Wednesday, November 16, 2005

The state WILL control your consensual activities!

According to Carlos at RedState, to do otherwise would be an unconstitutional violation of the separation of church and state--in this case, the secular humanist church of Hedonism!!

Even I can't believe this one. At a gut level I can understand the people who argue against the necessity of a separation of church and state. They want a theocracy, and they express that belief honestly. OK. But this floors me--a statement that the fact that we have no impositions is in and of itself an imposition.

Monday, November 14, 2005

Bill O'Reilly: terrorist sympathizer

"Bill O'Reilly is a terrorist sympathizer."

Just doing my part to participate in the Google bomb against Bill O'Reilly for encouraging terrorists to strike at SanFran.

Go ahead and give it a try if you haven't already: type in "terrorist sympathizer" in your google search and hit the "I'm feeling lucky" button. See what happens!

Sunday, November 13, 2005

What is liberalism?

The fact that a diary like this could make the recommended list at RedState proves unequivocally that these "people of faith" and "conservatives" really have no idea what liberalism is or what it stands for.

I have to go to bed. I don't want to get into all of it. But what offends me the most, actually is the part about liberals hating Christians and empathizing with Muslims. This statement, of course, comes about in the context of the idea that liberals are "abetting the enemy"--which, at the current time, happens to be Islamic extremism--and are waging a war against Christianity, with regard to such things as evolution vs. ID in schools, and religious displays on public land.

In any case, the statement is extremely off-base. We don't "empathize with Muslims" any more than we empathize with any other group, religious or secular. Just like Christians, Jews or any other group, we will get along with the Muslims that wish to live their life and practice their faith without making attempts to impose it on the rest of society. Our "war on Christianity" is not a war against religion at all. I have known plenty of Christians in my time, both on the more liberal and conservative side of things, and I have gotten along with all of them exactly to the extent that they did not try to impose their values on me in whatever capacity they might have been able to do so--and I'm sure they would say the same of me--and usually, I was able to get along with just about everybody. It's a "live and let live" policy--and you can bet that if Islam were the dominant religion and attempts were made to have the Qu'ran replace science classes in the United States, we liberals would be just as opposed. Same goes with Hinduism and the Bhagavad-Gita.

We also DON'T have an optimistic view of humanity. In fact, we're very negative about humanity. We see the greed, the selfishness, the corruption, the tendencies toward violence, and everything else, and realize that it needs regulation so as to form a decent society based on fair laws and a system that is above any individual that resides within it--such as the system founded by the United States Constitution. But we do try to appeal to the better nature of humanity if we possibly can--and prefer to count within our ranks those who are most motivated by such an appeal.