A Disaster Lurking

[Adam's Apple]

Society as Clay in Liberals' Hands
By Thomas E. Brewton
Feb 15, 2007

The liberal paradigm recognizes no spiritual dimension to human nature or to human society. In the liberals' atheistic and materialistic world, humans are merely animals a notch along the evolutionary scale from the apes and, like them, motivated only by material factors: water, food, sex, and shelter.

Societies, in that paradigm, are held together by whatever may be the currently reigning regulations governing those material wants. A political society theoretically is a lump of clay that intellectuals are capable of shaping anyway they wish.

In contrast, Cicero, the great Roman orator and admirer of Plato, Aristotle, and the Stoic philosophers, observed in The Republic:

for full article:
http://www.michnews.com/artman/publish/article_15806.shtml

 

[CTRLALTDEL]

The disaster has already happened. It was called the REPUBLICAN PARTY.

 

[Annie]

Society as Clay in Liberals' Hands
By Thomas E. Brewton
Feb 15, 2007

The liberal paradigm recognizes no spiritual dimension to human nature or to human society. In the liberals' atheistic and materialistic world, humans are merely animals a notch along the evolutionary scale from the apes and, like them, motivated only by material factors: water, food, sex, and shelter.

Societies, in that paradigm, are held together by whatever may be the currently reigning regulations governing those material wants. A political society theoretically is a lump of clay that intellectuals are capable of shaping anyway they wish.

In contrast, Cicero, the great Roman orator and admirer of Plato, Aristotle, and the Stoic philosophers, observed in The Republic:

for full article:
http://www.michnews.com/artman/publish/article_15806.shtml

I'm always glad to read pieces that mention Plato and/or Aristotle. The piece was thought provoking, though too many of this type manage to tie in AIDS, etc. as some sort of devine punishment. On the other hand, I do appreciate the links from the 60's/70's and the nexis to today's problems.

Great post AA!

 

[Gurdari]

that argument was poorly constructed, and borderline racist. In fact the number of ridiculous claims are almost funny.

"People who have lost faith in God do not fight. They run. Since they do not believe in life after death, this life is the only thing they have to lose."

Give me a break. Thinking that there is no afterlife, means this life is far more precious.

"The very word Islam means "submission." Many Europeans have submitted already. In that sense, they have already become Muslims."

Yeah, it means the Muslim submits to God, not Europe submits to Muslims.

"The welfare state also intentionally undermined religion to crush the spirit of freedom among its subjects. And it undermined demographics, because people who do not believe in God do not believe in the future and see children as a burden."

What? This just straight BS, I'd love any evidence that I view children as a burden...

"An enduring society is not a random assemblage of people drawn together, like pigs around the feed trough, waiting for welfare-state handouts.
The liberal paradigm recognizes no spiritual dimension to human nature or to human society. In the liberals' atheistic and materialistic world, humans are merely animals a notch along the evolutionary scale from the apes and, like them, motivated only by material factors: water, food, sex, and shelter."

The first sentence may be true, but he doesn't connect it to the second, he just implies a connection. And really, water, food, sex, and shelter? That's all I care about? Give a f***ing break.

Too many other lines are worthy of rebuttal, but I'm off to do some deep breathing.

 

[trobinett]

"People who have lost faith in God do not fight. They run. Since they do not believe in life after death, this life is the only thing they have to lose."

Now, that I like, the more you read it, the more sense it makes.

 

[Adam's Apple]

On the other hand, I do appreciate the links from the 60's/70's and the nexis to today's problems.

Those rebels/radicals of the 60's/70's were hard enough to deal with at the time, and now we're learning we're going to have to deal with them again. In my opinion, it will be harder dealing with them this time because of the steady deterioration of the social fabric of the nation.

 

[Avatar4321]

The disaster has already happened. It was called the REPUBLICAN PARTY.

Have anything useful to contribute to any part of this board?

 

[CTRLALTDEL]

Have anything useful to contribute to any part of this board?

You talk about us being materialistic. Republicans only see money and oil as the things that matter the most and must be aquired no matter what the cost. Today's Christians have no christian values whatsoever.

 

[Hoyt Clagwell]

Do you have a job?

Do you drive a car?

 

[Annie]

Do you have a job?

Do you drive a car?

Welcome! Good questions.

 

[CaffeineKid1988]

You talk about us being materialistic. Republicans only see money and oil as the things that matter the most and must be aquired no matter what the cost. Today's Christians have no christian values whatsoever.

You can bitch about Christians not having Christian values anymore...as if you'd be all for us if we suddenly saw the light.

Let's see...If I try to quote a liberal, it's always out of context, if I try to have a debate with Bullypulpit or some other jack-off, there's never any response other than, "Go fuck yourself, you God-loving fascist neocon homophobic religious nut", if I give my opinion on anything that's going on in the world, it's always because I brainwash myself with AM radio, any attempt to help a buddy of mine cool down is drowned out by, "Well, he's just going to have sex anyway...," and when I accuse liberals of being in denial, they scream, in effect, "NO, I'M NOT, YOU ARE!"

I'm beginning to wonder why I never got sick of this a lot sooner.

 

[Bern80]

You can bitch about Christians not having Christian values anymore...as if you'd be all for us if we suddenly saw the light.

Let's see...If I try to quote a liberal, it's always out of context, if I try to have a debate with Bullypulpit or some other jack-off, there's never any response other than, "Go fuck yourself, you God-loving fascist neocon homophobic religious nut", if I give my opinion on anything that's going on in the world, it's always because I brainwash myself with AM radio, any attempt to help a buddy of mine cool down is drowned out by, "Well, he's just going to have sex anyway...," and when I accuse liberals of being in denial, they scream, in effect, "NO, I'M NOT, YOU ARE!"

I'm beginning to wonder why I never got sick of this a lot sooner.

Don't beat yourself up. To have the constructive conversation you want you have to deal with objective/rationale people. Objectivity/rationality are not compatible with being a liberal. They function almost solely on an emotional level.

 

[Avatar4321]

You talk about us being materialistic. Republicans only see money and oil as the things that matter the most and must be aquired no matter what the cost. Today's Christians have no christian values whatsoever.

Yeah heaven forbid we actually think people should be able to do what they feel is right with the wealth they make through their hard work. I think "Thou shalt not steal" is a pretty Christian value. I also think hard work is a pretty Christian value.

What exactly do you see in working hard and not wanting others taking what you make that would be unchristian?

btw if we have no Christian values anymore what the heck are you guys complaining about?

 

[Vintij]

I dont see why its so hard to have your own faith, and seperate that from your own political agenda. Thats what most democrats and moderate republicans try to do, but the argument is that tough conservatives who put god first (as they should) dont realize that the whole world does not share in there specific values because christian values today are not always divine and are sometimes distorted between different generations. Nobody really even knows if the bible allows taxing or nuclear weapons, or invasion, or dictation, or any type of modern day policy. The bible is just too old to comfortably fit into the fabric of today's policy, which republicans try to do. I personally have much faith in the lord, and the afterlife etc....but i also have common sense to know that the king james version of the bible is somewhat of a contradiction to the modern day values of christians. So to say that BUSH makes all his decisions based on the lord and the bible would definately be a contradiction to his present day foreign policy.

Ive always believed that god did not create government or money or weapons so why should we involve the bible in our govenment, our money, and our weapons.

If anybody really cared about the bible, they would bring up hundreds of morals and values from the OLD and NEW testaments, not just the parts they want to follow. To call yourself christian comes with the responsibilty of actually being able to read about christianity and its very beginning.

And in todays society, its difficult to find someone who has read one spec of the old testamin and realized how hard it is to conform to it with every day life and still actually lives by it.

Its not hard to have values, and great policy. You just have to let people have there own values without forcing them on yours.

 

[Gurdari]

Let's see...If I try to quote a liberal, it's always out of context, if I try to have a debate with Bullypulpit or some other jack-off, there's never any response other than, "Go fuck yourself, you God-loving fascist neocon homophobic religious nut", if I give my opinion on anything that's going on in the world, it's always because I brainwash myself with AM radio, any attempt to help a buddy of mine cool down is drowned out by, "Well, he's just going to have sex anyway...," and when I accuse liberals of being in denial, they scream, in effect, "NO, I'M NOT, YOU ARE!"

I won't say those nasty things to you, CK... comment freely, we can stick to the points and avoid emotional appeals and ad hominems, reductios of any color and focus on the search for understanding.
AM radio's sound quality is too crappy for brainwashing anyway...

 

[Gurdari]

If anybody really cared about the bible, they would bring up hundreds of morals and values from the OLD and NEW testaments, not just the parts they want to follow. To call yourself christian comes with the responsibilty of actually being able to read about christianity and its very beginning.

And in todays society, its difficult to find someone who has read one spec of the old testamin and realized how hard it is to conform to it with every day life and still actually lives by it.

The closest adherrants to their religion appear to be Muslims (IMO) as most Christians I know don't really believe in old school religious notions (demonic possesion, stoning, slavery, no women in church... you get the idea) even though, according to what I've read - back in the 6-700s Islam was actually the most progressive religion towards women, even though nowadays it seems the most backward... again, if all religious people REALLY followed their book of choice, we'd be in for some archaic, bloody times.

However, if people choose to ignore the violent parts, and focus on the 'help each other, live a good life parts' then so much the better.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Society as Clay in Liberals' Hands
By Thomas E. Brewton
Feb 15, 2007

The liberal paradigm recognizes no spiritual dimension to human nature or to human society. In the liberals' atheistic and materialistic world, humans are merely animals a notch along the evolutionary scale from the apes and, like them, motivated only by material factors: water, food, sex, and shelter.

Societies, in that paradigm, are held together by whatever may be the currently reigning regulations governing those material wants. A political society theoretically is a lump of clay that intellectuals are capable of shaping anyway they wish.

In contrast, Cicero, the great Roman orator and admirer of Plato, Aristotle, and the Stoic philosophers, observed in The Republic:

for full article:
http://www.michnews.com/artman/publish/article_15806.shtml

Great article AA. It is definitely the goal of Pelosi and the liberal left to shape our country into Europe's image: secular, socialist, and multicultural. If they succeed they will effectively destroy the USA and bring it closer in line with the ideals of communism which were at the core of the 60s revolution.

 

[Vintij]

What are you talking about screaming eagle? Europe's image is not even remotely communist its reformist socialism.

And most american corporations and universitys are secular in nature. Keep in mind Secular does NOT mean athiest! It is more along the lines of worldly and religious neutrality. The whole reason we have such a problem with iraq right now is primarily based on religous violence and non secular corrupted government. America is the most multicultural country in the world, you cant change that with government or religion.

Karl marx started the socialist movement with the right idea but some people took it in a new direction, they are called "communists". The ones who want a mild form of socialism are called "reformists" like your president MR BUSH. So either your calling him a communist, or your saying we dont need reform. I dont understand your position on that.

Infact i dont understand anything your saying, what i got from all this is that you want america to be run by the pope and the clergy, or like some kind of religious cult or group and you promote religious violence? Sorry but it just wouldnt work that way, sure America is very christian dominated and thats great, but america would not kick out athiests, or gays, or blacks, or jews, or muslims. Life just doesnt work that way, thats the reason we are so multiculterd, because we are a FREE!! nation.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

What are you talking about screaming eagle? Europe's image is not even remotely communist its reformist socialism.

And most american corporations and universitys are secular in nature. Keep in mind Secular does NOT mean athiest! It is more along the lines of worldly and religious neutrality. The whole reason we have such a problem with iraq right now is primarily based on religous violence and non secular corrupted government. America is the most multicultural country in the world, you cant change that with government or religion.

Karl marx started the socialist movement with the right idea but some people took it in a new direction, they are called "communists". The ones who want a mild form of socialism are called "reformists" like your president MR BUSH. So either your calling him a communist, or your saying we dont need reform. I dont understand your position on that.

Infact i dont understand anything your saying, what i got from all this is that you want america to be run by the pope and the clergy, or like some kind of religious cult or group and you promote religious violence? Sorry but it just wouldnt work that way, sure America is very christian dominated and thats great, but america would not kick out athiests, or gays, or blacks, or jews, or muslims. Life just doesnt work that way, thats the reason we are so multiculterd, because we are a FREE!! nation.

Pelosi is a "caviar commie". Read about her and her connections to the DSA:

Prior to the cleanup of its website in 1999, the DSA included a song list featuring "The Internationale," the worldwide anthem of communism and socialism.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52798

Europe is "not even remotely communist"? Are you kidding? Europe has become very socialist in nature which is essentially one step away from communism. The Communist Party is growing in European countries. There is increased representation of Communists in the parliaments of France, Italy, Greece, Spain, etc. Germany is of particular concern. There is also a strong connection to Chavez, another socialist/communist that the stupid liberals in Europe and in this country seem to think is just as hunky-dory as Fidel Castro, another craven communist.

America has good reasons to be concerned about the resurrection of communism in Germany. As mentioned, Die Linke-PDS is not a traditional Western European leftist party. It is the former official communist party of East Germany. It still denounces economic freedom and capitalism; it diminishes the atrocities committed by governments in the Soviet empire; and its success is a source of inspiration to other European communist parties. Down the road, it will seize every opportunity to influence the European Union and it already boasts skilled and experienced politicians in the European Parliament.

One of them is Sahra Wagenknecht. A leading ideological scholar in the communist resurrection movement, she represents Die Linke-PDS in the European Parliament. There she holds a seat on the prestigious Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs. Aside from her ambitions to create a strong German communist party, she nurtures the European Union’s relations with Latin America. Her affinity for Latin American socialism was expressed in her book Alo Presidente, a tribute to Venezuela’s president Hugo Chavez. She is also the German spokesperson for Venezuela Avanza, a “solidarity movement” promoting Venezuelan socialism.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=23311

So what if secular does not mean atheist? The point is that both groups are against religion. And it is very obvious that they cannot and will not co-exist with religious groups. Pluralism is not a word in the secularist vocabulary despite the lip service they give to multiculturalism.

Of course I don't want the USA to be run by the Pope. For you to even think that tells me that you are a very deep drinker of the secular liberal koolaid.

I don't want the US to be run by the likes of Pelosi (or the other Big Nanny, Hillary) who is bent on taking down our capitalist society and curbing our democratic freedoms. She isn't an actual communist party member but she is the leader of the Far Left which is bent on bringing more socialist and communist elements into our democratic country.

Heh. "multiculTERD" I'll have to remember that one.
There is nothing wrong with legal immigrants. It is the illegals I have a problem with. I also have a problem with immigrants who don't want to adapt to our American society.

 

[Hoyt Clagwell]

Welcome! Good questions.

Thank you Kathianne.