Sofia Jirau

Pure Good can exist in theory, and does exist in practice; pure Evil can't, and doesn't. This is no dogmatic assertion, but a logically self-evident statement. Think it through: what do the words mean? They're harder to define than you might think, but Good must mean something like seeking, or at least desiring, the maximum happiness and fulfillment for all people, including oneself. Evil, then, presumably means seeking and desiring the minimum happiness and fulfillment (i.e., the maximum suffering) for all people. But wait a minute--does that include oneself? If you seek and desire the suffering of every other person, then achieving those goals would by definition bring you happiness and fulfillment--which means that, if only to the extent of a single person, your goals are aligned with those of Good. So once again we see that Evil is ultimately self-defeating.

We tend to envision Good and Evil horizontally, as it were, like the circles of a Venn diagram: there’s some overlap, a sort of grey zone, but Good is pure white and Evil pure black. As we've just seen, however, this is nonsense. A better image is a vertical one--not two circles but a single cone, standing on its tip. At the top of the cone, its widest point, are all the colors of the rainbow, joyful and resplendent. As you go further down and the cone narrows, the colors become drab, drabber--brown and grey and puce. At the bottommost point, the cone is still a circle--thus, in a sense, still infinite--but the most cramped and squalid infinity imaginable, the black of old dried vomit stains, a curled-up maggot stuck in the drain of a latrine. Beyond the top of the cone, all colors burst into radiant white, spreading out forever to the heavens; beyond the bottom is a lone point, infinitely dense, made of nothing more than ancient, ever-reeking filth.

Which brings us to Victoria's Secret. The lingerie juggernaut has (literally) unveiled their first model with Down's Syndrome: Sofia Jirau, innocent spearhead in the next phase of female degradation. Let's not even wade into the issue of what constitutes informed consent; the relevant point is that the self-gnawing serpent of Leftist ideology has once again betrayed the dignity of womanhood under the guise of advancing that very dignity.

Opposites often look identical on the surface. A leper and an emperor are both outside the law, but for antithetical reasons. All rational thought is predicated on a few basic axioms, beginning with the ultimate truth that A is A (a literal paraphrase of the Name of God, I Am Who Am)--and these primary axioms cannot, themselves, be defended by rational thought. They can't be deduced from logic, because they are themselves the foundation of logic. One of these axioms is the dignity of the human person: a super-rational conviction, founded in a moral and spiritual certitude. In a well-ordered soul, that moral certitude proceeds into the mind as a rational premise for further reasoning--and that reasoning, in turn, proceeds into the emotions as a visceral instinct. Now, a soul without a properly formed conscience (and please observe the root meaning of that word: with knowledge) may very well possess a sub-rational, instinctive reverence for the dignity of the human person. But, because that reverence is founded on nothing, it cannot withstand the day-to-day assaults of conflicting emotional imperatives. Even the strongest emotion--even the strongest rational premise!--cannot ultimately stand without being grounded in a moral and spiritual certitude, but will inevitably--inevitably--contradict itself. It has no "A is A." This is why, for instance, the Left is forced to praise Fallon Fox, the (male) mixed martial arts fighter who "switched genders" and went on to use his naturally superior upper body strength to pummel women in the ring.

In his leprous apotheosis of despair, Ivan Karamazov said brilliantly, "If there is no immortality, then everything is lawful." His underlying (and self-evident) error was, of course, the undefended assumption that there is indeed no immortality; but, correctly understood as a counter-factual hypothesis, his statement is absolutely true. If everything disappeared into nothingness, then nothing would matter. Nothing could matter. This is why, in the end, it grows ever clearer that an atheist can't be a good citizen. Atheists, ungrounded in anything, can only bobble and sink to the muddled conviction that allowing a woman with Down's Syndrome to parade herself essentially naked before the male gaze is equivalent to a triumph of women's rights.