Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

What every American needs to know about liberalism - and its attitude to the moral absolutes of our day. A MUST READ!

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached."

1 posted on 08/19/2008 9:35:30 PM PDT by goldstategop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: goldstategop
Liberals, on the other hand, look for nuances, subtleties or extenuating circumstances. They feel reluctant to denounce any action or position as unequivocally wrong, or to endorse any alternative as quintessentially right.

False. They very quickly judge conservatives as wrong and totally evil. They never give conservatives "the benefit of the doubt" concerning our motives.

2 posted on 08/19/2008 9:50:39 PM PDT by DeweyCA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: goldstategop

I have a simpler perspective of Liberals vs Conservatives. The Libs are actually cowards. Libs are like Woody Allen, and Conservatives are like John Wayne.

As individuals Liberals live in fear of everything and everybody. It’s the gang, the association, the club, the Party, the collective that allows them to thrive. They are “People whom need People”. Without the support of the collective, Liberals scurry about like rats in the dark. The collective gives them their strength, and as the cowards they are, a collective gives them the strength to become as arrogant as they are.

Had I the time, I’d provide more examples. Liberals are cowards. Think about their issues, and the way they approach issues in general. If not sidestepping, roundabout answers, then only responding with the mantra of the collective.

Anyway, that’s my simplistic way of looking at Liberals and Conservatives. It isn’t quite the same rule of thumb for Dems/Repubs as those Parties are made up of both Liberals and Conservatives albeit by varying degrees of participation.


4 posted on 08/19/2008 10:20:52 PM PDT by rockinqsranch (Say Obama were "Pinky", Then who is "The Brain"?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: goldstategop
A BTT for an interesting article. As long as we're painting with broad brushes (and Medved would be the first to admit it) I'd like to take a couple wipes at the canvas myself.

One idea along these lines that describes the watershed between liberal and conservative concerns the source of the morality of which both sides tend to claim that they're the sole defender. For a conservative one might suggest that the basis of politics is morality; for a liberal that the basis of morality is politics. "...that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights" on the one hand, and on the other the notion that human rights are the product of an international declaration.

That is not to say that liberals aren't religious people, but one cannot help noticing that that religion frequently serves only to rationalize attitudes already dictated by politics, especially with regard to equal distributions of wealth and power among individuals and even more especially among classes. And, as well, as far as it becomes the function of central human authority, and not God, to rectify these inequities.

That is very far afield indeed from the original meanings of both "liberal" and "conservative" and so one has to consider those terms in their current, rather distorted meanings rather than wonder how liberals journeyed from beliefs in individual rights and free markets to beliefs in collective rights and centrally planned economies. They didn't; it was only the term that changed over time.

One must temper this ponderous theorizing with a healthy dollop of "it ain't necessarily so." Human portraits cannot be accurately painted with billboard brushes. But it is difficult to see how basing one's morality on a liberal's hurt feelings and vague apprehension of "fairness" is a great deal of improvement over basing it on some "imaginary" Deity. The latter, imaginary or not, is at least consistent.

5 posted on 08/19/2008 10:24:25 PM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: goldstategop

I read it, and it’s crap. Conservatism is not about “moral absolutes” or rallying around the siren call(s) of any one religion, faith, dogma, or creed.

Conservatism is about letting the individual decide for him or her self what is, and isn’t, good, worthy, or desirable for him or self. Conservatism is about the sanctity of the individual and the choices said individual makes. It is not, and has never been, about “collective” morality.

And I truly pity those lost souls who feel that conservatism is about any form of collectivism, moral or otherwise.


6 posted on 08/19/2008 10:49:06 PM PDT by NCPAC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: goldstategop
"Conservatives approach every challenge with a determination to approach the question (as far as possible)as a choice between right and wrong, good and evil. Liberals, on the other hand, look for nuances, subtleties or extenuating circumstances. They feel reluctant to denounce any action or position as unequivocally wrong, or to endorse any alternative as quintessentially right. Those who take their inspiration from Ronald Reagan enthusiastically embrace moral absolutes; those who admire Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton or Barack Obama feel uncomfortable with terms like good and evil when applied to politics and world affairs. "

Not entirely. McCain was clearer and more emphatic on good and evil in the Civil Forum. But liberals can get quite Manichean on certain issues. The difference is where they locate the evil. The Soviet Union wasn't an evil empire for liberals, despite its history of human rights abuses, gulags, and subjugation of other nations. For liberals, American conservatives are evil. For them Reagan was a "warmonger" who might start a nuclear World War III. Nixon was evil incarnate for liberals. Liberals also tried to blame Rush Limbaugh and conservative talk radio for the Oklahoma City bombing. They still view conservative talk radio in Manichean terms.

They have also gotten quite silly in inflating Obama into this global healer messiah figure. Nothing subtle, nuanced, analytical, or sophisticated about that. In fact, it has been one of the silliest campaigns in memory. They are certain about the absolute goodness and godlike status of Obama for them. He is above questioning, criticism, or analysis. Liberals are the true believers here. They are not always subtle or nuanced.

Liberals adopt moral relativism and situation ethics on certain social issues but become righteous on others. They think they are "quintessentially right" on Roe vs. Wade, on immigration, affirmative action, feminism, multiculturalism, minimum wage, health care, and against school choice. There is not much that is nuanced or subtle about the liberal positions on these issues. They are absolutely against free speech when it comes to conservative talk radio. They pick and choose when to be nuanced and subtle.

Global warming is another political issue where liberals become Manichean and self-righteous. Nothing subtle or nuanced about Algore's promotion of global warming hysteria and eco-socialism.

8 posted on 08/20/2008 1:14:53 AM PDT by HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: goldstategop
Latest on Obama

An American Expat in Southeast Asia

9 posted on 08/20/2008 6:26:43 AM PDT by expatguy ("An American Expat in Southeast Asia" - New & Improved - Now with Search)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson