Oct 16 2006
Liberals Trade War On Al Qaeda For One On Christians
While we head to the polls, we need to understand what voices and forces will be unleashed if Democrats get even a marginal victory this November. We know the Dems will bow to their liberal feverswamp base and repeal all Bush’s tax cuts. We know Democrats will try and surrender Iraq to Al Qaeda so they can redeploy our troops to Japan. We know Democrats will try and end the monitoring of terrorists overseas so we can avoid the chance communications they have with people here in the US (‘chance’, got it?). And we know all the fake promises about not impeaching Bush will fall away when serious evidence arises that he used faked documents from Niger to lead us into a war in Iraq (under a Democrat led Senate!). But do not forget that the liberals are angry, and Bush simply represents their source of their anger – Christians. The whole idea underlying all these surrenders to Al Qaeda is to free resources in the real battle – against Christianity (and no, I am not religious or attend church, so I am not feeling threatened by the goons on the left). Let’s read their intent in their own, eloquent words.
I had to get your attention, because I believe the Christian Right is a bigger threat to decent Americans than radical Islam. In fact, to many, the Christian Right is known as the American Taliban. I think that is a fair description.
…
I am concerned that they are forcing their will upon me. For example, let’s look at television. You know that TV has become more heavily censored every year since nipple-gate. The fines for indecency have been raised four-fold just in the last year. Does this come from the outrage of families or TV viewers?
Turns out that 99.98 percent of broadcasting complaints came from this one organization, The Parents Television Council (PTC). This group is single handedly deciding what every single person in America is to watch. That isn’t Democracy, nor is it the free market.
While this poor deprived soul is struggling to protect some personal sexual satisfaction in front of the boob tube, us parents of small children just want some wholesome TV to share with our two seven year old daughters. And we want the smut behind parental controls so we can let the girls switch TV channels without adult supervision. Is it too much to ask to keep open TV kid safe IN OUR HOMES!
This is why the war on Christians is something we all need to care about. Because Christian values underpin much of our legal system. Though Shall Not Steal. Though Shall Not Kill. We are better as a nation because we took some excellent elements of a world-class religion and applied them to our society. This wingnut is up in arms because he cannot see more breasts on TV without having to enter a parental control code???. Is this the new war we are going to wage when Democrats win the House??? My guess is yes – those on the angry left will push as hard and as far as they can, as fast as they can. Don’t believe otherwise. And will these paragons of virtue protect children or push for adult-child sex? I let this model liberal explain the views on that front:
These Catholic Church officials knew for decades [about child molestation by Priests] and shifted the offenders around the country. Guess what, Mr. Dobson; boinking is a biological imperative. It is mandated by nature, and to repress that only creates horrible and sometimes lethal consequences.
Pretty clear to me this mega-liberal is saying sexual encounters with children are a force of nature that must be accommodated. I guess just like Iraqis had to accept encounter the sexual desires of Saddam’s sons on their young duaghters, just something we have to learn to live with.
It has been evident for years that liberals are at war with Christianity.
The ACLU has all but declared war. You have to understand what their plan is and the steps they have taken to accomplish this plan. Take over the media so that Americans will only hear and see news the liberals want us to see. Take over the schools so they can brainwash our children. Take over the unions so they can control big business. Abolish Christianity so the lynchpin of our government and Constitution is endangered. Allow Islam to be taught in our schools and not Christianity to let us know Chrisitianity is not important. Indeed, that religion is not important. At Christmas time it is one thing after another. A truly tolerant person would ignore the manger scenes, trees, angels, etc., but liberals won’t do this. They want us to think and act like them. Any other behavior is unacceptable. They want to tear down the foundation of our country and rebuild according to their ideology. And like AJ, I am not religious and do not go to church, but I understand that religion is necessary in a lawful society. If Republicans stay at home in November they will be contributing to the downfall of our freedom and indeed the safety of our country. The liberals talk on and on about freedom of speech. How much freedom do you think socialists allow?
AJ,
To be honest, the FCC stuff is one of my biggest beefs with social conservatives. Never mind the fact that they come with things called remotes where you can chaneg the channel if there’s something on that you don’t like – or a power switch to turn it off. They want to simply take away the option from everyone.
And the PTC is kind of fishy on this, too. Did the people who filed complaints do so because they saw the show, or did they do so because of what the PTC said about the show?
We have seen a push to ban internet gambling while we have an aging airlift fleet. The majority of our C-5s are over 30 years old. The KC-135s are all over 40 years old. The P-3s are also getting up there in years. The F-15 first entered service 30 years ago this past January.
Yet we have anti-pork groups calling the production of more C-17s and F-22s “pork” – we see efforts to replace the C-130E with the new C-130J also labeled “pork”.
Congress can’t even get serious about solving real problems like immigration (no, the fence bill is not serious legislation in my opinion) or fixing Social Security. No, they’re going to increase fines for indecency by 300% because some folks either don’t want to use their remotes (and exercsie personal responsiblity for what they and their kids watch) or because they’re a bunch of control freaks who want to impose their aesthetic tastes on others.
On thing like gay marriage and the crusade against the Boy Scouts, the social conservatives are correct to fight. But when it comes to the PTC’s antics with FCC complaints… I’m not with them. They can use the remote or the blocking featurs that are available (as some recent TV ads illustrate).
First, it seems to me the values mentioned here are of a pre-Christian source. Second, I’m not sure if these are values or injunctions. In any case, we have a report of Jesus being asked which of the commandments is most important. His reported reply was that the most important is to love God with all you’ve got, and the second is to love your neighbor as yourself, and importantly: that all the rest of the commandments are based on these.
OK: if you’re interested in imposing values such as the ones you mention, why not stop at those? How about all 613 injunctions/commands known as the “mitzvot?”
On the topic of sexual encounters (the quote). You are deliberately misinterpreting this quote. The original writer has admittedly not been clear in his or her argument, but I doubt he or she is talking about adult/child sexual encounters when referring to “boinking.” Instead, he or she is arguing that imposing celibacy on Roman Catholic priests (or other people)–and thus repressing sexuality (a natural behavior)–leads them to act out their sexuality inappropriately, with very dangerous results. I might draw a parallel with the recent Foley scandal. Because the culture of the US does not really encourage people to be “out” as gay persons, especially in the Republican Party, he had to repress his natural sexual urges. What happened? Unhealthy sexual expression.
Notice that I am not bashing Christians in this discussion, even though I am a liberal.
Yesterday at church I had a discussion with someone about “socialized medicine.” I lived in a nation with socialized medicine for five years and had excellent medical care. I also had no worries about what might happen to me if I were out of work and needed to see a doctor. So to your commenter, this form of “socialism” actually permitted a great deal of freedom, at least to me. It provided freedom to move from one job to another, from one insurance company to another (there were few real differences), and freedom from worry about my health. Compare that to the lack of freedom our current system provides: less freedom to change jobs (you might lose your health insurance), less freedom from worry, etc. Sure you can change health care plans, but you also are going to have to think about losing some of your benefits. How is that free?
DRK it is so nice to find debate here instead ok KOS/MoveOn dookie.
Regards your argument about ‘does not really encourage people to be “out†as gay persons, especially in the Republican Party’ I disagree. I consider myself a centrist Republican. I no more consider the extreme right of my party and more credible then the extreme left of the Democrats. We do have the Log Cabin Republicans, and while I admit that the religious conservatives are not too happy about it they are hardly excluded from the process.
I personally don’t care what a fellow Republican’s orientation is. I do not support ‘marrage’ but I do support ‘civil unions’. As for AJ’s point about decency on television I strongly support him. While I have no problem pay-per-view, the amount of sex on broadcast television does nothing but increase the networks profits at the expense of our
morals.
sorry about all the typos.
If you want to know how the progressives REALLY feel you should check out the following from REDSTATE……..be warned, it is not for all ears……it concerns the Santorum/Casey PA race……..AJ I hope this doesn’t get me booted;
http://www.redstate.com/stories/elections/2006/democrats_should_be_the_party_of_fun_and_f
Limerick,
Why would I boot you for posting a comment????
AJStrata
Well AJ, it is pretty raw……….I know my grandkids won’t see it but geez, this is exactly why I am afraid of the left………hypocrite central
Cheers and keep on getting out the truth.
AJ,
Your fears are well directed. We are still living off the legacy of well developed Judeo-Christian values. But once they are gone, it will be rule by force. Whoever controls the apparatus of government will decide our values. And they will be informed by the gurus of popular culture.
HH seems to think a remote is enough to protect one’s family from unwanted media sewage. This is unrealistic as we can’t follow our kids everywhere they go. The libertarians should yield on this, as many already have on “free access to drugs.”
It doesn’t take much discovery to see which political party the bottom dwellers inhabit. I think we should oppose them, without embarrassment about being labeled self righteous.
The Macker
So I am a bottom-dweller, merely for pointing out the facts?
I’m sorry, I really take umbrage at the notion that objecting to the hyper-sensitivity of some people is “bottom-feeding”.
There is blocking technology available. If you’re not willing to use it, never mind taking the taking control of the remote from the kids, but instead want to just click online and file a complaint with the FCC, then I have no sympathy for you. Running to the FCC for a big government solution as opposed to exercising personal/parental responsibility is a form of laziness.
Harold
One think people miss about the FCC mandate is that it only applies to over the air broadcasts. It doesn’t apply to satellite providers or cable and the coming tech of IPTV and it surely doesn’t apply to the internet.
This is based on the public use of the airwaves which depending on how the recent spectrum sales were defined, I don’t have the knowledge of if the FCC still has jurisidiction there, ie cell phone, wireless broadband.
How many people rely ONLY on over the air TV? My guess is a small percentage. I don’t see a lot of outside antennas around anymore.
I believe these actions by the FCC do little to affect content available at most households, and is just a convient standup target to leverage to the max.
Also parental control features are available on most systems if you just use them.
I grew up in the 50’s and the 60’s. And we never saw anything like this on TV. And there were a lot of liberals in government too. So I don’t know when it became a political issue.
You’re shameless, Strata.
Bush’s tax cuts have been overwhelmed by his expenditures on a no-win war you scarecrow whatever sheep you still can into supporting with the al Qaeda straw man.
And Limerick, you’re a liberal not a centrist. You sanction civil unions, which defames marriage strictly by its ersatz quality being legitimized.
Homosexuality must be discouraged as severely as possible short of violence,as there are always plenty of people on the margins who will
not surrender to their negative urges if society stands firm.
Robespierre! Robespierre! Oh but for a Robespierre!
(Enjoy your jihad Ken.) (Have you EVER smiled? Hugged your kid? Listened to the sound of your sniveling?)
http://www.washingtontimes.com/commentary/20061015-103453-5327r.htm
This is how well the intifada is going in France.
http://www.answers.com/topic/jean-marie-le-pen
This is Ken’s hero. Ken references him when he gets in a fluster. No slant. Just straight biography. I was right. Ken you ARE Vichy!
Herald,
I apologize for the confusion. I didn’t mean to include you among the “bottom dwellers.”
I ask libertarians to understand the limited options available to parents trying to raise children today. Policing the TV in one’s own home isn’t enough since kids have friends with TVs. I’m willing to make you pay extra for material inappropriate for a general audience to keep it restricted. (said with a smile) And” laziness” is in the eyes if the beholder. “Big government” is already involved. That is another subject.
Ken,
Gee, thanks for stopping short of violence in discouraging homosexuality! I’m sure everyone appreciates your forebearance in this case. Sounds awfully like some of the things done in the 1930’s and 40’s in Germany, such as “Schutzhaft” and other wonderful creations to “protect” Jews and other “undesirables. But I digress, and I do not mean to say that conservatives today are “like Nazis.”
I would just ask you and other conservatives to discourage violence against gay people with just as strong words and efforts as you would use to discourage the appearance of homosexuality in the human population. Violence is a response to “negative urges” with clearly demonstrable results, unlike being an “out” gay person, which is a response to natural proclivities (you can call them “negative urges” if you like, but that’s a very debatable point, unlike their natural appearance in a population) with no demonstrable negative results. I would also point out that unlike homosexuality, violence is a choice, and you might do yourselves a favor to work on that end of things, that is, behaviors with a relatively high likelihood of change…
DRK,
Conservatives believe individual liberty is paramount and that it applies to all. And liberty also includes personal safety. Anyone suggesting otherwise is not a conservative.
You lecture very assuredly on human sexuality, about which there is still much to be discovered. Spare us the unwarranted generalities.
barbara – you might find this article by peggy noonan interesting – it was on last friday’s opionjournal
http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/pnoonan/?id=110009078
the ‘technology’ (i assume you mean parental controls) would have not blocked the superbowl – i am betting it is rated tv/g
socialized medicine MIGHT dole out care to everyone equally – i would argue that it does not – but at the cost of medical advancements – for better or worse, capitalism drives medical discoveries
it seems drk is looking to government to free him from ‘worries’ – i don’t see providing medical care as a function of government (or even food and housing for that matter) – benefits from an impersonal government have turned to ‘rights’ – the great society (like socialism) is again failing – people who support the great society blame the failure on not enough money and programs – so we add and add to the vision held by those that see government as a solution – only to see fewer fathers raising children, soaring crime rates and demands for more entitlements – its not working
it also seems that when people turned to other people (family, friends, church, charitable institutions) in a personal crisis, people benefitted on both sides – under the great society, people complain about paying taxes (if not evade) – recipients are robbed of dignity and make more demands – more of the dollar i give to my church will find its way to someone in need – detouring that dollar through washington (on its way to aid someone) takes a sizable chunk
but the original topic was the assault on Christianity – and there is a lotta anger at Christians now – phrases like ‘forcing their will upon me’ takes on real meaning when talking about Islam (convert or die) – i suspect the author quoted (lono) fears what he believes (incorrectly) is the judgement of Christians – he is so obsessed with this fear that he makes outrageous statements equating Christians with people that murder in the name of their faith – his right to see janet jackson’s boob is infringed upon by people that MIGHT judge him, so he starts spewing irrational hatred and relishing his rightous indignation (best when shared with other that share the outrage) – news flash lono: a Christian’s judgement can be ignored – your life (if you are allowed to live) under Islam will be more than ‘inconvenient’
a couple of years ago i was watching pat robertson’s 700 club show – his operation blessing was being highlighted – for $1500 they can drill a water well for an african village – clean water for an entire village for $1500 – evil, judgmental Christians making a huge difference in the lives of people they will never see – that is just one of many services operation blessing performs – and operation blessing is only one of many Christian ministries – i would be curious about how many water wells lono has provided (since i am one of those judgmental, oppressing Christians) – my guess he is too busy being inconvenienced because he is not allowed to see janet jackson’s boob