If Deism is the belief that God is so transcendent from the cosmos He created that He no longer participates directly in it, Pantheism must be the worldview at the other end of the continuum believing that a higher power exists as Pantheism holds that God is so immanent with the universe that God and the universe are one. As a worldview, Pantheism has plagued the religious thought of both the East and West from ancient times on up through our contemporary day.

Though there are various forms of Pantheism, most share a set of common characteristics. Pantheists will agree that ultimately there is but one substance.

Parmenides hypothesized that there is either being or nonbeing and in order to exist there must be being. And if everything possesses this quality, everything is of the same substance as to differ by nothing would be not to exist at all.

Though everything is ultimately one under Pantheism, what we perceive as multiplicity or distinction are either manifestations or emanations of the absolute unity.

In the "Enneads", the Greek mystic Plotinus said that from this impersonal unity flowed the various levels of reality starting with unity, then inward into mind, then the world soul, then multiple souls, then to the lowest level of matter. It is man, Geisler writes in "Christian Apologetics" of this brand of Pantheism  as "the microcosm who possesses mind, soul, and matter" that the journey back to unity and oneness begins (175).

Though slightly different, other forms of Pantheism share considerable similarity. For example, in Spinoza's pantheism, God is a substance of infinite attributes and we exist as transient manifestations of the absolute that are eventually reabsorbed back into it. And in Hinduism, though that world religion is noted for its multiplicities of divinities, in its philosophically complex variants, the various gods all the way down to the material components of the physical world are the assorted levels of the comprehensive totality known as Brahman.

Though many Pantheists claim to embrace tolerance as they contend all religions are merely human efforts to understand the same all-encompassing God, one is really taking the serpent to one’s bosom when dealing with Pantheism. For example, in much of Pantheist thought, it is held that both good and evil flow from God much in the same way there is both a light and dark side of the Force in the Star Wars epic. Other Pantheists claim that God is beyond good and evil as understood by human beings.

Such positions could be used to not only justify any number of atrocities but also to view them in a disturbingly detached manner or even positively in an around about fashion. For example, if good and evil are simply just human conceptions useful for ordering social relations, what is so inherently immoral about the Holocaust?

After all, were not the Jews the ones anyway that set the ball rolling on the theism that ended up promoting the conceptual dualism that now hinders the expansion of consciousness? Besides, by liberating them of their physical materiality, aren’t we doing them a favor by reuniting them with universal oneness? Under Pantheism, the “is” becomes the “ought” and that is why one sees cows strutting freely down the streets of India with the baby girls tossed out with the trash.

by Frederick Meekins

Don't know whether to laugh or cringe at the tone of some articles calling for eager obedience and compliance with government dietary guidelines. Elites wanting to alter the composition of snack foods should be told to go lick a salt block.

Wonder if Anderson Cooper is as enamored now as he once was of the proverbial "Arab Street". Wonder if Anderson Cooper realizes now the considerable differences between Islamists and those he once ridiculed as “Teabaggers”.

Interesting that the unions insisting Obamacare is essential to the Republic's survival have been granted exemptions from it the legislation. Interesting how the corporations pledging allegiance to the Obama regime are being exempted from his punitive decrees.

The "pro-democracy" demonstrators of the present decade usually end up being the tyrants chased from office decades down the road.

In Canada, a child was excluded from a contest to win a stuffed animal because he brought his lunch in a Ziploc bag. Eventually, parents of students caught trafficking in prohibited forms of nutritional conveyance will find social services knocking on their doorsteps.

According to WUSA9.com, students in the “Social Justice” class at Archbishop Caroll School write letters to companies the students believe are exploiting the employees. Do they also intend to write letters about welfare recipients, that obviously don’t know how to keep a zipper up given their number of out of wedlock kids, who eat higher up the food chain than those paying the taxes providing entitlement benefits? Better yet, to understand the full implications of social justice, shouldn’t students acing the coarse have points shaved off their stellar grades and distributed to those that did not put forth as much effort in the class?

Obama is urging Mubarak to leave office promptly and peacefully. Wonder if he'll eventually follow his own advice when it is his own turn to leave power.

If Fox can reject a Super Bowl advertisement for advocating beliefs or practices that might spark “the wrong kind of controversy” in regards to John 3:16, shouldn’t the network ban ads for beer as well? For do not commercials for that particular product promote the position that it is moral to imbibe noxious liquids for nonmedicinal purposes often in pursuit of fornicative ends?

If an advertisement featuring John 3:16 couldn't air during the Super Bowl because broadcasting the segment would spark undue controversy and advocate a certain belief, will the Black Eyes Peas be punished for their ditty calling for increased education spending? Apparently the band is talented in neither music nor public policy.

No matter what side prevails in Egypt, we are pretty much screwed for failing to cultivate our own domestic petroleum resources.

If it is improper to ask potential voters or accused criminals to show their ID's to authorities, there is no reason for Burger King cashiers to ask me what my name is so they can print it on the receipt.

Traditionally, national security is invoked as an excuse to justify any assortment of civil liberties infringements. Thus, if Frau Obama is successful in persuading the policy establishment as to the veracity of her perspective linking obesity and nutrition to national security, just how much control will government exert over what Americans eat.

The White House Super Bowl party menu included bratwurst, cheeseburgers, pizza and beer. Where are the locally grown vegetables and low salt snacks?

Only asinine hippy parents make their kids eat carrot sticks, apple slices, and milk when they go out to eat.

If the federal government is going to send out Presidential Emergency Alerts to the nation's cellphones, is the message going to be charged to the recipients account or is Obama picking up the tab?

A WMAL host laments that the Super Bowl is not family friendly from the standpoint of the late kickoff. How is the NFL responsible if you can't get your kids to bed at a respectable hour? Not like youngsters are going to be irrevocably damaged by missing an ideal bed time. Guess this will be the next thing the Obama's monitor.

In comments at the Washington National Cathedral regarding faith and environmentalism, the head of the National Association of Evangelicals said that we need to revision our entire lives, families, and COMMUNITIES. Perhaps foremost among these is why does there need to be a National Cathedral? For though it is a beautiful and inspirational edifice, if we are to live lives of pious austerity, technically God doesn't really require a structure all that ornate.

In discussing GoProud (a group of gay Republicans) at CPAC, WMAL host Chris Plante invoked a quote by Ronald Reagan about working with those over which you agree 80% and disagree 20%. Does this mean that the Conservative Political Action Conference will eventually welcome a breakaway polygamist Mormon?

The New York Times is outraged that Disney marketers are targeting newborns by visiting mothers in maternity wards and trying to get new mothers to sign up for email updates and complimentary merchandize. Too bad the nation's paper of record is not as eager to expose how Social Services often pressures new parents into home visits.

The Washington Post reported that most handguns in DC were registered in Northwest neighborhoods. In others words, where the rich liberals thinking we rabble should be denied the Second Amendment reside.

Some banks have announced that they may impose fees on basic checking accounts. These financial institutions will no doubt moan and whine for more government handouts when consumers close out accounts.

If George Will is favorable to the presidential candidacy of Mitch Daniels and Mitch Daniels is hinting that healthcare should be denied to those of marginal social utility, does that include Will's mentally challenged son or is this something to be imposed upon those of us that don't wear red bowties, bad toupees or write useless tomes on baseball?

Hispanosupremacists are condemning an Arizona proposal to verify the legality of those utilizing that state's hospitals. You as a real American without lips chronically attached to the welfare teat try to get medical services without the proper paperwork. If You show up at some foreign hospital without proof that you are there legally, they'd probably vivisect you for organ harvesting.

Frau Obama believes youngsters are to suckle teat as long as possible. Is there any aspect of our lives that this government doesn't think is it's place to hand down a proclamation regarding? Guess we'll soon be given instruction as to which position the Obama administration prefers husbands and wives to partake of carnal relations in. hypothetical future headline will read: "Obamas Insist Lefthand The One For Proper Anal Hygiene". This isn't too far out of a conjecture given their propensity to interfere in all aspects of our lives and for often siding with Third World cultures of a certain persuasion over our own.

It's time to sell off American park lands and museum treasures on Ebay to tackle the debt. It's heartbreaking, but less so than selling your children into slavery. What good is the Hope Diamond, Fonzi’s Jacket, or Archie Bunker’s Chair going to do you when you receive the mid to late 21st century’s equivalent of a jury duty notice that you are to report to a Chinese foundry where you are to render 15 years of hard labor to go towards national debt restitution?

What idea do you prefer and gives you greater comfort: that the First Ladies’ Inaguration Ball Gowns are on display or avoiding an old age living under what use to be a highway overpass as you evade being cannibalized by starving migrant teens?

by Frederick Meekins

Of the tumult in Egypt, columnist Armstrong Williams posted that America should not be afraid of Egypt's emerging democracy that "will be different from America's political system."

Williams comes to this conclusion because, "Egypt is a Muslim country...It is only natural that their...government will take on characteristics unique to its culture."

So basically, this alleged conservative is excusing ahead of time the violent persecution of Christians that will likely erupt and the mass slaughter of dissidents that often takes place in Islamic societies undergoing revolutionary upheaval.

Would Williams be so eager to overlook such atrocities if Egyptians were White rather than the ancient civilization many contemporary Black radicals rest their laurels upon the accomplishments of as an excuse to justify their own lack of effort and accomplishment?

As someone accused in a lawsuit of instigating a bout of unwelcomed tonsil hockey with another man, before giving his endorsement to what will likely be yet the rise of another totalitarian realm, perhaps he should ask himself how he would fair under a regime that dispensed with certain American niceties he insinuates are not essential for the protection of a free people.

by Frederick Meekins

Too bad no member of Congress possessed the courage to blurt out "You lie", especially in light how everyone was suppose to make bipartisan goo-goo eyes at one another.

Obama says cutting stimulus is akin to taking the motor out of an airplane taking off. But how can a jetliner even take off when the flue supply has already been burned up?

The camera panned the congressional gallery and showed the head of Xerox sitting in the crowd. Guess they need her to help make all that money that really isn't there.

Obama praised education for beginning earlier in China than in the United States. Guess the government should haul the child off as soon as the youngster emerges from the womb. Perhaps Obama should elaborate to the nation what he thinks of those slave labor camps where children are snatched from their parents and beaten into being Olympic athletes and the like.

Does Obama realize that it's not government that sparks imagination?

Soviets did not beat America into space not so much because of the superiority of their technology or social system but because we were concerned they would disapprove of us using a missile as a rocket.

If Obama believes in spreading the wealth around like he told Joe the Plumber, why should we bother being educated for the complex jobs he is promising?

If more students get college degrees through government subsidies that disrupt the market, the credentials will be useless in securing better employment and higher pay.

I guess $4.00 per gallon gas is reinvented energy policy.

Will one of the promised millions of electric vehicles be Obama’s or will he continue to ride around in gas guzzlers?

Obama is emphasizing rail transportation because the electric cars he is promoting will pretty much otherwise confine people to the areas in which government will permit them to live.

Wonder how many homes will be abolished and how much private property seized to build this fabled high speed train.

By calling the proposed high-speed rail system a "bullet train", isn't the President contributing to the coarsening of the national discourse?

Quite revealing how History is deliberately omitted from the list of subjects such as Math and Science that those advocating an increased federal role in education believe need to be emphasized as part of a renewed national education policy.

If Obama doesn't like foreign students returning to their native lands upon completion of their studies, perhaps they should not be admitted to American universities to begin with.

Obama insists that foreigners are the ones enriching America and fostering innovation. Guess actual Americans are just suppose to keep our mouths shut and paying taxes out the wazoo.

Many of the implications of what Obama says are more between the lines rather than said openly.

For example, the President calls for the leveling of tax rates. This could just as easily mean increasing assessments instead of lowering them.

Obama claims he will eliminate unnecessary regulations. Thing is, he no doubt sees the vast majority of those his minions are promulgating as absolutely necessary.

Contrary to the impression Obama attempted to create, deficit spending just didn't begin a decade ago. My grandfather passed away more than a decade ago and I remember him warning about the national debt when I was a kid.

The way the camera froze and elongated the image, for a moment, Obama looked like the Necromonger emperor in "The Chronicles Of Riddick".

Obama reassured that Muslims are a part of the American family. What about other religions, especially the ones not as inclined to blow things up when they don't get their way?

Likewise, Obama went out of his way to mention gay military personnel. Why aren't the sacrifices of heterosexuals worthy of mention?

Obama hopes to establish new alliances and friendships across the Americas. Wonder how much that is going to cost.

I tabulated 81 rounds of applause during the 2011 State of the Union Address.

by Frederick Meekins

A number of leftist Democrats either boycotted the reading of the Constitution in the House of Representatives or denigrated the ceremony.

These representatives should either resign or be removed from office.

For if they think that the very thing that authorizes them to hold office and wield authority is irrelevant, shameful or outdated propaganda, they certainly shouldn't be granted a hefty salary under a system that they have exhibited so much contempt for that they can't even grant the respect to to hear read aloud.

Americans would be shocked and outraged to learn of an athlete thinking themselves too good to be bothered with learning the basic rules of the game.

Then shouldn't we be even more so when it comes to those that actually assume that they have more of a right to run and order our lives than we do?

by Frederick Meekins

If Christians are to avoid altogether books such as "The Lord Of The Rings" and "The Chronicles Of Narnia" because these stories contain wizards and witches, by definition does that prohibition also include the Bible since it too mentions witches and the like?

Like the Bible, don't these works warn that what we categorize as magic is not for mortal beings and in many instances depict what happens to those that succumb to this particular temptation?

In regards to Gandalf, though he is referred to as a wizard, in Tolkien's background materials, weren't the wizards beings more akin to angels in terms of their ontology?

More importantly, for hyperpious critics to condemn these books in such minute detail, wouldn't they have had to have read them or at least have had to study them closely?

If so, then on what grounds do they forbid you the opportunity to read these materials if for no other reason than to verify the conclusions that they have arrived at?

Rather, wouldn't the more respectable position be to warn the reader and to let them decide for themselves?

by Frederick Meekins

It was stated on Fox News that each family's share of the national debt is approximately $45,000.

In the attempt to make the amount more manageable, perhaps naming rights could be sold to various government landmarks or agencies in a manner similar to the way corporations currently purchase the ones to athletic stadiums.

For example, the Lincoln Memorial could be renamed “the Lincoln Mercury Lincoln Memorial”.

Social Security checks and statements could have boldly emblazoned across them “Brought to you by Depends Undergarments” or the name of a prominent retirement community in a given area.

The Capitol Building could have a giant Pepsi logo painted on it for the right price.

Prominent national parks could be sold off or contracted out as Disney resorts provided the Magic Kingdom agreed to leave these land holdings in a state close to natural. Given the levels to which gas prices are expected to rise over the coming years, it’s not like anyone other than the elites are going to be able to travel to enjoy these treasures anyway.

Since it has been hinted at in occultic circles that the Washington Monument is actually a gigantic phallus, it could be renamed “Trojan’s Washington Monument”.

Of course in each of these cases, steps could be taken to ensure that corporate influence would be limited to advertising and image purposes only.

Still distasteful and undignified?

Of course it is; but it less so than your children starving to death for lack resources available to feed them, being conscripted into Red Chinese slave labor factories, or having to surrender the nation’s daughters to Arab harems in the attempt to settle astronomical debt.

by Frederick Meekins

An assassination attempt was made against an Arizona Congresswoman. What freedoms will Americans be coerced into surrendering as a result? In a press conference, the sheriff there has already blamed talk radio for the tragedy.

A Fox News talking head made a fuss about Gabrielle Giffords being the first Jewish woman elected to Congress from Arizona. Would the assassination attempt be less tragic if it had been on a Christian man?

In analyzing the shooting of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, blame is not placed on the gunmen for this evil deed but on politics becoming “too personal”. But aren’t the liberals the one that made it that way in their efforts to control every facet of existence?

Maybe political rhetoric would not have grown so intense if the government had done its job of securing the borders and minding its own business as to what type of toilets we have in our homes, what kind of lightbulbs we decide to illuminate them with and what kind of food we decide to stick in our mouths.

The shooting of Arizona representative Gabrielle Giffords is tragic. Too bad there isn't as much outrage over illegal aliens murdering, raping, and looting the average citizens of that state. Perhaps the Speaker of the House ought to make a statement that an attack on any run of the mill American is an attack on all Americans, not just when these horrors befall the ruling elites.

An ABC news report reveals that the shooter of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords listed The Communist Manifesto as one of his favorite books and didn’t make it past the urinalysis in his attempts to enlist in the military, essentially meaning he was strung out on dope. It has also been learned that the gunmen had constructed an occult altar on his parents' property. Seems he has more in common with Obama voters than members of the Tea Party.

A fuss is being made that the gunmen's Satanic altar was in a camouflage tent. Would the hyperfeminized media have pointed out its coloration if it had been pink with lacy frills?

If all men are created equal, the murderous Arizona scumbag deserves no more of a stiffer sentence for killing the federal judge than he does for the young girl or senior citizens he murdered.

Is Congress really postponing scheduled business to focus on the tragedy or merely using this as an excuse for an extended weekend that few will have the gonads to question?

Will the tragic AZ shooting serve as the Reichstag Fire in the attempt to abolish the Internet, Talk Radio, and the First Amendment? Of course, in the New World Order that will likely spring from this, merely raising such a suggestion will likely get one incarcerated in the near future.

Stenny Hoyer claims Gifford's astronaut husband wants the nation's political rhetoric toned down. News flash to Hoyer, while sympathetic to the Congresswoman's plight, this isn't the 1950's anymore. There is no reason compelling Americans to defer without question to the preferences to an astronaut.

If astronauts are going to preach to us from the Space Station as to what we can say, does that mean preachers can now run the space program from their pulpits?

And what if we refuse to "tone down our rhetoric", which means conservatives are expected to silence ourselves. Not many ways legitimately around "Congress shall make no law..." unless you plan to repeal it.

Does the government intend to establish a Bureau of Verbal Tone & Infliction to objectively determine what rhetoric "needs to be toned down" or has crossed the line?

An Associated Press story claims the scumbag shooter was noted for being "confrontational, nonlinear, and obsessed with how words create reality". So basically, he was indistinguishable from the average postmodernist university literature professor.

If Congresswoman Giffords had been 15 to 20 years older than she is now, the policy wonks behind the Obama healthcare legislation she voted for might not see her worthy of the heroic actions taken to save her innocent life.

If the Arizona Tragedy is to serve as justification for additional gun control, does that mean Gabrielle Giffords should have her gun confiscated because someone else shot her?

The crazed Tucson sheriff claims that the shooting of Representative Giffords was a result of the Arizona ID law intended to crackdown on illegal alien criminals. So basically, citizens thinking that those the world doesn’t come to a screeching halt over when befalling a horrible tragedy are as valuable in terms of their basic humanity and thus worthy of the same protection as the vaunted members of the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government are the ones responsible for this act of terrorism.

It has been projected that energy bills are expected to triple. Before it's all over with, overheated rhetoric is about the only warmth Americans may be left with as no one will be able to afford gas or lights.

by Frederick Meekins

Each winter without  fail, the flu sends millions to the local pharmacy in search of some kind of relief. However, it won’t be this pesky virus that will give you a headache and make your stomach churn.

In order to purchase pseudoephedrine, consumers must now produce a photo ID (something that is apparently an outrage to require illegal aliens to do when accused of a crime) with these details added into a computer database tracking how much and often you purchase this perfectly legal substance. It is claimed that this procedure is necessary as a result of the meth epidemic sweeping across the country since pseudoephedrine is an ingredient used to make this drug.

While methamphetamine might be illegal, pseudoephedrine is not and is available over the counter in smaller doses. If the nanny state wants to restrict access to this substance, why not make it unavailable in its entirety without a prescription or enact an outright prohibition all together.

It could be argued that there are already restrictions on other products deleterious to bodily health such as cigarettes and booze. However, the regulations stipulating how these products are to be dispersed are not part of the Patriot Act nor are (as far as I know since I have never purchased either) the details of the photo ID necessary to purchase them entered into a computer database.

And at least with a six pack of beer, you can actually caresses or fondle the package before finalizing the purchase. Simple cold pills are now concealed behind the counter and one must bow and scrape before authorities in order to be granted access to them, no doubt as part of yet another training exercise to further condition a once free people into acquiescing control over additional areas of their lives to the technocrats wielding power.

What is to prevent these kinds of restrictions from being applied to additional legal products “our betters” have deemed communally irresponsible? For while shoppers have to surrender their most private information just for a bit of sinus relief, condoms hang on the wrack just a few aisles away with anyone free to thumb through them.

Americans are constantly reminded that we must endure these embarrassing indignities for the sake of public health. If that is the case, then why shouldn’t we be required to produce a marriage license before being permitted to purchase a prophylactic?

After all, in the case of decongestants, we are being inconvenienced because of the small percentage that abuse a legitimate product. Then shouldn’t similar safeguards be put in place in reference to a product that, whether we want to admit it or not, all of us could be tempted into using illicitly? After all, in terms of the costs, fornication likely surpasses the expense caused by abused Sudafed tablets as evidenced by the lives shattered by sexually transmitted diseases, welfare payments to unwed mothers, and the conception of the next generation of meth addicts who will end up strung out on this chemical trash because their parents are to busy out whoring around rather than raising the babies they have made.

Some may not care one way or the other if the government steps in to regulate either of these errant behaviors, thinking that their own exemplary character will prevent them from falling under the surveillance of government operatives. However, even though at this moment this manner of draconian regulation is directed towards behaviors most would consider social pathologies, it won't be long until this kind of bureaucratic procedure is applied to other basic human behaviors no sane person would have any qualms about.

According to a piece of legislation at one time submitted to the Mississippi legislature, it would be illegal for a licensed restaurant to serve obese patrons. Some are quick to point out that the measure quickly died in light of the public outcry against it.

Maybe so for now. But does anyone honestly believe that this will be the last time we hear something like this?

This measure or something like it will be proposed again and again in legislative bodies across the country until it is no longer news and is quietly enacted without much fanfare. Or, as in the case of homosexuality and assorted abridgments of liberty such as high taxes and government agents interrogating you over how many toilets you have in your home, most Americans will still oppose the advance of these policies within their own hearts and minds but their resistance will be so eroded that the will just accept the regimented status quo without much protest. The dispirited will conclude there is little point in speaking up anyway.

Preventing drug abuse is an important health policy concern. However, no legitimate interest is served by treating the entire population as potential suspects without a single hint of probable cause.

 by Frederick Meekins

The deficit reduction commission was a panel charged with suggesting way to curtail America’s decline into paupery.

Foremost among these ranked increasing the retirement age to nearly 70 years of age. If such a proposal were ever enacted, it would be the first time in decades that the ruling elites have taken Biblical revelation into consideration.

You see, the Good Book teaches that that is about the end of the human lifespan and anything beyond that is usually categorized as a descent into suffering.

To state things bluntly, dear readers, the government eventually plans to cross its fingers hoping that you will just die on the job.

But whereas you will be extolled the glories and delight of sacrifice, it is doubtful the same will be required by the likes of those seated on the commission.

For example, the co-chair of this panel was retired Senator Allan Simpson. As part of the sacrifice we are all expected to shoulder with a smile, has Allan Simpson forsaken the benefits the members of that deliberative body have been known to accumulate once they leave it?

So before we ever cut back on the elderly tottering along the edges of destitution, perhaps we should curtail the lavish benefits extended to those elevated to membership in the federal legislative body already millionaires to begin with or whom often use their time in elected office as springboards to additional fortunes, accolades, and honors.

Perhaps better yet, lets abolish Congressional salaries all together. Then those entering these national halls will be more prone to depart from them under their own power long before they have to be pushed out in a wheelchair.

by Frederick Meekins

The annual Prison Fellowship Angel Tree direct fundraising letter has arrived in the mailboxes of Christians across the nation.

On a positive note, the ministry didn't role out the organization's usual sob story letter supposedly written by a convict, incarcerated for a sentence of about nine years, asking for a handout for his daughter.

I guess if they had continued repeatedly sending the same plea as they have done year after year since at least 2005, the discerning would have realized it was nearly time for this deadbeat to be released.

Thing is, this year's appeal still left much to be desired.

One woman is quoted as saying, "It was hard to see...him [her father] in prison...Angel Tree just showed us that he was thinking about us while he was there."

Perhaps all well and good. But what is Angel Tree doing for the children of victims no longer able to let their children know that they are thinking about them thanks to a number of the very same convicts Prison Fellowship no doubt depicts as being put behind bars by an inequitable criminal justice system rather than by felonious misdeeds?

by Frederick Meekins

As the opening act of the Greatest Story Ever Told, each character mentioned in the Christmas narrative has had a number of literary traditions and homiletical assumptions added that may or may not be directly traceable to the text of the Holy Bible. One of these is none other than the Innkeeper.

 When we are confronted with the dichotomy of the Second Person of the divine Godhead, enthroned in Heaven throughout all previous eternity, being born into a filthy barn with the stench of feces and urine all around, knowing this account not from the standpoint of the characters within but rather as the beneficiaries of the complete Good News of the Gospel message, we are horrified on an instinctive level and look for someone to blame for this apparent breech of cosmic protocol. Often, the Innkeeper is thrust into the role.

But is such an outrage warranted? Though literature and tradition can be useful tools of instruction, enlightenment, and illumination if they are kept in check by the foundation provided by the Word of God, it is to the Word of God that the investigation must turn if we are to distinguish undisputed fact from what may turn out to be nothing but well-intended imagination.

The text reads in Luke 2:7, “And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn.” With that passage, one has exhausted the corpus of Biblical references regarding the Advent Inn though definitely not the speculation or debate surrounding the figure that no doubt tended this mentioned structure.

Technically, there isn’t even an innkeeper directly mentioned. One can conclude that the expansion of the role that he played in interpretations of the Christmas Story is more about giving pageant parts to kids who, to put it bluntly, don’t quite measure up to the charisma of those selected to play Joseph and Mary but who are a cut above those selected to play shepherds and animals in terms of intelligence.

The Innkeeper also becomes a foil through which assorted ministers, church music directors, and aspiring ecclesiastical playwrites make assorted points that these respective thinkers feel either need to be made but are not explicitly spelled out in the portion of Scripture under consideration or even placed as hints to draw applause to their own vaunted sense of holiness or spirituality.

The first misconception construed about the Holy Family and tossed at the Innkeeper is that these wanderers were homeless and that this particular businessman typifies the attitudes exuded by commercial interests towards the destitute. This line of reasoning was popularized years ago by Jesse Jackson and is no doubt widespread today as assorted charities often capitalize on these kinds of sentiments prevalent this time of year in order to shame the general population into complying with solicitations for donations.

Racemongers such as Jackson constantly hold their ears to the rails of the public discussion ready to pounce on any thinker daring to make the error that all within a protected demographic happen to partake of a certain characteristic not inherent to what makes an individual part of the particular group in question. Then why isn’t this same care of thought applied to those finding no roof over their heads?

As Rush Limbaugh astutely rejoineded at the time, Mary and Joseph went to Bethlehem to pay their taxes. Thus, their state of lacking a domicile was merely a transient one. Technically, they were no more homeless than someone going to the beach and finding nothing but “No Vacancy” signs lit along the boardwalk.

The dilemma faced by the Holy Family in no way justified the increased social spending Jackson was calling for at the time nor infuse the most debauched among indigents, unwilling to lift their own fingers in the effort to elevate their status, with a sacredness or purity with which they should not be esteemed. Unlike Mary and Joseph, many of the homeless end up in this lamentable condition because of their willful refusal to pay their bills rather than because of an eager compliance in seeing that their obligations are met.

A related criticism of the Innkeeper accuses the Innkeeper of being insufficiently religious or spiritual. Those out to find fault with him will respond, “He should have been able to find room for the birth of the Messiah by either kicking out another paying customer or by giving up his own bed.”

This suggestion makes a number of assumptions that cannot necessarily be supported one way or the other from the text as it was inspired by the moving of the Holy Spirit.

For example, no where in the Gospel account is the Innkeeper explicitly portrayed. Mary and Joseph may have learned by other means than directly from the proprietor’s mouth that the inn was full and they wandered about the town looking for an alternative place to stay until the blessed event transpired and there was no where else where they could get off the street.

If sufficiently secluded and in dire enough of an emergency, Mary and Joseph might have dashed into the nearest stable without even notifying the owner or caretaker. The manger in question might not have even belonged to the innkeeper.

Even if Mary and Joseph interacted directly with the Innkeeper, there is no proof that the couple even told the Innkeeper of their unique plight. As difficult as it may be to remember, the Nativity took place in pre-Internet times when pregnant women didn't go around posting pictures of their bare bellies with stretch marks and protruding navals for all the world to see.

 Joseph was initially of the mind to hide Mary away privately all together away from public view in Matthew 2:19 and Mary's cousin Elizabeth went into seclusion for five months following the conception of John the Baptist according to Luke 1:24. As such, if the Innkeeper even met Mary and Joseph, he might not have even known that she was pregnant if the couple went to extraordinary measures to conceal that she was with child.

Since, according to tradition, the Innkeeper placed Mary, Joseph, and the Baby Jesus in a livestock sty, the Innkeeper must not have been an overtly devout individual if that is the way he treated the Messiah and the human vessel through which the Son of God entered the mortal realm in human flesh. But even if Mary and Joseph pulled rank (something they would not have likely done given what we are told in regards to their character), why should the Innkeeper have believed them at the time?

To pious ears, that may sound shocking. However, it must be remembered that at that point in history, Mary and Joseph were no more renowned than any other Israelite.

Before going into the stable, Jesus hadn't even been born. Mary knew that a miracle had occurred within her. However, even Joseph was disinclined to believe his espoused's account until he was persuaded otherwise by no less than the intervention of God Himself.

As an Israelite, the Innkeeper could have been aware of prophecies that the Messiah would be born of a virgin. However, short of a detailed anatomical examination or divine encounter of his own, how would he have known Mary was telling the truth or simply pulling his leg to swindle something out of him as religious charlatans have been known to do throughout history. If we are going to add extraneous details to the Christmas story, perhaps we might as well applaud this willingness to assist while keeping the potentially deceptive that we can't verify at arms length.

Living 2000 years after the events chronicled in the Gospel accounts, we are privileged to know from beginning to the end this particular portion of the Story of Stories. There is more than enough to meditate and ponder upon in those pages without having to drag through the mud the character of a character that what is known of is little more than historical conjecture and literary speculation.

by Frederick Meekins

Giant, a prominent Washington DC area supermarket chain, has curtailed the number of days that the Salvation Army will be permitted to solicit donations this season outside of the grocery retailer’s locations.

In a number of media reports, it was claimed that the bells were offensive and irritating to a number of shoppers.

So what about those food solicitation campaigns where the grocery chain doesn't simply set out a receptacle for those wanting to contribute food items to charity but instead gets broadcast news outlets involved?

Spokesmen from both institutions not only smooch their own rearends in letting the public know just how progressive both the media outlet and food distribution corporations are in bringing awareness to the plight of the supposedly malnourished but also castigate the viewing consumer if they do not comply with the demand for a contribution.

Why isn’t this deemed offensive?

Or how about the recipients of such charity who are not really starving per say but rather simply not receiving the quality of food they think that they otherwise deserve but are unwilling to work for in order to acquire?

Isn’t it offensive to be lectured to by such types or rather their benefactors?

But perhaps the greatest outrage of all occurs when the price for food the average consumer is forced to pay is jacked up with the goods not being sold often simply being tossed into the dumpster.

by Frederick Meekins

Students sue for the right to love boobs. Or at least there was a case filed for the right to wear a t-shirt attesting to such fondness in regards to breast cancer awareness. Will there be parity for testicles along with the opportunity to wear paraphernalia referencing the bawdy vernacular often used to describe those bodily organs.

If Michael Kinsley is going to look down his nose at Marco Rubio for insisting that America is the greatest country in history, perhaps in the spirit of international balance, perhaps Kinsley and his family should be sent to take the place vacated by Rubio’s family in Communist Cuba. Am sure Kinsley’s Parkinson's will get the treatment it needs under the wonders of Castro’s glorious healthcare program.

Of course it was a miscarriage of justice to waterboard Khalid Muhammad. Interogators should have instead used the same rusty knife on him that he used to hack off Daniel Pearl's head.

Obama was to visit Indonesia's largest mosque. Is it his habit to visit the prominent religious landmarks in countries with a predominantly Christian heritage as well? If you will recall, if there happens to be Christian symbols at venues where Obama is appearing, he demands that such iconography be removed. Such objects, no doubt, have similar effect upon him as they would a vampire.

All that marriage is an indication of is that a person is married. Contrary to a number of churches, ministries, and political candidates, it is not a barometer of spiritual maturity or standard of eligibility for ecclesiastical or political office. The statistics on broken and unhappy marriages alone are evidence of this truth.

If liberals can invoke tragic incidents such as mass shootings to justify curtailments of firearms ownership and even proposed restrictions on talk radio such as the Fairness Doctrine, shouldn’t the riots that inevitably follow the conclusion of nearly every championship game especially among ghettoized segments of the population justify the abolition of professional athletics?

Would the San Francisco Chronicle had brushed aside the World Series Riot as "joyful mayhem” if it had been the neswpaper's building vandalized rather than that of a Wells Fargo office?

If the government is authorized to shoot on site anyone violating the perimeter of Area 51, why can't we apply that same policy and spirit of vigilance to the entire U.S. border?

Interesting that Juan Williams would be done in amongst his liberal bedfellows over matters of appropriate speech. For years, he has insisted in various interviews that Whites should have greater restrictions placed upon them than Blacks regarding what Caucasians should be permitted to say.

If Juan Williams had been White, would Whoopi Goldberg have even cared about this political analyst being fired from NPR?

Would Juan Williams have stood for the free speech of someone saying that they were leery of Black hoodlums in oversized pants riding down their rearends?

Degenerates at NPR should realize that, should the Muslims ever take over, they will be among the first rounded up and eliminated.

Interesting how CAIR thinks Juan Williams is a greater threat to America than the actual terrorist groups that CAIR has associated with over the years.

Vivian Scholler should be told that saying she's sorry isn't going to pay Juan Williams' bills. Hopefully, she'll learn that lesson for herself on the receiving end soon enough.

On The O'Reilly Factor, Dana Parino remarked that the firing of Juan Williams was handled in a "ham handed" fashion. There will probably be some Islamist flying into an outrage over the mention of ham on broadcast television.

A campaign ad mocked Christian O'Donnell as being from the Twilight Zone. That ought to be considered a compliment. It must be pointed out that that program had a way of expressing fundamental truths dimwitted conformists would otherwise fail to comprehend in much the same way lesser minds have failed to understand the startling realities she was courageous enough to raise in a number of her campaign appearances.

Given that his wife called Anita Hill from out of the blue after nearly 20 years demanding an apology and given his history with Anita Hill, it makes you wonder if Justice Thomas has the hots for psychopathic mentally unstable women.

The Crystal Cathedral has filed for bankruptcy. So much for the power of positive thinking. Maybe it can be turned into a mosque since Schuller is alleged to have said he wouldn't mind if his grandkids became Muslims.

The same human rabble outraged that Sharon Angle thought that a group of Asians looked Latino are probably the same ones that have contributed to Hispanosupremacist groups that have discussed openly of their future plans to kill White people.

Unless there is a specific rule as to what color cleats must be, a student kicked off a high school football team for wearing pink ones should be reinstated because a coach’s authority ought not be allowed to extend that far. We are constantly badgered over the head how scholastic athletics teach important life lessons. If this decision is allowed to stand, the lesson is none other than that we must submit to regulations that have no basis other than arbitrary opinion. No wonder America is now on the brink of tyranny if the young are conditioned to simply do as they are told.

In the Washington Post, Ted Koppel put his nonpartisanship on display for the public to fawn all over. Are you going to tell us that his documentary lauding the wonders of Red China was evenhanded and not onesided? But then, since the former Nightline host laments the proliferation of broadcast opinion beyond the establishmentarian party line, perhaps an authoritarian regime is exactly where he belongs.

Interesting how a number of the same Prince George's County elites that drone on constantly about the injustices of slavery centuries ago and invoke that tragedy as an excuse for the handouts going to their own constituents, even though the recipients of such public largess have never been slaves, are themselves linked to a scandal involving human smuggling.

It's like you've got to have the dexterity of a neurosurgeon now to role a long enough sheet off of these new fangled toilet paper dispensers. Eventually they will probably be monitored electronically to catch those violating the Cheryl Crowe one sheet maximum.

by Frederick Meekins