BINGHAMTON REVIEW Editor-in-Chief Contents
P.O. BOX 6000 BINGHAMTON, NY 13902-6000 EDITOR@BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM
Founded 1987 • Volume XXX, Issue VI Patrick McAuliffe Jr. Managing Editor Kayla Jimenez Copy Desk Chief Elizabeth Elliot
Business Manager Jason Caci
Editor Emeritus Jordan Raitses
Associate Editors Adrienne Vertucci, Colin Gilmartin
Staff Writers
Aditi Roy, Luke Kusick, Chris DeMarco, Jordan Jaline, Tommy Gagliano, Thomas Sheremetta, Matthew Rosen
Contributors
Rev. Dr. Ian Paisley, EXTRA ECCLESIAM NVLLA SALVS, Max Newman
Special Thanks To:
Intercollegiate Studies Institute Collegiate Network Binghamton Review was printed by Gary Marsden We Provide the Truth. He Provides the Staples
CALIFORNIA, GENDER, AND THE CULTURE WARS
PAGE 9 by Matthew Rosen 6 Kremlin Kraziness by Jordan Jardine 7 The War on Traditionalism by Aditi Roy 8 What the Hell, Hollywood? by Thomas Sheremetta 10 Jesus Christ was a Free Presbyterian by Rev. Dr. Ian Paisley 11 Catholicism’s True Christian Heritage by EXTRA ECCLESIAM NVLLA SALVS 13 Make Them Feel the Heat by Max Newman 14 Sharia For Everyone
Departments
by Suomynona
3 Editorial 4 Campus Presswatch 5 Letter to the Editor
Throwbacks
15 Binghamton Review Attacked by the White by Alex Paolano House!
TELL US WHAT YOU THINK! Direct feedback to editor@binghamtonreview.com 2
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
Vol. XXX, Issue VI
EDITORIAL Dear Readers,
I
From the Editor
hope things weren’t too spooky for you in our last issue, because now we’re getting into the real spooky time of the year: elections! By the time this hits shelves, elections for this year will be over. I hope you carefully considered, not only the candidates up for election, but the state constitutional convention proposal and the other amendments. We have a few rare opportunities to effect monumental change in our government, however proportionally small it may be; don’t let it go to waste. This issue might as well be Binghamton Review theology debate team, because we’re tackling lots of different topics, many pertaining to religion, from all different sides. A fan submission responding to Luke Kusick’s Protestant article in our last issue argues against Catholic tradition and the hierarchy of the Church. On the very next page, Catholics shoot back in a piece responding to specific criticisms the author mentions about Catholicism. Meanwhile, Suomynona reasons that Sharia law, or certain aspects of it, could actually have positive effects on American cultural and political problems. As we fly out to the West Coast, many of our writers have taken issue with the shitstorm that has engulfed Hollywood and the much-sunnier-than-Binghamton Golden State. In our cover article, Matthew comments on the necessity of winning the culture wars, citing the recent Californian legislative changes that run counter to rational conservative thought. Tom expresses his frustration with the massive amount of sexual assault scandals rocking Hollywood, and the sheer hypocrisy of cultural figures prescribing our political action yet waist-deep in moral degeneracy themselves. Aditi points out this trend on a full cultural scale, not limited to Hollywood, and yearns for a more prosperous and traditional time. You’ll also find hot takes on the goings-on in the Trump administration and the Republican Congress. Jordan asks why the Manafort indictment has not led to deeper probes into foreign entanglements on both sides of the aisle, something he finds dangerous to the ideals of justice and freedom. Max, a returning contributor, urges readers to accept the reality of a Trump presidency, and the new direction the Republican Party is slowly heading in. We have some great things planned for our Thanksgiving issue (believe me *pointing*), and even more for the rest of the year. As a reminder, although online streaming for WHRW 90.5FM is down indefinitely and at the time of publishing this issue, my Public Affairs show The Right Approach is always looking for new guests and topics. Email your interest to editor@binghamtonreview.com, and no matter your ideology we’ll find something fascinating to talk about. Next semester it might even become the official Binghamton Review Show, but it’s a secret for now...you can keep a secret, right?
Our Mission Binghamton Review is a non-partisan, studentrun news magazine of conservative thought at Binghamton University founded in 1987. A true liberal arts education expands a student’s horizons and opens one’s mind to a vast array of divergent perspectives. The mark of true maturity is being able to engage with those divergent perspectives rationally while maintaining one’s own convictions. In that spirit, we seek to promote the free and open exchange of ideas and offer alternative viewpoints not normally found or accepted on our predominately liberal campus. We stand against tyranny in all of its forms, both on campus and beyond. We believe in the principles set forth in this country’s Declaration of Independence and seek to preserve the fundamental tenets of Western civilization. It is our duty to expose the warped ideology of political correctness and cultural authoritarianism that dominates this university. Finally, we understand that a moral order is a necessary component of any civilized society. We strive to inform, engage with, and perhaps even amuse our readers in carrying out this mission.
Sincerely,
Patrick McAuliffe Jr.
Views expressed by writers do not necessarily represent the views of the publication as a whole. editor@binghamtonreview.com
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
3
CPampus resswatch We know you don’t read the other campus publications, so we read them for you. Original quotes are in regular text, our responses are in bold. “Graduate school fees create barriers for students” Jessica Gutowitz, Pipe Dream October 22, 2017 “If you thought you were done with standardized testing the day you got your sweet, sweet Binghamton University acceptance letter … you were wrong. Sorry to be the one to break it to you, but if you’re looking to pursue education beyond your bachelor’s degree, you’ve barely even begun.” God forbid students seeking higher education have to take standardized tests! Call the authorities! “The GRE costs $205. Assuming you get the score that will get you into the school you’ve been dreaming of on your first try, that’s over $200 just to get your foot in the door.” I love how Jessica is overdramatizing this $200 fee. Dude, people make $200 a week as a part-time employee. If you want to get into grad school, new flash, you have to work for it. Grad school is expensive anyways! At least they allow you to pay $200 to determine whether or not you’re grad school material or not, before taking thousands of dollars from you. “And then you have to actually pay for graduate school.” HOW DARE STUDENTS HAVE TO PAY FOR HIGHER EDUCATION!! GRAD SCHOOL SHOULD BE FREE!! Girl, bye. Grad school is not for everyone, and if someone wants to receive a graduate degree, no one is forcing them to. It is her/his own choice to attend school, and if they so choose, they have to pay. Why is this made out to be such an abomination? “I agree, this process is ridiculous... it’s a miracle anyone decides to go to graduate school...We are told that the only way to get anywhere in life is to get an education, but then when we try, we are plummeted into lifelong debt... All qualified students should be able to attend graduate school — not just the
4
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM
Written by our Staff
wealthy ones.” Who are you agreeing with? Your thought process is ridiculous. Not only wealthy people attend grad school! There are scholarships and federal aid available to people who work for it. Attending grad school should not be easy; there should be challenges and hardships to attain a prestigious degree. If everybody could easily go to grad school, where would the merit be? Also, who that attended BU is plummeted into lifelong debt? I can’t. “Wealthy individuals must decrease their consumption” Georgia Kerkezis, Pipe Dream October 26, 2017 “Advocating for a general decrease in consumption does not suggest who exactly should be responsible; it may be interpreted as implying that all people must limit their spending equally. To more successfully combat environmental degradation, I argue that this statement must be modified: Wealthy individuals must decrease their consumption.” … no bitch all consumption must be decreased. Way to use pretending to care about the environment as an excuse for tearing apart rich people. Not to mention what would happen to the economy if rich people just stopped consuming things. “... we as individuals must take initiative. We must make more conscious day-to-day efforts to limit our consumption. We can each do our small part by decreasing our consumption of things such as gasoline (don’t drive your car as much), plastic water bottles (use a reusable one) and clothes (do you really need that $90 sweater from Urban Outfitters?) to name just a few.” I’m with you on this one. If we want change, we can’t turn to wealthy people to take responsibility, or the gov-
ernment, or literally any entity other than our own being. The power is in our hands to impact the world around us. Blah blah be the change you want to see in the world blah. “Understanding feminism in the wake of the accusations against Harvey Weinstein: Response to Mayim Bialik’s 10/13 New York Times op/ed” Kristen DiPietra, Pipe Dream October 26, 2017 “Bialik isn’t guilty of victim-blaming, but she engaged in something far worse: Bialik elevated herself above the victims by citing her physical appearance as the primary reason she was able to evade harassment.” No she did not. Anyone who actually read Mayim Bialik’s original NYT piece knows that she was talking about her own personal experiences of not being conventionally attractive and choosing to emphasize her talents instead of her physical appearance by dressing modestly. That’s not an attack on women who don’t dress that way. You can’t dress like a stripper and expect the respect of a congresswoman. “ Bialik, no matter how she looks and dresses, operates within a patriarchal society. Bialik can censure Hollywood’s objectification of women all she wants, but she still took a job on a show that is rife with misogyny. To a viewer like myself, her character is not so much the big, bold feminist scientist her actress wishes to play, but comes off rather cold, prudish and shrewish.” You think everything is controlled by the patriarchy. Should women just give up trying to work and only find jobs with female employers? If the Big Bang Theory is “rifle with misogyny” then what do you think about Game of Thrones and rap music? Being a feminist scientist doesn’t mean she needs to take her clothes off to prove a point. I thought feminism advocated for women being able to make their own choices, so who are you to judge her for being “prudish” and “shrewish”?
Vol. XXX, Issue VI
BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM
LETTER TO THE EDITOR D
ear Editor,
I agree with your initial statement that the Boy Scouts of America should not be recruiting girls for their programs, but from a completely different perspective. As you note, the Girl Scouts of America is a rigorous program whose final project, the Gold Award, is just as difficult to achieve, if not more difficult to achieve than the rank of Eagle Scout. It’s also, as Kayla notes, an organization that values glitter glue in addition to science and nature. Keeping these two aspects in mind, I think that instead of pushing girls to join the Boy Scouts, we, as a society should encourage boys to join Girl Scouts. Other than a lack of the military training aspect that is even now being downplayed by modern Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts of America offers everything the Boy Scouts do--and then there’s more. Girl Scouts teach cooking as an art form after cooking as a survival skill. They teach sewing, and embroidery, and knitting. The Girl Scouts lead theatre programs and teach child care and prioritize art. As our world moves increasingly towards automation, the two fields least touched by computerization are childcare and art. As someone studying computer science I’ve been told I’ll have to be the one to automate myself and my co-workers out of a job at least once if I want to ensure I stay employable; we can automate anything we want. We don’t automate art and childcare, because we don’t want to. We want art to stay human, and we fear robots raising our children. When we look at scouting programs, the issue with the division was not that girls were missing out, it’s that boys still are. As a Boy Scout you explored the wilderness, and learned about technology, and helped people, all in the most masculine way possible--and sometimes, as a Girl Scout I did that too, but I also attended bedazzling parties. I was taught that I didn’t need to dislike the color pink or hold contempt for those that relegate them-
editor@binghamtonreview.com
selves to domestic tasks to be equal to men. We need less coal miners and more school teachers, and so it’s essential to our society that it isn’t just women that are given the skills to nurture young minds, and value creativity. It’s important that we teach children that glitter glue is not inferior, and that on Sundays we build robots and on Wednesdays we paint still lives and neither of those two tasks is more important than the other. In encouraging girls to join Boy Scouts, we tell them that Girl Scouts isn’t good enough. That “women’s work” and the arts are inferior to masculine jobs; that women who live their lives according to tradition are inferior. I’m proud to have wielded my glitter glue and to have baked elaborate pastries for the soup kitchen. I want the next generation of children to be to.
H
i there,
I definitely agree that the BSA is lacking in artistic opportunities. My only artistic-focused merit badge that I chose to take was Theatre, and it was taught by a gay man (as a theatre kid, I understand that stereotype and know it to be untrue, but it certainly didn’t help squash the stereotype). Being able to affect the world and the people around you in a more emotional and creative way is important to any successful adult, regardless of gender. Regarding childcare, I didn’t ever know that that was something taught in Girl Scouts, but it’s certainly valuable. Again, there aren’t many comparable options to Boy Scouting, and the only related merit badge, Family Life (which is still required for Eagle rank) is severely lacking in thinking forward to one’s own home life. I’m glad you mentioned automation, because that might be something that Boy Scouting is underprepared for. There are science-related merit badges but hardly any are Eagle-required. Plenty of the most important ones pertain to physical activity or survival skills, which you predict will quick-
ly become obsolete from automation. Granted, participation in governments and communication and leadership skills are things that are also taught and emphasized, but a revitalization and adaptation of the Boy Scout program to the modern needs of future adults would be invaluable. The only place where I disagree with you is where you encourage boys to join Girl Scouting. Girl Scouting has much to learn from the structure and rigor of Boy Scouting, just as the Boy Scouts have much to learn from the holistic approach of their female counterparts. Having that separate space, away from the pressures of the opposite sex, is something I touched on in my article and that I think is underestimated as the world gets more integrated. There are good ways to behave in those private spaces without them becoming hotbeds of tribalism or stereotypes. There are things that each organization can learn from the other, and afterwards they can continue on their separate paths. As always, I appreciate the feedback, and this was a great reply to a conversation I want to keep having. I hope you stick with us and keep engaging with our material. It’s the point of college after all! -Patrick McAuliffe Jr, Editor-in-Chief
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
5
KREMLIN KRAZINESS
Kremlin Kraziness
BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM
By Jordan Jardine
L
ately, the Democrats have been displaying an incredible talent for creating fake scandals to cover up their own genuine ones. The October 30th indictment of Paul Manafort is a perfect example of this diversionary tactic. I completely agree with the statement that White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders made where she pointed out that the mainstream media in the U.S. has been “obsessed” with trying to find any piece of dirt they can find on President Trump regarding his relationship with the Kremlin and the sometimes president/ sometimes prime minister of Russia: the incomparable Vladimir Putin. First, I want to say that I completely support the indictment of Paul Manafort. His charges include tax fraud and money laundering, according to the New York Times. Manafort reportedly laundered $18 million, allocating clandestine funds to various offshore companies and also exploiting real estate and home improvement deals right here in America. This was a very stupid and greedy move on Manafort’s part, so he should be punished accordingly. However, he isn’t the only one who has to answer for his secret and corrupt dealings.
“It also says a lot that the Clintons’ lapdogs in the mainstream media keep harping away... on the Trump-Russia collusion nonsense... the media has a responsibility to harp away on both of these stories and not obsess over just one of them.” An entertaining plot twist in the soap opera that is the Trump-Russia “collusion” hysteria, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and former president Barack Obama also find themselves woven into this complex
6
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
tapestry of foreign entanglements and corruption. The Hill has reported several stories that reveal that Clinton and Obama may have approved secret deals that gave Rosatom, a state-sponsored Russian nuclear energy company, control over 20% of the United States’ supply of uranium, which definitely puts our national security at risk. Although it is not the biggest national security concern, it was still a horrible idea if it was indeed worked out by the Russians, Obama, and Clinton. By the way, during Hillary’s tenure as Secretary of State, her husband Bill (who you may or may not have heard of) gave a speech in Russia and was paid a whopping $500,000 speaking fee and millions of dollars from other Russian donors who had a vested interest in closing the so-called Uranium One deal. Very suspicious. The Uranium One scandal is merely an allegation at this point. If the Clintons and Barack Obama are found to have done nothing wrong, that’s fine and dandy. However, I think it says a lot that Obama hasn’t refuted the allegations and that Hillary has engaged in her usual pretentious, sanctimonious denial charade. It also says a lot that the Clintons’ lapdogs in the mainstream media keep harping away, with ever increasing aggression, on the Trump-Russia collusion nonsense. The main point I am trying to make is that the media has a responsibility to harp away on both of these stories and not obsess over just one of them. Also, Hillary and Obama should testify on their behalf concerning their knowledge of and/or their participation in the Uranium One scandal, just as Manafort did a few months ago. This country was founded upon many revolutionary princi-
ples, two of which are in question in this case: a fair press and equality under the law. It is simply unfair for one actor to be called to testify in regards to a scandal and not an actor from the other side of the aisle. Refreshingly, The Hill has reported that an anonymous FBI informant received permission to testify before Congress about his knowledge of what went on between Obama, the Clintons, and the Russians. At least someone is stepping up to the plate and providing the American people with the information they deserve. Of course, it is unrealistic to expect that we actually have 100% equality under the law in this country, but we should strive to be as equal and as fair as possible in legal matters. If the scales of justice are tipped too far in one direction over another, the inevitable result is governmental and judicial tyranny, which this country was designed to fight and be immune to. Sources:
http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/357230fbi-informant-in-obama-era-russian-nuclearbribery-cleared-to-testify-before https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/31/world/ europe/ukraine-manafort-indictment-yanukovych.html http : / / t heh i l l. c om / bl o g s / bl o g - br i e f i ng room/358051-white-house-accuses-media-ofbeing-completely-obsessed-with-russia
Vol. XXX, Issue VI
BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM
THE WAR ON TRADITIONALISM
The War on Traditionalism By Aditi Roy
W
hat ever happened to the great American culture of traditionalism? Today we live in a society where gay marriage is celebrated and encouraged, but straight millennials are openly discouraged by Hollywood and media to not marry or have children because of climate change or something. We celebrate traditional gender roles only when they are performed by the opposite sex or a trans person. We idolize the worst kinds of people in pop culture, whether it be rapper XXXTentacion, who had the number two album in the country and is a literal ex-convict who served jail time for robbery at gunpoint and is now being prosecuted for beating the shit out of his pregnant girlfriend, or Cardi B, who had the number one song in the country and used to be a stripper and a member of the Bloods gang. It is widely known and accepted that Hollywood is rampant with perverts who manipulate and force aspiring actors and actresses into complying with their sexual deviancy in exchange for the limelight. Yet, these people just get a pass, because who cares about morals anymore... amirite? It used to be the case that men and women recognized their differences and talents. Men would pursue a career while women would pursue raising children, and they were happy to do so. In the 1970’s, American women reported a much higher overall life satisfaction than men. But since then, women’s’ happiness score has fell below that of men. It was the expected norm for men and women to look forward to marriage. But today, the percentage of Americans who are married is at its lowest point since 1920. The median age for marriage went from 20 for women in 1960 to 27 for women today and from 23 for men in 1960 to 29 today. According to Pew Research Center, one in four millennials will likely never get married, even though 70% of millennials expressed a desire to get married. So what gives? It is pretty obvious that marriage does not have the same social capital as before. A 2014 Pew Research Center survey found that when respondents who were asked about the value of marriage for society, 50% said that society would be just as well off if people had priorities other than marriage. Marriage does not have the same incentives as it used to. Back then, people waited until marriage to move in together and have sex. Since 1990, there has been a 138% increase in couples living together, even though on average couples who live together before marriage have a 33% higher divorce rate than those who waited until after marriage to live together. Only 3% of Americans wait until marriage to have sex, and have the lowest divorce rates compared to those who did not wait. Even before the 1960’s, this figure was quite low at just 11%. The Institute for Family Studies found that women who were virgins until their wedding night had a 5% chance of getting divorced. That figure goes up to 22% with one sexual partner before marriage. When a woman has ten or more sexual partners before marriage, her marriage has a 33% chance of ending in divorce within the first five years. It is no wonder why over 52% of marriages end in divorce.
editor@binghamtonreview.com
But why should we care? So what if relationships don’t always work out? Because marriages that end in failure cause significant damage not only to the two people involved, but especially if kids are in the picture. No fault divorce occurs when no wrongdoing is shown by either party, and either party can request a divorce without any evidence of breach of the marital contract. This means judges can award alimony and custody without any evidence or fault, and allows a spouse to forcibly divorce their partner. Up to 80% of divorces are unilateral and have served to separate a high percentage of children from their fathers. The divorce courts are systematically biased against fathers and almost always award custody to the mother while making the father pay thousands of dollars in child support, regardless of whether or not the mother is using the money for her child. Not only is divorce harmful for fathers, but it is also taxing for the women who become single mothers. When children lack parental guidance growing up because their father is out of the picture and their mother is constantly working to make ends meet, they end up finding solace in dangerous activities. In fact, 85% of imprisoned youth grew up without fathers. Even President Obama has acknowledged that “children who grow up without a father are five times more likely to live in poverty and commit crime, nine times more likely to drop out of schools and 20 times more likely to end up in prison.” With all that being said, why shouldn’t we try harder as a society to bring back some standards for both men and women to be good spouses and parents in the end? It is safe to say that most people want to become married and stay married, and when certain premarital behaviors are guaranteed to end in higher divorce rates, why shouldn’t we try and avoid them? Instead, we try to move as far away from traditional gender roles as possible, rather than acknowledging that they do have some merit. This is not to say we need to go back to the 1950s and prevent women from entering the workforce. But perhaps we could tell men and women that a life of endless hedonism and not worrying about the consequences that your actions will have tomorrow is not the way to go. Maybe we can stop buying the movies and albums of sexual predators and ex-convicts and demand some standards to be set in place. Or we can continue heading down this path of unending degeneracy and keep wondering why we’re so unhappy. Sources: https://www.bet.com/music/2017/09/08/xxxtentacion-domestic-violence-case.html http://www.pewresearch.org/topics/marriage-and-divorce/ https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/03/the-science-ofcohabitation-a-step-toward-marriage-not-a-rebellion/284512/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17236611 https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr53/nvsr53_20.pdf http://www.bentley.edu/impact/articles/nowuknow-why-millennials-refuse-get-married
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
7
WHAT THE HELL, HOLLYWOOD?
BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM
What the Hell, Hollywood? By Thomas Sheremetta
I
f you’ve been following the liberal utopia that is Hollywood, you would see that it’s become a gigantic witch hunt for people who love to take advantage of others… and I’m absolutely loving every second of it. It is simply wonderful that all these pedo creeps are finally being exposed for the monsters that they are. This is thanks to all the women who have finally decided to come out against the many forms of harassment they encountered by Harvey Weinstein, sixty-four women to be exact (USAToday). Ever since his sex scandal, the ball started to roll and continues to pick up speed as Hollywood continues to implode. Actors and actresses left and right are now demanding their voices be heard regarding their experiences with sexual harassment. They saw Harvey Weinstein’s fall from power as a way to show that nobody is untouchable, no matter how powerful they may seem to be. Before Weinstein, there wasn’t much of a buzz of sexual harassment going around, even though people like Courtney Love warned of Harvey Weinstein in the past. But, since a man who got away with it sixty-four times has finally been brought down, it shows that it can be done. For example, Terry Crews opened up about a time a “high-level Hollywood executive” groped him (The Guardian). However, he didn’t do anything about it in fear that Hollywood would ostracize him. It’s truly despicable that Hollywood would use fear to corner its actors into silence, but that same silence is now being broken. Truth be told, many people in-
8
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
volved in Hollywood have already stated their utter disbelief in these growing sexual harassment cases. I find it far-fetched that some people knew about it and others had absolutely no clue, but that’s for another discussion. However, one person definitely got what was coming to him when he hypocritically called out Weinstein. Ben Affleck, who you may know as the current Batman, decided to be one of the first actors to call out Weinstein’s behavior. It was very virtuous of him to do that, until he was called out for sexual harassment soon after. This is not a joke. He called out someone for doing a heinous crime that he was caught doing himself. Of course, he apologized for groping Hilarie Burton, but then, another video surfaced of him saying some perverted things to a reporter who was on his lap. However, the reporter in the video debunked this, as it was part of a TV show. Regardless, you could say that now was not a good time for that video to resurface. Other members of Hollywood have also been called out for sexual harassment. Two examples are James Toback and Chris Savino. James Toback was a director/producer that has been accused by over two hundred women for sexual harassment. His response to this initially was that he doesn’t know these women or had no recollection of them. For me, it would be tough to say that over 200 women were all lying about these alleged sexual harassment events. Next, with Chris Savino, it makes me uneasy that he was part of the Nickelodeon company. He was accused by a dozen women, and apparently threatened them with blacklist, going back to what Terry Crews feared most. But, the most recent allegation has truly caught my eye, this being about Kevin Spacey. Kevin Spacey has gotten a lot of attention as of late. If you don’t know Kevin Spacey, he is (was) a well-renowned actor with many achievements to his name, including roles in American Beauty, The Usual Suspects,
and House of Cards. But recently, he’s been in some trouble. Anthony Rapp, a fellow actor, accused Kevin Spacey of sexually harassing him after a night of drinking (NYtimes). The worst part about it is that Anthony Rapp happened to be a fourteen-year old boy. Seeing that this is absolutely fucked up on many levels, Netflix has already decided to cancel House of Cards. The part that annoys me the most is that while apologizing for his unjustifiable actions, Spacey tried to divert the heat by coming out of the closet as a gay man. I’m sorry, but how dare you have the audacity to think that right now is a good time to talk about your sexuality!? You potentially tried to go all the way with a minor but clearly this event is nothing more but a stepping stone for letting everyone know that you love men. It’s completely despicable but considering it’s Hollywood, again this doesn’t surprise me. I am happy that people are finally getting the justice they deserve, while showing that no amount of power will leave you free from your sins. I’m also glad that the corruption and the villainy in Hollywood is being uncovered. It’s still a damn shame that people are reluctant to call out their perpetrators due to fear of being blacklisted, but Hollywood is moving in the right direction. I truly hope that all the sleezebags abusing their power get called out for what they are, a monster and stain on society. Sources:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/people/2017/10/27/weinstein-scandal-complete-list-accusers/804663001/ http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/25/us/listof-accused-after-weinstein-scandal-trnd/ index.html https://www.theguardian.com/film/2017/ oct/11/actor-terry-crews-sexually-assaulted-by-hollywood-executive https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/30/ theater/kevin-spacey-gay-anthony-rapp. html
Vol. XXX, Issue VI
BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM
CALIFORNIA, GENDER, AND THE CULTURE WARS
California, Gender, and the Culture Wars By Matthew Rosen
O
ver the last couple of years, we have witnessed a major shift in culture wars. The story of this insane wave of the culture wars began during the Obama years, where sensitivity in the country hit an all time high. The entitled became increasingly entitled, the dependent became increasingly dependent, and the triggered became increasingly triggered. We live in a United States where, according to the left, everything you do is racist, sexist, or homophobic. All of the examples of the left killing the culture of the United States are reasons for the election of President Trump. I agree with Trump politically, but the culture that was created under President Obama was what gave Trump the push to win. Every proceeding example led people to say “That is why I voted for Trump.” This month, California upped their game once again. The first example can be summed up in five words: Jerry Brown, Scott Wiener, California. In an attempt to make California more politically correct, State Senator Scott Wiener, along with Governor Jerry Brown, turned the priorities of California upside down. Governor Jerry Brown recently signed a law which lowers the penalty for knowingly infecting people with HIV from eight years to no more than six months. This means that having the intent to transmit a potentially deadly virus is no longer a felony. The worst part is the reason why it is “necessary” to pass this law in the first place. Scott Wiener tells CNN that the reason for passing this law is to “destigmatize HIV.” So in order to make people with the disease feel less ashamed, California made it easier to knowingly spread a disease that could ruin someone’s life. But wait, there’s more! Senator Wiener also authored the new “LGBT Senior Bill of Rights,” claiming that the law, not the nursing homes, should punish employees who misgender. This is basically saying that they must pretend other people are a gender that they are not or else they can go to jail for a year and be fined for up to $1000. Scott Weiner believes that if someone who has an X and a Y chromosome in every cell in their body (besides sex cells) wants to be called ‘she’ or ‘ze’ or ‘zur,’ and you don’t comply, you should serve some time in jail. That’s right, A YEAR for using their correct biological pronoun, but only six months for intent to transmit a potentially deadly disease. These laws and bills were put into place to avoid offending those with gender dysphoria or HIV. I am personally frustrated by all the gender politics. I’m sorry to stay on the topic of the Golden State of California, but I also want to emphasize that they are the first state to legally recognize a third gender: non-binary. Non-binary means that you are neither of the two genders that exist. You also do not need a doctor’s note to prove you went through gender reassignment surgery to legally change your gender. Remember Bill Nye the Gender Spectrum Guy? Remember when Facebook went from two genders, to fifty-eight genders, to seventy-one genders, to typing the gender you feel you are? Now the governments of liberal states (such as California and New York) are moving towards this belief in gender fluidity and more than two genders. Before you call me transphobic, I am not denying your
editor@binghamtonreview.com
humanity or legitimacy if you feel this way; it is simply unfair to force other people to behave in ways that make others more comfortable. It is called gender dysphoria, and I hope everyone experiencing this deals with it the way they see fit, but making up science or forcing other people to conform is unacceptable. I am sick of being insulted for acknowledging science. I am sick of feelings coming before facts. In my opinion, this gender confusion problem and the creation of the political correctness of genders is one of things conservatives must push back on. Here’s a bit more of the stupidity that the oversensitive, politically correct culture war has brought upon us: • BBC News posts a video on “Digital Blackface,” the racism of black emojis or GIFs • “Dear White People,” a new show about how all white people are bad • MTV video about what all white men should do better • Buzzfeed videos and articles shaming white men • Standing for the American flag is racist • Censoring and shutting down conservatives on campuses • A comedy act right here in Binghamton University that stated all white men are racist for asking her about her accent • A school in Seattle renamed its Easter eggs ‘spring spheres’ to avoid causing offense to people who did not celebrate Easter • In Seattle the term “Citizen” is now considered offensive • Calling it discrimination for employers to use criminal histories on job applications because it has a “disproportionate” impact on minorities • Boy Scouts allowing girls to join • A professor here at Binghamton University who alluded to the fact that all Republicans are a part of the KKK • Latinx, a gender neutral term for people with ties to Latin America • Hollywood claiming the end of America because of Trump (Example: Jennifer Lawrence saying hurricanes are caused by Trump) • Facebook event for the anniversary of Trump’s election to “scream helplessly at the sky” • Check your privilege = making whites, males, cisgender, and straight people feel ashamed for being white, male, cisgender, and/or straight • Professor from Illinois claims teaching math promotes white privilege • Push to change the name of the Washington Redskins because it is offensive • Removing Confederate flags, and statues of our history… most recently the removal of a plaque honoring George Washington in Virginia because it makes some feel “unsafe” This is only the beginning. If we continue to let culture wars and identity politics run our nation, who knows what the future holds?
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
9
JESUS CHRIST WAS A FREE PRESBYTERIAN
BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM
Jesus Christ Was a Free Presbyterian By Rev. Dr. Ian Paisley
B
rethren, today we mark the joyous occasion of the five hundredth anniversary of that day on which Martin Luther introduced his fateful Ninety-Five Theses to the Church of Rome in Wittenberg, Germany. He started a great movement that continues to this day. However, modern times are getting darker and darker, and it seems that we are no longer in a revival period. It is a sure thing that God will bring about another revival.† However, we must be its cutting edge. In today’s America, everyone believes that there is some great malevolent force that is threatening our way of life. However, these opinions are diverse, and often fail to strike at the hearts of our problems. For example, many Americans wave their hands in panic at the supposed Mohammedan takeover of America. There are legitimate reasons to hold this fear, for the Moslems deny the blessed Son of God. However, friends, I must warn you that there is a far greater threat to our American way of life than Mohammedanism. When American Christians speak in fear of Mohammedan takeover of our society, and increasing Mohammedan numbers, and Mohammedan subversion of American values, they often fail to realize that they are averting their gaze from an even bigger threat, which can be spoken of in the same terms. And that threat, I want to tell you friends, is the threat that is Romanism. Romanism is apostasy. It is false religion. Romish stances, Romish schoolings, and Romish sacraments are all Satanic subversions of the path that has been laid by Jesus Christ.† According to Pew research data from 2014, Muslims make up 0.9% of the American population, while the followers of the Church of Rome make up 20.8%. There are almost twice as many Mormons as Moslems.1 However, Christianity in the United States is in a fierce struggle for survival. It is assaulted on all sides and from all generations, by secular media, by unrighteous people, by higher criticism, by
10
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
socialism, atheism, and progressivism, by Romish propaganda, and worst of all, by the apostatizing of so-called Protestant denominations all over this country. Friends, the Church of Rome is a much greater threat to America than Islam ever was. We have had a Catholic president. We have Catholics in the White House. And don’t get me wrong, I have no problem with individual Catholics as people, nor do many of them have any problem with me, because this is America, where the First Amendment guarantees people’s rights to speak as firmly as they’d like about their opposing religious convictions—and we are all brothers united by our common nationality, Protestant or Catholic, in our struggle to keep America free. But in the battle for souls, Popery has to be fought with all our hearts, and that means striking with sharp tongue at the Satanic apostasy, irrespective of where it be found. Romanism denies the foundation laid by Jesus Christ. For hundreds of years, the Church of Rome has cast the Bible aside and replaced it with priestly worship. The term ‘Protestant fundamentalist’ calls to mind the image of a man or woman of God, relying on the Bible as the foundation, and not relying on anything else whatsoever. No faith in idolatry, no faith in sacraments, and no faith in the tricks of the Devil. But what is a Catholic fundamentalist? A Catholic fundamentalist is one who relies absolutely on the word of the Pope! Who has absolute faith in the saving power of sacraments, and absolute faith in the papal infallibility, and absolute faith that the Pope is the Vicar of Christ! Brethren, this is not true Christianity. There is no mediator between Christ and Man. The Pope, currently Mr. Bergoglio, claims to be Christ’s representative on Earth. He claims to be the ‘Vicar of Christ’—a replacement for Christ. My friends, did you know that, when translated into Greek, this title, according to the European Institute of Protestant Studies, literally means
‘anti-Christ’? There are millions of Roman Catholics in Hell because they followed the Pope!† You’re not saved by sacraments! You’re not saved by indulgences! You’re not saved by priests! You’re not saved by good deeds! You are saved only by Jesus Christ, who died for our sins, and thank God that no Pope can take that away from us!† Turning for salvation to anything other than Jesus Christ, whether it be holy candles or holy beads, or the Virgin Mary or good deeds, is apostasy! I do not believe that all Catholics go to Hell. Quite the contrary. I want to tell you, the faith in Jesus Christ held by many Roman Catholics in addition to their faith in ungodly things is often sincere. However, the Church of Rome is the foremost purveyor of apostasy and degradation of the faith, in all the world. Priests are deceivers. The Church of Rome teaches that a priest can summon Jesus Christ down from Heaven at will in order to reincarnate Him as a wafer. The Church of Rome teaches that the Virgin Mary has saving power. The Church of Rome teaches that priests have the ability to forgive sins, and that without the priest, the soul is lost. We need to take a strong stand against the Scarlet Harlot and her perversions, and we need to take a strong stand against the Romanizing, apostatizing secularists and ecumenists who are disemboweling their Protestant faith and handing America over to Rome. There are many Presbyterian ministers in America today who preach that Jesus Christ loves homosexuality! There are many who believe that the Bible is not the word of God! How, O, how many believe that people without faith in Jesus Christ can enter Heaven, just because they did good deeds? Now let me come to the main part of my sermon today. I have read a Binghamton Review op-ed by a man named Luke Kusick, entitled “Protestants Are the Real Liberals”. This article is a breath from Satan. It claims that Martin Luther was an arch-heretic and
Vol. XXX, Issue VI
BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM that Protestants are liberals because they have abandoned priestly worship and therefore accept no authority. This is absolutely false. Protestants do accept an authority, and no other authority, and that authority is Jesus Christ. And in the Bible, it says “For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.” (1 Corinthians 3:11).† A Christian should have no foundation other than Jesus Christ. Now let me quote to you some sentences from Mr. Kusick’s article. “At the time of the Reformation, religion and politics were intertwined; therefore, an attack on the Church was an attack on the very government as well.” He describes the Church of Rome approvingly as being the government of Christians. He also says about Martin Luther: “Evidentially, instead of trying to reform or attack corruption from within, he began to attack the very nature of the Church.” But the very nature of the Church was corrupt, and one can only fix that by being outside of it. You don’t defeat the Devil by joining hand in hand with him and trying to softly convince him of the error of his ways! You defeat him, by waging the Lord’s battle against him and his crowd! Call him out! Reject him! And go not into his midst, lest ye become one of his! Mr. Kusick says further: “the Catholic and Orthodox Church believe to this day that it is through Faith and sacred Tradition that one finds himself saved… Attacking tradition is an attack on the social order, so sola scriptura, which means scripture alone, means that tradition has no place in one’s faith.” That’s what he says. But Romish traditions are often medieval or even more modern! Let me read to you briefly an excerpt on the Rosary from the European Insti-
JESUS CHRIST WAS A FREE PRESBYTERIAN tute of Protestant Studies: The Rosary is an arithmetical guide to Romish devotion of comparatively modern use in the Roman Church. It is a string of beads larger and smaller designed to aid the worshipper in repeating a definite number of Paternosters (Our Fathers) and Ave Marias (Hail Marys). There are as many as twenty forms of Rosary devotions enumerated by standard authorities. The most ordinary form has five decades (or tens) of smaller beads making in all fifty each decade separated by a single large bead making in all five. The arrangement is that for every one of the fifty smaller beads the Romanist offers up a prayer to Mary, the Ave Maria, and for every one of the larger ones he offers up a prayer to God, the Lord’s Prayer. In other words, the Romanist is taught to pray ten times to Mary for every one that he prays to God. There are many, many other examples like this. Let me hasten to add that the liberal Protestant denominations in America today are jelly-legged travesties, and their own invented traditions are a disaster for our way of life. So, for Mr. Kusick to claim that conservative Bible-based Protestant Christianity is liberal and opposed to authority is flagrantly false. The Church of Rome teaches diversion from Jesus Christ’s authority, reliance on idols such as mariolatry, and medieval innovations such as purgatory— not at all mentioned in the Bible—in which the souls of the living can supposedly hasten the salvation of the souls of the dead through prayer. The Church of Rome also, in today’s world, preaches the adoption of attitudes soft on sodomy, and soft on other Satanic heresies and apostasies, such as Islam,
Judaism, and apostatized Protestantism. The morals that bind our righteous society together need to be upheld. We do not hate anyone for being Catholic, and we want to convert as many souls as possible to Christianity, so that they may enjoy everlasting Paradise. As the most populous Protestant country in the world, we must reject all the Devil’s attacks on the infallibility and immaculacy of our beloved Savior, and, thank God, He will lead us into His eternal light. I would like to finish my sermon today with a few words of thanks to the Protestant men and women in the United States and the United Kingdom, who have done more than anyone else to spread the faith around the world. Not only does this year mark the fifth centenary of the beginning of the Protestant Reformation, but it marks also the Sapphire Jubilee of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, Defender of the Faith. As Americans, we thank her and her husband the Duke of Edinburgh for maintaining Protestantism in her country. Long may she reign, and God bless America. Sources: † King James Bible. This is God’s word! It is not the word of Man! Wormald, Benjamin. “America’s Changing Religious Landscape.” Pew Research Center’s Religion & Public Life Project, Pew Research Center, 11 May 2015, www.pewforum. org/2015/05/12/americas-changing-religious-landscape/. 1
Kusick, Luke. “Protestants Are the Real Liberals.” Binghamton Review, 27 Sept. 2017, pp. 10–11. 2
Paisley, Rev. Dr. Ian R. K., Sr. MP MEP. “Mariolatry 178. What Is the Rosary?” A Concise Guide to Bible Christianity and Romanism, 1991, www.archive.is/JlmHN. 3
Catholicism’s True Christian Heritage By EXTRA ECCLESIAM NVLLA SALVS
W
hen dealing with Protestants (particularly those in the US), I’ve come to expect a certain degree of ignorance when it comes to authentic Christianity (aka Catholicism). They usually know next to nothing about Church history, Church doctrine, or anything besides what has to be literally spelled out for them in the Bible. I thought I saw it all, but our
editor@binghamtonreview.com
office received the article “Jesus Christ Was a Free Presbyterian.” I now realize I’ll have to actually lower my standards further. Before I get into the actual substance of this sermon, I’ll address a couple of questionable stylistic choices. First and foremost, the word “Romish” is not a word, and neither is “Popery.” The author uses the word “Mohammedan” to refer to “Mos-
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
11
CATHOLICISM’S TRUE CHRISTIAN HERITAGE lems” even though the term fell out of the common parlance some centuries ago. All in all, it gives the vibe of a sheltered, Midwestern “pastor” preaching some nonsense from the local grocery store. This does not surprise me considering that I know what constitutes low-church Protestantism. So now for the actual substance of the author’s “sermon”: his main thrust is that Catholicism is a demonic path to apostasy from his supposed “genuine” Christianity. He writes, “It is false religion. Romish stances, Romish schoolings, and Romish sacraments are all Satanic subversions of the path that has been laid by Jesus Christ.” This is a tad strange, since the first Christian church was the Catholic Church, the very same institution that exists in Rome. As St. Irenaeus wrote in “Against Heresies,” “...by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul ... it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere.” For those of you who do not know, St. Irenaeus was a student of St. Polycarp, who himself was a student of St. John the Apostle. The author continues, “Romanism denies the foundation laid by Jesus Christ. For hundreds of years, the Church of Rome has cast the Bible aside and replaced it with priestly worship.” Again, the Church in Rome was the very same Church established by Peter, a fairly well-known follower of Jesus Christ; furthermore, no Catholic “worships” a priest. His hostility towards the priesthood is also rather interesting considering the word “priest” comes from the word “presbyter,” which, as his title states, Jesus supposedly was. “No faith in idolatry, no faith in sacraments, and no faith in the tricks of the Devil.” Ahh, the good ol’ “Catholics worship idols” cliche. This person gets zero points for originality or accuracy. To be absolutely clear, no Catholic worships idols. Do you worship and bow down to pictures of your family members? Of course not, and neither do we. Like the photos of your loved ones, we use icons and statues to remember our brothers and sisters in the faith who came before us. There is no worship involved, as that is reserved for God. “A Catholic fundamentalist is one who relies absolutely on the word of the Pope! Who has absolute faith in the saving power of sacraments, and absolute faith in the papal infallibility, and absolute faith that the Pope is the Vicar of Christ.” A couple of things here. Firstly, we do not absolutely accept every word the Pope ever says. In order for what he says to be considered infallible, it must be deliberately invoked by speaking “ex cathedra” (“out of the chair [of St. Peter]). Historically, this has only ever happened twice, and there are numerous rules that must be followed for the statement to be considered licit. But, as I stated at the beginning of the article, I don’t expect this nuance to be completely understood by this particular brand of Protestantism. Secondly, papal infallibility is scriptural: Matthew 16:17-19 reads, ““Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father. And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of
12
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” Please note the phrases “I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven” and the authority to bind and loose on Earth. This is the basis for Papal Infallibility, something we would see exercised within the first century of the Church. “My friends, did you know that, when translated into Greek, this title, according to the European Institute of Protestant Studies, literally means ‘anti-Christ’?” This is just demonstrably untrue, like most Protestant “theology”. He then disputes the True Presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist: “The Church of Rome teaches that a priest can summon Jesus Christ down from Heaven at will in order to reincarnate Him as a wafer.” Well, not just the Church of Rome. Every single church (like the Orthodox Churches) has accepted this as Truth for 1500 years. Not only does John’s Gospel make it clear that Jesus is the physical “bread of life” (and that we must eat Him to be saved), but every Church Father accepted this since the first century AD. Some examples: St. Ignatius of Antioch (student of St. John the Apostle), “They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not admit that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, the flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in His graciousness, raised from the dead.” St. Justin Martyr, “ For we do not receive these things as common bread or common drink; but as Jesus Christ our Savior being incarnate by God’s Word took flesh and blood for our salvation, so also we have been taught that the food consecrated by the Word of prayer which comes from him, from which our flesh and blood are nourished by transformation, is the flesh and blood of that incarnate Jesus.” So to say that the Eucharist is just a “wafer” contradicts what the earliest Christians actually believed. Lastly, he brings up the sole authority of the Bible (aka “sola fide”); not only was this never believed by any Christian Church for over a millennium, but it isn’t even supported in the Bible itself. In addition, the Bible as we know it today didn’t exist for three centuries. And do you know which institution compiled the Bible, and discerned which texts were considered divinely inspired? It was the Catholic Church, the same very Church that existed since Pentecost and that still endures in Vatican City. As I’ve stated ad nauseum, this demonstrates utter ignorance to history and ecclesiology, though I’m once again not surprised. All in all, his nonsensical proddie sermon is based on complete ignorance of Catholicism and authentic, orthodox Christianity. It’s based on conspiratorial falsehoods rooted in sheer nonsense and misinformation, likely born from ignorance or a refusal to learn. The Catholic Church is the first true Church, established by Jesus Christ Himself on St. Peter. Outside of the Holy Mother Church there is no salvation, and Martin Luther is burning in Hell for his heresy and schism. I encourage all my Protestant readers to inform themselves of the history of the Faith: what the early Christians believed, what they practiced, and what they wrote concerning the Pope, the Eucharist, the necessity of the sacraments, the importance of the Blessed Virgin, and why Protestantism is a man-made doctrine conjured by a heretical priest (with no one believing anything remotely similar for over a dozen centuries.) Glory love you all.
Vol. XXX, Issue VI
BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM
MAKE THEM FEEL THE HEAT
Make Them Feel the Heat By Max Newman
I
t has been nearly a year since President Donald Trump was elected against all odds on November 8, 2016. Since President Trump’s inauguration, America has seen a new Supreme Court Justice in Neil Gorsuch, the cutting of regulations, the gradual remaking of the judiciary, stricter immigration laws and a new Federal Reserve Chairman. However, it is unfortunate that not one major legislative accomplishment has been passed under President Trump, even though Republicans have control of both the U.S. House and the Senate. The blame for Trump’s lack of accomplishments in Congress lies not with the President, but with a group of weak and out of touch Republican Senators who refuse to admit that the modern Republican is changing before our eyes. It is time that the American people rise up as we did in 2016 and make the Senate GOP realize that the Republican Party is now the Party of Trump, and the Senate GOP must do as they promised. During the 2016 campaign, it is well known that President Trump did not run as a traditional Republican. Instead of stressing trickle down economics, expressing support for free trade, and promising to cut Medicaid as most Republican candidates have done, Trump refreshingly spoke about “America First” nationalism, an ideology which emphasizes strong borders, an opposition to free trade, acting tough against radical Islam and prioritizing loyalty to America above all else. President Trump’s campaign, and to a relative degree his presidency, has espoused populism, as Trump has pledged to help “The Forgotten Men and Women of America”, the working class in Middle America who have been forgotten by the political establishment for far too long. This ideological divide between nationalist Republicans such as Steve Bannon and Donald Trump, compared with establishment Republicans such as George W Bush, John Kasich, Jeff Flake and John McCain, clearly prove that the Republican Party is engaged in a civil war. The first victory for the America First nationalists was in Alabama, when conservative Senate candidate Roy Moore defeated pro immigration, pro Common Core and McConnell backed candidate Luther Strange in the 2017 primaries. But unfortunately, even with the clear writing on the wall that the Republican Party is changing, it is not the Democrats who are Trump’s biggest roadblock to success, it is an out of touch group of Senate Republicans. Trump’s fight in transforming the modern Republican Party will not be short, but Trump is making some headway. Two victories for Trump’s ideological allies occurred in the past few weeks, when milquetoast Republican Senators Bob Corker of Tennessee and Jeff Flake of Arizona decided not to run for re-election. Senators Corker and Flake have been two of President Trump’s most outspoken critics on the Senate Republican side, with Senator Corker calling President Trump “incompetent” and Senator Flake repeatedly declaring President Trump a “danger to democracy”, as well as saying that President Trump’s behavior is “reckless and outrageous”. Senator Jeff Flake has been the Senate GOP’s most outspoken Trump critic. The
editor@binghamtonreview.com
Donald noted in his speech that Flake’s moderate views from the Bush era may not have a place in today’s Republican Party. Flake said, “It is clear at this moment that a traditional conservative, who believes in limited government and free markets, who is devoted to free trade, who is pro-immigration, has a narrower and narrower path to nomination in the Republican Party, the party that has so long defined itself by its belief in those things. It’s also clear to me for the moment that we have given in or given up on the core principles in favor of a more viscerally satisfying anger and resentment.” Senator Flake, for once, halfway gets it. Flake realizes that as Trump advisor Stephen Moore told Congressional Republicans in January, the Republican Party is no longer the Party of Reaganism, but the Party of Trumpism. Moore is right, and Flake sort of realizes this. The Republican Party is slowly transforming into a nationalist and populist party, as Trump’s allies are working to to put America and Americans First, by not selling our working class out to bad trade deals, by securing our borders, by honoring and respecting law enforcement and by working to prevent the outsourcing of American jobs to Asia. This transformation from a party of supply side economics, praising outsourcing and automation, as well as neoconservative interventions in countries like Iraq, into an America First Party angers the out of touch political class in Washington D.C. Republican voters have seen this with John McCain loudly denouncing Trump’s “half-baked nationalism” and stressing that American leadership abroad is vital. McCain, one the most vocal senators in favor of America still being the world’s police officer even after several failed experiments in nation building, does not understand or accept the fact that Republican voters are sick and tired of nation building and getting involved in foreign wars. Likewise, Senator Lindsey Graham, who in July stressed his support for amnesty for illegal immigrants and expressed support for outsourcing American jobs to Asia, also does not understand that Republican voters no longer want this either. Republican voters will no longer accept feckless and submissive Republican senators like Flake and Corker, who sell ordinary Americans out, while preaching about American “values” and how getting tough on immigration “isn’t who we are”. It is time that Republican voters rise up in the same anger and resentment that Jeff Flake denounces and vote out every out of touch Republican senator, none of whom seems to accept that the party is changing before their eyes. We should follow Steve Bannon’s lead as he declares war on the GOP establishment, who sadly still rule the halls of the US Capitol, and rise up to send more anti-Trump Republican lawmakers home. Republican voters did it in Alabama by propelling Roy Moore to victory, and we can do it again. We need to do this to get the Republican Party on the same page, because as Ronald Reagan once said, “When you can’t make them see the light, make them feel the heat.”
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
13
SHARIA FOR EVERYONE
BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM
Sharia for Everyone By Suomynona
C
onservatives of the modern era tend to consistently use terrible talking points to critique Islam. They try to rebut liberals with claims such as “Islam oppresses women” and “we have nothing to learn from Islam.” Let’s examine these claims and see where we can advance our civilization in order to be as enlightened as the Middle East, while at the same time critiquing the crucial points against Islam. Gay provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos tirelessly emphasizes that feminists are not concerned with the oppression of Muslim women in Muslim majority countries. This is because women in those countries are not oppressed. Women are prevented from driving, which is beneficial to everyone. Saudi Arabian clerics correctly point out that women need to be banned from driving because they “lack the intellect of men.”1 As we are all aware, dwindling intellect is directly correlated to female driving, and there have been much dumber women in the West since they have began to drive. Secondly, women in Middle Eastern countries are effectively protected by anti-thot clothing, also known as a burqa. It is interesting to note that I have not read an article discussing the Middle Eastern rape culture from highly regarded websites such as Salon or Vice. This is obvious: Islam does not have a rape culture because their women are properly taken
14
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
care of via burqa implementation and not being allowed to leave the house unless they are in the presence of a male member of their family. For some reason, properly taking care of women and having them understand their role in life appears to have eliminated rape culture. One out of five women on college campuses have reported being sexually assaulted; however, we do not see a similar trend at Middle Eastern Universities. This is a uniquely American phenomenon. When comparing crime in Saudi Arabia to the United States, I was flabbergasted to find that violent crime was more common in America than Saudi Arabia.2 In the comparison, I even find that maybe the crime problem is a result of a lack of Islamic influence rather than the existence of it. Rather than critique Islam, we should adopt some of its principles. How can we implement the good parts of Islam? We simply need to institute some Sharia law in our own country. Women should absolutely not be allowed to dress slutty. Instead, they will be venerated while they are protected with a burqa. Rape culture will be a thing of the past, and we will elevate to the status of Saudi Arabia by protecting our sisters with male escorts when they leave the house with burqas for protection. No more will cultural appropriation be a problem during Halloween, as women, the main perpetrators of this disgusting practice, will be wearing burqas. Stupid women driving? No longer will we have to suffer the consequences or a woman driving slow in the fast lane while texting and driving and consequently decreasing her IQ. Instead, they will be in a burqa while a man drives for them, keeping them safer from damage in a car acci-
dent and more importantly, protecting humanity from their inferior intellect. Of course, not all of Sharia law will be implemented, as we Americans understand what is needed and what is not. First, we understand that religion is silly as God is not real; he is simply a giant flying spaghetti monster. As a result, we will get rid of all the laws about praying to the spaghetti monster or going to a mosque. Secondly, we will remove all laws prohibiting alcohol, as alcohol is certainly an okay thing to have in moderation and no American would accept losing their rights to drink. Essentially, we will keep only the social laws that will advance our society, mostly pertaining to burqas, how to handle crime and punishment, and things that are overall the most important thing about the law. Conservatives often do not critique the real problem with Islam. It is not its social stances, which are usually on point; rather it is the fact that they believe in a false desert God that forces people to kill themselves in violent action for their religion. Like any other religion, which is all just men believing in fairy tales, this fairy tale is constantly being invoked for war, genocide, and terrorism. Rather than critiquing the fact that God is not real and that any belief in a flying spaghetti monster is just absurd, they prefer to criticize the fact that they have effectively ended rape culture in their country. The bottom line is that we need Sharia Law. Sharia Law now, Sharia Law then, and Sharia forever. If we can properly end rape culture, women losing their intellect, cultural appropriation and all the quarrels the left has, as well as lower our crime rates, then we will become the shining city on the hill. Sources: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/ middle-east/saudi-arabia-woman-driving-banremain-lack-intellect-men-sexism-sheikh-saadal-hajari-islamic-leader-a7960501.html 1
http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/ compare/Saudi-Arabia/United-States/Crime 2
Vol. XXX, Issue VI
BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM
BINGHAMTON REVIEW ATTACKED BY THE WHITE HOUSE!
This article was originally published in the November 2009 issue of the Binghamton Review.
editor@binghamtonreview.com
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
15