On “Deeply Held Beliefs”

bruce-springsteen-north-carolina__oPtFrom The Daily Caller:

A petition on Change.org has garnered nearly 500 signatures in support of Bruce Springsteen’s decision to cancel an April 10 concert in Greensboro, NC. “Bruce Springsteen has a right to his deeply held beliefs. He has a right to control his business and refuse to do business with those he disagrees with.”

It appears that the boss can get away with denying his services to those with whom he disagrees based on his “deeply held beliefs” that men and women NEED to be able to share a toilet. Not so much for those who are on the other side such debates. Do you remember Memories?


The Battle of Walkerton: Kevin O’Connor & the Defiant Survival of Memories Pizza

. . . People of conscience would do well to reflect on the attempted takedown of Memories Pizza. Crystal clearly told the reporter that Memories would never deny service to a gay couple who came in to eat. But in response to a pointed question, she did say, “If a gay couple came in and wanted us to provide pizzas for their wedding, we would have to say no.” As if people routinely call upon pizza joints to provide their wedding reception dinner. It was clearly a setup—a sting interview cavalierly crafted to get multiple page views; good-faith reporting be damned. At that, it was wildly successful, but it also roused an alarmingly malicious mob demanding obeisance or blood. . . .

Further reading from Salvo:

Intolerant Tolerance: The Myth of Moral Neutrality

. . . these advocates claim that their own position is morally neutral. It isn’t, and it really can’t be. But their objection to judgments like Pace’s reflects the assumption, held by many, that only their opponents are trying to “impose their morality” on society. In fact, it is in the nature of their own advocacy to do so. . . .

*Boss pic lifted from the Perez Hilton website.

Salvo Links 04.12.2016

Some articles that caught our eye recently:

When Pieties Collide
Feminism and multiculturalism in Western Europe
by Heather MacDonald for City Journal

The Faith of Christopher Hitchens
Contrarian to the end?
by Douglas Wilson for Books & Culture

What’s behind the demolition of conscience rights in Canada?
Autonomy, choice, and tolerance are being used to justify euthanasia but these grand principles don’t apply to opponents
by Margaret Somerville for Mercatornet

Schizophrenic About Science


I follow Scientific American on Facebook and they recently posted something that caught my eye. “There’s Still Time to Get Presidential Candidates to Focus on Science: The ScienceDebate organization is working hard to get science policy into the political conversation.” A fine sentiment. But the thing that irks me is the left’s insistence that they are the “Party of Science.” Comments such as these followed on the Facebook post:

“Has anyone foreseen the likely backfire from this with GOPs current record on science? ‘Focus’ for them will mean destroying it, not using it.”

“Unfortunately, time and time again the right has demonstrated their distain for education, science and facts!!”

I would like to humbly submit to you a sampling of articles from Salvo that counter this notion that those on the left are the righteous defenders of facts and science.


Schizophrenic About Science
The “Party of Science” Is Nothing of the Sort by Regis Nicoll

. . . These social constructions of “personhood” and “gender” reveal the intrinsic incompatibility of the left with modern science. In this regard, the left is epistemologically and ideologically postmodern. Science is based on the belief that objective truth exists and is discoverable through empirical observation and investigation. But despite its own dogmatism on certain matters, the left claims to be skeptical of truth and of people who claim to have it. . . .

Sci-Fact or Sci-Fi?
What We Won’t Learn from Hyped-Up Science News Headlines by Casey Luskin

. . . So why are such paltry and uncertain claims being hyped in the first place? Materialists are apparently desperate for such “good news” stories because they need them in order to convince their patrons, the public, to continue funding their work. The media willingly cooperates, printing stories that sound plausible but that are ultimately science fiction. The fact that materialist cultural elites are willing to hype such modest—and dubious—claims tells you everything you need to know about the state of the evidence. If they had something better, we’d surely know about it. . . .

Blinded by Science
Believe Science Has All the Answers? Evolutionary Biologist Austin Hughes Says, Open Your Eyes

. . . Science itself could disappear. I really believe that this is a possibility. There’s this ingrained belief in our culture that science will always progress, but we have no way of being sure that this will in fact happen. Civilizations collapse and disappear. Science is a unique phenomenon that really only appeared once in the history of the world—in Christian Europe. If its philosophical foundations are undercut, then it’s very possible that it will disappear. There’s also the danger that the misuse of science will become a tool for political tyranny. . . .

Can Science Explain “Origins”?
by Patrick Henry Reardon

. . . Let us instead bracket theology for the moment and look simply at Krauss’s neglect of logic. How is it, he asks, that we now have something? Well, says Krauss, there wasn’t always something. Until about 13.72 billion years ago, there really was nothing. (By the way, I love the scientific precision of that decimal, .72 billion. A lesser mind would simply have rounded it off to 14 billion.) Until then, nothing existed. Then—and rather suddenly, it seems—there was something. Well, okay, but how? . . .

Cooler Heads
A Closer Look at All the Factors & Views on Global Warming
by Regis Nicoll

. . . Every religion has its doctrines of Sin, Judgment, and Redemption. The current misanthropic strain of environmentalism, all the rage among cultural elites, is no exception. In this eco-religion, the Sin is man’s carbon footprint; the Judgment is the sizzling Eschaton of global warming; and Redemption can be obtained through carbon credits and population control. Pounding its pulpits, its prophets preach on the ecological Fall and the gospel of sustainability. One such prophet is Steven Schneider, who, early in the global warming debate, confessed: “To capture the public’s imagination . . . we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. . . . Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest.” . . .


Facts Evasion
When It Comes to Sex, the Left Hates Science by Hunter Baker

. . . In thinking about this public game of claiming to be the advocates of science against the knuckle-dragging illiterates who understand it not, I am often struck by the degree to which liberal materialists themselves are not scientific when it threatens their view of the good life. . . .

Failed Operations
Medical Malpractice in an Age of Gender Denial Disorder by Terrell Clemmons

. . . If enough of the professionals involved had been strictly pursuing medicine as the art and science of healing that medicine should be, the whole debacle would have been written off as a failed experiment. “We tried changing the body to fit the mind” they might have announced, “but found that changing the body did not solve patients’ problems.” Transsexual surgery would have gone the way of leeching and lobotomy, as it should have. . . .

The Illusionist
How Herbert Marcuse Convinced a Generation that Censorship Is Tolerance & Other Politically Correct Tricks by Robin Phillips

. . . Commenting on this new type of tolerance, Daniel Flynn wrote: “Tolerating what you like and censoring what you don’t like, of course, had a name before Marcuse came along. It was called intolerance. Intolerance had an unpopular ring to it, so Marcuse called it by its more popular antonym, tolerance. This word was often modified by liberating, discriminating, and true. Further corruption of language came via his criticism of practitioners of free speech as ‘intolerant.'” . . .


State Purposes
Utopian Creep & the Struggle for Human Rights & Freedom
by Terrell Clemmons

. . . Secularists who fancy twenty-first-century man as enlightened beyond hunter-gatherer savagery are hard-pressed to come up with an explanation for what Shin represents. But however they may try to explain him away, there he stands: evidence of contemporary man’s inhumanity toward his fellow man and a living result of utopian fantasies gone to seed. . . .

Unfashionable History
A Review of How the West Won: The Neglected Story of the Triumph of Modernity by Rodney Stark

. . . Americans are becoming increasingly ignorant of how the modern world came to be what it is, says Rodney Stark. A generation ago, most college curricula included a course in Western Civilization that covered Western achievements in art, music, literature, philosophy, and science. Today those courses have all but disappeared, on the spurious grounds that the West is but one of many civilizations and that it is ethnocentric and arrogant for Westerners to study it. So Stark is out to educate us, its beneficiaries, in the “remarkably unfashionable” story of our own heritage. . . .

School Deform
How Common Core Promotes Cultural Engineering by Killing the Imagination by Robin Phillips

. . . In his books Beyond Freedom and Dignity and Waldon Two, Skinner described what an ideal society would look like: it would be one in which all citizens, having recognized the terrible cost of freedom, voluntarily submitted to collectivist measures (including population control) for the greater good. Such a society could be produced with the right educational and environmental conditioning. . . .

If you appreciate what you read here and would like these articles in your mailbox, you should subscribe! We depend upon our readers to keep Salvo going. $19.99 for one year plus the Science & Faith issue.

Coming To A Preschool Near You?

by Michael Avramovich

The Montview Community Preschool and Kindergarten (“Montview”) in Denver, Colorado, is a parent cooperative preschool and kindergarten for children three years of age and older. The school advertises that its highly experienced staff is “committed to best practices and to excellence in early education,” and that the school is accredited through the National Association for the Education of Young Children, which the school administration considers the “gold standard” in early children education. Montview states that its goal is to provide an environment for experiential learning, including “developmentally appropriate play-based learning.” As a parent cooperative, there is significant parental participation as parents are considered “partners in joyful learning.” The school advertises that it uses “engaging materials” that invite children to explore and learn with their “heads, hearts, and hands.” It also seeks to foster new ways of thinking for their students. In an article posted on its website, Lance Rushton encourages parents, “Look for books that are very different from your own family and personal experience . . . . Pick books that focus on different family structures, belief systems, cultural values and understandings, social position, historical trauma or economic circumstances. Yes, all of these examples can be found in children’s literature.” He then goes on to suggest the following dialogue as an example:

Daughter: “Dad, why do those kids have two moms?”

Dad: “The two moms are the parents of Claudia and Enrique. Some families have a mom and a dad like you have, and some have two dads or two moms. Some kids have one parent, a mom or a dad. Families come together in many different ways for many different reasons that I don’t even know.

Daughter: “I don’t know of any families that don’t have a mom and a dad.

Dad: “Actually you do. Drew has two dads, and Sonia from your class last year, has two moms. Oh, and Daren and his mom, and grandma are his family!

Daughter, “hmm, I didn’t know that.”

Dad: “Yep. Sometimes it’s hard to know what other families are like or who is in them when you only see one adult come to pick them up. Right? But they are all families who love each other just like we do.

Recently, one of Montview’s four-year-old students was expelled after her mother questioned the administration’s controversial curriculum that openly promoted homosexual behavior and transgenderism in the classroom. The child’s mother wanted an opportunity to opt her daughter out of the classroom discussions focusing on sexuality, same-sex relations, and gender issues, believing that her four-year-old is far too young to participate in sex education and related topics at school. The mother told the Denver Post, “I think, at this age, they don’t know what bias is. They could have kids from Mars and they would still play with each other.” But the mother made the foolish mistake of thinking that it is her parental right to judge when, where, and how her daughter is exposed to sensitive issues. So how did this issue even come to mom’s attention? Interestingly, mom became concerned about the sexual indoctrination program at Montview when her daughter came home from school and expressed worry that her father might not like “girls” any more. After finding out more from her daughter, she met with the school principal, Linda Mars, over concerns about the books being read in class, including ones that told the stories about same-sex couples. According to a CBN News reports, “School officials . . . . explained the stories were part of the school’s anti-bias curriculum, and because the discussions are sprinkled through the day’s activities, [the administration] told her that opting out was not possible.” However, a mere two days later, the preschooler was kicked out of the school. The school’s letter handed to mom simply stated, “[The situation is] not a good fit,” and that it was her daughter’s last day at the school. So Montview apparently could not accommodate mom’s request to protect her child.

Principal Mars then wrote another letter to the Montview community about other concerns that were expressed over the choice of books being read by students and teachers in the classroom. In an attempt to avoid further problems, Principal Mars insisted that the preschoolers and kindergarteners must learn about diversity and tolerance during classroom instructional time, and that they must become familiar with all the different languages, skin colors, cultures, and family structures in American society. In contrast, the preschooler’s mom maintained that her daughter is immersed in a community that is diverse since she is being raised in a biracial family, where she is exposed to both Western and Moslem cultures on a daily basis.

Personally, I think that her “expulsion” is a blessing. Recently, the American College of Pediatricians (“ACP”) issued a statement entitled, “Gender ideology harms children,” available here http://www.acpeds.org/the-college-speaks/position-statements/gender-ideology-harms-children, in which they warned educators and lawmakers to resist embracing the LGBTQ+ agenda that encourages gender transitions among children. In its statement, the ACP said that the trend toward gender transitioning is tantamount to “child abuse,” and further noted, “The [ACP] urges educators and legislators to reject all policies that condition children to accept as normal a life of chemical and surgical impersonation of the opposite sex. Facts – not ideology – determine reality.” Indeed. Ironically, as a culture, we have fallen far in the 75 years since publication in 1941 of Robert McCloskey’s classic and immensely popular book for young children, Make Way for Ducklings. Who even knows if such a wholesome book is read today to the children at Montview? But what is happening at Montview is only the tip of an iceberg. A Queer Endeavor, an “initiative” started in the School of Education at the University of Colorado at Boulder, has helped train 2,500 Colorado teachers over the past three years. In the public preschools of Boulder, Colorado, all teachers were trained this year to integrate a broader type of diversity to include gender and sexual differences, and to have “conversations” with young children. Ultimately, I would encourage my readers to find out what your children and grandchildren are being taught in their preschools and kindergarten. You might just be as surprised as was the mother of this four-year-old little girl. Is it really any wonder that millions of children are being homeschooled in the United States?

Stanford’s Demands

Nice work here from The Stanford Review on this April 1, 2016. We at Salvo also believe you’ve got to have a sense of humor about these things.

• • •
Stanford University has repeatedly failed to address systematic issues on campus. We, the Students of the Stanford Review, have seen our voices silenced, our rights trampled, and our experiences ignored. Not once has an administrator inquired as to the relative health of our feelings – the system is broken! We, the Students of the Stanford Review, DEMAND change.

  1. WE DEMAND that Stanford builds a wall around El Centro Chicano, and makes MEChA pay for it.
  2. WE DEMAND that Stanford expels Panda Express from campus, since its food is culturally appropriative, and celebrates the harvesting of the endangered panda bear.
  3. WE DEMAND that Stanford renames White Plaza to Black Plaza. Naming a central plaza after a race is hateful.
  4. WE DEMAND that Stanford recognizes that half-lives matter, and establishes a committee to fund the Chemistry and Physics Departments accordingly.
  5. WE DEMAND that Stanford’s Classics Department end its disgusting and exploitative profiteering off the lived experiences of ancient Greeks and Romans.
  6. WE DEMAND that swimming pools be abolished at Stanford, since their blueness shows implicit support for the Israeli flag, further dehumanizing the Palestinian people.
  7. We DEMAND that Stanford ends its use of European languages, since they are inherently colonialist. We recommend Xhosa, Zulu, and interpretive dance as alternatives for person-to-person communication.
  8. WE DEMAND that Stanford’s Applied Quantitative Reasoning requirement not be fulfilled by cis-linear algebra. The experiences of marginalized matrices have been ignored for too long.
  9. WE DEMAND the banning of the Stanford Federal Credit Union from campus, since all debt is alienating and shackles people to the capitalist machine. Also, people use their SFCU debit cards to purchase food from the aforementioned, oppressive Panda Express.
  10. WE DEMAND that Hoover Tower be removed, since its phallic symbolism is not countered by a suitably feminist building on campus.
  11. WE DEMAND that the Math Department immediately cease reducing fractions, each having their own unique identities and experiences, to their lowest common denominators.
  12. WE DEMAND that Stanford base grades only on attendance records in class, since all other measures are discriminatory, as SAL already nobly recognizes.
  13. WE DEMAND that Stanford remove the clearly ageist language in “Old” Union. From now on, the Review will meet in Union 215 on Monday nights.
  14. WE DEMAND that Stanford bans hard alcohol in dorms.
  15. WE DEMAND that the Administration immediately accepts the aforementioned demands, and that a statement of acceptance, a timetable of implementation for each demand, and an administrative point person for each demand be presented to the Review at 3 PM on Friday April 8, in open forum at Buffalo Wild Wings, San Jose.