Wish I'd said that!

In recent decades, the ACLU has used its so-called "wall" to fight tooth and nail to prevent government sponsorship of the Pledge of Allegiance, memorial crosses, Ten Commandments displays, nativity scenes, Bible displays, and virtually every other acknowdgement of America's religious heritage.

At the same time, it is worthwhile to note that there have been some instances in which the ACLU has endorsed public displays of religion. For example, When New York City Mayor Rudi Giuliani threatened to cut taxpayer funding from the Brooklyn Museum of Art for displaying a painting of the Virgin Mary with cow dung and pictures of female sexual organs pasted all over her body, the ACLU was first in line to defend the display. U.S. District Court Judge Nina Gershon ruled that New York City's elected officials were not allowed to place conditions on the museum's funding.

In another instance, the ACLU offered its support to the taxpayer-funded National Endowment for the Arts, after the agency sponsored an art show featuring "Piss Christ" - an exhibit consisting of a crucifix submerged in a jar of urine.

In the ACLU's myopic world, it appears that the only permissible publicly-funded displays of religion are those which blatantly mock or disparage the Christian faith.

-- Indefensible: 10 Ways the ACLU is Destroying America, Sam Kastensmidt, 2006

Tuesday, June 2, 2009

The World Turned Upside-Down

I can't be the only one noticing how the Obama malAdministration is working overtime and at warp speed to turn our entire concept of reality inside-out.

Example: The entire month of June has now been officially designated (somehow I don't think "Christened" is the appropriate term here) as LGBT Month. This, just a couple of weeks after the president all but blew off the National Day of Prayer. He claimed to be a Christian during the campaign (with 20 years under Rev. Wright's tutelage), yet in a live interview inadvertently refers to "my Muslim faith." When he decided against public commemoration of Prayer Day, Obama professed that it is his practice to "pray every day." I wonder which way he faces when he does so. Hey, if he is Muslim, that's his choice. However, that is not how he presented himself to the American voters, and one has to wonder at what agenda his faith promotes.

Oh, gross! Several new studies claim that conservatives are more prone to squeamishness and disgust. According to the article, Prof. David Pizarro of Cornell University concludes from the study he participated in that "disgust is evolution's way of protecting us from disease.

Unfortunately, in his view, disgust is now used to make moral judgments." Wow; now there's a profundity! Can you imagine making moral judgments without a sense of repugnance when deserved? (Oh, was that a moral judgment?) And if disgust was to protect us from disease, why are so many homosexuals so enthralled with having unprotected anal sex, even when they are aware of all the sexually-transmitted diseases out there? It would seem to me that evolution failed another test. So much for 'accidental creation.'

Pizarro continues, "Liberals...are more likely to base judgments on whether an action or a thing causes actual harm." Hmmm. Does this explain why most (real) conservatives are disgusted by abortion, while liberals seem undisturbed by the absolute barbarity and bloodshed of it? Or why liberals have such vitriolic hatred of conservatives who simply want respect for God, innocent human life, and our constitutional liberties?

Oh,...good? But before you right-wingers decide to end your miserable, disgusting lives, yet another study (government apparently has a huge daily quota for meaningless studies at public expense) from the National (Junk) Science Foundation indicates that "Individuals with conservative ideologies are happier than liberal-leaners." Great news, eh? Not so much, in their interpretation. According to the currently ruling scientific elite, "Conservatives rationalize social and economic inequalities." Damn this conservative happiness!

What do we make of all this? Well, to begin with, if you're a liberal science writer you get to infer whatever conclusions best fit your own mindset. This means if you're a liberal it's OK to be miserable because you're only worried about the inequalities of life. And if you're a mean old conservative, you're happy because you don't care about the misery of others. Are you following all this?

OK; now for a dose of reality. Liberals are inclined toward blaming conservatives for all the things they themselves are guilty of; also known as guilt transferance. For example: libs' internal guilt over their support for abortion - killing the innocent - redirects their self-resentment toward conservatives who can see the logic of, for instance, shooting someone in self-defense. Similarly, their willingness to steal from those who labor is offset by their willingness to give part of those proceeds to those who will not labor (but they are so often very stingy when it comes to giving from their own largesse). In this scenario, theft occurs via taxation; government serves as the 'enforcer,' absolving them of guilt for the legalized theft.

Conservatives, on the other hand, may be happier (47% compared to 28% of libs) because they are willing to give of their own charity, perhaps because they realize that doing the right - but sometimes difficult - thing pleases God. This may explain why so many conservatives cheerfully give to charities which actually help people, while liberals generally are not so generous in opening their own pockets (except to political causes; go figure). After all, it is a human trait to be willing to share with those you love, including the God who made us and has promised to save us.

No comments:

Post a Comment