Fear of Spines; Fresh Meat

Atheists are adamant against “Abstinence only”. Why? It doesn’t work? It worked well for many generations before this one. If there ever were a valid “hockey stick” graph, it would be in charting the rise of STD’s and unwanted pregnancies vs. the war on morality being waged by the Atheist left through the ACLU, the media, and the courts. The rise in STD’s and unwanted pregnancies began its rise mid 20th century, just as abortion was legalized and sitcoms started to revile white males, morality and religion in general.

Could it be that anything that smacks of encouraging a moral spine within the younger generation is a threat?

The campaign against A-O only makes sense in the light of a campaign against morality of any kind. The alternative to A-O is to go ahead and have all the sex you want then kill the unwanted progeny. This is consequence-free, decision-free, hedonistic paganism. It is spineless. And it is the consequence of the war on morality.

Atheists proclaim their own personal morality loudly and frequently. But their actions belie their words. Every decision that can be made that would interfere with unrestricted hedonism is warred against. Charges are created with false information and based on false assumptions, and then made to appear as moral tenets themselves; these are used to war on traditional values.

Do Atheists really care about STD’s? Or do they care more about forcing their will on others? Is “giving a Clinton” a failure of A-O, or the success of hedonism? Is the ACLU defense of convicted child molesters having unsupervised access to playgrounds a blow for morality or an attack on children?

Is there really no relativity in the value set of an Atheist? There is universal Atheist rejection of such a notion: that the values of an Atheist cannot be based on a universal foundation despite having rejected such a foundation. But being without a baseline for comparison of actions to values, there arises the incredible unrestricted, unfettered freedom that accompanies the lack of accountability, even to oneself. This is the basis for hedonism, and it is so delicious, so seductive, that any and all rationalizations will cheerfully be produced in order to sustain it. The “absolute freedom to” draws forcefully toward itself. It is the gravitational force accelerating toward hedonism.

This is the pull phase of the logical inversion of rebellion. While the pull of absolute freedom from responsibility is seemingly irresistible, the need to reject the control of the authority of traditional values is also irresistible. Again, any and all rationalization is acceptable in gaining the “absolute freedom from” as well as the “absolute freedom to” . The rejection of authority in all moral forms is the push phase of the logical inversion of rebellion. The push away from morality is accompanied by a pull toward the absolute freedom of hedonism.

So the “freedom from” sexual responsibility and consequence becomes accompanied by the “freedom to” kill the inconvenient progeny (abort the consequence) of the sexual irresponsibility. This miscarriage of conventional logic is lost on the Atheist-hedonist, who considers this logic perfectly sensible, because it supports his worldview.

Those who advocate the removal of consequence from the teenager are also advocating irresponsible behavior; there is no way to logically divorce the two. So the basis for illogical attacks on A-O is an expected outcome of such a philosophy.

Such inversion of logic by the Atheo-hedonist is the root of a significant portion of the current culture war. There are to be no consequences for our actions. There is to be no judgment of our actions. There is to be no need for self-discipline. There is no need for any moral structure whatsoever. In fact, all these things get in the way of the perfect “freedom from” and “freedom to” that are cherished by the Atheo-hedonists. So the culture war will become even more disruptive as time goes along.

I have seen absolute denials that there even is a culture war. Atheo-hedonists would have us believe that their morality – none that is absolute – is so compelling that it is natural, it is the only one, and the question is closed. So there is no war, no dispute at all…. except from “radical fundamentalists” who refuse to accept the Atheo-hedonist vision of spinelessness as a moral value. So the denial of logic is complete, with the devaluation of all nonconformers as “radical fundies”. Their hedonism is the ultimate truth in their minds.

This is why it is not possible to converse rationally with Atheists. Their system of reasoning is inverted and rationalized to match their desires for truth to correspond to their own worldview. The Atheist will immediately discount your inputs as trivial and meaningless. Then the ridicule and demeaning will start, as you personally are devalued. The ridicule will continue until you leave, because of course everything you say is meaningless to the logically inverted mind of the Atheist. In the Atheist mind, it is perfectly reasonable that you and your ideas are trivial, and worthy only of disdain. And this is why atheists are elitists, who generally clump together with other Atheist elitists, acting as dog packs would act upon the arrival of “fresh meat” (an actual Atheist term).