Liberalism and oligarchy
First, I'll address liberalism, the great destroyer of democracies. Liberalism is very effective in democracies and democracies only. The reason for this is that they play on emotions or feelings, both of which democracies take into consideration BUT are not BLINDLY controlled by them. Just look at the constitution and you will find a large amount of emotion and value placed on a persons well being. Even the preamble states, "insure domestic tranquility, promote the general welfare, secure the blessings of liberty". Liberalism by definition relies on the "goodness" of mankind. Which I do not believe exists. I believe we are all wicked by nature some far more than others. This belief comes from the bible which states in Psalms 51:5 that we all come into the world as sinners: "Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin my mother conceived me." I am not saying that people are not generally good but we all have skeletons in our closet and have bad deeds in our past "done in our youth" or "while I was drunk or "hi on drugs" maybe even in a fit of rage things were said or done. Now our liberal friends would say that we must look past the evil and try to "look past" the flaws. You see, that is the biggest mistake one can do. I'll explain. Accepting our mistakes and the responsibility for the consequences makes us a better person. We have all heard "well, he was picked on in school, that's why he killed his mom" or " he did drugs that caused damage to his brain, so he shouldn't go to jail" and the list goes on and on. We have to accept a level of personal accountability. Liberals focus on the finger pointing away, whereas conservatives focus on the three pointing back, knowing by accepting our faults we can correct them.
First, I'll address liberalism, the great destroyer of democracies. Liberalism is very effective in democracies and democracies only. The reason for this is that they play on emotions or feelings, both of which democracies take into consideration BUT are not BLINDLY controlled by them. Just look at the constitution and you will find a large amount of emotion and value placed on a persons well being. Even the preamble states, "insure domestic tranquility, promote the general welfare, secure the blessings of liberty". Liberalism by definition relies on the "goodness" of mankind. Which I do not believe exists. I believe we are all wicked by nature some far more than others. This belief comes from the bible which states in Psalms 51:5 that we all come into the world as sinners: "Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin my mother conceived me." I am not saying that people are not generally good but we all have skeletons in our closet and have bad deeds in our past "done in our youth" or "while I was drunk or "hi on drugs" maybe even in a fit of rage things were said or done. Now our liberal friends would say that we must look past the evil and try to "look past" the flaws. You see, that is the biggest mistake one can do. I'll explain. Accepting our mistakes and the responsibility for the consequences makes us a better person. We have all heard "well, he was picked on in school, that's why he killed his mom" or " he did drugs that caused damage to his brain, so he shouldn't go to jail" and the list goes on and on. We have to accept a level of personal accountability. Liberals focus on the finger pointing away, whereas conservatives focus on the three pointing back, knowing by accepting our faults we can correct them.
Liberals (as a whole) are not very religious by nature because the bible is full of truths (that sometimes hurt) and consequences for actions. Liberals will say that is all bible beliefs and they don't believe that it is anything more than a book at best. Our founding fathers said quite the opposite. Quote George Washington (Farewell Address)"It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and Bible . What students would learn in American schools above all is the religion of Jesus Christ. [speech to the Delaware Indian Chiefs May 12, 1779] What about separation of church and state??? Gasp. A person would be flogged out of office for making such comments today. John Adams said "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." --October 11, 1798. You can see that the view of the founding fathers is vastly different than ours today and yet we act as though the founding fathers would be okay with gay pride parades, welfare, and tolerate the burning of the flag they fought so hard to fly. Which leads me to my next point. If I recall correctly, the revolutionary war and the freedoms and liberties it brought with it were started because of a group of acts referred to as the INTOLERABLE acts. These acts were passed by parliament in 1774 and pushed America into war. Everything we have in this country was brought about by intolerance. I am not sure when intolerance became an evil trait but having an amount of it is very American. Being intolerant makes you passionate about a subject and motivates you to correct it. Too much is also a weakness but too much of any trait considered a flaw and intolerance is no different. We need to intolerant but not to the point of harm or injury to another but at the ballot box. Interestingly enough liberals pride themselves on their level tolerance" and point out the intolerance of the "Right" and "Christians" they chant this mantra at every venue they encounter. Let's look at THEIR level tolerance for those of opposing views. "I hate Republicans and everything they stand for". Howard Dean. "This is a struggle of good and evil. And we're the good". Howard Dean. "Republican comes in the dictionary just after reptile and just above repugnant... I looked up Democrat. It's of the people, by the people, for the people." Julia Roberts. "We cannot let the right wing roll back more than thirty years of social progress." Barbara Streisand. "I agree with Tony Kushner that they are the ones imposing war on us, and the Constitutional amendment is the line in the sand. If that gets crossed, there will be people getting arrested in the offices of the people who are supporting this amendment. There will be marches in the streets. We will be calling these people the bigots that they are". Matt Foreman (Executive Director National Gay and Lesbian Task Force). "So, unless we also deal some crushing blows to heterosexism and the other isms that afflict our society along the way, the win will be illusory." Matt Foreman . The Federal Marriage Amendment -- as now written -- has no chance in the Senate, thanks to the solidarity of the Democratic caucus. Matt Foreman (Executive Director NGLT). HRC, NGLTF, NCLR and PFLAG have nixed Supreme Court nominee John Roberts, declaring him hazardous to GLBTs and women who want abortions. I have no doubt he's an accomplished lawyer and an affable dinner companion, but that doesn't make him any less a mortal danger to equal rights for gay people, reproductive freedom and affirmation action." Matt Foreman (E.D NGLT). "In a last-ditch effort to "save marriage!" our enemies -- including George W. Bush -- want to give us a "marriage lite" Gay journalist Rex Wockner.
I could go on and on. The point I am making is they are hypocrites at best. These people preach love and tolerance and acceptance of one another, yet they are completely intolerant of both Christians and Republicans and those that disagree with them. They refer to "wars" and "enemies", "evil" and also of "agendas". They like to put fear in the hearts of people with statements like "Christians want to throw their morals down our throat and take away our freedoms we have" (please refer to the John Adams quote above). I will answer with this. Can you name me one group that doesn't have an "agenda" or want to force us to "change" the way we think using their version of "morals". I can name a dozen off the top of my head. (N.O.W, Moveon.org, ACLU, ACTUP, Planned Parenthood etc) I think it's rather odd that the gays have sided with pro-abortion groups and N.O.W. (National Organization of Women) the N.E.A and A.F.T. The ACLU is headed by a openly militant homosexual. Have you seen them defend the "CIVIL LIBERTIES" of Christians, Republicans (I know Rush Limbaugh. but let look at the rule and not a rare exception, they had a motive for that) and more decidedly with such praise of the liberal democrats across the board. I'll save that topic for a future date.
Now back to liberalism. The focus is on ones feelings not good judgment look at the words they use (mean spirited, diversity, acceptance, inclusive, bigot, racist, offended) So, basically lets all hold hands, love all and accept everything and if you don't you a mean spirited, bigoted, racist. Basing laws and actions on emtions can be a very scary concept, since these vary with gender, understanding of the subject, up bringing, age, morals and values, location in the country. Let us look closer at "Morals" (Def) Dictionary.com Rules or habits of conduct, especially of sexual conduct, with reference to standards of right and wrong. I chose this because it is straight to the point. We do not call a person that does a "good" deed as moral, but someone who engages in sexual deviant behavior is considered immoral
Now the final piece of this puzzle. Oligarchy. On September 28, 1820 Thomas Jefferson wrote: You seem... to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions; a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men, and not more so ... and their power [is] the more dangerous, as they are in office for life and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. How many times have you read or heard about a judge who made a decision that goes against "the people". I'll give you some recent examples. A judge in Wash state said that the parents had no right to stop their (8th grade) daughter from smoke dope and having sex with her boyfriend. School districts all over the country are removing (CHRISTmas) and any reference to the birth Christ (nativity sets, songs etc) because a single family or even several families were offended. Lowe’s and Walgreen’s have taken out all mention of Christmas with "Holiday trees" or in the case of Walgreen’s removed it altogether. A judge allows gay marriage in MA even though 69% of the residents voted AGAINST it. I could go on and on. We have all seen it in the news. Frankly, I am tired of the very few dictating policy to the many. Now, 86% of Americans identify with some form of God or "higher power" which leaves 14% that are atheist or Agnostic. I am certain that not all 14% of them are protesting Christians and starting lawsuits. Most of them probably think we are ignorant and simple minded because believe, and pray to someone we can't see. So, maybe 1/2, I'll say 7% try to do something about those "bible thumping, God fearing freaks". Why are we even fighting? I have not seen in my entire life an act or law that passed because 7% of the population wanted it. You will notice that ALL of these radical groups will go to the courts and NOT the people to forward their agendas, here are some examples.
In Poway, north of San Diego, a former student at Poway High School told a court this week that for several years he was repeatedly harassed because he is gay (so was I for being fat and having pimples, being poor). Their suit seeks unspecified damages and a requirement that the school to create "a healthier environment" for gay and lesbian teens( Hey what about fat kids, smelly kids, ugly kids, handicapped kids, poor kids ALL are ridiculed and belittled).
Another case involves five teachers who received threatening voicemail messages on their classroom phones. The teachers found them when they returned from spring break. The principal, Chris Holleran, said the messages were garbled but it was clear the messages said, "We know who you are, we put up with you". (How horrific)"
Lambda Legal Files Historic Lawsuit Seeking Full Marriage for Gay Couples in New York this is the whole enchilada. We seek, and intend to win, full marriage for lesbian and gay couples across New York - nothing more (Oh really, 8-10 years ago it was "just accept us, and lets just get along, now it's marriage. Whats the next step, everyone has an agenda) and nothing less, said Kevin Cathcart, Executive Director of Lambda Legal.
Liberalism is a extremely flawed philosophy because you blur the line between moral and immoral, but more seriously between what is right by most people and what is right to a few. It is also dangerous because you cannot please all people all the time. So trying to be all INCLUSIVE you exclude others by default. I'll give you an example by not saying "Merry Christmas" you are not INCLUDING a group or groups you EXCLUDING the group that wishes to say it. By removing snowmen from textbooks in California you are not including females you are applying gender to a pile of snow. By removing the name "Founding Fathers" and changing it to "the framers" you accomplishing what? These men were not carpenters nor were women involved or minorities. So let us forget the facts, regardless of their truth and add other groups so no one is left out. They were men and as a group are the founding "fathers" of this country, they made it and developed it and ran it. You see liberalism wants everything a vanilla/chocolate swirl (or in the case of most homosexuals, rainbow) not understanding that most people like EITHER chocolate OR vanilla at any given time, not both at the same time, every time.
I could go on and on. The point I am making is they are hypocrites at best. These people preach love and tolerance and acceptance of one another, yet they are completely intolerant of both Christians and Republicans and those that disagree with them. They refer to "wars" and "enemies", "evil" and also of "agendas". They like to put fear in the hearts of people with statements like "Christians want to throw their morals down our throat and take away our freedoms we have" (please refer to the John Adams quote above). I will answer with this. Can you name me one group that doesn't have an "agenda" or want to force us to "change" the way we think using their version of "morals". I can name a dozen off the top of my head. (N.O.W, Moveon.org, ACLU, ACTUP, Planned Parenthood etc) I think it's rather odd that the gays have sided with pro-abortion groups and N.O.W. (National Organization of Women) the N.E.A and A.F.T. The ACLU is headed by a openly militant homosexual. Have you seen them defend the "CIVIL LIBERTIES" of Christians, Republicans (I know Rush Limbaugh. but let look at the rule and not a rare exception, they had a motive for that) and more decidedly with such praise of the liberal democrats across the board. I'll save that topic for a future date.
Now back to liberalism. The focus is on ones feelings not good judgment look at the words they use (mean spirited, diversity, acceptance, inclusive, bigot, racist, offended) So, basically lets all hold hands, love all and accept everything and if you don't you a mean spirited, bigoted, racist. Basing laws and actions on emtions can be a very scary concept, since these vary with gender, understanding of the subject, up bringing, age, morals and values, location in the country. Let us look closer at "Morals" (Def) Dictionary.com Rules or habits of conduct, especially of sexual conduct, with reference to standards of right and wrong. I chose this because it is straight to the point. We do not call a person that does a "good" deed as moral, but someone who engages in sexual deviant behavior is considered immoral
Now the final piece of this puzzle. Oligarchy. On September 28, 1820 Thomas Jefferson wrote: You seem... to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions; a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men, and not more so ... and their power [is] the more dangerous, as they are in office for life and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. How many times have you read or heard about a judge who made a decision that goes against "the people". I'll give you some recent examples. A judge in Wash state said that the parents had no right to stop their (8th grade) daughter from smoke dope and having sex with her boyfriend. School districts all over the country are removing (CHRISTmas) and any reference to the birth Christ (nativity sets, songs etc) because a single family or even several families were offended. Lowe’s and Walgreen’s have taken out all mention of Christmas with "Holiday trees" or in the case of Walgreen’s removed it altogether. A judge allows gay marriage in MA even though 69% of the residents voted AGAINST it. I could go on and on. We have all seen it in the news. Frankly, I am tired of the very few dictating policy to the many. Now, 86% of Americans identify with some form of God or "higher power" which leaves 14% that are atheist or Agnostic. I am certain that not all 14% of them are protesting Christians and starting lawsuits. Most of them probably think we are ignorant and simple minded because believe, and pray to someone we can't see. So, maybe 1/2, I'll say 7% try to do something about those "bible thumping, God fearing freaks". Why are we even fighting? I have not seen in my entire life an act or law that passed because 7% of the population wanted it. You will notice that ALL of these radical groups will go to the courts and NOT the people to forward their agendas, here are some examples.
In Poway, north of San Diego, a former student at Poway High School told a court this week that for several years he was repeatedly harassed because he is gay (so was I for being fat and having pimples, being poor). Their suit seeks unspecified damages and a requirement that the school to create "a healthier environment" for gay and lesbian teens( Hey what about fat kids, smelly kids, ugly kids, handicapped kids, poor kids ALL are ridiculed and belittled).
Another case involves five teachers who received threatening voicemail messages on their classroom phones. The teachers found them when they returned from spring break. The principal, Chris Holleran, said the messages were garbled but it was clear the messages said, "We know who you are, we put up with you". (How horrific)"
Lambda Legal Files Historic Lawsuit Seeking Full Marriage for Gay Couples in New York this is the whole enchilada. We seek, and intend to win, full marriage for lesbian and gay couples across New York - nothing more (Oh really, 8-10 years ago it was "just accept us, and lets just get along, now it's marriage. Whats the next step, everyone has an agenda) and nothing less, said Kevin Cathcart, Executive Director of Lambda Legal.
Liberalism is a extremely flawed philosophy because you blur the line between moral and immoral, but more seriously between what is right by most people and what is right to a few. It is also dangerous because you cannot please all people all the time. So trying to be all INCLUSIVE you exclude others by default. I'll give you an example by not saying "Merry Christmas" you are not INCLUDING a group or groups you EXCLUDING the group that wishes to say it. By removing snowmen from textbooks in California you are not including females you are applying gender to a pile of snow. By removing the name "Founding Fathers" and changing it to "the framers" you accomplishing what? These men were not carpenters nor were women involved or minorities. So let us forget the facts, regardless of their truth and add other groups so no one is left out. They were men and as a group are the founding "fathers" of this country, they made it and developed it and ran it. You see liberalism wants everything a vanilla/chocolate swirl (or in the case of most homosexuals, rainbow) not understanding that most people like EITHER chocolate OR vanilla at any given time, not both at the same time, every time.
posted by OfByForPeople @ 10:25 AM
0 comments
