You Like Knights? You Must Be Racist

People seem to be perplexed when they see I like knights. They at first think I am a fan of Dungeons and Dragons. Morons, I would never play that game. I like knights - noun: a man, serving as a page and squire before being raised to special military rank and pledged to chivalrous conduct for life. Imagine my surprise when a recent conversation with another student at IU led him to saying "Knights were responcible for terrible attrocities. Because of them, we are continuing to fight an ideological war in the Middle East." Wow, as Bill O'Reilly would say "You are a pinhead sir, and I say that with great sincerity."

The politically correct rewritten history does label knights as bloodthirsty, greedy (after all, they only went to Jerusalem to get riches), ignorant, depraved, and usually psychotic individuals who followed the greatest evil in the world, The Catholic Church! Well to those dumbasses I say, no. I will not let you take away a great piece of my heritage (even if it is part of the western civilization which created all evil on earth, spreading to every heathen, I mean peaceful people in the world. Ha! these people crack me up and make me sick at the same time).

I respect knights for several reasons. First, these were high class people who where humble (try finding that today). Although rich land owners, many knights litterally gave all of their money to the poor, living in relative poverty. They left the table a little hungry to avoid gluttony and to help feed those who had no food. They were close to being monks in their religious faith, living a life of constant prayer and devotion. They were true warriors, practicing their craft daily (except on Sunday to keep the Sabbath). Their code was the beginning of what it meant to be a real man. Anyone who enjoys John Wayne and what he embodies (strength, heroism, bravery, compassion for the weak, discipline, a clear idea of good and evil) would enjoy a knight.

A historical example of true selflessness. Niklas (or Nicholas) Zrinski picked 700 knights to fight the attacking Turkish army in Croatia. Niklas evacuated the fort and set it ablaze to make sure the Muslims gained nothing of worth. Zrinski spoke elequently "..Let us go out from this burning place into the open and stand up to our enemies. Who dies - he will be with God. Who dies not - his name will be honoured. I will go first, and what I do, you do. And God is my witness - I will never leave you, my brothers and knights!" They then attacked the 90,000 Turks head on, fighting to the death. The Turks suffered mightily, leaving 25,000 dead not including wounded (18,000 cavalry men, 7,000 elite jannissaries which decimated the jannissary corps). Suleyman (or Suleiman or Soleyman depending on translation) the Magnificent, leader of the Turks died two days later (one of the uncounted wounded). The Turks were forced to retreat and western civilization was saved (and with it Christianity). This act was latter captured by Nikola, the grandson of Niklas, in The Peril of Sziget.

Homophobia? Give Me a Break!

I must say I have not seen "Humpback Mountain" in theatres, and judging by the ticket revenue neither has a good portion of the population. I must say I was tricked into reading half of the short story several years ago in my Creative Writing class at IU. It seemed like a normal, trite story about two ranchers. Lo and behold one guy suddenly jumps the other's ass in the middle of a paragraph. Needless to say I did not finish the story and could care less what happened (after all the story follows most Lifetime movies of affairs, except there are two guys instead of a man and a woman). Am I a homophobe for this? Hell No, I am not scared of homos. I will not be brain washed into accepting every liberal propaganda piece that is put out there. After all, didn't Hitler use filmmaker Leni Riefenstahl to create a propaganda movie, Triumph of the Will, to drum up favor of the Third Reich?

Jake Gyllenhaal, who played one of the homosexuals in the movie, had a very interesting quote which shows the corruption of Liberalism and Political Correctness. Jake was talking about the trouble he had while filming the simulated sex scenes with heath Ledger. He said "I was super uncomfortable . . . [but] what made me most courageous was that I realized I had to try to let go of that stereotype I had in my mind, that bit of homophobia, and try for a second to be vulnerable and sensitive. It was f---in' hard, man. I succeeded only for milliseconds." Notice he was uncomfortable because of his subtle "homophobia." Think for a minute Jake. Do you think it is possible you were uncomfortable because your conscience was telling you these actions were inappropriate? This entire "homophobia" crap is just to force people to ignore internal barriers we have against unnatural acts. Fight the Mind Police, save your soul. And Jake, step out in front of a bus. After all, it is only "courageous" to go against your conscience.

To all of those narrow minded people out there, conscience is not something that is only a construction of your upbringing. My dad never told me "Son, it's wrong to get someone up the ass." That is a feeling I had all of my life. Could this be why, even in San Francisco, church going Christians are happier than homosexuals? It is not because homos feel they must sneak around (obviously, have you been to most college campuses lately?) orbecausee society has too many restrictions against them or they have no outlets for their stories (watch news lately?). It is simply that most Christians recognize the importance of that little voice of warning inside each of us. Going against that voice is what leads to depression, sadness, and a feeling of worthlessness.

"Happiness and moral duty are inseparably connected."
"Labor to keep alive in your breast that little spark of celestial fire called conscience."
~George Washington

Liberal - A Person So Open Minded Their Brains Have Fallen Out

"Free" thinking sounds great doesn't it? After all, who could be against "free" thinking? Sadly, anyone with an ounce of common sense would be against it. According to academics, possibly the greatest "accomplishment" of the Enlightenmnet period is the idea of "free" thinking. Like most liberals, they see the act itself as good but fail to envision the future (but then again they like the future it has lead to).
So why am I against "free" thinking? i simply answer because of the tradgedy it has lead our society and our world to. Following liberalism will lead a person to "free" think. But without the constructs of conscience and God, free thought eventually leads to free morals, or immorality. Restraint is thrown off and free reign is given to the passions. Whoever thinks as he pleases will do as he pleases. Disorder in the intellect will lead to disorder in the heart and vice-versa.
In philosophy, we just finished going over Hume's A Treastise of Human Nature. The book is a 600+ page volume to create a moral order based solely on man's intellect. It fails of course, as does every morality based on personal inflection. Sitting in class listening to the teacher describe how Hume tries to answer complicated questions that arise against his argument made me realize that this is the reason so many philosophers commit suicide or live their life in depression. Intellect does not answer all of the questions and sometimes trying to answer a question draws other points of view into conflict. Trying to seperate this madness into a coherent argument always fails. I truly do feel sorry for anyone tormented with "free" thought because its alure promises freedom, yet leads to a life of slavery. Remind you of another liberal creation, the Welfare State?