Ann Coulter's New Book: Godless: The religion of Liberals

[dilloduck]

I just found this for anyone who wants anything:
www.thelefthand.com
This site has a whole bunch of stuff designed for lefties. I just ordered a dozen binders and notebooks, a lefty keyboard, mouse, scissors, and even pencils designed not to smudge when your write!!!!!! Pretty much it's the greatest thing I've ever found on the internet. I highly recommend the lefties on the board take a look.

Dillo:
You should really look as well. The site has a couple of lefty handwriting books. I suggest you get one for your son. My grade school taught everyone to write in cursive. The problem was that all the books were designed for righties. Because of that, I have terrible handwriting and can't write for sustained periods without a lot of pain. I'd buy a book for him and talk to his teachers about letting him use that in class instead of those terrible righty ones they'll try to force on him. Trust me, you'll be saving him a lot of pain later in life.

Thanks for the nice gesture!! We did manage to find him a lot of lefty accessories for school but the only really successful one was his baseball glove.
Actually he has one year left to graduate but he has his fathers' penmanship genes. Neither one of us can read what we write.

 

[Diuretic]

I think either Ann Coulter or this article failed to show the other religious aspect of liberalism, the return to paradise. <snipped some> With liberalism, it all goes back to their idea of tribals as noble and in touch with nature (rather than primitive, bloodthirsty savages, which most of them were and some still are). At one time, humans communed with nature and lived in harmony with it. They shared everything and there was no fighting, and the UN did everything right (just kidding). Then we became greedy, raped mother nature, and invented the idea of God to justify it. Only by denoucing God, giving all of our greed gotten gains to the government, and refusing to harm anything 'natural' can we return to this paradise.

An interesting idea but flawed because you equate a political idea with a religious idea. "Liberalism" is not a theology and nor is it one identifiable concept so the religous metaphor fails there. As well you have labelled a whole range of political concepts as "liberal" without allowing that there are a great many different, sometimes opposing, concepts in the left of centre political spectrum.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

An interesting idea but flawed because you equate a political idea with a religious idea. "Liberalism" is not a theology and nor is it one identifiable concept so the religous metaphor fails there. As well you have labelled a whole range of political concepts as "liberal" without allowing that there are a great many different, sometimes opposing, concepts in the left of centre political spectrum.

Buddhism is really a philosophy, yet we call it a religion. Don't be so stringent. Liberalism is a belief system and most importantly provides a form of moral guidance. These traits make it fair game in any discussion of religion. Not an identifiable concept? LOL. You libs crack me up. :rotflmao: That's like the "there's no such thing as white people" argument.

 

[Bullypulpit]

I hear she toyed with the title, "The Ignorant Hillbillies Guide to the Universe", but didn't want to alienate one of her fans.
No matter the title, it appears there are plenty around to lap up exactly what they wanted to hear. She has her moments of brilliance, but like Rush, sometimes she's way over the top.

Like Rush, she uses just enough truth (about 20%), to sugar coat the rest of her assertions which are utter BS (About 80%)

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Like Rush, she uses just enough truth (about 20%), to sugar coat the rest of her assertions which are utter BS (About 80%)

WHat has rush lied about? Can you name one of his lies?

 

[Bullypulpit]

Buddhism is really a philosophy, yet we call it a religion. Don't be so stringent. Liberalism is a belief system and most importantly provides a form of moral guidance. These traits make it fair game in any discussion of religion. Not an identifiable concept? LOL. You libs crack me up. :rotflmao: That's like the "there's no such thing as white people" argument.

Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism <i>et al</i> are philosophies. They sink to the level of religions when they become overgrown with the rank weeds of metaphysical speculation.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism <i>et al</i> are philosophies. They sink to the level of religions when they become overgrown with the rank weeds of metaphysical speculation.

They're still all metaphysical speculation. Karma? Reincarnation? those aren't speculative?

 

[Bullypulpit]

My actions would be more on personal principle, as opposed to making a bold statement against ann coulter.

I am sure she cries enough anyways, seeing as how she is dillusional, cold-hearted, and probably has an eating disorder.

And a junk-totin' tranny...

<center><img src=http://www.stephaniemiller.com/Gallery/photos/Fotoshop/anncoulter.sized.jpg><center>

 

[Bullypulpit]

They're still all metaphysical speculation. Karma? Reincarnation? those aren't speculative?

The Buddha never spoke of the fact of reincarnation, only the possibility. Karma is simply the notion that your actions have consequences, and those consequences will eventually catch up to you. Unfortunately, Buddhism has also suffered at the hands of those inclined to fruitless metaphysical speculation.

 

[Diuretic]

Buddhism is really a philosophy, yet we call it a religion. Don't be so stringent. Liberalism is a belief system and most importantly provides a form of moral guidance. These traits make it fair game in any discussion of religion. Not an identifiable concept? LOL. You libs crack me up. :rotflmao: That's like the "there's no such thing as white people" argument.

A person can be a liberal and be a Christian or a Jew or a Muslim. Since someone can't be a Jew and a Christian or a Jew and a Muslim that means liberalism can't be a religion.

There, that's finally sorted out.

 

[dilloduck]

A person can be a liberal and be a Christian or a Jew or a Muslim. Since someone can't be a Jew and a Christian or a Jew and a Muslim that means liberalism can't be a religion.

There, that's finally sorted out.

Not really---liberalism allows people to worship whatever the hell they feel like at the moment. It's the nature of the religion.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

A person can be a liberal and be a Christian or a Jew or a Muslim. Since someone can't be a Jew and a Christian or a Jew and a Muslim that means liberalism can't be a religion.

There, that's finally sorted out.

I would argue that liberal socialists who feel it's ok to redistribute wealth are not really christians, because socialism is stealing, and god said not to steal. So there.

 

[Diuretic]

I would argue that liberal socialists who feel it's ok to redistribute wealth are not really christians, because socialism is stealing, and god said not to steal. So there.

 

[jillian]

I would argue that liberal socialists who feel it's ok to redistribute wealth are not really christians, because socialism is stealing, and god said not to steal. So there.

Funny, there are about 2,000 verses in the Bible about taking care of the poor. You must hate that.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Funny, there are about 2,000 verses in the Bible about taking care of the poor. You must hate that.

Through VOLUNTARY giving. Compulsory wealth confiscation is not the same.

 

[jillian]

Through VOLUNTARY giving. Compulsory wealth confiscation is not the same.

Give unto Caesar what is Caesar's...

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Give unto Caesar what is Caesar's...

But caesar didn't take care of the poor in jesus's time.

 

[jillian]

But caesar didn't take care of the poor in jesus's time.

But he collected taxes to be used for the common good. Didn't he?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

But he collected taxes to be used for the common good. Didn't he?

Yes, but the words of jesus can only be taken in the context of how "common good" was defined in his day. We can't be certain that if jesus saw the stunning corrupt hierarchies in government today if he would still have such a blanket policy regarding governmental intrusions.

 

[Said1]

But he collected taxes to be used for the common good. Didn't he?

Why yes he did. I think they even had a national health and child care program, not to mention free abortion and methodon clinics. His standing army really suffered in light of all his social spending. Mighty fine transport system too.