Skip to comments.Palin to Rightly Divide USA all the More
Posted on 11/19/2009 3:59:19 AM PST by freedomyes
Sarah Palin, if running for President, surely will divide this Republic all the more into two definite segments-fiercely opposing segments.
Already we have two primary segments: believers and secularists.
Believers are those moralists who hold to the God of the Bible, particularly the New Testament God in Christ. It may be via Roman Catholicism, evangelical Protestantism, Orthodox Christians, or non-church members who hold to biblical ethics.
Secularists are exampled by Joy Behar on The View. She is with conviction a non-believer who holds that this life is all there is. No deity. No hereafter. No judgment accountability. This is it; write your own (im)morals.
(Excerpt) Read more at magic-city-news.com ...
Right.. conservatives vs. rinos.. yep
Secularists? Nope. One can be secular and a believer.
The left is ATHEIST. They are godless and not just secular.
In this particular context, the author meant secularists to be secularist/atheist/agnostic/satanist. He did not mean it in the more generic understanding of being benign secular.
The context is looking at secular as a religion as in contrast believers are religious-based.
Thanks for your note.
We are already divided. Us against them. The idiot, wishy-washy independents that cant seem to make up their mind from day to day on what they stand for, might as well be considered leftists, as they are only a tail-wag away from being them anyway. In my opinion, there isnt gonna be a race war, or a religion war, or anything else for that matter. If this country ever does split in two, it will be because of those in the middle and on the left that are trying to destroy the very thing we hold dearest. Just my humble opinion.
Hey! I was agnostic for quite a while, and was still a solid conservative. Don’t lump being agnostic in with being atheist or satanic!
Most people’s definition of agnostic goes something like: “I’m just not sure what’s out there, don’t think anything can be proved for sure, and therefore I’ll sit out of the whole religion / God debate.”
There’s nothing in that viewpoint that restricts one from understanding right from wrong, or that the “Culture of Death” is profoundly awful.
true and thanks.
a.k.a. "bitter clingers."
Hmm, second time I see a religious posting from this
J. GRANT SWANK referencing Sarah Palin (Disclosure: Met her last night and found her charming). I wonder about the point of these postings he is making - yesterday it was she was pentecostal, today it is she is a moralist and both articles state she will divide the nation.
I am not criticizing the postings, just wondering what the motivation behind them is. Are we not to like her because she has a moral compass or is from a evangelical group?
Whats the point? I am so Conservative that almost everyone else is in another group and I am divided from them. Even quite a few fiscal conservatives and I differ on social conservatism. That doesn’t make me like them any less for office.
A man who has never gone to school may steal from a freight car; but if he has a university education, he may steal the whole railroad. - Theodore Roosevelt
“Theres nothing in that viewpoint that restricts one from understanding right from wrong, or that the Culture of Death is profoundly awful.”
Ahh but you just described the “crux” of the matter. If one has no opinion or belief in a higher power then one has no basis by which one establishes a personal sense of right or wrong, good or evil.
Paul clarifies the matter this way...”If there be no Resurrection(Christianity’s established linch pin upholding all morality), then let us eat, drink, and be merry for tomorrow we die!”
No God, no need for morals and ethics, no need for civil society, no mortar to hold rational society together. Law of the jungle stuff...and in the end let’s just nuke it all!
The author is totally conservative, all in favor of Sarah Palin running for the top office. He in no way is deriding in his posts but all the more attempting to get out the call for other conservatives to back her up solidly. Thanks for your questions.
so true. thanks.
I don’t find this article very compelling. It takes a rather simplistic view of things.
At times the obvious is simplistic.
Looking at an issue via a simplistic view can be wise.
That’s a truth; but it’s a “dificult” truth; it’s a taxing and “tasking” truth as well. That probably doesn’t make any sense; you would have to have known my Grandmother to understand that I guess.
Further divisions - Sarah Palin Beautiful, Joy Jehar Ugly.
I just hope a qualified Presidential Candidate announces his intentions soon.
totally agreed. . .
Redefining the meaning of words. Secularist is not the meaning of atheist as you said. And who cares what that nasty thing misnamed Joy thinks about anything. She is gross.
I disagree strongly with this writer. They argue not for religion vs. no religion, but “my” version of religion vs. everybody else, no matter what they believe.
Among conservatives, there are some who are so single issue oriented that they see everybody else as the enemy.
But news to them, for example, if someone is anti-abortion, it *means* they are anti-abortion, not that all conservatives are anti-abortion, as it is not a litmus test for conservatism. To make matters worse, being anti-abortion *itself* does not mean the same thing to different people.
Does it mean banning all abortions all the time, even if the baby is dead and the mother is about to die, and that the mother is a 12 year old rape victim? There are some people who would say “yes”, but most would say “no”.
So the issue here is what do we mean when we say “conservative?”
Well, there is a spectrum within conservatism as well. Don’t neglect that a lot of conservatives are “status quo happy”, in that they don’t want much change at all, and for government to just not make things worse.
They are just the opposite from the large number of liberals who are just aching to change something, anything. Willing to gamble with the hope of it being better, because they think right now is so rotten.
And certainly, there are religious conservatives, both those who belong to and believe in religion, and those who want to integrate their religious beliefs into the government. Likewise, these are just the opposite of their liberal counterparts, for whom religion is just a social thing, and those who want to drive religion out of the government in any way, and force it into darkness.
Then, there are all sorts of other kinds of conservatives. Those who are very pro-business and pro-prosperity. Those who believe in a potent national defense and anti-crime policies. Those who lean heavily to federalism, and libertarianism. And certainly there is a ton of overlap here.
Lots of agreement and disagreement.
re joy, you speak truth.
You are confusing atheism and agnosticism. Atheism rejects the notion of God. Agnosticism states that their is no way to know if God exists or not IN THIS LIFE.
All agnostics I know, my former self included, figured we'd be finding out the truth of the situation once we kicked the bucket. There is still plenty of "face the wrath of an angry God" incentive factor to be good in this system.
-Yossarian (FORMER agnostic)
glad to know u r a former agnostic. congrats.
I haven’t confused agnosticism and atheism...I don’t see the difference when it comes to understanding the lynch pins that undergird morals and ethics. Whether one doesn’t believe there is a God or if one kind of believes(but we can’t ultimately know for sure) but wants to keep his/her options open makes no difference in terms of having no solid point of reference in even having discussions of morality with those who are believers.
The only point of reference believers have with non believers are that we are all sinful men whereas nonbelievers,atheists and agnostics have no concepts of good or evil other than what they “borrow”(or cover themselves with a la “fig leaves”) from the cultural influences of believers. The most clever of the evil ones, connected and infested in the highest of our politics, certain church denominations, and media know of the restraining power of our Judeo Christian past; all of them recognize that it must all be pulled down so that their evil schemes can be brought to fruition.
I think many self avowed book writing atheists and agnostics are by and large patsies...the craftiest and most dangerous of the evil ones are those who promote such folk and give them utterance via the media and courts. They know what they are doing as they are, and some would acknowledge when pressed, in league with Satan. Indeed, some see Satan as the antidote against the “oppressive” EL.
You know what the story of Prometheus was really all about, don’t you?....Satan’s Apologetic(his personal mein kampf); a time diluted story of “his struggle” against our “cruel oppressor” who wanted to leave us humans completely “in the dark”, ignorant of our “true god like status”!