Liberals
70MORAL RELATIVISM
To understand Liberals, one must understand Moral Relativism. Moral Relativism is the belief that no objective truth—no universal standard—exists in morals or ethics. It is critical to comprehend Moral Relativism if one wishes to grasp the ideology of Liberals.
Virtually all Atheists are Liberals. The belief that there is no concrete right or wrong, no meaning or purpose to human life—and no Transcendence—is the foundation of Moral Relativism and the ideology of Liberals. This worldview ultimately leads to Moral Anarchy, as man becomes disconnected from his history and sense of eternity.
DECONSTRUCTION
To justify Moral Relativism, Liberals must use the hammer of Deconstruction. Deconstruction means to smash the impartial Rule of Law, traditional values, and metanarratives. Deconstruction is used to destroy the orthodoxies, traditions, customs, and conventions that represent the American Way.
From this Deconstruction comes Identity Politics, Multiculturalism, and Political Correctness. The resulting synthesis is a drive for power by any means necessary, particularly through bypassing Democracy or Representative Government, wielding power through the courts, bureaucracies, NGOs, and appointed officials.
ANTI AMERICAN
Liberals are Anti American in the sense that they reject the belief systems that made America the greatest nation on earth. Liberals are Anti American in that they are relentlessly critical toward America, its history, its Flag, its Military, and its Patriotism. Liberals believe America is racist, oppressive, imperialistic, and responsible for much of the evils in the world. Liberals are Anti American.
LIBERALS
To Liberals, Marriage is focused on sexual companionship rather than a lifelong commitment to rear the next generation in a traditional family setting. Liberals have successfully pushed for societal acceptance of easy divorce, the removal of father from the family, cohabitation, illegitimacy, pornography, and homosexuality—all in the name of Deconstruction.
The favorite word of Liberals is Tolerance, but Liberals are totally intolerant of those who do not share their views, especially people who believe in the Judeo-Christian values that have formed the foundations of Western Civilization. This is Liberal Fascism.
Liberal Fascism is an ideology that wishes to use the power of the federal government to force people to conform to the ideals of Liberals. Liberal Fascism seeks to implement indoctrination of their Socialist Beliefs through the schools, universities, and main stream media. Liberal Fascism has as its chief aim a fundamental transformation of America into a totalitarian nation—a nation in which the government is in total control of people's property, earnings, actions, speech, and even their thoughts.
LIBERAL FASCISM
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is the bulldog of Liberal Fascism. This organization is incessant in their war against God and the American Way. The ACLU is decidedly Anti American; their focus is on pushing for Deconstruction, Moral Relativism, and Socialist Beliefs. It has filed thousands of lawsuits in opposition to any reference to God in the public life of our Nation.
SOCIALIST BELIEFS
Liberals hold dear to Socialist Beliefs. They believe in "leveling" society by creating equal outcomes for all people, regardless of their contribution to the commonweal.
While it is impossible to make a drunken bum into a CEO of a Fortune 500 company; it is possible to make the CEO into a drunken bum. Liberals, with their Socialist Beliefs, want the State to fix prices and wages through Central Planning, and if possible to take ownership of the businesses in America.
Liberals strongly believe that the earnings of those who achieve in society should be confiscated (theft by government) and given to those who do not. Liberals have taken the Christian concept of Charity and used it to make everyone a ward of the State because of their Socialist Beliefs.
INDOCTRINATION
To accomplish the Deconstruction of American Society, Indoctrination must be used against the citizenry. By taking control of the Teachers Unions, Liberals have radically altered public school curriculums, in particular the complete revision of American History.
By infiltrating the Universities, Liberals with Anti American Socialist Beliefs have destroyed the Educational Canon of Western Civilization that bound generations of American college graduates together; and replaced it with Indoctrination through transgender studies, diversity classes, identity politics and sensitivity training.
Liberals control the Main Stream Media, which they use to propagandize the news for the purpose of indoctrination of the masses on a daily basis into their gospel of Anti American Socialist Beliefs and Moral Relativism.
The more recent innovations of Liberals include "mandatory volunteering" in community activist organizations, which naturally require indoctrination into "right-thinking" and learning to avoid "hate speech;" indoctrination into Anti American Moral Relativism and Socialist Beliefs. Now Liberals intend to take control of government student loan programs to ensure that these loans only go to those whose views are approved of by Liberals, and only for attendance to colleges that teach the "Politically Correct" curriculum.
All of this is to be reinforced by Liberals through "Hate Crime" legislation, e.g., that to murder a man pretending to be a woman is an act of Hate, but apparently to murder an old lady for her jewelry is an act of Love.
LIBERAL FASCISM
The most important issue for Liberals is the right to exterminate babies in the womb—which they call reproductive health. Though women who are Liberals are Feminists, they will defend men who routinely use and abuse women—even those who would leave a drowning woman in a car—providing such men support the unfettered slaughter of babies.
Women who are Liberals fiercely demonize the most accomplished woman who is Pro Life. Liberals believe girls as young as 12 years old have a right to kill their progenies without their parent's approval—or even notification to parents that their child is pregnant.
Liberals believe money should be confiscated from taxpayers to pay for this gruesome procedure, and that doctors and nurses should be forced to take part in this heinous killing against their will. This is a fine example of Liberal Fascism.
LIBERAL FASCISM
The irony in all of this to me, is that Deconstruction, Moral Relativism, and the Indoctrination into Anti American Socialist Beliefs it is said to be in the name of radical individual freedom and tolerance; but it is in fact Liberal Fascism—a Radical Authoritarian Political Ideology designed to repress Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Thought, Freedom of Association, and foremost: the Free Exercise of Religion.
In addition, Liberals are opposed to the 2nd Amendment in the Bill of Rights—the Right to Bear Arms. They know their plan cannot reach its apex against the will of an armed populace. Let us not forget what NAZI means: National Socialist Worker's Party. A NAZI is the epitome of Liberal Fascism.
CommentsLoading...
In any political system you have a left and right wing. Usually the country ends up in the middle. To say someone with Liberal views is Anti-American is ridiculous. Liberals want the country to be the best it can be they just have a more forward view point while conservatives tend to look backwards to the "good old" days.
spiderpam— Thank you for providing that wonderful link. I enjoyed it very much and must say I agree with its sentiments.
I saw this and I thought of you. Enjoy!
www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZpewGq8VkI
Larry Ivey— Why, thank you! I am humbled by your laudations. You are most assuredly welcome.
On a scale of 1 to 10, I have to give it a 10+++. Thanks for taking the time to put this hub together and post it for all to benefit.
sbeakr— It may be tricky. But by law one cannot give an aspirin to a 12 year old. Here is revealed the power of the pro-death camp. The family is the ultimate human authority on Earth—not the government—in a free society that is. Or shall I say, philosophically, it ought to be.
Your first paragraph is interesting . . . I will concede the former is more troubling and pertinent socially. And
. . . They do not necessarily bleed over, no. Good point.
Thank you for your insights.
I don't buy the idea that Moral Relativism is the same as, or in line with, Transcendental Relativism. I would assume, and hope, there is a difference, and that one doesn't have to bleed all over the other.
"Liberals believe girls as young as 12 have a right to abortion without their parent's approval—or even notification that their child is pregnant." To this, I would only like to mention that reproductive health is a very personal issue, even to a girl of 12. Humans do not biologically follow the laws and mores of any society, and a female's parts are her own, not her parents, at any age. Makes it a particularly tricky piece, I think.
Tom Whitworth— I do think the Liberals are overreaching. And their comments about those who object to their prescriptions are nasty and as always—elitist. The pendulum is swinging. Thanks for the visit and the comments.
The recent liberal proliferation of obfuscation, misinformation, pontifacations have causes much consternation and irritation within the population. They must temper their comments of they will find themselves at the brink of political elimination if not oblivion.
Tom Whitworth— Thank you for the visitation and your fine commentary. Social Liberals actually believe each person makes up their own Truth. It is a good thing they don't try that scheme with the "truths" of say . . . physics. You are so right that these "programs" are huge failures. But the left was in denial about Papa Joe Stalin for 50 years, too. They have got us in a mess. But with clear thinkers like you, I believe we can change the future of our society for the better.
Thank you very much for your astute remarks.
James,
Great Hub. I totally agree with your view on liberals and their belief on moral relativism. There are so many examples of this in their statements and actions the assertion is undebateable.
I don't consider center left persons as liberals. There are many valid reasons for a person to consider situations as best being served by a center left point of view.
I do believe as one ages and matures they will gravitate to conservativism, unless one has incurred some brain damage by excessive use of illicit drugs or alcohol. If one examines the history of our country, I defy that person to give one good example of a big liberal program that has truly achieved the intended goal.
Social Security and Medicare-Current unfunded liabilities of $60 trillion.
Deficit spending- Current National Debt about $12 trillion
These two programs alone amount to a debt on each and every citizen at this moment of $230,000.
Was this intended? Is it an unintended consequence? When liberals enact their programs they don't dare look to the future. The past is clear proof of that statement.
jiberish— You are so right. To be a free people we have to be a responsible people. Or we will lose the freedom. Thank you very much for your wise words. :D
I'm not sure how I missed reading this Hub until now. I've read all the comments, and still continue to be surprised by the thinking of those who call themselves liberals. I started writing a comment on my opinions, and thought better of it. All I will say, is that I am fortunate that from an early age it has been instilled in me, that freedom does not mean you can do anything, anytime, I wrote about it, and hold to my belief that someday I will have to answer to a higher power. Thank you, James, great as usual.
Don't Think— I agree that it is their business until it becomes society's business, such as age consent laws, sexual acts in public, rape, etc.
Thanks for your comments and I appreciate the visit.
I remember hearing Ian McKellan (he played Gandalf in Lord of the Rings and Magneto in Xmen) talking on a breakfast radio program.
He was lobbying for the age of consent for homosexual intercourse to be reduced to 16- there was a bill in the UK Parliament at the time. He told the interviewer, 'the important thing is not think of anal sex, think of young love.'
I was eating a bacon sandwich at the time and really didn't
want to think about either.
Anyway, when it comes to other peoples sexuality it is best not think about it. It really is their business and if they keep it their business just forget about it.
jaynap01— Don't forget the collection plate on your way out! :D
Thanks for the exhortation.
Amen, preach it brother Watkins! :)
Thurstjm— Since your Columbia guy starts off with "Damn Lies" I might suggest there is something more than Journalism in his writing. I just pulled up a study done by Oxford, you may have heard of that college, that says 50% of gay men will never see their 65th birthday. An Insurance group estimates they live 21 years less. I subscribe to the New Yorker and have seen many liberal writers lamenting all their gay friends who tragically died so young.
Being attracted to people of the same sex might well be innate desire in some people. So what? Some people desire their neighbor's wife; or desire to screw every girl in town; or desire child pornography; or desire pedastry; or be kleptomaniacs; or desire to set fires; or be sociopaths. Just because people desire something doesn't make it right, good for them or good for society. In fact curbing desire is part of an orderly society. Or, we get back to moral anarchy—anything goes.
What Supreme Court case are you referring to regarding State's rights? Not the 10th Amendment, that's for sure.
internpete— Why, thank you very much for your laudatory comments. This Hub has had an incredible amount of traffic. I appreciate you reading and leaving your words.
James. Well done! You hit the nail on the head with this one and you hit it very hard at that! haha, it is scary to me to think about all the liberals who have infiltrated our government and changed it in so many ways that contradict what it was founded on.
Bravo and well done
sneakorocksolid— Rock Solid commentary, as always. The lack of education of "thurstjm" is appalling—just what I'd expect from a product of our public school system. Moonbeam made a bit of a comeback with some pretty accurate history. Thanks for chiming in.
Dear Thursty and Moonchild, Look I honestly believe if you would ask James nicely he would help with your arguement. That way you would have a logical arguement with some facts mixed in. Now I know facts give you the hives Thursty but you should make a sacrifice for the truth or it won't mean thing! So break out your favorite lotion and apply it QID.
Moonchild, Moonchild, Moonchild! You know Thursty? I think hes gay and I think hes real serious about the gay lifestyle thing. If you don't prepare for the worst and it happens you could end up a liberal democrat! So before you hit rock bottom and start digging, step back, take a deep breath. THEN RUN! Run far and run fast to the safest place you know and it may pass, or not. Peace.
Will Apse— Thank you for your comments. No mischief intended, though I do like that word. My point exactly was to point out the difference between "classical liberals" and "social liberals" or "progressives."
Someone really should write a hub pointing out the very profound differences between left wingers and liberals.
The mischief-making of so many right wing commentators who want to prey on their readers lingering fears of communism has clouded political debate in the US to the point that it is often meaningless.
Unfortunately, this hub falls into the mischief making format.
Mindfield— Jesus didn't have to. Any one caught in this act during the lifetime of Jesus would have been killed on the spot. And as a Jew, Jesus knew that full well. If Jesus had wanted to contradict this punishment he certainly would have as He was not bashful about contravening the reigning authorities. His silence on this topic speaks volumes, though some try to twist it into His tacit approval. Hardly.
I do not agree with punishing those who practice this behavior today. But I also cannot approve and our society shouldn't either—if it hopes to last long.
"Anybody who wants to make love to a shit hole is sick." Did Jesus say this, James?
thustjm— Now that you have quoted Marx I don't feel there is much more to say to you. But I will after I publish this Hub I am working on. Idiocy, huh? You got some pretty big britches there, son. It may be a good thing you have no idea who you are talking to with your nasty mouth.
Moonchild60— Abject hatred?! Of whom? I don't hate anybody in this world.
I am impressed with the history lesson. This totally contradicts your earlier assertions that Christianity was somehow "invented" out of thin air in the 4th Century. If you meant "Roman Catholicism" you should have said so.
I certainly have zero ill feelings toward you. In fact, I like you. You are mistaken that no geniuses believe in Jesus, of course. See Francis Collins of the Human Genome Project and Sir Isaac Newton and on ad infinitum. That thought of yours is absolutely crazy. If I were you, I would reflect on WHO planted that thought in your mind that one has to be an idiot to be a Believer. That's nuts. Try www.ttf.org and look at their board and tell me how unintellectual that group is. Absurd.
Wow. Your idiocy never ceases to amaze me.
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/21stC/issue-3.3/ross.ht When I searched gay life expectancy, that is one of the articles I found. It basically explains the errors in the calculations used in the study that determined gay people die earlier than straight people. 26 years is a huge difference. How can you believe the difference is THAT huge? Why would a gay person be more likely to die young than someone who isn't gay? How does that even start to make sense? If the reason is AIDS, the article I linked to clearly explains why that is bullshit. To get the number that study claims, even if half of all gay men died from AIDS at 40, all of the ones that dont have AIDS would have to die, on average, at 46.
Having gay sex is a choice. Good job at using a fact in your argument. Please remember though, as I've told you many times, that sometimes two things that are similar are not the same thing. We give them different words to show these differences. See, being gay means feeling sexually attracted to the same sex. It is the desire that makes you gay. We do not choose our desires, rather we choose how we will act on them. Being gay and having sex = not the same.
Yes, I know what congress is. Thanks again for insulting my intelligence by the way. It's true that congress is separate from state government. It's also true that the supreme court ruled that the first amendment applies to state governments as well as congress.
Oh yeah, my bad on the vocab fail earlier. I actually realize that kids were not held down and forced to pray. I probably could have used a better word than mandatory. However, it was still a case of a certain religion being part of a child's life every day, regardless of the beliefs of the child and his/her parents. My point remains valid though, that they didn't stop anybody from praying who wanted to. They just banned pushing prayer on kids. Religion is the opiate of the masses after all. Thanks for ignoring my point and latching onto that.
Alex H. - Everything you wrote about liberals was absolute bull**it. But you see, that is what most of you ignorant "I only speak the truth these are facts" Republicans WANT to believe. No one can actually have a conversation with you about it because you are so closed minded and already have decided that whatever you believe is the truth. Period. James, no self respecting genius I know would ever believe most of the crap you do, so I am sorry I will never accept that.
Christianity itself began in the early 30's James, it was not yet accepted in Rome at that time and there were certainly no Roman Catholics yet. The Romans were Pagans and persecuted Christians. You wish it was just Christmas trees and Easter Bunny's James but I am sorry, it is ALOT more than that. In any case Here is a quote:
"The Catholic Church traces its foundation to Jesus and the twelve Apostles.[38] It sees the bishops of the Church as the successors of the apostles and the pope (the bishop of Rome), in particular, as the successor of Peter, the leader of the apostles.[22][39] Catholics cite Jesus' words, in the Gospel according to Matthew, to support this view: "... you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, .... I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."[16][28][40] According to Catholic belief, this promised Church, the Catholic Church, was brought fully into the world when the Holy Spirit came upon the apostles in the event known as Pentecost.[39]...
Many scholars agree that the Catholic Church was founded by Jesus and that the historical record confirms that the See of Rome in particular was considered a Christian doctrinal authority from its beginning."
Keep believing in Jesus and that he will let you and your abject hatred get into heaven because your so righteous. Yes James, jews were killed for "treason" which the Romans considered to be speaking out about their religion which they saw as against the Kingdom of Rome and was therefore considered treason.
Here is yet another quote to prove my point that ROME was not yet CHRISTIAN itself until the 300's... "The early church which was called Christian or Catholic was persecuted by the Roman Emperors. Christians were crucified, burnt alive and given to wild beasts to be eaten alive. Then there was a sudden change as Constantine the Roman emperor (A.D 313) granted liberty to all Christians as before Christians were persecuted and killed but now Constantine gave religious freedom to the people. He exempted Christian ministers from taxes and encourage to build churches. He moved his capitol to Byzantium and he called Constantinople, “New Rome.” Of the Empire.
Then Emperor Theodosius (A.D 378-398) made Christianity the state religion of the Roman Empire and made church membership compulsory".
These are not my OPINIONS...oh wait, just one more, I love this one...
"Roman Catholicism was formed in the 4th century A.D. Peter was not a Pope at all. The first pope was Siricius. He was the first one to use the term "POPE." While it can be said that the visible church of God had become so apostate that Roman Catholicism was started about 270 A.D., it actually was not until 384 A.D. when Siricius (384-399) became the first Roman Bishop to call himself "Pontifex Maximus" and a new term, "POPE" (papa). Satan was a busy fellow. He could not kill the church of God off by persecution, so he joined the visible religious church.
Now pagan Rome became the so-called "holy" city. The pope had the religious powers of Caesar and claimed to rule the "church."
By the way out of my gay friends, two are over 60 and 1 is 56...my parents friends who are also gay are in their mid 70's...genius my ass...
Cls1321— I didn't say that. The commenter said only Christians were against it and that is patently false. All three of the major religions on earth are against it.
thurstjm— It is not what I "think." It is true. Google gay life expentancy and it says 46. All men 72.
It is not in the front. You are misrepresenting the Truth again. In the front. It says CONGRESS not make a national religion NOR interfere with the free exercise of religion by any people, state or school board, or town. You don't know what CONGRESS is, do you? It is the Federal Senate and House of Representatives. State governments are not CONGRESS.
Any sex act is a choice unless you are raped.
"Homosexuality has been recognized as unhealthy and immoral all over the planet for thousands of years—not just by Christians. How do you think Muslims view it? Off with your head! That's how they view it."
so just because the general Islam faith is against gays...that means it is right ?
Did you really just say that being gay will lower your life span by thirty years? Because every gay person has AIDS, right? Straight people never get AIDS either.
Being gay is not a choice. The only choice is whether or not they should admit who they are and face being ridiculed by people like you, or live their lives pretending to be something they are not.
Why would anyone choose to be gay and make their lives that much more difficult?
About the constitution...It's the first amendment, right at the front. We talked about that.
thurstjm— Sure it does. We have reproductive organs. Lungs, livers, pancreases, and sex organs all have a purpose. What do you suppose our reproductive organs are naturally for? Do you know what an anus is for? The elimination of feces. Anybody who wants to make love to a shit hole is sick. They need psychiatric help. Sorry.
Yes, I do. Because all of us should give a damn what kind of society we live in and that includes what behaviors we sanction. Any behavior that shortens ones life span by 30 years (gay men) should be discouraged.
It is not remotely the same as skin color. You come out the womb with your skin. Who you have sex with as a adult is a behavior. Skin—behavior. No link (one hopes—unless you are saying . . .)
You don't know what you are talking about. Show me where in the Constitution it says the State of Massachusetts cannot have a State religion. Have you never seen the Constitution? You can read it right now on line. Give me the clause. You are wrong again. I am not talking about colonies. 7 states had state religions long after we became the USA. It did happen. You have no knowledge son. Please crack open a couple books besides the Communist Manifesto.
Virtually everything you write is wrong. I thought anybody could hit on a speck on truth by accident. Prayer was never mandatory. Prayer in public schools went on for 200 years until it was outlawed. But there was always an out for conscientious objectors.
I wrote a Hub just for you. Put this in your pipe and smoke it.
Kebennett1— It would be satisfying to make a small difference before I go home to be with Jesus. There is a whopping amount of misinformation and misunderstanding in America. It is staggering. Kids weren't this dumb when I was in high school. The dumbing down in our public schools is amazing, sad and damaging to the future of our nation.
I appreciate your voice of reason. Thank you for reading my works today and leaving your insights.
Wow. Logic fail.
There is a difference between homosexuality being natural, and exclusive homosexuality being normal for every single person in the world. Yes, if everyone on the planet were gay, our race would probably have died out. That doesn't mean that it is unnatural for part of the population.
Yeah, Muslim cultures don't approve of homosexuality. Big whoopty shit. It doesn't matter whether or not something has been accepted in the past. "That's the way it's always been," is not a good argument for any position. Do you have an actual, logical reason as to why homosexual marriage should be outlawed? (Remember that religious dogma doesn't count)
The same rights as everyone? Because they have the right to marry someone of the opposite gender. Yeah, they do. That universal right gives straight people the right to get married. By adding that qualifier (of the opposite gender), you are restricting that right to straight people. That does not give people equal rights. That's like saying everyone has the right to vote, as long as they're white.
States can not have a state religion. It is unconstitutional for a state to endorse any religion over another. I know many colonies were founded by certain denominations, but that was before the USA existed. I'm sure throughout history there have been situations in which the majority of a state's population follows a certain religion. That's fine. But that doesn't mean they have a state religion. When a state declares one religion as right, and forces tenants of that religion's beliefs on it's population, that is a state religion. That has yet to happen in our country, thank God.
The Government never outlawed prayer. They outlawed mandatory school prayer. Again, there is a difference between these two things. If you want to pray at school, no one will stop you. In fact, every day at school we had a minute of silence every morning so those who wanted to pray had the opportunity to do so.
James, you and I think a lot alike! I want you to keep spreading your intelligent views! They help off set those who aren't so intelligent :) And maybe you and many others like you can help to make a difference in this world, just by writing! It certainly can't hurt!
Stick with the Medication— Help I'm a rock!
Alex Homme— Bravo! You have made a great addition to this thread and I thank you! I agree with your list. The circular thinking of Social Liberals amazes me. It is filled with such falsehoods and contradictions that I knew better about in Junior High. Thanks for raising some great examples.
k@ri— I cannot thank you enough for your wonderful comments. They brought a big smile to my face. I suppose I'll have to do a few more Hubs to fight the utter falsehoods in some of the other comments above. :-)
Just keep saying the voices I hear are not real, the voices I hear are real, the voices I hear.. well you get the message.
Here are a few more inconsistent beliefs I have found in the average liberal.
1. Police cannot be trusted, therefore we must have the exclusionary rule. Police are the only people that can be trusted with firearms.
2. It is wrong to kill an inmate convicted of capital murder regardless of the crime. It is ok to kill unborn children regardless of the reason.
3. I am a liberal and you must tolerate my speech. You are a conservative and I must regulate your speech (thru speech codes, lawsuits, etc).
4. All humans are created equal. Some humans are special (and deserve special benefits) because of the color of their skin, their genitalia or who they choose to sleep with.
5. Women should be treated as equals and should not be subjugated by men. It is wrong to fight wars against countries that have institutionalized subjugation of women.
6. It is wrong to take military action to protect the standard of living of Americans (Iraq). It is right to take military action to increase the standard of living of foreign citizens (Kosovo).
7. We need to increase taxes on wealthy corporations to support those less fortunate in society. We need to heavily regulate wealthy corporations thereby decreasing their ability to generate profits (which are taxed to help the less fortunate in our society).
8. Media outlets, even those with a marked liberal bias (NYT), should not be regulated. Talk radio should be regulated (fairness doctrine) because it has a marked conservative bias.
9. I am a vegetarian, I only eat grains and vegetables. We need to prevent the farmer from farming his land because he cuts down trees and kills endangered animals and every creature deserves to have a life. (but also, see No. 2 above)
10. Criminals use firearms to break the law. Therefore, we should criminalize possession of firearms. Then, criminals will not longer use firearms because it is against the law.
These are things that make you go Hmmmmmm.
James, Thank you for this coherent and wonderfully written hub on some issues that need to be discussed! I have never seen the problems of our thinking put to pen quite so well. You truly have a gift of getting to the truth of the matter! I will tell you here, if you leave us, a voice of reality will be silenced forever! Please stay!!! I love your logic! :D
mdawson17— Wiser words have never been spoken! They are in rebellion. Against their Creator; and against the America that has made this life of plenitude possible for them to comfortably sit around and rebel. Thank you so much for adding this dimension of Truth to the thread.
sneakorocksolid— I appreciate you coming in out of the bullpen to save the game for me. You are so right. The ideology of the Left is constructed on Hate. That's why it comes out of their mouths so often. They suffer from psychological "transference" of their hate of the the Light, the true nature of the World, and themselves, unto those who stand for Goodness and Truth.
Cls1321— Unless you are the village dunce, you know that Hub authors have no input as to what is advertised on their Pages. You, not me, choose to ignore the ultimate Truth of the Universe and your place in it. Go in Peace.
sneakorocksolid— Thank you for all of your commentary in this thread. Obviously, the demons are awake now.
Moonchild60— You assume a lot about me here. I possess a genius IQ myself—not that I am bragging about it, because I did absolutely nothing to earn it. God gave it to me. I am grateful and humbled at this gift. Brainwashed by my upbringing? I had no upbringing. My natural parents did not rear me. I was reared by a hodgepodge of various family members whose beliefs were all over the map. I have 3000 books behind me right now lining the wall of my office. Everything I say, and believe in, is the result of my own investigation. There wasn't anybody to tell me what to believe. That is why I am chosen to witness to the Truth.
James very well said hub! After reviewing your comments as well as hub let me post my comment:
To be a liberal is to try to follow your own sect or begin a sect of your own! To be a liberal is to in act a riot against an order!
Most liberals are rebels against a system and will justify their acts with empty words and can find no solid evidence in supporting their claims!
mdawson17
sneakorocksolid— Where would I be without your witty commentary?! I appreciate your sanity.
thurstjm— Well, it should be obvious to you, that if homosexuality were normal and natural the human race would be extinct in 3 generations. And more than 1 or 2 % would claim to have these inclinations. Remember, 10% of all people are criminals. Should they have special rights?
sneakorocksolid— As always, you cut to the heart of the matter with a piercing eye. Thank you very much.
thurstjm— You are correct. The Federal Congress cannot enact a national religion. But the States can enact a State religion—and did.
The government never said anybody had to pray. The Supreme Court in 1962 OUTLAWED prayer. An entirely different thing. An opposite thing.
Homosexuals have the exact same rights as anybody else—they are free to marry anybody of the opposite sex not closely related to them provided they are not already married.
Homosexuality has been recognized as unhealthy and immoral all over the planet for thousands of years—not just by Christians. How do you think Muslims view it? Off with your head! That's how they view it.
Government has a vested interest in a healthy, reproducing, stable society. There is no institution ever as healthy, stable and reproducing as traditional marriage.
Mindfield— Please do not deify me. I am just a person, like you. :D
sneakorocksolid— I appreciate your awesome display of your knowledge of the truth. Thank you!
Moonchild60— Your words:
"My only problem with Christianity at this moment and I mean like this very second, is that they want to control the country and that is frightening. Furthermore, I don't understand their need to push their ideals and desires on the rest of the world."
It appears to me that Christians are playing defense. I know, it is described by its enemies as on the offensive, but the history of our nation makes it clear Christians are seeking to conserve and preserve our real heritage as a country.
All religions think they are the right religion. That is certainly not unique to Christians.
"Any knowledgeable Theologian will tell you that Christianity is based on Pagan rituals and beliefs"
No. Admittedly, many things like Christmas trees and Easter bunnies have pagan origins, but not Christianity.
"During the Roman rule clearly there was no Christianity yet. Jesus was still about and Christianity did not come into being until long after he was gone, aabout the 300's A.D"
Say what???!!!! This is not true. Who do you think the Romans fed to the lions? Who did Nero blame (falsely) for burning down Rome in 66 AD?! Christians. Man oh man. No wonder. I'll do another Hub just for you about the Christian Church from 33 AD to 300 because you can believe what you want but you may as well have said the sun rises in the west.
Jews were only crucified if proven in court to be guilty of murder or treason.
Dearest cls1321(what?), If none of this article rings true to you, you must be a commie! And a worldly one at that! Lets see you love gay rights, you love welfare, you love abortion, you love illegal aliens, you love pot, you love one world government, you love inclusivness, you love political correctness, you love enviromental nazis, you love the whales, you love grazing, you love tests without scores, you love America getting a blackeye, and you love Nancy Pelosi! YEAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!
Now the fun part you hate our country, you hate our miltary, you hate corporations, you hate suvs, you hate fishermen, you hate hunters, you hate compitition, you hate lumberjacks, you hate Christians, you hate Fox News, you hate Sean Hanity, you hate border patrol, you hate shaving your legs, you hate suits, you hate buisness, you hate plucking the hair between your eyebrows and I'm sure you hate me.
You made one mistake we won't allow ignorant people to be conservative your the supporters of the mixed nuts.Peace.
This article is 100% bias and screams "ignorant conservative" at anyone who reads it.
you know an article is bullshit when ann coulter is the one being advertised across the top.
Dear, well reseached, Moonchild, I'm a convert to Christianity from a nothing. I always had a strong sense of right and wrong so following the Bibles teachings was an easy sell for me. That said, He is the truth, He is the light and his love for you is based on obeying Heavenly Father. When Jesus walked the earth he tasked with two things to love Heavenly Father and Love each other. He also gave you a choice we call 'Free Agency'. You choose to accept his teachings or you choose not to it will always be your decision.
I've always been for gay rights, just not for ruining the institution of marriage by adding a kinky twist. If they can moderate they're position and keep from offending us they could count on moderate support. As with anything you have to give something to get something thats what a compromise is all about.
Finally I don't hate anyone I feel bad for the people who feel they have to be sexually disfuctional. But hey, I'll tell you what I'll hug any gay person bring'm on! Hell I'll hug your husband!
Sounds like you made a good catch, go girl! Peace.
Sneakorocksolid - First of all I never said I hated Christians. I love my family and they are all christians, I love my friends and most of them are christians. I was not smoking anything but I am married to a man who never takes sides just drowns in facts. He hates hype, B.S. dishonesty or fantasy. He comes from a very scientific family. He is both literally, a genius and an intellectual. If I tried to argue with him about the bible being real and Christians and Jesus and all that crap I would lose as he knows his facts. His intelligence and beliefs are based solely and completely in reality, not wishful thinking. Both you and James are products of your thoroughly brainwashed and irrational upbringing. Most people are. They are conditioned from birth to believe whatever crap their parents believed, no matter what!! And you damn well better not question them. Then there are those of us who don't care and question EVERYTHING seeking the truth. Do the research. I did. By the way, I am not gay and I believe completely in their rights. I guess I just don't want to go around hating people or denying them simple basic rights.
Hey Thursty, There are alot of confused people and I'm sure plenty would have pity for your cause. The gay side of our society are very sensitive people and need to be watched after. That way bigoted homophobic bullies like me can't beat you down and steal your lunch money.
I want to make a retraction of my statement refering to your size, I was wrong, you're an angry big man.
Animals and sexual relations are kind of tough to compare to humans but I do agree they can get excited and forget themselves. When you get excited do you forget yourself and dry hump other peoples legs? That is really wierd! Now as far as the Greeks are concerned their gender issues were directly related to the gay helmets they wore and they were very fond of their spears.
Well, the way I see it why should the minority have rights when the majority are tyrants. If the minority have rights then the majority suck as tyrants so Bill can take his rights and go home!
Look I don't appreciate you awarding me the honor of owning the dumbest thing ever said without some kind of trophy. Its taken a lifetime of sorting to find just the right thing to say that would earn that kind of recognition. So don't get me all worked up and BAM nothing! Once I'm that excited I could dry hump somebodies leg!
How you and moombaby doing?Peace
First of all, I don't have to be gay to believe they should have rights. Secondly, I'm 6'2" and would hardly qualify as an angry little man.
How can you say that homosexuality is unnatural, but heterosexuality isn't? What is this based on? Animals in the wild have homosexual relations. So did the ancient Greeks.
This has always been a majority rule country? Since when? Have you ever heard of the concepts "tyranny of the majority" or "minority rights" ? There's this thing called the Bill of Rights. It's supposed to apply to everyone, not just the majority.
"If the majority speaks, you should listen not throw little bitch fits."
That is quote possibly the stupidest thing I have ever heard or read. Bravo sir for bringing human intelligence to a whole new low.
Whoa Thrustjm! Does your Mom know you talk like that? Look the infos right your interpretation is wrong, well atleast twisted. The reason people originally came was to move away from religious persecution in Europe. The persecution was based on a state mandated religion. What our founders meant was they didn't want the country to pick a religion and make everybody participate.
I'll tell you are an angry little man! You are going to have to face some facts homosexuality is not a gender therefore you can't apply the same set of standards that you do to heterosexuality. One is naturaly correct the other is fantasy. You should have the rights but before you go saying you're the same as heterosexuals it would be nice if asked us how we feel about it. I know I don't want to be thrown into the same pot and stirred up so it seems theres no differance. There is, and I want a boundry or something thats says there is.
Hey man look, this has always been a majority rule country except for some rare examples. If the majority speaks you should listen not throw little bitch fits. Just go with it because the more negative attention to your cause the more moderates you will lose.Peace.
The first amendment says: "...Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." No law respecting an establishment of religion. I think that's pretty clear. Thomas Jefferson thought so too.
"...I contemplate with solemn reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church and State..."
Every single founding father DID NOT believe the nation was founded on God's providence. George Washington and Thomas Jefferson were both deists. A deist is someone that believes, because of the complexity of the universe, some divine being must have created it. They did not believe in Jesus, they did not believe that God was watching them or gave a shit about what they did. At that time period, it was unheard of to be an atheist, and admitting it would have been a terrible political move. It's entirely possible that they weren't actually deists, but were atheists, and couldn't admit it.
Yes, I called you a jack ass, but that isn't necessarily an Ad Hom argument. If I said, you are a jackass, therefore your ideas are wrong, that would be an Ad Hom argument because you being a jackass has nothing to do with whether or not your arguments are valid. However, I argued that your ideas were misinformed and hypocritical. For these reasons, I deduced that you were a jackass. That is not the same.
It's true that religion can play a part in government. Religious groups can lobby, write letters, and protest to support views they agree with.
When the government says that someone has to pray in school, that is the Government making a law that establishes religion in a public place. That is the government making religion it's business, which is against the first amendment.
The same thing applies for laws against homosexual marriage. There is no logical reason to ban homosexual couples from marrying, or if them using that term really puts a stick up your ass, getting a civil union. Homosexuals are not allowed the same basic freedoms as most Americans because the majority of Americans consider homosexuality immoral. Why do they consider it immoral? Because Leviticus says so. This is a case where the government is basically saying that, the Christian God says what you are doing is wrong, most Americans believe in the Christian God, therefore, you can go to hell and not be married. That is the Government interfering in matters of religion.
There is a God!
JW, Thats not good! Is there a limit?Peace.
sneakorocksolid— I will no longer participate in this community. goodbye
Moonchild60— I have just now published a new Hub to "educate" both you and this boy. "Founding Fathers" is the title and I hope it answers all your questions. It is also my last Hub Page as for the second time in 43 Hubs, the "bosses" have flagged my Hub for excessive quoting. How else can I make you and him understand the Truth? If my own words won't do it I must quote the source.
Goodbye.
Yikes they're out inforce! Moonchild whatever you're smoking I want some! Thrustjm, whoa dude, you're not suppose to look directly into the ball with all the mirrors on it! Christians, all you two know about Christians is you hate them and everything they stand for. It could be that your ruled by your own guilt and theres no need, repent! You're welcome at my church we'll help you recover and become an acceptable citizen of our society.
Moonchild what do you know about good ole boys? Aren't you a female? I've never seen you in the duck blind. Thrustjm you could use a few hours in the blind to help reassemble whats left of your manhood. Well I have an idea how about you two get married! Then Moonchild you'll have a bonified cause and Thrustjm you'll have Moonchild! Now wasn't that fun? Peace.
I'm baaaack...Ok first of all Thurstjm I am SO impressed. You are 19? I would love to see how intelligent you are at 30!! Some excellent and well made points here. And getting to the bare bone of the issues was incredibly impressive. Bravo my friend.
Next, lets not confuse "God" with "Religion". Our founding fathers believed in "God" not necessarily "religion" and this is a well known fact, or at least I was pretty certain most people knew this. That is why there is no religion in our government and there never should be. Our country proudly represents all people. Many of our ancestors came here for that reason. Religion creates seperatism and elitism and other "ism"'s that we can live without. God never said "Go forth and create religion and kill each other over it". Yeah, don't think that was the game plan.
My son came home from school in his junior year of high school with a letter asking if he could be approached by the Armed Forces, I said No. He knows who they are, what they do and if he wants to be part of it, he will join himself. I don't see psychologists and retail store owners approaching students in school to elicit their support in their choice of careers. This is my choice and I have a right to it. Parents who want their children to be approached or don't really care said "yeah sure", THAT is America, that is democracy at work.
Christians, oh wow, where does one start. I was born and raised Christian but then I started asking questions and that was shot to hell...oh sorry, heck...There is no hell.
My only problem with Christianity at this moment and I mean like this very second, is that they want to control the country and that is frightening. Furthermore, I don't understand their need to push their ideals and desires on the rest of the world. What makes them THE religion or the BETTER religion? It just comes off as arrogance and is insulting to other religions.
Lets be honest here, you guys swear by a book that was written YEARS after Christ, had no witnesses and was re-written over 50 times that we are certain of. Then your cop out answer to this is "Thats why we call it faith"...that kills me. It says Christ was born during tax season in December, tax season was in August in that part of the world. Any knowledgable Theologist will tell you that Christianity is based on Pagen rituals and beliefs and they have proof on this, their job is to verify and study these things so they can get to the truth and mysteries of the bible. Additionally, and this really only takes a tiny bit of common sense. During the Roman rule clearly there was no Christianity yet. Jesus was still about and Christianity did not come into being until long after he was gone, aabout the 300's A.D. So what were the Romans? Pagans. Caesar and other Emperors even had an Imperial cult. And did our friend Pilot really ask the Jews what to do with Jesus? HA!!! Yeah sure, he was going to ask the opinion of the lowly filthy Jews? I don't think so, he didn't give a damn what they wanted. No one did. They were just slightly above slaves. They were garbage to the Romans. They were Jews for christ sake...whoops...anyway, lots of Jews were crucified back then by the Pagans for talking about their religion. It wasn't allowed. Christians don't have to worry about taking the fall for killing Christ and try to blame the Jews. It was the Pagans!! and you Christians hate them anyway...
And lets not be naive about slavery. We know damn good and well this country made tons of money on the backs of slaves. What do you think the good ole boys were fighting for? If they had to PAY people to work it would cut into their profit margins big time! They may have been ignorant but they weren't stupid.
"typical liberal" is only an attack if one is utterly devoid of a sense of humor. It is a joke.
Slavery was one of the oldest institutions in the world. It was ended by Europeans and Americans. It still exists in large parts of the world.
I am sorry, sir, but you have no idea what you are talking about when you talk about our Constitution. The Constitution banned the Federal Congress from instituting a National Religion such as they had left in England when attendance on Sunday and tithing were enforced by law. The States could and did have State Religions. And by religions they meant denominations—you couldn't be forced to be Baptist or Episcopalian. The Constitution banned the Federal Government from interfering in any way with Religion—it did not ban Religion from involvement with the Government. The Constitution is available on line. Read it and tell on what page do the words, "Separation of Church and State" appear in the text.
Every single Founding Father DID believe the nation was founded by God's Providence. If they don't teach you that at your high school that proves my point about Indoctrination of the young by Social Liberals.
You first post was not an ad hominem attack? Let's scroll back up there . . . I believe you called me a jackass, seven times accused me of hating people, said my opinion was a crock of shit, said my facts were pulled out of my ass.
Anarchy means no rules or authority. I find it interesting that you would consider that evil. I never said it. But I'm glad you did.
I know that's Al Franken, but I am pretty sure that's not a real picture. http://mediamatters.org/research/200905040004
Either way, it is a ridiculous, negative depiction of someone, and by saying that is a "typical liberal," you are personally attacking them without any evidence, and also making shit up.
About the ACLU, I wasn't doubting that they had lawsuits having to do with religion. I was doubting that that they had lawsuits against any mention of religion, which is completely different. I'm sure the ACLU gets involved in matters of separation of church and state: cases where a certain religion might be endorsed in a public setting. I think this is fair and legitimate. Endorsing any religion over another in a place like a school that has students of many religions and cultures is unfair and unconstitutional. I doubt that they could file a lawsuit simply because someone made a "mention of religion".
Again, you misunderstand me. When I said I had never heard of ROTC protests, I wasn't trying to say that they never happened, only that it's not a widely held liberal position to protest ROTC. That is the opinion of a group of individuals, most of whom happen to be liberal. The main point of that paragraph is that the right to free speech and free protest is central to the ideology of our constitution and that it would be unfair to call someone anti-American for using this right.
Again, about the damn slavery. I've said, twice, that my point is NOT that slaves made our country great, or even had any significant impact on our economy (though I'm pretty sure they did have an impact). My point is that what people see as the best way to live their lives, the way people view morality CHANGES OVER TIME. At one time, slavery was accepted, even though most people now (almost everyone I hope) believe it is an atrocity. It's not always best to blindly accept what others before us believed.
I'm only 19, but I know that our country was founded on the constitution, a document that believes in the separation of church and state and the right for a person to be free and live his life as he chooses, without interference from people who believe they are morally superior to others. It was not founded on God's providence, but rather on the right for everyone to worship as he sees fit.
I'm also old enough to actually know what an Ad Hominem attack is. It translates to "To the man" and means attacking someone personally instead of refuting their arguments.
You said, "I didn't say liberals are evil. You are making an Ad Hominem attack here." That would not be an Ad Hom attack, because I am not attacking you as a person. If anything, what I said would be called "making shit up," which is completely different. However, like I said in my last post, you did strongly insinuate that they were. Moral anarchy sounds pretty close to evil to me.
Suggesting that I am an uneducated child would be an Ad Hominem attack.
thurstjm— You questioned the existence of any lawsuits against religion in your previous post by the ACLU and I failed to respond because I thought you must be kidding. The majority of ACLU lawsuits are to demolish religion. I will do another Hub about this shortly.
What Moral Relativism means is simple: For most of human history humankind believed in moral absolutes that existed regardless of our opinions. And our pursuit was to find them, understand them, and explain them to others. After Darwinism took hold—the greatest chess move in history by Satan— people like you started to believe that human beings were just monkeys with thumbs and therefore— all truths uncovered by mankind over the past 6000 years were simply social constructs and that in the new reality: there is no such thing as "The Truth." Each person makes his own "truth" subjectively.
The "fat man in a diaper" is none other than your latest United States Senator Al Franken (from one of his movie roles).
If you don't know about protests by Social Liberals against ROTC, I suggest you give Google a try. I don't have time to teach you the basics of life in America. This information, as well as everything I referenced, is easily searched on the internet. You act like you just came out of a nuclear bunker from 1969.
Our country was founded on the Protestant Work Ethic—not slavery. It was founded on the belief in God's Providence. Don't you kids learn anything in school? How old are you?
If you are so proud of the Liberal Programs foisted upon the American public in the last 40 years I must ask you: What have been the results? I suggest you read my other Hubs, such as "Liberty Lost in America"; "Has America Changed for the Better"; "The Progressive Movement"; "Conservative"; "America is Two Nations"— and then come back to me with a well-rounded opinion.
johnb0127— We must not succumb to hate, Brother. We must love them back into the family.
gurgei1— Thank you!
Great job again. I hate liberals and hearing what they are doing to our country makes me SICK!
Great hub.
You are right. You never said they lacked morals, but you definitely insinuated it when you compared them to Hitler, and I consider that an Ad Hominem attack. Though you didn't say directly that liberals lack morals, you did classify them as moral relativists. Btw, Being a liberal does not make you a moral relativist. Your explanation of moral relativism insinuates that they lack morals (they lack definite morals, which leads to moral anarchy), and plainly says that they believe there is no purpose or meaning to human life. So by your definition of moral relativism, and by classifying liberals as moral relativists, you seem to be saying that they are morally bankrupt before you even address any of their positions that might be morally questionable. For the record, moral relativism simply means that situation and society have an effect on what actions can be considered ethical. For example, murder is normally ethically wrong, but if you kill someone in self-defense, because they were trying to kill you first, or you are at war, then that action could be considered moral, in that circumstance.
Another thing about Ad Hominem attacks: Do you truly think that depicting a typical liberal as a fat man in a diaper with bunny ears and a giant stuffed bear is an objective criticism of liberal ideology?
Quote:" I never inferred that to exercise free speech or criticize the government is anti-American. Who attempts to keep ROTC off college campuses? Who protests the military? What kind of people say of 9/11, "The chickens came home to roost" "No wonder after our actions around the world" and on and on and on? Social Liberals, that's who." End Quote.
In this paragraph you say that you don't think criticizing the government is anti-American, but you seem to say that these liberal actions are. I've never heard of any liberal movements to keep ROTC away from colleges, and I doubt that it is a position all, or even most liberals share. However, expressing opposition to ROTC in universities is an expression of free speech, and it is a criticism of the government. Protesting the military is also quite clearly criticizing our government, and is an example of free speech. By ending that statement with "Social liberals, that's who" you insinuate that they are doing something wrong. You then go on to say that liberals don't have flags in their yard, suggesting that what's wrong with their protests against ROTC programs and the military is that they are anti-American or unpatriotic at the least.
You misunderstood my comment about slavery. I never said that our country became wealthy because of slavery. I said that our country was founded on slave labor, which it was. Plantations were economically successful because of free slave labor. My point also had nothing to do with how much slavery helped our country. My point was that at one time, slavery was considered moral, but time has shown that to be false.
Though it may be true you are talking specifically about social liberalism, you are still attacking liberals. The difference between a classical liberal and a social liberal is that a social liberal believes in positive freedoms, which are basically things like more services for the unfortunate to shorten the gap between the wealthy and the poor. Examples are welfare, social security, and things like medicare. These are things that most American liberals support.
thurstjm— The Hub is about "Social Liberals", which is a distinct ideology from "Classic Liberals." I wrote about the former not the latter. I said "Virtually all Atheists are Social Liberals" and that is a fact. I never said all Social Liberals were Atheists, nor would I say that because I know quite a few personally who are Social Liberals and do believe in God. I never said Social Liberals or Atheists did not believe in any code of morality. I said they believe in moral relativism. There is a huge difference between the two.
Hatred? Explaining a political ideology is hatred? I don't hate anybody. You have used the word "hate" seven times in your comment—I did not use that word. If you are looking for hate, I would search your own heart because out of the heart the mouth speaks.
Then your whole paragraph is about things I never said. You seem to be arguing about things somebody else said, Lord knows who. I never inferred that to exercise free speech or criticize the government is anti-American. Who attempts to keep ROTC off college campuses? Who protests the military? What kind of people say of 9/11, "The chickens came home to roost" "No wonder after our actions around the world" and on and on and on? Social Liberals, that's who. If you go down the street in any neighborhood that is in an predominately Social Liberals you don't see any American Flags displayed. Find a voting district that has a Republican congressman and ride down a quiet residential street and report back about the rows of American flags on people's porches. Social Liberals don't argue about that point. They say they disdain "nationalism" they are "citizens of the world."
It would take more space than a comment box to explain the devastating damage done to this country by the ACLU. This organization is controlled by demonic forces. But I do not hate them or their members. Their favorite tactic is to find a little town somewhere in middle America, swoop in with a coterie of Left Coast lawyers and sue the town because for 150 years the town seal has a cross on it and no one has ever complained. Sometimes, they actually have a person move to the town first to become their complainant. Then the town consults an attorney who informs the town how the ACLU operates: they have endless funding, they will file countless motions, interrogatories, and depositions, they will appeal at every level. To defend the suit will cost ten years of the town's entire budget—which means no fire department, police department, etc. So they cave in and change their seal because of financial intimidation. They would win the case in a court of law is the point. But they can't afford it. They lose their justice because they don't have the money. This is not an accident. This is the modus operandi of the ACLU.
Our country did not prosper because of the backs of slaves. That is a myth. Our country only became a wealthy nation after slavery ended. And while it existing in the South, the North, without slavery, had five times the wealth. I didn't say liberals were evil. You have made an Ad Hominem attack here.
How can you say that you are not bashing liberals? As mentioned above, you use anything that has the word socialist in it, and equate it with American liberals. Being a liberal doesn't make you a socialist, and it sure as hell doesn't make you a nazi. Your entire post seems to be a bunch of random, unexplained, undefended information, most of which you seem to have pulled out of your ass and written in a very biased way.
I really hope I misunderstood your first paragraph, but it seems to say that liberals are atheists, and therefore have no ethical code. Most democrats are christians who definitely follow a moral code. Of those who are atheists, myself included, almost all of them believe in morality. Not believing in God does not mean you believe there is no purpose in life, or that there is no such thing as morality. That sir, is a complete crock of shit.
The anti-American paragraph is another shining example of biased, unintelligent hatred. What exactly is it about liberals that makes them anti-american? Liberals get upset when the government does things they do not agree with, things that they think violate either the constitution, or the best interests of our country. That does NOT mean they hate the country. It means they disagree with something the government does. By your logic, if you ever criticize any bill or government act that comes from a liberal politician, then YOU hate America. You can't just say that everything you believe is American, and anyone who is against you hates their country. One of the central beliefs of our constitution, and our country, is the right of free speech, the right to disagree with the actions of the government. Jackass.
Why do you hate the ACLU? What lawsuits exactly do they have against "any mention of God"? The ACLU exists to defend the constitutional rights of Americans, a very noble cause. Do you hate them because they support homosexuality, something your religion believes is wrong? Should we ignore the seperation of church and state because your God is so damn sure that gay people getting married will destroy the moral framework of our country?
I won't talk much about abortion, because it's already been discussed so much. But, I just want to say again that being pro-choice doesn't make you pro-abortion. It means that you believe the mother should have control over her own body. Many pro-choice people would rather that no one get an abortion, but recognize that illegalizing it doesn't make it magically go away. It just makes people do it in a very unsafe way.
Talking about conservatism, you said that basically, older beliefs are right because they've been followed so long. Well, that's a complete crock too. It is often true that if certain practices work well, they will continue to be used. That doesn't necessarily mean that long standing practices are right. Our country was founded on the backs of slaves, and women were denied the right to participate in our democracy for the longest time. That doesn't mean it was right to treat them as they were treated. Saying "That's how it's always been, so it must be right" does not logically support any argument. You need to give reasons for why your positions are right, not just go on about how evil liberals are.
Moonchild60—Well, thank you very much. It's all that healthy living! :D
You know James this is going to sound ridiculous after all we have written but I am truly amazed....you don't look anywhere near 54...you are several years older than I am. Didn't see that coming...
Linda Myshrall— You know . . . I might just get my old training wheels back down from the attic myself. I appreciate the levity. Thank you very much.
My opinion- you did what you were trying to do, and you did it with great focus and aplomb. As I said, I'm in absolute agreement with you... speaking as one who needs guardrails and training wheels. :)
Linda Myshrall— I'm glad I "did my job." :-)
I appreciate your thoughtful and insightful commentary. There are strong feelings on these issues. My attempt was to show the underlying ideology that causes people to accept these ideas, which in the scope of human history are radical. Relativism and deconstructionism, primarily. These twin philosophies would have been anathema to people throughout history until postmodern man came along. It is an unmooring. It is dangerous. Because nihilism leads to anything goes. And if anything goes . . .
Just like drivers on a narrow mountain road with steep cliffs on both sides, people need guardrails.
cristina327— As you know, when light shines into darkness, darkness liketh it not. :D
Thank you and you are welcome.
newsworthy— Thank you for your comments. I agree with you and I appreciate you for taking the time to read my article and leaving the words you did.
sneakorocksolid— I agree that if a mother's life is in serious physical danger, she should be able to get a court order—with a doctor under oath that she is in danger of dying herself—for an abortion. I'll go along with rape even, since the reproduction act was involuntary. That's it. If you want dance pay the piper.
I appreciate your wise words. Thank you for visiting and joining the conversation.
Moonchild60— I didn't say it was infanticide. I'll grant you that eight inches of the birth canal. kerryg was saying we ought to allow abortion because in many cases they'll just kill the kid after it is born anyway.
I am 54. How old are you? Having babies is serious business—it's dangerous, yes. 39 women died of botched illegal abortions in 1972. Way more died in childbirth, sadly. 29,000 people committed suicide. So what? What does that have to do with the morality of killing a living human in the very place designed for its protection during gestation—the womb of its own mother?
The "completion" of life for all of us is death. Abandoned and abused children is certainly a grave problem, but I'm not sure extermination is the best solution.
Just War Theory is a separate Hub, methinks, as it is a deep subject, and in no way related to abortion that I can see. Gun laws aren't related either but I'll tell you this about that in plain language: 100,000 protecting themselves from serious crime last year with a gun. The number of crimes committed by a registered gun owner was in 2 digits last year. Criminals get guns on the black market. You won't stop that anymore than you'll stop them from getting pot or coke. If you take my gun, I'll be defenseless against them.
I do not mean to be insulting. I am tolerant of other's views; meaning I am not against them having their views. Everyone has a right to their opinion; that doesn't mean their opinion is right. It is not intolerant to disagree.
Hitler called himself a Socialist. Put that word right in his party name. National Socialist Workers Party—NAZI. I didn't make that up. I also acknowledged that no ideology contains a monolithic group of people.
And I hate to say this to you—but you are wrong. Scientists are LOOKING for a "gay" gene but have failed to find one. Please fact check. Even if that were true, humans have all kinds of proclivities that need to be curbed; that aren't good for them or society—surely you agree? Love gay people? Absolutely! We must love everybody.
Welfare is a big subject. It is widely proven that it saps the motivation of a populace to know they don't have to make anything of themselves—and they learn this as youngsters. That would take another Hub to explain the psychology. Charity of the non-governmental type can handle the downtrodden. How many people were homeless or starving in America BEFORE the Great Society? Less than we have now! Because this implied safety net reduces motivation to apply oneself in school, learn a trade, be a good employee. National Health Care? I wrote a Hub last month with this very title. Check it out.
I think you are a fine and compassionate person. I believe your intentions are good. Humans are complex. They are robbed of their dignity by an enabling society, in my opinion. I appreciate your words and mean no insult. You make excellent and valid points and I accept your worldview.
Finally a minute to give this hub a well-deserved and thoughtful read. Glad I did, as it is as thought-provoking as the opening paragraph promises. As an aside, I will applaud the tasteful and respectful debate that has ensued... from every side of the issue. Having said that, I tend to sit to the right of center, so it is natural that I will agree with everything you said, although, truthfully, I can't speak to the abortion segment because I couldn't leave the text on the screen long enough to read it because of the picture. I did read a comment from one participant that said that abortions like that are the exception rather than the norm... still, for me, one instance of something like that is enough... I can't imagine doing something like that to anyone... for any reason... not even once. It isn't ok to torture people in Gitmo, and it isn't ok to torture a baby like that. Not one detainee - not one baby. Now, I'm not a poly-sci major from a university or anything, but it does seem like the country is having trouble finding a real 'center,' and, truthfully, I really don't believe that we (as a country or a hub community) can. I do believe we should keep trying though.
p.s. I got up at 6am to work on a hub and got lost in this thing... that means you've done your job!
This is indeed an excellent hub, Very well written. Thank you for being courageous in exposing the social liberals. Keep up the good work.
What you have written clearly calls attention to issues that need better concentration. Your voice strongly relays a message about Individuality, connection or disconnection and alerts readers to pay closer attention to those being heard and to those not being heard.
These are hard topics that you have tackled and made evidence of their importance. Well done with spelling it out so straighforwardly.
James , This was a very serious Hub. It deserves to be judged for its value after a long thoughtful moment so I'll hold my sarcasm. Abortion is a truely horrible option and should be considered only in the most serious situations. I feel we shouldn't take any lifesaving procedure off the table. I think I could accept it for rape, incest, or for the life of the mother if it is determined by a true medical authority its necessary. No abortion for anything but the life of the mother after the first tri-mester. Under no circumstance should abortion for birth control be allowed and late term and/or partial birth abortions should carry the same penalties as murder. That said our country has taken a position that children aren't as valuable as adults, this has to change! Its not just abortions its also the same for abuse and neglect victims.
As for the political terminology a facist is a facist. Evil lives at both ends of the spectrum, I've always viewed political position as a circle. You really need to be some where near the middle to be on the right path the farther you go from center the more opportunities for evil exist. Once you are at the polar opposie of center its all pretty vile, so does it really mater what you call it?
The pictures of aborted people are one of the things I don't like that the right does but the murder of children is so wrong. That's why I always want to know the issue before I declare allegiance. Good job. Peace.
Oh James - You keep trying to say that abortion is infantcide and it isn't. How old are you? I remember all the stories of babies found dead in dumpsters, shallow graves, etc...I remember stories of unwanted children being abandoned or women dying trying to do "at home" abortions out of desperation. I remember reading about them and seeing them on the news. More unwanted, abused children in the world is the answer? Do you think if abortion is illegal people will just stop having unsafe careless sexual relations? Yeah, right. I do not believe in late term abortions because at some point it stops being a fetus and becomes a baby that could survive outside the womb. You know I had a friend years ago that had a miscarriage and wanted a funeral for her unborn child. The church told her exactly this "The child was not born yet and therefore did not have a soul". They refused to do it. This was the 70's before the church finally realized it had to take a position on the subject. Funny how they changed their minds...
I don't get you people at all...we can send grown men and women to be killed in senseless wars that I would bet my own life on, God does not approve of, but we can't kill a potential life prior to its completion. We MUST keep gun laws so the thugs and lunatics can continue to kill innocent people in the street, but discontinuing a pregnancy is vile. okay....
You are clever and have a back handed way of insulting people so you appear tolerant and I find that offensive. You clearly think liberals are morons and you insult them at every turn, you are not a tolerant person as most Conservative Republican's never are.
"...If not, is there any action a person could take that would be Anti-American?"
Yes, for example one could write hubs against a certain group of people that are American's. Is that not anti-american as well? No matter what your justification you are still Liberal bashing and Liberals are Americans too.
You compare Socialists to Hitler. First I laughed because of the stupidity of it, then I realized your "followers" would actually fall for it. Yes James, all people who believe in a socialistic society or even just some socialist ideas are just Hitler wanna-be's...Good lord...
You keep lumping liberals into a group as if they all think exactly alike. For example, I do not believe a 12 year old can or should get an abortion without their parents consent, or an abortion at all, or even be having sexual relations!!!!
Scientists have proven and I know you Christian right people hate to admit this, but Science has PROVEN that gay people do not choose to be gay and persecuted by you guys...they just ARE. They are also God's children and God wants us to accept and love them.
I knew several young girls when I was younger who I accompanied as a friend to welfare offices for money and food stamps because they were unmarried and had small children. I had my children after marriage and would not even collect unemployment between jobs because I thought it would make me lazy.
I do not believe everyone should live off the government. I believe that there are people in this world that are quite capable and sadly people who simply are NOT and they need a leg up, they need help. We need to take care of those who cannot care for themselves for a plethora of reasons.
I know people who cannot pay for food this month, how will they pay for their own healthcare? Unfortunately, sometimes government is necessary to help those in need. You have money James. I am quite comfortable as well....now. Wasn't always the case. I pay a fortune in healthcare now. I feel like the insurance company is ripping me off every month to the tune of $900 for my husband and I. If you think of a better way then socialist healthcare and poor people doing without, please let me in on it...How can we have affordable healthcare for EVERYONE? Because every human being deserves that much.
A Texan— First things first: I love the avatar! :-)
I humbly accept your compliments. I agree that though I have no doubt their hearts are in the right place, a good place, appeasement with those who want to destroy something as precious as the United States of America will not work. I hope that I am making an impression on some of the hearts on the other side—whether they admit it or not isn't the issue.
I actually bookmarked your home page because your titles were so compelling (important BTW) that I want to read them all. I will visit you over there soon. Thank you so much for coming to see my latest work.
This is a brilliant description that those like Steve and Paraglider fail to see. I may be more militant than most but I do not see any reason why we should "unite" as paraglider suggests. It seems that they would rather ignore what the true problem is in the hopes we can all just get along, I don't want to get along I want to destroy what these people stand for and salt the earth in my wake! I will leave it at that and I am glad you happened along one of my hubs and became a fan, after reading this I am definately one of yours, thanks again!
If anybody wonders how social liberals can twist their minds into not only acceptance of these beliefs but the vicious defense of the indefensible——or if you are a social liberal who will give me five minutes that will boost your self-realization——please read this Hub.
Cayenne_Pepper— I am sorry if it is harsh. I didn't mean for it to be. That picture is ugly alright. I am curious how anyone can compartmentalize that in their minds to reach the conclusion that this is a good thing.
I appreciate you for taking the time to read it and leave your comments. I agree with you.
James A Watkins Hub Author 12 months ago
peanutroaster— Thank you for reading my article. I appreciate your comments.
I think an honest look around the country and its social pathologies ought to make any person long for the "good old days." What most liberal ideologues want is a different America, an unrecognizable America from the great nation it once was.
As I wrote above, if I may quote myself, "Liberals are Anti American in the sense that they reject the belief systems that made America the greatest nation on earth. Liberals are Anti American in that they are relentlessly critical toward America, its history, its Flag, its Military, and its Patriotism. Liberals believe America is racist, oppressive, imperialistic, and responsible for much of the evils in the world."
This is not true of every single liberal voter, particularly of average Joes, but it is true of the leaders of the so-called "progressive movement."