Why Western Civilization Is Dead

Western Civilization is dead for two fundamental reasons:

1. America is no longer an exceptional nation due to the Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion back in 1973 and their recent (June, 2015) ruling redefining marriage to mean anything to everybody.

2. With his encyclical, “Laudato Si,” Pope Francis severed any rational tie between the Catholic Church and the Western Civilization it spawned.

pope-francis

America was founded on the exceptional understanding that all just law must be based on “the Laws of Nature and Nature’s God.”

And, “that they (each human being) are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

The mother’s so-called “right to choose,” is actually the legal sanction of the mass murder of unborn human beings.  Such a “right” actually deprives the unborn human being of his authentic right to life.

Marriage, for all of human history, has conformed to human nature, male and female, until now.

Marriage, the fundamental unit of any culture, any time, any place, now does not conform to human nature in Western Civilization.

That is because “gay” or homosexuality is a fundamental disorder in truth, and a mere sexual preference at the very least.

Disorders and preferences are not what define human nature.

Thus American law no longer conforms to human nature and is therefore fundamentally unjust.

This places America with every other nation on Earth and in human history.

Consequently, America cannot be considered exceptional any longer.

Laudato Si, a recent encyclical published by Catholic Pope Francis and addressed to all humanity, castigates mankind for its profligate lifestyle and blames human activity for “climate change.”

Since change is the nature of climate, blaming the nature of climate on human activity is a big Dumbzilla.

Further, since there isn’t any difference between Pope Francis’ lifestyle and that of any other civilized human being, his castigating humanity for its profligate lifestyle is pure, high grade hypocrisy.

So with the Pope of the Catholic Church now a champion of hypocrisy and the big Dumbzilla called “climate change,” Western Civilization has completely lost its anchor to justice and reason.

The only question now concerns whether the collapse of Western Civilization will be a long whimper of decades or centuries or a bang of economic catastrophe and social strife.

54 responses to “Why Western Civilization Is Dead”

  1. I was under the impression you were Catholic.

    Like

    1. Tiribulus,

      You are correct, I am a Catholic with a mind of my own.

      Like

      1. Not to start an argument, but there are areal limits on how much of your mind is allowed to be your own in the RCC. You haven’t crossed that but just sayin. Anyway, I was favorably impressed by you last year. I hope things are going well for you.

        Like

        1. TB, SOM has said repeatedly that you and your fellow evangelicals are “an incoherent mess.” And I have to agree with him.

          Like

          1. I am quite aware of the RCC view of protestantism JZ. I did not come here to pick a fight with this person. Who for some reason I actually thought was a woman.

            Like

            1. I’m not talking about the RCC, rather SOM’s specific words in relation to evangelicals, such as yourself: “An incoherent mess.”

              Like

            2. JZ days: I’m not talking about the RCC, rather SOM’s specific words in relation to evangelicals, such as yourself: “An incoherent mess.”
              I know what you’re talking about John and your attempt to instigate a fight here will not work on me. I have far more respect for Catholics who would burn me at the stake than I do these confused spaghetti spined Vat II ecumenists like the current “pontiff”.

              MY BOY. I love this guy. If I were ever to become a Catholic (in other words if Saturn were to collide with Pluto), I’d beg him to disciple me. As it is , his office is 15 minutes from where I’m typing this and I cannot get him to meet with me for lunch 😀 His assistant Simon does not like me one bit LOL! I’ve actually been complimentary and respectful too.

              Liked by 1 person

            3. I think you have far more pressing logical problems to deal with than wondering if you’d ever become a catholic 🙂

              Liked by 1 person

            4. Tiribulus,

              Don’t mind John.

              He can be such a little devil sometimes.

              Liked by 2 people

        2. That is correct, Tiribulus, the properly educated Catholic is trained to think with the mind of the Church.

          That means we are not allowed to make up our own religious doctrine.

          But legitimate criticism of a papal encyclical is allowed.

          Which means I may catch hell, and I have, but I won’t be excommunicated.

          Liked by 1 person

  2. MicheleMariePoetry Avatar
    MicheleMariePoetry

    Unfortunately the times are changing and the indoctrination in schools is working. Legalized Gay marriage will not be enough. The first thing that happened in England when it was legalized was that lawsuits started as Gay couples sued churches to get their weddings ‘blessed.’ suddenly I understood that people weren’t exaggerating when they said this would end up being an attack on churches!

    Liked by 4 people

  3. The mother’s so-called “right to choose,” is actually the legal sanction of the mass murder of unborn human beings

    SOM, murder implies killing something, a human being. How can you “kill” something that cannot die? Something cannot be considered “alive” until it can “die.” Defined Human Life begins at the moment its twin, death, also springs into existence. Without death there is no life. The former begets the latter. The latter assigns meaning to the former. One delineates the other, and fortunately the definition of death is not in dispute. Death is when electroencephalography (EEG) activity ceases. That’s it. That’s death. It follows quite naturally therefore that the onset of defined human life is when foetal brain activity begins to exhibit regular and sustained wave patterns, and that occurs consistently around week 25 of pregnancy. Only after something can die can it be considered alive, only when something is “On,” can it be turned “Off,” and to argue anything to the contrary is patently absurd.

    Like

      1. Sorry, have to login in to view article. Can you give me the outline?

        Like

        1. Offered and documented in the linked article:
          In the practicing medical community, the definition of death is in dispute; legal criteria vary; and EEG readings are neither regularly taken nor relied upon to make a clinical determination of death.

          Like

          1. I’m afraid to say, but you’re mistaken here. The legal, scientific and medical definition is not in dispute.

            In 1979, the Conference of the Medical Royal Colleges, “Diagnosis of death” declared: “brain death represents the stage at which a patient becomes truly dead.”

            This was updated in the 1980s and 1990s to state that brainstem death, as diagnosed by UK criteria, is the point at which “all functions of the brain have permanently and irreversibly ceased.”

            Further still updated in 1995 (to present), “It is suggested that ‘irreversible loss of the capacity for consciousness, combined with irreversible loss of the capacity to breathe’ should be regarded as the definition of death’

            American law follows, and is universal on this: A person who has received a brain-death diagnosis cannot breathe on his or her own and is legally dead, in all 50 states.

            So, the point stands: how can you turn something “Off” that is not “On”? How can something be considered “alive” when it cannot “die”?

            Like

            1. Sorry, I thought you were paying attention. I offered a link; you asked for an outline; I supplied one that is accurate. You can’t mean that I’m mistaken with regard to the content of the article because 1) I’m not and, 2) you wouldn’t know since, apparently, you can’t access it. You can’t mean I’m mistaken with regard to the points made by the article because I’m not the one that wrote it.
              With regard to what, then, am I mistaken?
              Now, on the basis of the information in the article, and considering its source and documentation, I’m inclined to believe that it undermines your assertion of an absence of dispute with regard to the medical definition of death. In fact, by its very existence, it is evidence of at least some dispute in the medical community since it is authored, sponsored, and supported by a medical professionals actively engaged in what, in their own terms, is a “dispute”.
              In addition, a 2012 article in the British Journal of Anaesthesia asserts and documents a “growing consensus” with regard to the definition of death but, by definition, a consensus can only be ‘growing’ if there is relevant dissent [article at: http://bja.oxfordjournals.org/content/108/suppl_1/i14.full ].
              Similarly, a 2007 article in the Journal of Medical Ethics claims that there is a “worldwide controversy on alternative definitions of death” [ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2598255/ ]
              The drafters of the Uniform Determination of Death Act (UDDA) are also explicit on the issue of “definition” stating, “The UDDA is intentionally not entitled the Definition of Death Act. This is because it does not contain an exclusive definition of death.” [ http://www.uniformlaws.org/ActSummary.aspx?title=Determination%20of%20Death%20Act ]
              Finally, US law is not “universal” on this point as not all 50 states have adopted the same standards. Even among those who’ve adopted the UDDA, there are meaningful amendments that some states have made that alter the determination [ http://healthcare.findlaw.com/patient-rights/what-is-the-uniform-declaration-of-death-act-or-udda.html ].

              Should you continue to insist, against this collection of medical and legal experts, that there is “no dispute” then I hope you’ll at least concede that you should proffer either your own (self-evidently preferable) credentials or an equally compelling, verifiable collection of authorities supporting your position.
              Failing that, I see no reason to accept your premise as presently structured in relation to the topic at hand.

              Like

          2. Wrote a reply last week but it’s embargoed in moderation..?

            Like

            1. DFXC,

              Sorry about that. How about now? Did your comment appear?

              Like

    1. John,

      Your question regarding the vagina’s right to choose prenatal genocide, “How can you kill something that cannot die?” is the usual atheist denial of science.

      It is a simple, observable fact that human life begins at conception and this simple, observable fact is supported by molecular biology and genetics.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. I’m afraid to say, but you’re also mistaken, SOM. At no stage does “life” magically appear in a zygote, a blastocyst, embryo, or foetus. Life began on earth 3.8 billion years ago and hasn’t been interrupted since. A foetus was never inorganic and suddenly becomes organic. The only way we can define the onset of a distinct human life is when its twin, death, enters the equation, and that is when the brain begins to exhibit sustained EEG activity. After all, only after something is “ON” can it be turned “OFF.”

        Like

      2. SOM, let’s assume there are no more abortions. What do we do with all those children? It’s a serious question. Are you going to take them in? Are you going to feed and clothe them?
        I know Jesus tells people to not worry about those things, but I think starvation and abuse isn’t “Living”.
        Why do you want children to suffer in this world?
        Won’t they go straight to God if they are aborted, according to your religion?

        Like

        1. SOM, since 1980 there have been 1.34 BILLION abortions. That means we’d not only have 1.34 BILLION more people on Earth, but they would have had children by now, too – perhaps doubling that number.
          And, many of them would – no doubt – have become Non-Christian and gone to Hell.
          According to your religion – all 1.34 BILLION are in Heaven right now.
          Where you, yourself, want to be.
          Did you want to deny them that?
          What’s your game?

          Like

          1. Brent,

            The Progressive (ie atheist) view of humanity is that one more person is one more mouth to feed and one more mouth to control.

            The Christian, capitalist, Enlightenment view of humanity is that each person is an asset whose liberty and capabilities create unlimited wealth and resources.

            The worldwide genocide of the unborn has impoverished the Earth.

            Like

            1. SOM, I know you believe this because your overlords tell you to, but it makes no sense. it’s classic wish-full, la-de-da, pie in the sky thinking with no grasp on reality.
              Hell, even you think Liberals aren’t assets whose liberty and capabilities create unlimited wealth and resources, so you.
              And, I bet you feel the same about Mexicans, Blacks, Women and all the traditionally despised groups of people you Group-Think Conservatives are commanded to hate.
              And, notice you didn’t answer the question: Will you take in all those babies?
              Do you guys ever try to think realistically? Or is it always dreams of Heaven, Perfection, Angels and pretty ponies?

              Like

            2. Brent,

              It is a simple fact that the human being is an asset in Christian, capitalist culture.

              That is why America rose further faster than any culture, nation or empire in human history.

              Like

            3. Sure, it had nothing to do with the massive amounts of natural resources, our distance from other war powers and the freedom FROM religion when doing scientific research…
              I really think you should try to see the world without your Christ-O-Glasses on.

              Like

            4. Brent,

              Soviet Russia is far richer in resources than the US.

              Yet it collapsed.

              If you enjoy living in 3rd world poverty, Russia is should suit you nicely.

              Prosperity, like liberty and civilization, doesn’t happen all by itself.

              Like

            5. Russia borders countries that were warring (meaning resources and people were lost defending their borders whereas America had little external threat to guard against), and Russia has a massive geographical area – which means there was no ability to adequately govern the “little guys” (It’s the same problem in China: they will never become a Super Power any time soon because they have no control over the “little guy”. You really should read more and try to understand reality – not your Jesus-Centered propaganda.
              Please tell me you finished high school!

              Like

            6. Brent,

              I am just giving a basic economics lesson.

              Please don’t blame me for the way the economy works.

              Like

            7. I don’t think I’d ever blame you for much of anything.

              BTW, do you know what “economics” means?

              Like

  4. “The only question now concerns whether the collapse of Western Civilization will be a long whimper of decades or centuries or a bang of economic catastrophe and social strife.”

    My money’s on the “bang” theory.

    Liked by 2 people

  5. John you’ll just nave to forgive me if I am not real impressed with your thoughts on logic.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Not as good as 1+1, huh?

      Oh well, how about this one:

      Like

      1. John,

        Good humor is good humor because it is based on truth.

        Your slide of an atheist hallucination is big time bizarro-zilla and doesn’t make any sense at all.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Thanks for that, SOM. And I do appreciate your sense of humour. It’s special kind, and I like that. If you’d like to critique my joke please go ahead and let me know which parts are in error 😉

          Like

  6. Forgive my hurried typos please.

    Like

  7. Western Civilization, aka Christian Civilization, is dead. It hasn’t had the courtesy to lie down after God died decades ago: until now.
    Thank goodness we have a new Civilization rising from the ashes of the patriarchal, racist, misogynist, homophobic and anti-science/anti-reality Christian regime that has held sway for 2000 years.
    Superstitious thinking is obsolete. It is of no use to Humanity anymore.
    The Religious are dinosaurs; slowly slipping into the tar pits of superstition and dogma as Progress races boldly on.
    Mourn your loss of Western Civilization, then join the party we are having.
    DING DONG! THE WITCH IS DEAD!

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Brent,

      There is no new civilization rising.

      Our civilization is in the midst of collapse as a matter of fact.

      Like

      1. Like Egypt collapsed? Like Rome collapsed? Like India, China, Meso-America, Africa, Mesopotamia? Like the Vikings, Native American, Jews, Midianites, Vandals, Moors, Ottoman, … Right?
        And then there was a new civilization…
        Civilization (Capital, singular) doesn’t disappear, civilizations (lower case, singular) do. Civilization changes.
        New morals, new mores, new things to worship, new mistakes to be made.
        I know you think Christianity is a bag of chips and the bees knees, but it’s just a religion like any other. The American “way of life” is yet another “way of life”.
        These are temporary things you latch onto and worship.
        Join Humanity! Join us in Love, Caring and Progress. Help us usher in a new Golden Age – one that our children can – then, in turn – improve upon.
        Throw away childish things.
        We can take the good parts of your religion and throw away the bad things.
        It’s OK. It really is. God isn’t watching and judging you! Stop living in fear!
        Slavery, homophobia, misogyny and all the things the Bible has supported aren’t good. They aren’t good for your daughter, wife, mother, father, brother, uncle, friends, or you. They do nothing but cast a pall on Humanity.
        Let ISIS be the hate group: Let them proclaim the truth of the OT, of homophobia, etc. Let go of the hate.

        There is a new civilization. It’s a nudge better than the old one, but better nonetheless.

        Ancient Jews probably felt the same way you do now. But look what came out of it! A better religion that took some of the good parts of Judaism and some of the good parts of Paganism, and the Greek/Roman religions.
        We know too much to turn back.
        Please don’t hold us back.

        Like

        1. @silenceofmind

          A setback, even a series of setbacks, is not death. We die when we give up or we stop breathing.

          @Brent Arnesen

          It seems to me you would have confused the French Reign of Terror on Bolshevik Revolution confused with the rise of a new civilization. If you think collapse of Rome, without something better to replace it, was a good thing, you are naive, to say the least. And no one is in the process of replacing what we have with anything other than chaos. The undisciplined, greedy, prideful people we have in charge have yet to demonstrate they actually care about this care about this country. They serve themselves.

          Like

          1. My point is that Civilization will always exist, while it may change. SOM is right to the small degree that CHRISTIAN Civilization is dying. Hooray!
            However, a different – perhaps more progressive, secular, peaceful, intelligent, better, kinder and less superstitious civilization will replace it.
            And, you say we have greedy, prideful people in charge: when in history was this ever NOT the case?
            If you haven’t noticed, the greedy and prideful are the only ones running for office. It’s how they make the money to run, and how they have the pride to put themselves out there.
            If you don’t like it, you can always move to that country that has giving and meek rulers… where ever that is… :-/

            Like

  8. Brent,

    Your claim, “that Civilization will always exist…” is a result of the central dogma of atheism, that everything just happens all by itself.

    Civilization cannot happen without religion, a market (economy) or a governing regime.

    In other words, civilization does not happen all by itself.

    Like

    1. SOM, even if the Nazi’s won, a civilization would have still existed and I bet people would have gotten tired of persecuting people because of religious reasons.
      You are so caught up in your Hate Cult that you can’t see straight.

      Like

      1. Brent,

        Fascist hell awaited the world had the Imperial Japanese and NAZI Germans been victorious.

        A study of the Rape of Nanjing and a death camp like Treblinka would do you a lot of good.

        Fascist hell is like atheist hell:

        Mass death, poverty, oppression and misery for the most, and civilization for those in power.

        Like

      2. A wild Freud appears! He uses Civilization and its Discontents! It’s super effective!!

        Like

    2. Civilization does happen by itself. Humans create it as part of their nature. They can’t NOT make a civilization. There are very few people who would or could live in anarchy.
      A civilization doesn’t NEED religion, a market or regime, it simply needs a general set of mores and rules for people to recognize as part of that particular civilization. As it is, religions, economies and governments are common manifestations but some civilizations have done without – or at least very differently.
      My point, before you and I, eminent scholars in Anthropology i’m sure, enlighten our dear readers, is that humans make civilizations like birds make nests: as part of their nature.
      Our social structure emerges from our intelligence, sociability, empathy, fears, hopes, desires, etc…

      BTW, that atheist hell sounds pretty bad. Not as bad as the Christian hell, though. Isn’t that funny? You are trying to scare me into thinking atheists can create a hellish condition, yet you believe one exists even greater right now.

      Atheists don’t have a hell anywhere, since they aren’t in power. However, according to your religion, I could go to your “loving” god’s hell any time I wish.

      I don’t even have a choice, whereas in atheist hell, you’d have the opportunity to overthrow the guards.

      I find your scare tactics funny and highly ironic.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Brent,

        If human beings create civilization as part of their nature, than that means civilization does not happen all by itself.

        You give yet another example of you arguing with yourself and losing.

        Only atheists do that with such consistent, dedicated fervor.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. If human beings create civilization as part of their nature, than that means civilization does not happen all by itself.

          I’ll give you ten seconds to re-think this comment, SOM….. 😉

          Liked by 1 person

          1. John,

            I hope Brent isn’t holding his breath.

            Liked by 1 person

        2. Way to miss the point and avoid the discussion… Something theists do with relish.

          Like

        3. SOM, just to be clear. You said we were witnessing the end of Civilization. I said it’s only the end of CHRISTIAN Civilization.
          You acted as if the civilization we have had in America is the only “Civilization”, and everything else is not Civilization.
          I pointed out that Civilization emerges from the basic natural facts about human beings.
          I said “humans create” and I think you took that to mean “they consciously manifest”, as opposed to saying, for example, “continental plate uplift creates mountains”.
          This is semantics and has nothing to do with what you were talking about, nor I. you have simply followed some small thought down a rabbit hole.
          Get back on topic: What makes you think “Civilization is ending”?
          Gay marriage? That would be one aspect of a civilization. For example, the Japanese, Scandinavian and other European civilizations have gay marriage. THEY ARE STILL CIVILIZATIONS!!
          I think you are caught up in the Right Wing fear mongering and are too scared to think properly.
          Fear clouds thinking, it’s why the Right uses it so often, and thinks so poorly.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. Brent,

            You may have noticed from the title of my piece, that Western Civilization is the topic of discussion.

            Like

            1. You said:
              “Western Civilization is dead for two fundamental reasons:

              1. America is no longer an exceptional nation due to the Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion back in 1973 and their recent (June, 2015) ruling redefining marriage to mean anything to everybody.

              2. With his encyclical, “Laudato Si,” Pope Francis severed any rational tie between the Catholic Church and the Western Civilization it spawned.”

              These have very little to do with Western Civilization on a whole. In fact, I’d (successfully) argue that the Enlightenment and the Humanist ideals that emerged post-1500 are the eventual outcomes of the ethos of “Western Civilization”.
              Western Civilization isn’t dead, it’s fulfilling it’s Ideals in these latest rulings.
              Next will be Equal pay for Women, and, eventually, for lack of a better term, “Class Warfare” (peaceful or not).
              America is lagging behind European nations because of America’s ridiculous adherence to ancient Palestinian ethics and rules. The laws of Jesus or Moses aren’t “Western” by any stretch.
              If anything, Christianity was reshaped by Western Civilization: The Civilization of the West forced Christianity to adjust.
              Christianity didn’t change people, people changed Christianity so that it fit to modern, “Western” moral values.
              From the Med. to Europe, to America, the Humanist values have been embraced. For the most part, the sanctity of the individual has defined the Western Civilization.
              Jesus would have been rejected if he didn’t agree. Jesus simply picked up on the ethos of the day, brought to him via the Greeks.
              The lineage of Western Civilization begins in Greece, not ancient Egypt, Mesopotamia, etc. (While I agree that ALL Civilization ultimately spawns from Africa, in the larger sense.)
              What has emerged from “westerners” have been social structures that have led, directly, to gay marriage and other examples of fairness and the rejection of ancient superstitions.
              While the Bible has been used to justify a lot of good and evil, the West has not based it’s society or civilization on the Bible but has developed it’s own culture.
              To reduce the magnificent achievements of countless human beings to the one, ancient superstition you like is absurd.

              Like

Leave a comment