Last week I heard some left-wing commentator talk about how "dangerous" the "Religious Right" is and how an overtly Christian agenda has wound its way into conservatism. Hmmm. as a card-carrying member of the vast-right-wing-conspiracy this is news to me. I haven't heard a lot of "God is on our side" rhetoric emanating from my fellow conservatives. But assuming that there are some devout Christians who have gotten interested in politics, so what?
Does having strongly-held religious beliefs automatically disqualify one from participating in a democracy? Well, if you listen to the hysterical rantings of people like al Franken and Michael Moore, you'd think the Spanish Inquisition was being revived in america because Christians are getting involved in politics.
It's really interesting to note that when some liberal icons, like the famously incompetent former President Jimmy Carter, or the famously incompetent former Vice-President al Gore, talk about their faith and God, they're transformed into paragons of goodness. Yet according to left/lib orthodoxy conservative Christians pose a grave danger and should be disenfranchised.
See, there is yet another example of liberalism's famous contradictions. You would never hear a liberal say that fundamentalist Muslims, for instance, should barred from voting as they pose a danger to our way of life. Even if they espoused hatred toward Western culture, it's considered their right in a free society. anyone who would dare suggest that Islam might be a threat to our way of life would be vilified by liberals; yet, they'd take the vote away from Jerry Falwell in a New York minute.
We are all familiar with the Rev. Jessie Jackson and the Rev. al Sharpton, both of who figure prominently among liberals as outstanding leaders of the civil rights movement. But no one is warning americans about the dangers of their faith, even if that faith is apparently the same as that of those on the "Religious Right".
What's with that? Is it because the Rev. Jackson, who is famous for putting the bite on american corporations with threats of mass boycotts and using the proceeds to pay off his mistress, is an alleged black civil rights leader? Or is it because Jackson has been given some kind of special dispensation from Chuck Schumer or Ted Kennedy and is therefore an "acceptable" Christian.
The Rev. Sharpton, you may recall, was involved in the Tamara Brawley affair some years ago, which amounted to bearing false witness (a Christian ‘no-no') as the rape that Tamara and the Rev. Sharpton alleged never occurred. Those falsely accused are still waiting for an apology. What makes Sharpton's faith acceptable over George W. Bush's and why is it that no one seems to be able to note the contradictions of the liberals' viewpoint?
It appears that liberals have a built-in filtering mechanism, somewhat like those 3-D glasses they used to give you at the movies that allows them to determine good Christians from bad Christians. I don't think it's a color thing, as that would have sunk former President Jim-ah and I certainly don't think it's a "character" thing, as that would sink both Jackson and Sharpton.
So the only reason to fear conservative Christians would seems to be their belief in "traditional values", which are directly opposed to the radical left's anti-family, pro poly-sexual agenda.
Jimmy Carter seems to constantly be defending america's enemies, among them some individuals whose world views are a hell of a lot scarier than any Christian, while Sharpton and Jackson are working hard to keep african americans down on the liberal plantation, as it is in their own self-interest for them do so.
Yet those who have a belief system that opposes the cynical nihilism of the left are reviled as iconoclasts and treated like pariahs. What's wrong with this picture?
Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Views are those of authors and not necessarily those of Canada Free Press. Content is Copyright 1997-2024 the individual authors. Site Copyright 1997-2024 Canada Free Press.Com Privacy Statement