Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Conservatives believe in God, Liberals believe they are Gods

S

Solo

Guest
In God we trust (Coulter:Conservatives by and large believe in God, Liberals believe they are Gods)
Worldnetdaily | 7/4/03 | Kevin McCullough

Liberals despise hearing it! In fact they have worked hard to have the truth of it erased from public life. But it is true nonetheless.

After spending nearly a half hour of my radio show on the topic of Joseph McCarthy and the revolutionary claims set forth in her book, Ann Coulter bowled me over when I asked her the following question: "Ann, why do liberals hate conservatives in 2003 America?"

Her answer was a simple one, and then the clock ran out and she was gone. But that simple answer stirred the pot, and it echoed what this column had proclaimed merely weeks ago.

"Conservatives, by and large believe in God, and liberals believe they are gods," came the reply.

The basic gist of the idea is easy enough to understand. But let me clean up the edges for those of you who will yell about speaking in generalities. For truth to ever be understood – generalities must be used. In the end, generalities must also be proven on some scale or a new generality will replace it.

My stunned silence at Ann's answer was reaffirmation of a conclusion I had come to a long time ago. By liberals, Ann and I are both referring to those who make up liberal ideology – the radical activists within the Democratic Party. They have been on the wrong side of history – at least American history – primarily because they have been on the wrong side of God. What Ann is just coming to realize as a constitutional attorney, I have been realizing as a theologian for some time – absolute truth is knowable, and expected to be understood and followed.

So does this argument mean that Republicans never make mistakes or are on the wrong side? No! And when they do, they are less conservative in making such judgments. I also believe that there are very many Joe and Susie farmroad Democrats in America that philosophically are more conservative than liberal.

What is perilously unfortunate is that many of these folks lend their political votes and will to radical ideologues such as the Clintons, out of ignorance or presuppositions that may be perceived but not verifiable. (Democrats care more about poor people, Democrats care more about race relations, Democrats are more fair or – my favorite – I've been a Democrat all my life and I will never be anything other than a Democrat. All of these make compelling reasons, do they not?)

But all of this being the case carries no meaning on whether the statement is any less true.

Liberal elites, Bill and Hillary Clinton, James Carville, Jesse Jackson, Terry McCaulliffe, Diane Feinstein and others are far more radical in their beliefs than they ever betray to the public – although it is nearly unavoidable, because through policy they betray their thought process. They believe that the state (similarly to socialism) is the great giver. Conservatives believe that God is.

Liberal elites believe that morality is merely a matter of opinion. Conservatives believe God established this world and therefore morality is not up for debate but has narrow and specific limits to it.

Liberals believe that taking an innocent person's life is allowable in the process of gaining power. Conservatives believe that innocent life should be protected – and that each loss of innocent life is tragic.

Liberals believe that a family is "whoever you would like to have sex with" being allowed to do so. Conservatives believe that a family is one man, one woman, a covenant before God – and raising children in the safety of that healthy home.

Liberals believe that they hold divine wisdom in how the money that everybody else earns should be spent. Conservatives believe that the Creator has given them the stewardship of how they should control their priorities on how to spend the money they have earned.

In essence, liberals believe that they are gods and should be allowed to control your actions, beliefs, money and future. Conservatives, in essence, believe that God has granted us life and that in each life He has charged us with the task of being stewards of our own choices.

I have no doubt that I will receive more hate mail from this column than any other I have ever written. Frankly I don't care. It is not up to the demagogues to instruct me on how to think. Liberals' ultimate goal is to shut down all opposing voices that counter their power-hungry rhetoric. But the truth must be told nonetheless.

You may not buy into the idea that liberals have a hard time dealing with truth. You may be of the opinion that "just seeing things different" is a sophisticated enough explanation for how liberals go about life. I beg to differ.

Hugh Hewitt documented in his recent column, "Democrats Will Get You Killed" how James Carville had a hard time even seeing the truth when hard physical evidence was laid directly before his eyes. Hillary Clinton's book has recently been debunked, not just by Ann Coulter, but by men who knew her well, such as Dick Morris and Sydney Blumenthal. And the Rev. Jesse Jackson is continuing to betray his supposed Christian beliefs by pressuring his named replacement for Operation Push, James T. Meeks, to go against his own Christian beliefs and vote in favor of homosexual license.

Liberal elites have no moral anchor and, I guess by nature, have difficulty understanding what virtue looks like.

Conservatives must wake up. Conservatives must speak up. For if they do not, their apathy will cause them to lose the very freedoms that they love so much today. And in doing so, the phrase "In God We Trust" will be nothing more than an outdated mantra of time before the world can remember.

And that friend, will be the saddest day of all.
 
1. I consider myself a Liberal.
2. I do not consider myself a God.
3. Your article is therefore disproved. Q.E.D.

:roll:

Edit: Quotes like this one...

Liberal elites have no moral anchor and, I guess by nature, have difficulty understanding what virtue looks like.

...are part of the problem. No moral anchor? What trash.
 
Cosmo said:
1. I consider myself a Liberal.
2. I do not consider myself a God.
3. Your article is therefore disproved. Q.E.D.

:roll:

Edit: Quotes like this one...

Liberal elites have no moral anchor and, I guess by nature, have difficulty understanding what virtue looks like.

...are part of the problem. No moral anchor? What trash.
Your definition of virtue is so much less than God's definition of virtue, therefore your antiChristian, liberal stance is suspect according to the article. Since you disagree then you make yourself right and the author of the article wrong. Translation: You are god; the author is not.

Thanks for the hands on example for the article! :D
 
Solo said:
Your definition of virtue is so much less than God's definition of virtue, therefore your antiChristian, liberal stance is suspect according to the article. Since you disagree then you make yourself right and the author of the article wrong. Translation: You are god; the author is not.

Thanks for the hands on example for the article! :D

Your definition of virtue is so far-out and exclusive, therefore your proChristian, fundamentalist stance is suspect according to common sense. Since you disagree then you make yourself right and common sense wrong. Translation: you lack common sense; non-fundamentalists do not.

Thanks for the hands on example of a lack of common sense! :D
 
Cosmo said:
Solo said:
Your definition of virtue is so much less than God's definition of virtue, therefore your antiChristian, liberal stance is suspect according to the article. Since you disagree then you make yourself right and the author of the article wrong. Translation: You are god; the author is not.

Thanks for the hands on example for the article! :D

Your definition of virtue is so far-out and exclusive, therefore your proChristian, fundamentalist stance is suspect according to common sense. Since you disagree then you make yourself right and common sense wrong. Translation: you lack common sense; non-fundamentalists do not.

Thanks for the hands on example of a lack of common sense! :D
And your position of being your own god has not been dimished one bit, so continue in your stroll through life ignoring God's truth, and get ready for a very rude awakening.

I will continue to rely on God's common sense over your professed common sense, but thanks anyway. :D
 
Solo said:
And your position of being your own god has not been dimished one bit, so continue in your stroll through life ignoring God's truth, and get ready for a very rude awakening.

I will continue to rely on God's common sense over your professed common sense, but thanks anyway. :D

You don't get how absurd you're being, do you? That's okay, I can keep playing. :)

Your position of sticking to your fundamentalist god has not been diminished one bit, so continue in your stroll through life ignoring all vestments of common sense and reality, and get ready for a very rude awakening.

I will continue to rely on science and human achievements over your bible's oft-debated 'truths', but thanks anyway. :D
 
In God We Trust

"Liberals despise hearing it! In fact they have worked hard to have the truth of it erased from public life. But it is true nonetheless. " - Kevin McCullough
 
Solo said:
In God We Trust

"Liberals despise hearing it! In fact they have worked hard to have the truth of it erased from public life. But it is true nonetheless. " - Kevin McCullough

You don't research much, do you?

From here...

While there can be little doubt that Christian values shaped the thinking of the Founders, it is wrong to jump to the conclusion that the Founders were almost all orthodox evangelicals Christians. Even though many of the Founders applauded religion for its utility- believing religion was good for the country- they also argued vigorously for voluntary religion and complete religious freedom. Thus, even if Barton's point were true, it does not compel the conclusion that we should privilege Christianity in any legal or constitutional sense.

Emphasis mine. Also, from here, "In God We Trust" is a recent addition (1956), not a part of the founding of this nation.
 
Cosmo said:
Solo said:
In God We Trust

"Liberals despise hearing it! In fact they have worked hard to have the truth of it erased from public life. But it is true nonetheless. " - Kevin McCullough

You don't research much, do you?

From here...

While there can be little doubt that Christian values shaped the thinking of the Founders, it is wrong to jump to the conclusion that the Founders were almost all orthodox evangelicals Christians. Even though many of the Founders applauded religion for its utility- believing religion was good for the country- they also argued vigorously for voluntary religion and complete religious freedom. Thus, even if Barton's point were true, it does not compel the conclusion that we should privilege Christianity in any legal or constitutional sense.

Emphasis mine. Also, from here, "In God We Trust" is a recent addition (1956), not a part of the founding of this nation.
So?


Why do you, an atheist post on a Christian forum?
 
Emphasis mine. Also, from here, "In God We Trust" is a recent addition (1956), not a part of the founding of this nation.

Just what nation are you from, Pilgrim. :-? This country was founded on the belief in God and the principles of the bible- and if you don't like that, there are plenty of planes headed due east of here. :o May be as close to Heaven as you'll get.
 
Solo said:

Did you read what I posted? The United States was not founded on Christian principles, and the "In God We Trust" addition is extremely recent (1956). I doubt the founding fathers would have agreed with it as a national motto.

Why do you, an atheist post on a Christian forum?

What does that have to do with this thread?

I'll answer anyway. I post here because I desire a greater understanding of Christianity. To a degree, and with help from certain posters, I have achieved this goal. But fundamentalists like yourself do not appear interested in discussion or debate.
 
D46 said:
Cosmo said:
D46 said:
This country was fouonded on the belief in God

No, unfortunately, it wasn't. I suggest you reread the two links I posted.

I suggest you read the history books.

Instead of floundering around, how about you do some research yourself and cite your sources? There's a good boy. :) We can discuss more once you've got something more to offer this discussion than your own subjective opinion.
 
D46 said:
http://www.wtv-zone.com/Mary/forsakenroots.html

From that site:

Did you know that 52 of the 55 signers of The Declaration of Independence were orthodox, deeply committed Christians? The other three all believed in the Bible as the divine truth, the God of scripture, and His personal intervention.

BZZT! Wrong!

From the link I posted earlier:

Barton claims that 52 of the 55 signers of the Constitution were "orthodox" Christians and many were "evangelical Christians."

Barton does not cite any authority to support this assertion. Indeed, the weight of scholarly opinion is to the contrary. For example, Professor Clinton Rossiter has written:

"Although it had its share of strenuous Christians... the gathering at Philadelphia was largely made up of men in whom the old fires were under control or had even flickered out. Most were nominally members of one of the traditional churches in their part of the country.. and most were men who could take their religion or leave it alone. Although no one in this sober gathering would have dreamed of invoking the Goddess of Reason, neither would anyone have dared to proclaim his opinions had the support of the God of Abraham and Paul. The Convention of 1787 was highly rationalist and even secular in spirit." (Clinton Rossiter, 1787; The Grand Convention, pp. 147-148.)

Much has been made of Benjamin Franklin's suggestion that the Convention open its morning sessions with prayer. His motion was turned down, however, and not again taken up. Franklin himself noted that "with the exception of 3 or 4, most thought prayers unnecessary." (Ferrand, Records of the Federal Convention of 1787, rev. ed., Vol. 1, p.452.)

While there can be little doubt that Christian values shaped the thinking of the Founders, it is wrong to jump to the conclusion that the Founders were almost all orthodox evangelicals Christians. Even though many of the Founders applauded religion for its utility- believing religion was good for the country- they also argued vigorously for voluntary religion and complete religious freedom. Thus, even if Barton's point were true, it does not compel the conclusion that we should privilege Christianity in any legal or constitutional sense.

Also, from your link:

Consider these words from George Washington, the Father of our Nation, in his farewell speech on September 19, 1796:

"It is impossible to govern the world without God and the Bible. Of all the dispositions and habits that lead to political prosperity, our religion and morality are the indispensable supporters. Let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that our national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle."

BZZT! Wrong again! From mine:

Barton quotes at length from George Washington's Farewell Address extolling the salutary effect that religion has on politics and civil government. Barton says we have ruled the study of Washington's Farewell Address out of the public schools.

Washington no doubt firmly believed that religion is good for government. And there is nothing wrong with studying his Farewell Address in the public school system. But other statements of Washington should also be studied, to give a more complete picture of what Washington truly believed. Washington wrote the following:

"If I could now conceive that the general government might ever be so administered as to render the liberty of conscience insecure, I beg you will be persuaded, that no one would be more zealous than myself to establish effectual barriers against the horrors of spiritual tyranny, and every species of religious persecution... [E]very man, conducting himself as a good citizen, and being accountable to God alone for his religious opinions, ought to be protected in worshipping the Deity according to the dictates of his own conscience." (Stokes, supra, p. 495.)

Thus, while Washington may have recognized the benefits of religion for the state, he also believed persons' religious preferences were a matter of individual, voluntary choice in which the government should not interfere.

So, not only is your link plagiarizing Barton's work, it's also completely wrong. Got anything worthwhile to share?
 
Cosmo,
You continue to support the article with your posts.

In God We Trust

"Liberals despise hearing it! In fact they have worked hard to have the truth of it erased from public life. But it is true nonetheless. " - Kevin McCullough
 
You can read! Wow!! that's great. So get started. You may learn why you have the freedoms you have today.
 
Solo said:
Cosmo,
You continue to support the article with your posts.

In God We Trust

"Liberals despise hearing it! In fact they have worked hard to have the truth of it erased from public life. But it is true nonetheless. " - Kevin McCullough

Hey, lookie! I can post articles...

http://www.grist.org/news/maindish/2004 ... christian/

...that supposedly say things about you, too! Then I can say "Solo, you continue to support my article with your posts."

You don't understand much about debate, do you?
 
Cosmo said:
Solo said:
Cosmo,
You continue to support the article with your posts.

In God We Trust

"Liberals despise hearing it! In fact they have worked hard to have the truth of it erased from public life. But it is true nonetheless. " - Kevin McCullough

Hey, lookie! I can post articles...

http://www.grist.org/news/maindish/2004 ... christian/

...that supposedly say things about you, too! Then I can say "Solo, you continue to support my article with your posts."

You don't understand much about debate, do you?
Since you do not understand the rules of forum debate, start your own thread with your article. If you need help coming up with a subject name, PM me and I will help you.

Please get back to the topic of this thread. Thanks.
 
Back
Top