Posted on 03/19/2004 5:43:00 AM PST by Theodore R.
The issue is that the liberals want to use the law to promote it. That is an illegitimate imposition of liberal moral values on the rest of society.
The danger America faces today is rooted in the takeover of our schools by left leaning zealots.
They indoctrinate the kids into thinking that it is government's job to provide jobs, and that all other values are "relative".
Government grows and the culture blows.
"I wish more Americans had an opportunity to get to know Muslims. Then they would not be susceptible to the silly anti-Muslim propaganda that is floated by some right-wing Christians."
The once strong belief in the existence of God and, indeed, in the existence of the entire Holy Trinity was eroded by people's acceptance of evolution and secular humanism thereby causing the American public to drift away from belief that their rights and freedoms came from God (as the founders believed and stated) and thereby removing the most significant cornerstone of our nation's foundation. This shift has had profound impact on shaping our government's actions since it no longer felt it had to answer to any higher power for its actions.
The Godly ethic of hard work went down the drain, and so people started demanding that their government provide for them, hence the socialistic social programs we have.
The rise of selfishness and the decline in respect for fathers and for the family as a cohesive unit in general has sparked the allowances for no-fault divorces, the breakdown of the American family, and the wholesale abandonment of American children by many of the parents in this nation. Parents instead began leaving it to daycares, foster homes, schools, and television to raise their children. More and more government has taken control of these institutions and thereby taken the authority of raising the children of this nation, and they never teach them the right things.
The ridicule and emasculation of men, and especially fathers, coupled with the demeaning rhetoric against motherhood and femininity, has led to a rise in gender confusion which has been used to convince many, many Americans that they are gay and to accept that lifestyle of death. This of course has led to more and more government intervention on behalf of the evil underbelly's twisted, permuted victims in the name of "gay rights" and the trampling of the rights of the morally opposed persons in our society who do not accept this lifestyle of death.
Again false science and our own selfishness came together to hammer away at our belief in the importance of protecting innocent life. This of course led to the clamor for and the legalization of abortion, a blight on our nation which has only served to eat us out from the core as it was intended to do.
It is quite obvious therefore in light of these things that moral decline is a necessary and inevitable precursor to a decline into tyranny and oppression. If our government is a government "of the people" then it only stands to reason that if the people are morally corrupted then they will bring that corruption with them and govern themselves corruptly.
Not just that -- they want government benefits (social security survivors' benefits, etc.) to be given to the partners in gay marriages.
And that is the heart of the culture war in America - morality is NOT a matter of individual conscience. Morality is based on the Judeo-Christian roots of America. The measure of morality is objective, revealed, and not up to the individual.
If his statement was true, then there would be NO grounds for assessing anyone as "right" or "wrong". There would be no objective standards for determining "evil" and "good." Neither Hitler nor Mother Teresa could be judged for the course of their lives.
That statement is foolish, self-serving, and just plain ignorant!
The net result is the same. I think some of Bush's opposition on the (so-called) Right is because his policies are perceived by them as being too favorable for Israel.
It's the message, not the messenger.
This is the heart of the libertarian thought. but the government has a vested interest in the stability that marriage between man and woman provides. So it endorses that marriage and provides some government goodies, like social security to widows...
The marriage of homosexuals, however important it is to them is really a part of the democrat coalition list of pet causes. So is more welfare for illegal immigrants. the left has been chipping away at the fabric of this country for a while. Teachers in schools all know how important acceptance of the homosexual lifestyle is. they could lose their jobs if they don't agree. So it goes. Charlie Reese is so very out of touch with what is really happening, and why the moral part of America is correct to enlist in the culture war that he really does not deserve editorial space, and would not get it if it were not for the media being party to the democratic coalition's agenda.
While Charlie may be right that some behavior cannot be a matter for the police, marriage is a public function that requires a public license. The government is involved, whether to issue it or deny it.
Reese is a loser.
"Wasn't it Pat Buchanan, who Reese once supported, that coined the term "culture war"?"
If I recall, charley wrote a column before the nov 2000 electoin saying that while PB was the 'best' man for the country, he had no chance of winning and every chance of putting gore in the WH, and thus should drop out so bush might win.
"He makes points that can be accepted or rejected. He himself, and his opinions on other subjects are irrelevant.
"
Posting a reese article is a good way to get some flames. Before the 2001 terrorist attacks, when most of his columns didn't involve the middle east, he was a favorite on FR. Now, given his very extreme dislike of anything associated with israel, his pro-palestinian views, etc., anything else he says tends to be discredited. I don't get the overt hostility some posters show, but it is real, and this is a private forum, so I guess they can ban it if they want.
I don't know who the "best and brightest" may be, but CR is definitely one of the "worst and dullest." His column appears in our local paper, a low-budget operation, so the column must come cheap. I have never seen a letter to the editor applauding anything CR has written, nor have I ever heard anyone around here talk about what CR says. He's a very peculiar man.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.