Another Sick Attempt To Justify Islamic Expansion over Secular Civilization


Learn from this argument:

1. What is a Religion?

2. What Does Secular Mean?

3. Why is the Constitution Scientific AND Sacred.



RELIGION: A religion consists of a set of Myths, Rituals, and False Promises of freedom from the laws of nature (Fraud), by repetition and social construction, that provides the individual with mindfulness by depriving him or her of the responsibility of continuous discovery, adaptation, innovation, and evolution by those of nature.

SECULAR: History, Rituals, Rules, And Institutions, that make no false promises of freedom from the laws of nature, that relies on rules measures and evidence, to produce goods, services, and information, that provide material mindfulness at the cost of continuous adaptation to the discovery, application and innovation of the laws of nature.
SACRED: A Commons in which all members share an interest, but no rights of “Usus, Fructus or Abusus”. Means you have no rights to aggress against, and have all obligations to refrain from aggression against, and all obligations to defend from, prosecute, and punish, any and all aggressors, where such aggression equals the severity of Treason.
THE AMERICAN CONSTITUTION: The constitution, is a work of political science. It evolved from the empirical common law, and the empirical adjudication of differences in court. When we read the history of the Norman conquest, the restoration of classical thought, the evolution common law, the English invention of the modern state, and most importantly, Blackstone’s commentaries on the laws of England, the federalist papers, the declaration, the constitution, this is not a religion. It is a work of social science – and the most scientific attempt at the production of government in human history. It is part of the ESCAPE from Abrahamic superstition championed by the English, who subsequently created the agrarian, commercial, financial, empirical, scientific, industrial, medical, and technological revolutions. So no, the constitution is a DEFENSE AGAINST the supernaturalism of the church and its long history of stagnating corruption, as well as a defense against the landed aristocracy that had degenerated into rent-seeking, as well as a defense against the ‘people of low character’. All of whom the founders sought to leave behind in Europe.
That is the correct set of definitions.
Why? Secular Empirical States evolve, and Religious Supernatural States stagnate or regress. There is a very good reason that despite the axial age’s post-bronze-age-collapse construction of political religion, by 800ad, every civilization that adopted the supernatural means of organizing stagnated or in the case of Islam, devolved, ending the evolutionary value of the agrarian revolution within a millennia – despite the increase in world trade. Religion destroyed the gains of the agrarian revolution in just 1000 years. (The reasons for which are rather easy to enumerate).
This speech is a subversive bit of pseudo-intellectual sophistry. An intellectually dishonest apologia, in order to justify Islamic expansion, despite Islam’s responsibility of 1B dead and the destruction of six great civilizations of the ancient world that vastly outweighs even the Marxist 100M dead and the destruction of Russian and German civilizations. The moment one relies upon such pretentious means of conflation as ‘in a sense’ or any variation thereof, he or she is relying upon the Abrahamic method of deceit. I specialize in explaining the means by which social construction of falsehoods is created, and the long traditions of doing so. And I found this speaker intellectually and morally offensive. We have enough problems in the modern world with the century and a half of Marxism, Neo-Marxism, Postmodernism, and now PC-Woke attempts to create a new pseudoscientific and sophomoric religion without the attempt to justify Islam with even more pseudoscience and sophistry. Both of these traditions rely on the Abrahamic method of deceit: false, unwarrantable, promise of freedom from the laws of nature, that baits people into hazard of ignorance poverty despotism and decline, advocated by pilpul (sophistry), and critique (undermining and reputation destruction), using straw-manning (fiction), and heaping of undue praise (fiction), behind plausible deniability of morality and innocence. There is no difference between pimps and drug dealers and sellers of comforting lies, other than the simple fact that religion is as immoral as both, and sold for the same reasons – to addict people so that they can be profited from by a parasitic clergy.

Leave a Reply