Posted on 11/24/2010 6:38:37 AM PST by WebFocus
I remember some older liberals in college telling me that if you were truly intelligent, then OF COURSE you would have to be depressed, with all your knowledge of the suffering in the world. I disagreed with this, saying that to depress and stymie yourself with the sad parts of the world would keep you from being one of the positive influences in the world, and they all thought I was an idiot.
Another interesting thing is to ask a liberal atheist why he does not believe in G-d. He will tell you that it’s because there is evil, or suffering, or bad in the world, so HOW COULD THERE BE A G-D??? There could not be a G-d because children die. Etc.
Think of how stupid that is. There cannot be an omnipresent omnipowerful Creator because obviously He is not Santa Claus??? Or a magical fairy who does everything you wish??
What kind of argument is that? A human father is benevolent; no one loves his child more than he. And yet even a Dad cannot save his son from that car accident, or cancer. A Divine Creator has obviously created a very complex universe. Just because we are not sappily happy all the time is no reason to say that WE are the most powerful forces in this universe, that there could be no loving creator at all.
They would just say, that's because Dad is not omnipotent, as God is supposed to be. They are cocksure that they would run the universe differently if they were omnipotent.
Which amounts to their assuming that they are already omniscient.
I sometimes ask kids, "Is there anything that God cannot do?" They usually answer, "NO!" But the answer is, there are lots of things God cannot do. The Bible says "there is nothing too hard for God", but it also tells us that He cannot lie, and He does not violate His nature, nor ours. He does not force Himself on the unwilling, and he respects their choices.
Which is one reason why there is so much evil around. God could very well wipe it all out, and eventually He will, but it's not a quick fix.
I think that colleges would do a much poorer job of liberal indoctrination if high school grads took a dead end job for a year between high school and college, or a stint in the armed forces.
So much of what college peddles is clearly nonsense, if you have even a bit or real world experience.
True words...
Liberal deceits like utopianism offer ample basis to believe in one's goodness by identifying with allegedly altruistic and Higher motives. All one has to do is deny their harmful outcomes, inevitable given the deception and aggression at the base.
This is also why liberals turn to hate so quickly when their view of themselves is challenged. Offer up a genuinely good person, like Sarah Palin, who has never done harm to another human being, and the shallow self-deception of the liberal as a "good" person begins to fall apart.
This is why I maintain, Liberalism is the Politics of Denial.
Liberal deceits like utopianism offer ample basis to believe in one's goodness by identifying with allegedly altruistic and Higher motives. All one has to do is deny their harmful outcomes, inevitable given the deception and aggression at the base.
This is also why liberals turn to hate so quickly when their view of themselves is challenged. Offer up a genuinely good person, like Sarah Palin, who has never done harm to another human being, and the shallow self-deception of the liberal as a "good" person begins to fall apart.
This is why I maintain, Liberalism is the Politics of Denial.
Liberal deceits like utopianism offer ample basis to believe in one's goodness by identifying with allegedly altruistic and Higher motives. All one has to do is deny their harmful outcomes, inevitable given the deception and aggression at the base.
This is also why liberals turn to hate so quickly when their view of themselves is challenged. Offer up a genuinely good person, like Sarah Palin, who has never done harm to another human being, and the shallow self-deception of the liberal as a "good" person begins to fall apart.
This is why I maintain, Liberalism is the Politics of Denial.
misery loves company.
I share your view. Prager is often like someone who can diagnose an illness in others, but can’t see that he suffers from it himself. Bless his heart.
I had a similar experience. I was born and raised a conservative but I got very involved in public interest law in law school. However, I approached it from a “teach a man to fish” perspective whereas the vast majority of my colleagues approached it from a “give a man a fish” perspective.
I should have pursued it further, I would have made an excellent mole!!
Boy, he cut to the bone with that passage, didn’t he??? VERY incisive.
I guess I always worry about assuming that kind of role (a mole) because there is always the danger you might “go native”, being immersed in it...
The “fish” analogy is so apt to liberalism. They simply cannot comprehend it.
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.