Dhimmitude and similar attitudes - meaning anybody who objects to overt imperialist agression
- The belief that sympathising with those who would 'wipe Israel off the map' is not anti-Semitism - mix any of the above
- Anti-Semitism - meaning any body who raises concerns about israeli policy
- 'Christophobia', to misuse a PC term - meaning anything you want it to
- PC - meaning anything you want it to
youre gonna fit in here fine.
Posted by: daytripper | August 30, 2006 at 07:39 PM
If Tripper disagrees with you, you will fit in fine with Planet Earth.
Posted by: David Vance | August 30, 2006 at 07:44 PM
Daytripper, this is one of the key problems with the Left: they will never agree the definition of a common language of communication.
How can we argue about "moral relativism" for example if we cannot first agree what it is we are talking about?
Posted by: Richard Carey | August 30, 2006 at 07:48 PM
Richard, another difference is that many on the "left" usually attempt a definition of key terms.
Most on the "right" usually run away from them.
The problem you have with the left could be that you can't accept hard and fast definitions, as your arguments then soon fall in on themselves.
Posted by: Cunningham | August 30, 2006 at 08:36 PM
Richard,
Are you prepared to countenance such a thing in the same way that Voltaire sees God, i.e. if He didn't exist, we'd have to create him (even if we can never know Him)?
Debates about absolute right and wrong tend to be long and ultimately pointless. I've yet to meet anyone who could explain what difference would be apparent between a world in which there is such a thing and one in which there is not (i.e. how you could test for it).
Bottom line is that if there are absolute values (and there seems to be no reason to expect that there would be) then you have no more clue as to what they are than anyone else.
Posted by: That Damnable O'Dwyer! | August 30, 2006 at 08:36 PM
Easy, a world with no admission of absolute right and wrong would have no police force and would have no more disapproval of the abomination of snuff porn than for the excessively boring sport of cricket.
Posted by: MrSmith | August 30, 2006 at 10:38 PM
MrSmith,
Easy, a world with no admission of absolute right and wrong would have no police force and would have no more disapproval of the abomination of snuff porn than for the excessively boring sport of cricket.
Obvious crap since there are hundreds of police forces all enforcing different laws, it is impossible to tell which one if any corresponds to "absolute right".
Moreover, many actions that are generally considered immoral (e.g. most of the ten commandments) are legal and many moral actions are illegal, so it's far from obvious that police have anything to do with enforcing morality. Not only that but many people (including myself) would consider it immoral that they should, others would consider it immoral for it to be otherwise.
The second part of your statement is a complete non-sequitur. No objective right and wrong does not mean no right and no wrong, nor does it mean that everything is equivalent. Quite the contrary.
Posted by: That Damnable O'Dwyer! | August 30, 2006 at 10:50 PM
There is a difference between what people shouldn't do and what they shouldn't be allowed to do.
Posted by: aileen | August 30, 2006 at 10:56 PM
Frank,
I suggest changing the name to "That incomprehensible O'Dwyer"!
Posted by: David Vance | August 30, 2006 at 11:00 PM
This little point is related to the RoP and its adherents although it's a bit OT.
I was travelling from Teesside to Aberdeen today and at the search point, a thorough check of a woman of at least 80 and her wheelchair was going on right in front of me. The thought then occurred as to how would searches be carried out if (or when) our muslim brothers decide to conceal their explosive pre-mixtures in their person: either in their orifice or swallowed in the manner of drug mules for retrieval and mixing afterwards on board. It's not a far-fetched proposition - just WTF do we do?
Posted by: [email protected] | August 30, 2006 at 11:02 PM
Muslim only airlines?
Posted by: David Vance | August 30, 2006 at 11:04 PM