W W W W  World Wide Web Witness Inc.  Home Page   Contents Page for Volume  What is New




The Generation Without Understanding

The Acronym for Acronymics

News 309, Channel 9, April 22, 2004

BBC News, May 31, 2003


                               THE GLORY OF VAINGLORY

What is the meaning ? Why am I here ? Oh you see, statistics show that 20% of people think this, and 35% think that, while 15% do not think, and 20% do not think that they should think, and 10% blink at the whole idea of thinking, and don't know what to think.

While there is perhaps a hint of caricature in this imaginary rendering, there is more than a touch of truth. Statistics instead of spirituality, surveys instead of God (cf. News 52).

You find man so interested in his own psychological navel that even Buddha might have felt impressed. Sometimes looking up, he meets Simon Stats, and Tom Simple, and not far behind, Felix Fox, who wishes to exploit the other two, then there is Tim Toad, who boasts a very fine collection of scalps, for he prefers to display his results, which in turn, Simon Stats uses for his own particular line of business.

Even the European Union seems ready to drop into the pit of purposeless pursuits, immeasurable miasmas and futile fogs. What are they like ? It is like some swimmers, lost in the oceans of time, forsaken by the empyrean of space, moving in the oceanic climes. Misfits for mists, they are to be seen grabbing now this boat that passes, and finding the occupants dead, sitting in it, then using its hooks to climb into a liner, where some stay, being superficially sated; or if not, then climbing into a fishing vessel, and finding it fishy, leaving it and its work; or simply studying the stars, without comprehension, as if their courses were dinner dishes.

Lost, they struggle; but first they struggle to be lost. It is not necessary to swim without purpose in the seas, hoping, always hoping that something will arise. This is the generation of displaced persons, who appear increasingly to be the majority.

But the European Union ? Is it not just a touch remarkable that BBC News, May 31, 2003 reported that none less than Giscard d'Etaing, who headed the EU body which drew up the DRAFT CONSTITUTION for nothing less potent than EUROPE, considered this issue of understanding in his own way, and left such an abyss of dissimulation in terms of doctrine that mists might rejoice at their own clarity.

We do not, he indicated, mention Christianity (in the Constitution for Europe) for fear of offending other religions.

What then DID the draft at this time in view, have to say about the topic of religion ? How did it relate to the whole issue of truth ? of ultimacies ? of meaning!

There is, BBC News reports, mention of "spiritual impulse". What a glorious piece of vainglory is this! "Spiritual impulse" ! how existential in feel, how dynamic in gesture, how void in signification. Impulse ? A sudden, possibly unmeditated and certainly unpre-meditated movement of will or thought or both, leading to certain action. So at the spiritual level there is a certain motion, lacking in due reflection, at the spiritual level, and this is the case for Europe! This is its spiritual physiognomy ? Here lies its head on the North of Mediterranean segment of this earth, sleeping in the vacuity of making courtesy more impelling than actuality, and courtesy to whom ? Certainly not to God.

How vast is its heritage, and how enormous its looting of wisdom, that it should gain such eminence. What heritage, that it should have such an issuance!

But there is more of this gobbledy-gook  and reference to the continent's Greco-Roman and Enlightenment heritage. It is interesting that it is not Graeco- but then perhaps we are moving with the times ? But where! Now we find this reference suggests Zeus (Greek) and Jupiter (Roman), and Romulus and Remus, and the wolf so kind to their budding lives, Sparta and Athens and there so diversified concepts of discipline and wisdom, which with Athens led as in Acts 17, to such a disqualification through sheer quality, that an unknown god was thought fitting to be recognised, while they disputed daily.

The quality of listless reporting and dissident record, and idle rather than idyllic ramblings, makes a certain sort of inheritance, certainly.

It brings to mind other dissensions:  Brutus' nice thought for the State and less so for Caesar, and his brotherly shove of the dagger, and law, Roman law, and roads and architecture and running Europe with administration and efficiency, and having a horse as a god in the Senate, and then the Emperor as a god, then killing those who did not see the point, with another point, that of the sword, unless of course it took the Greco-Roman fancy (now become Roman) to cover the disobedient with tar, and turn them in the stadium, into burning sources of light. Not much light in that!

Enlightenment ? That vast movement to human centrality which brought on the unparalleled darkness of sophisticated oblivion reaching to the heights of internecine philosophies, interested in throwing off Roman Catholic (really Romanist) irons, admittedly galling and appalling, and just being ourselves, glorious, wonderful MAN! Or, if you want to include more gender, then perhaps WOE-MAN, with no reflection on women, but on the race!

The human race has been lost (cf. SMR Ch. 3, pp. 422Eff.), and in particular its youth (News 51, 19), for long (cf. Gracious Goodness ... Ch. 6); but its lostness has become both more poignant and more rambunctious of late. It rejoices in it, gives it new cards, for identity, new phrasings, and makes it altogether such a  glorious thing that one must surely die for it, as some Islamic personnel in their own case,  routinely do, for good measure taking some others with them on their mortal spree, sometimes quite explicitly doing so with glee, on the mistaken understanding that this will bring them to some kind of paradise, suitably equipped in many concepts, for pleasure, and then more of the same, on a rather individualistically gratifying sort of schedule (cf. More Marvels ... Ch. 4, Lord of Life ... Ch. 8, Red Alert ... Ch. 6).

Others prefer to kill for racial autonomy, social superiority, territorial domination, ideological suppression and kindred wonders.

Thus does the lostness of the human race, like so many sprinters already disqualified but continuing with new endorsements and phrasings nonetheless, become cumulatively and increasingly catastrophic (cf.  SMR pp. 509, 1008-1111).

Human racism is trying hard, but wholly vainly, to make up for the fact that tying bows and giving parchments to people does not really confine them to the statements or frills, or make them equivalent. Man's assessment of man is like an instrument calibrating itself with itself, comparatively meaningless. However it follows necessarily from his refusal the calibration comments from his Maker. It is a very lost thing to lack your maker, and it leads to all sorts of questions of meaning, for what is the meaning of a poem, when the author is excluded, or of a will when the engenderer is dismissed! Man asks for his antinomies by his antithetical appreciation of mindless autonomy (cf. Predestination and Freewill Section   1).



More than such little self-willed and self-drilled sanctions are needed for understanding! Alas lack of understanding seems to have become a new glory, like a tramp glorying in the absence of funds. Certainly, plutocracy has nothing to recommend it, but neither has nebulosity merit accolades.

Let us ponder the situation as presented a decade or so ago from SMR from the latter reference above, with the red print for emphasis on our current point.

As always, indeed, you cannot invent morality from description, obligation from actuality or rational results from formal ignorance used as a criterion; far less when that criterion is shamelessly abused at the outset, by being stated in such general terms that it legislates for the whole area saying ... 'no one knows'!

How knowledgeable is this ignorance; how declarative this dumbness; how determinative is this agnosticism; how complete the knowledge that allows such determinations to be stated in advance of all enquiry, contrary to all reason, with a form of self-contradiction so total and manifold in kind that the unknowable has become a law, the law a lord, and the whole a cultural command! And what are these commands? Never state a religion is the truth; this is the first and the great commandment; and this religion which says so, it states that this is the truth by a glorious exception which feels at home in the imposture, because it is already dashed on the rocks of unreason. This it does by making any assertion concerning reality on a base which omits both reality as a knowable person, and means of access if it were.

Follies! Ignoring the evidence, the necessities of logic and the fulfilments of every particle of God's word as it requires history to act, this tedious spiritual Aids virus that is so prolific in Australia - but not here alone - is guilty of the woe of the ultimate racism. It elects the human race as its own arrogant assertion, its crux and centre, and recklessly disparages what reason attests, what deity declares: any command, any truth, any peace, any power or anything indeed, not sanctioned by this most perfect of races, in whom one may, it is made to seem, safely put one's trust. Meanwhile it intones the 'truth' that there is no truth, yet observes the canon of the creed, that no one can be wrong in religion; except of course those who say that others are wrong, or something is wrong. And how is this known ? ah, by 'revelation' for how else, and the revelation ? from a source conscientiously denied objective existence; for IF it were to be 'allowed'... that! who knows into what extremities this nation might fall!

And that ? to sell the truth for convenience, to sacrifice reason for survival, how exalted it is! To tell the 'truth' that there is no truth in the process, is it not to be the saviour of the nation! How exalted are its morals, how glorious is its vision, how victorious its living under such preaching, such political preaching. Indeed, in such a fantasy world, even facts can become the enemy of this civic righteousness! Illusion is chief and continuance is king! (Cf. pp. 1064-1072 infra.)

Alas, God is not mocked; and this is but idle mockery! He has spoken His answer.

This irrational, self-contradictory call to affirm where affirmation is denied, to know where ignorance rules, and to possess the knowledge of the holy while insisting all such knowledge not only lacks, but is impossible: it is for this liberty from logic and lordly self-assertion in a vacuum, that the nation is to be directed to serve ?

For the ultimate racism, the new political international racism, this human racism, this creed is equal in the frenzy of unreason to any other spiritual squalor invented by man. Its practical effects, as we see it in action, are the same denial to liberty as to logic; lest, you see, anything be said which awakes from sleep.

Thus with this tremendous enlightenment from the throes of anti-Christian persecutions by those using the name of Christ, and from ignorance, man has turned to the apotheosis of ignorance, and proclaims in the name of the race, that wholly self-contradictory assurance of his nescience. There is no science like nescience, and no knowledge like ignorance, and no pulpit so proclaimed as that of the race without a moor, without an oar, glorying in its own fragility, arrogating truth in the midst of denying it, and becoming so guilty of every illogical fraud and every useless vacillation, that now phrases sum up its place, as in Giscard's word above.

Now vacuity is in its glory.

Why it does not even MENTION what it means, the religious dimension for the content of the Constitution, so that nobody will feel bad. How wonderful! and to what eminence has this great race come! It is small wonder that it is becoming clear even where dark glasses are customarily worn, that the race is so lost that it does not even know what it is, and is satisfied with phrases of unparalleled ambiguity, to define its lost self.



Of course, this is the generation without understanding, as to trend. It seems to love to understand that it does not understand, and to voice the view with ardour that this is very understandable. Has it not seen the suffering of its great-grand-fathers and grandfathers, its fathers in Boer War, and WW I, and WW II, and in the Cold War, the Korean War, the Gulf War, the engulfing Second Gulf War, in the maelstrom inherited in the place of Christ's crucifixion, Jerusalem;  and has it not experienced local outrages and moral outages in Yugoslavia that was, but is no more, in Eastern Europe (shiver here, and not without reason at the politesse of letting Russia surge in while Montgomery waited, under duress, in the wings lest he get there first), in China with the iron ring on the ruling finger for the people of course, oh yes, always for the people, whoever they are.

So likewise has it been in Communist USSR, perhaps the most malodorous of all misunderstandings, that man is meat for the wolves, and the wolves are his deliverers!

How then COULD they be expected to understand ? Is not man about to meddle with destiny, take 'evolutionism' its god, by the scruff of the neck and start dictating the way it should go, all of course without understanding of life, facing the evidential realities, either biological or spiritual; and with the existential will that glories in its subversive cleverness, while accomplishing as always, precisely nothing. That is to say, nothing of much purpose, for if this be called accomplishment, yes it crashes, like crazed youth in sports cars, into poles for light, into other cars for death, mistaking mischief for life.

This lack of understanding is the often unspoken but intimated plea. It mocks at truth and even essays to become it!

Why does not a young lady of 16 all but break the heart of her parents by doing a couple of things, with help from that glorious sociology which makes of mankind, here at last, such a supra-human thing! On Channel 9, we have heard of the case, and it is important, not to judge the particular case, but the criteria which enable it, governmentally. Thus, beyond the appalling and in a new category of horror entirely, not far from that of the USSR in its most flamboyant and flummery newspeak, is the datum that the government does a few things to help here, when a young person thinks of leaving home and adventuring out with a man, a little older.

First, helpfully a teacher tells her about her RIGHTS!

How important are these, conferred by something probably called society, whoever that is, by in any case "the wider community at large" as one goobledy-gook has it (courtesy of a Federal Government MINISTER! no less, in explaining how such things can be, and will continue to be)! Thus may such a young person lean back when old enough,  that is when 16, ah glorious age of wisdom and power, and find she can legally leave home and pursue a different style of life altogether.

But what if they want her back! GONE! oh parents, begone. But what if the same parents REALLY think it is too soon to adventure with 16 years of life to hand, just yet ? Then THE LAW will prevent you, O parental objects, from having any power. You could be PROSECUTED, take care, beware of the green-eyed dragon, and shiver in your beds, little children, lest you arouse THE STATE*1!  Such was the appalling news on the TV session, graced by a Federal Minister, at one stage.

Who or what is the State ? It is the GOVERNMENT. But for what purpose does it govern ? To  become a nineteenth man in the team, to replace God ? To erupt into the disruption of families ? To divorce children from parents ? to inculcate a new religion, that neither morals nor ethics nor family can touch one thing, the WILL of the giant corporation in Canberra ?

But who gave it authority to remould man in its nebulous image ? It did. Why is it allowed to act in this pseudo-divine manner ? It tells us, via a Minister. Somehow they have divined it, they get a whiff of the thing and instantly analyse it. What thing ? Why that 'wider community at large' ? Ought it to be at large if it seeks such things; but ought we to blame it when so far it is only a phrase! Does a phrase then legislate, and do all the parliamentarians shiver at the very thought of insulting a phrase, or even being INSULATED from it ? Is it that they fear to be isolated if insulated, and thus throw off their caps and cry, Rule Community, Community rules the Slaves!

Ah, but it is democracy, and we RULE! But is democracy so outspoken against families and parents and in favour of ignorance ? IS there some REFERENDUM to establish such god-like bliss for this object called the community ? Is it a con word for disunity ? or is there evidence that it hates moral leadership, and insists on being a statistical assassin, without figures however, to be appealed to for grants of such graces as this ?

Ah sweet mystery of community, that to you is such power given, when in the past, mere nations were uprooted for their shamelessness, heartlessness and pride! (cf. The Pitter-Patter of Prophetic Feet Ch. 4). Who is this alleged 'community' in its religious clangours, political clashes, ideological mutations, endless disputations ? Why does it have such power, that even the form of truth is its target and morals lie dead before its potent sword!

It is just humanism, as a philosophy, clamouring for expression. If the young are not fully mentally or personally formed at 16 (and studies show developments for years after this as noted on this site previously, but who needs studies who has taught, that 16 is far from maturity!), then ah!  that sweet mystery of self, of autonomy, of the occasions of mind, of a body all but fully there, mainly minus experience, of sagacity without much opportunity to develop, moderation with small access to heart: this is to be god! More precisely, it is to be succoured and blessed, helped and enabled by the government, and the phrase.

IT will rule by proxy, evidently through the government. Touch it and you touch me! says the government. That sounds nice, really, if it meant that someone seeking to exploit youth's youthfulness would be prevented; but it does not appear to mean this, or even that the government would help prevent immaturity from flowering too soon, as if it should drop its ill-formed fruit, whatever good intentions might be present with two young lovers.

Lovers ? Is love then the emblem ? Is romance love ? Is what OFTEN is departed in months, to become the criterion of 70 years of life ? Is it all to be judged by current immature feelings ? Is life to be captive and is community to be slandered by being told it sanctioned all of this ?

This is not to say that no one so young COULD be happy, COULD develop, if leaving home for some sort of togetherness at 16. It IS to say that for a government to interfere so that the parents CANNOT play their part, when the young creation being educated decides at that age to depart, is quite manifestly to play God, and God is not so playful, after all, with interpreters who ignore His speech.






Constructed with WORDS, engineered with ORDERS in his DNA, man is equipped no less with WORDS from the same institutive source, and these are clear (cf. Spiritual Refreshings Ch. 16, SMR Ch. 1). Our Maker has not left us without a witness, and there is nothing to equal the validity, the veracity and the virtue of the Bible (cf. Barbs, Arrows and Balms   6, TMR Ch. 5, SMR Chs. 5, 8-9), either in principle or in practice. WHO gave community this right ? WHO ascribed to mortal man, born a babe and carried witless to the grace, such wisdom! By what authority does man drive man by his own hand, as if some pagan god on some pagan chariot, slaughtering the young thrown before its hideous wheels!

But no! as in Europe, so here, there is that glorious ambiguity, that marvellous ignorance, that profundity of non-comprehension, that highway of the illicit, that stunned anti-significance which KNOWS that there is no knowledge, which affirms as true that there is no truth, at least officially, and finds it CONVENIENT NOT TO USE THE TERM, Christianity, even when it is thought. What would the others say! says one when he statedly feels it obvious that this is the way. We are not here to deal with religion! says another, but then, why make one in the process! Do you not deal with what you create, impose and apply! Is the final say on morality and truth to come from what designs to avoid it ? Is the dust in a vacuum to become crowned!

So does Europe find some parallel in this country, not surprising since Great Britain, now a part of it to a very large extent (with a Blair-run referendum coming up in essence to determine whether the Constitution of Europe will do, or perhaps to reflect WHAT it would do!) was a major parent to this land. Indeed, it largely founded the civilisation here to be found, imparting much of its rules, laws, ways and historic affirmations!

Europe meanwhile is busily finding its new Constitution which may show how much that is divine is to be ostensibly imported; and soon Australia may be doing much the same in its new constitution, perhaps, if the atheist becomes PM, one to reflect what the election of such a politician might imply!

When government is roads, buildings, finance and defence, order and so forth, it is one thing; when morals and 16, and sociology and psychology, and education in infamous imaginations becomes law (cf. TMR Ch. 8), it is however apparent that with the liberty, the licence and the authority, there is now an increasing verbal facility though not actual ability to play GOD! Here, oh nation is your understanding, here are your morals, here is your power, here is your direction, here are your values, o nation! (the little 'o' is to reflect that it is a little nation). How glorious the pageantry, already sounding rather like a trial run for Revelation 13:4-15, and such may come not distantly to this land, except it repent of its ways.

Is this what it wants ? Are alternatives looking so much better ? If they do not soon amend their ways, partisan preference may replace principial reality, so that the ship founders on rocks decreed not to be there, by the nautical tracers of such things, who refer to such matters as too deep, merely going ahead anyway and declaring what it is thought, is thought!

Many brave men lie asleep in the deep, so beware, so beware! So says the old song, and it is still fresh and new. WHY are they so asleep ? It is because in many cases their ships were LOST, and the masters did not KNOW where they were. In other cases, they did not KNOW what lay beneath. Again, it might be because the travelling medium, the ship was inadequately constructed, or because there was mutiny or war on board.

We have it all, not just part of it. It is all here. The ship of State (like the religious fleet in large measure cf. Repent or Perish Ch. 5) is playing the ignoramus, in that incredibly impetuous - 'impulse' was that the word ? with such gusto that any rock can strike, while any rebellion can be sanctified and installed on the deck and called 'good', and any breach can occur. In the mists of oblivion, there are no limits to the wreckages to come. The deep is better investigated, not, as one health professional of my acquaintance once put it, occasionally looked at. Imagine occasionally looking at the ocean floor! occasionally considering its currents, its nature, while you sail, or considering which charts to use! The deep realities of life are what it is all about, and not to know what you are about is to be lost, and when you are lost, almost anything happens with that glorious exuberance which can come to the hapless.

There is of course no need to be hapless, ignorant, or putatively so, or even operationally so, in order that the wonder of the times, the 'community' may rule - especially the 'broader' version, which is perhaps so broad as to be in danger of death through bowel strangulation.  Forgetting God, those who rule begin to act like it, and the community, the people, if not directly, then by imputation from their rulers, with whatever nonsensical imagination, are the nominal authors of this confusion and corruption. By a combination of hands-off people, this is too important! and hands-on government, this is important!  we reach a strange ventriloquism, where the doll can say anything put into its mouth.

What a dictatorship of the doll is this! Poor doll, it is all dolled up to be duped!



There is no need for such a credo. We looked at something of this in Lead us Not into Educational Temptation Chs. 9-11.  It is filled with antinomies, unlike the biblical case with answers all (cf. SMR |
Ch. 5), and adds its august sovereign word to which the world responds, not in allegiance, but in its history to the last point of prediction. It is sick, and its prognosis is foul, and coming true at a fast clip daily (cf. Answers to Questions Ch. 5). Truth is found where it lives, in the Founder of the temporary, man, and the Creator of the chains of causality (cf. Causes), which some prefer to wear as chains, instead of being human and using the platform of the universe intelligently.

Obsessed with their platform, like an opera singer worshipping the recording apparatus, the audience or the stage, it continues en bloc awry, astray and in culminating conundrums. God however has provided for a life of a wholly disparate kind, one spiritually in harmony with its Maker. Reality ? It is not to be ignored for ANY reason, and if it is, it judges. Reality is not shelvable, like some maiden lady in the eyes of her non-suitors (she may prefer being single of course, but some wolves may prefer better endued ladies, with more funds or profile). If you ignore it, it does not ignore you.

Shutting the eyes may help little children at bed-time, when spooks are about, and daddy is too, but it is not fitting for the race. It merely increases, if it were possible, its lostness.

This calumny on God, that He is ignored and cultural declivities are enthroned, complete with phraseologies, becomes one of the culminations of mankind, the last darkness of the Enlightenment, and the last impulse of the disenfranchised, who simply PREFER darkness to light (John 3:19).

In the midst of this fabulous fiasco, it is time for leader and led alike to find the Good Shepherd, the God of Creation (cf. Wake Up World! Your Creator is Coming Chs. 4-6), and reverting to land, make sure it is rock solid, in fact, come to the Rock which is never rocked, and to the King whose crown was thorns, whose life is love, whose word is truth; and then, pardoned, to find in Him the map, the marvel, the power, the peace, the joy and the direction needed. Intelligence is not to ignore reality; and folly is not brilliant because it is culturally captured, if not captivated. It is time to assess; to realise the wretchedness of playing the fool, with pomp and ceremony, or law and order, or any other governmental gyration, and to return to the King of the Kingdom of Heaven, a holy haven; and not to the vomit of ages ... the impulse of man!




The political spokesperson, those discussing it or both, declared that if they are old enough to have sexual relations, then they are old enough to leave home. This, presented in the light of justification of some kind, is a profound confusion.

WHO SAYS whether they are young enough to have sexual relationships ? IF the law PERMITS it,
does this make it right ? If you do not break any assigned traffic law, does this make it right to drive over a cliff ? The law of a democracy  is NOT conceived as a conduct approval machine to designate life, but a source of rules and regulations. By BEING a democracy, a body politic allows that another government may arise to do something grossly different, within the Constitution; or if this be changed, within that one!

Thus IF the State comes into some field, to prohibit something, this does not make it RIGHT to keep within these guidelines, merely punishable if you do not! If government desires to make certain things political breaches, that is its affair; but NO ONE, repeat no one is giving them in a democracy the power to invent a new system of morals complete with creed, for the simple reason they are not elected to do that.

If in some case, they are involved within such a field to some extent, then this does not make it right to follow it, merely punishable if you do not. It is an opinion, nothing more, with the additional point that if you breach this particular one, you may suffer.

If then you keep within the opinion, are you RIGHT ? Is it moral ? Of course not, since there is no necessary analysis and education, training and power, or even evidence of thought sufficient to establish such a thing when a body VOTES, per se!

Thus to consider that NOT having sexual relations before 16 years of age becomes a thing that is RIGHT, so that when this advanced approach to maturity is actually reached, you may without legal penalty do so, is far removed from the concept that this is inherently, morally, personally, psychologically RIGHT. Hence it CANNOT logically be used as a basis for the view that SINCE it can be done, such juvenile sexual relations, within the law, then other things comparable must be RIGHT within the law; so that the law must at once provide for this too.

In the case in point, if some body decides not to prosecute people provided they wait till 16 to have certain sexual relationships, this in no way has a moral attribute to make comparable things right. If to protect exploitation of the young, government draws a line intended to exclude gross violation and preying on the young, this does not mean, then, that it makes it right to include pseudo-marital relationships at that age. If the first rule is anti-exploitation of the immature, then the second would become enlarged aid to permit it, scarcely comparable at all! In the space of a day, when it is wrong to have such relationships at all, it becomes right to have them authoritarianly imposed on parents, if their children have a yen for such a thing.

The steps are


1) to allow it as legal, 


2) to allow it to be supplemented by leaving home for a nest in marital quest,
or otherwise as the case may be,


3) to impose liberty for such a step,  as one exclusive of parental involvement
if this be not desired by the young,  and


4) to breach family relationships by law to secure this most radical and multi-step change.
From a prohibition, we have a multi-stage disruptive endorsement.

So does presumption become something exceedingly difficult to distinguish from arrogance, and what is meant to protect, an agency for increasing the vulnerability of those who, being immature, can strongly and suddenly, indeed assist them in peremptory manner  to be their own hangmen, or if you wish, hangwomen, though the latter term seems a trifle indelicate.

It is nothing relevant to the point, to ask how many such early relationships mature into something good.

It is a question rather of whether the State has a NEED to intervene to help 16 year olds leave home, and at the same time by legal penalty threatened, to impede the parents who have poured perhaps money and time and love into the process of bringing those young safely to maturity, for one simple reason.

And this ?

It is supposedly because that same State sought to protect the youngsters when they were even younger, from exploitation. To hinder danger is one thing; radicallyl to augment it is another. To use the first to provide for the second would appear rather an advance on the Mad Hatter's Tea Party.

Such things obviously assist the world to come to the brink of that judgment which also is multi-stage in preparation, but which has given to man two millenia to prepare. God is far more merciful than man, and it is this which is one of His most delicious qualities. Humanism is bankrupt, in ignorance worshipping it knows not what, and following the unknowable prescriptions with acumen, like a speed-car buff, so intent on velocity that the question of direction is omitted. The impending crash is predictable.