Insanity & Doom Update XV

Insanity & Doom Update XV

Item Keep under-25s out of adult prisons, MPs urge

Young offenders up to the age of 25 should be kept out of adult prisons because of “irrefutable evidence” that the typical adult male brain is not fully formed until at least the mid-20s, MPs have said.

The House of Commons justice select committee says young adults, who make up 10% of the adult prison population but account for 30-40% of police time, should be treated differently by the criminal justice system and be held in young offender institutions with 18- to 20-year-olds.

The MPs say that the most recent evidence shows that young people are reaching adult maturity five to seven years later than they did a few decades ago, which is affecting the age at which most typically grow out of crime.

It musn’t be forgotten that MPs have been arguing also to allow 16-year-olds to vote. Because Equality. Even American-grown effeminate soyboys say “Let children vote. Even 13-year-olds.” The reason why people in England are not as mature as previous generations is not far to seek. Neither is it difficult to explain the progressive push to lighten all penalties.

Item Martin Luther Is Probably In Hell

One might imagine that to write an article with this title is presumptuous in the extreme. But I do not make this assertion based on the wicked acts of Martin Luther — his division of Christendom, his hatred of the Jews, his licensing of polygamy, his accusations of adultery against the Savior, his railing, his curses or his insults — but upon the simple principle of faith alone. For faith has the power to wipe out any sin by the precious blood of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, but without faith we are lost.

The man who wrote this, Alan Fimister, is an Assistant Professor, Saint John Vianney Theological Seminary. What’s most interesting in this story are the comments from Lutherites (who may or may not be Lutherans) who seem to extrapolate from the fact Luther might be in Hell to the conclusion that all protesting Christians are going to Hell, and that it’s the Catholic Church which is sending them there, neither of which follows, and which Fimister doesn’t claim. There is also a strain condemning “dogmatism”, which is always a fallacy. What these people want is to substitute their own dogmatism for Fimister’s. At any rate, God bless Fimister for his boldness, which is on constant display.


And, not only is Al Qaeda 100% fundamentalist-Sunni, but so too is ISIS; and not only were all funders and participants in the 9/11 attacks fundamentalist-Sunnis, but so too were the Tsarnaev brothers who did the Boston Marathon bombing; and so too are all “radical Islamic terrorists” except for ones whose terrorism is directed against Israel, because Israel does suffer attacks not only from Sunnis, but also from Shia. But Israel is a unique case. And, the entire U.S.-Saudi-Israeli alliance is pro-Sunni and anti-Shia.

So: the reason why Pentagon think-tanks and the Pentagon itself and all U.S. Administrations play down the dangers and evils of fundamentalist Sunnis, and vastly exaggerate the dangers and evils of all Shia, is that the U.S. aristocracy, and the fundamentalist-Sunni aristocracies, and the Israeli aristocracy, are allied together against Shia, and against the major ally of Shia, namely Russia. Protecting the public is irrelevant, to each of these aristocracies, including the U.S. aristocracy.

These days ‘Think Tank’ is a singularly inapt name. Especially given this: In Shocking, Viral Interview, Qatar Confesses Secrets Behind Syrian War: “In an interview with Qatari TV Wednesday, bin Jaber al-Thani revealed that his country, alongside Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and the United States, began shipping weapons to jihadists from the very moment events
‘first started’ (in 2011).” Our own government funding (directly or not) the terrorists? Golly.

Item One in ten grooms now take their wife’s surname, study finds

Now however, just 72 per cent of married couples adopt the groom’s surname, compared to more than 97 per cent aged 55 or over.

Of the 2,003 adults surveyed, 11 per cent confirmed they had compromised by taking a double-barrelled surname.

Forget the scidolatrous “study finds.” Western culture is rapidly becoming feminized, which explains all the “hurt feelings” laws. You know no thought has been given to this asinine “double-barrelled” naming craze, because after the offspring of Smith-Jones weds the issue of Miller-Stephens, we’d have Mrs and Mr Smith-Jones-Miller-Stephens. And their spawn might marry Miss Abel-Baker-Charleston-Davis to produce Mr and Mrs Smith-Abel-Jones-Baker-Miller-Charleston-Stephens-Davis.


  1. Variations of the double-surname custom have been the rule in Spain since at least the Middle Ages, and are still the rule there and in the Spanish language diaspora. They follow a simple and obvious rule to prevent uncontrolled name growth.

    Those medieval conquistadors were obviously effeminate.

  2. DAV

    “irrefutable evidence” that the typical adult male brain is not fully formed until at least the mid-20s

    There’s growing evidence that it is closer to the mid-50’s while the snowflake generation and later may remain permanently underdeveloped.

  3. Ye Olde Scribe

    John Lennon was one of those who took his wife’s surname at marriage, and became, I believe, “John Ono Lennon.” Apparently, neither the marriage nor the name helped him much….

  4. “…after the offspring of Smith-Jones weds the issue of Miller-Stephens, we’d have Mrs and Mr Smith-Jones-Miller-Stephens. And their spawn might marry Miss Abel-Baker-Charleston-Davis to produce Mr and Mrs Smith-Abel-Jones-Baker-Miller-Charleston-Stephens-Davis.”

    Reminds me of the old English joke, poking fun at the Welsh (which culture follows a patronymic surname convention. “Ap-Richard” is “son of Richard.” Traditionally, their surnames included patronymics to infinity–John Ap-Richard Ap-Robert Ap-John, Ap-grandfathers forever).

    An Englishman was walking down a country road in the dark of night. As he passed a construction site, where a deep ditch was dug for drain pipes, a Welsh-accented voice called out, “Help! Down in the ditch!”
    The Englishman peered down, but couldn’t see anything in the dark. He asked, “Who’s down there?”
    The Welsh voice replied, “John Ap-Richard Ap-Robert Ap-John Ap-…” And the Aps continued for about 15 generations.
    The Englishman turned his back, began walking away, and called over his shoulder, “With all of you down there, just help yourselves!”

  5. Yes, we Protestants, who founded and built the only free nation on this Earth, just love hearing Catholics tell us that we’re all heretics who are going to Hell.

    Saying that the author of the referenced column did not say that all Protestants are going to Hell is disingenuous when he does state that “Protestants, generally speaking, have not faith,” and that salvation is achieved by faith alone. Of course, his claims are based on a bureaucratic trick of stating that the legal definition by the Catholic church defines faith as accepting the wisdom and leadership of the Catholic church. The point of Protestantism is that each man can receive the faith without the aid of an indoctrinated priest, because the words of the Bible are true – “For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.” A trained priesthood helps men to interpret the words of the Bible, but their teachings must, of necessity, they not having been present when our Lord and Savior walked the Earth, be based on learning the teachings of the Holy Writ.

    To say otherwise is simply equivalent to stating that only members of the lawyers guild can be allowed to read the law, and all others who dare to read the law must be punished as an example to others. After all, if laymen were to read the law, they might discover that the laws don’t match the lawyer’s claims, and they can’t have that.

  6. “Yes, we Protestants, who founded and built the only free nation on this Earth”

    Which nation was that, and which Protestants were those?

  7. Lee – Perhaps you should visit your local library and check out a history book or two. I do realize that true history is seldom taught these days, and a realistic account of the founding of these United States may be difficult to locate. With diligence, your claimed ignorance can be corrected. Enjoy learning about the incredible, unlikely birth of our country, and the essential role played by George Washington (you probably know him as the dollar bill guy). Benjamin Franklin was also quite instrumental – you may have heard of him (he’s the guy on the hundred dollar bill).

  8. McCharles,

    Thank you for clarifying that you were taking about the U.S. Franklin was not a Christian, and therefore, of course, not a Protestant. Washington, although he did attend Christian church services for the earlier part of his life (he was, formally, an Anglican), at one point seemed to stop doing so, and, conspicuously, never transmitted any form of religion to his offspring. Many of his contemporaries claimed that he was a deist (not a Christian, and, therefore, not a Protestant). Historians do not agree about his religious belief. There are some other founding fathers who were Protestant Christians, some who were what religious people call “atheists”, and some who were deists (not Christian, etc.). Yes, history books are interesting. I suggest you read some.

  9. Ye Olde Statistician

    Well, deists and atheists can, from the Orthodox perspective, be considered extreme forms of protestantism.

    Where the Founding Fathers differed from the aboriginal Protestants was in church-state relations. The Reformation morphed into a Revolution largely because unlike previous reformations, it was co-opted by the State. During the medieval times, the Church was an independent entity, with its own laws and courts. As A.D. Lindsay wrote in The Modern Democratic State, “It was perhaps equally important that the existence and prestige of the Church prevented society from being totalitarian, prevented the omnicompetent state, and preserved liberty in the only way that liberty can be preserved, by maintaining in society an organization which could stand up against the state.”

    Well, that would not do; so, the next round of reformations were co-opted in one of three ways: 1) adopt-a-heretic, as Saxony adopted Luther, or Brandenburg adopted first Calvin, then Luther; 2) nationalization of the Church within the State, as with England and Sweden; and 3) Concordances in which the State strong-armed its ancient power to name bishops and restrict the circulation of encyclicals within its borders, as in France or Spain. Hence, the birth of the “Established Church” by “Absolute Monarchs” against which the Founders reacted.

  10. Milton Hathaway

    I have 256 great-great-great-great-great-great-grandparents. Two of these seem to stand out from the other 254: one, a male, shares my surname; another, a female, shares my mitochondrial DNA.

    Some close relatives have traced our ancestry way back. We know who the male is from which we get our shared surname, and we know a number of things about him. But my siblings and I don’t know who the female is from which we get our mitochondrial DNA, since it has been much harder to trace the genealogy back through maiden names.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *