Replies

"Both Rush and Bennet seem to approach things from a religious perspective"

Bennet, yes, from what I know of him, he's decidely speaking from a Catholic viewpoint. And, btw, apology graciously accepted and thank you, but I still don't see where he came even close to not "barely keep[ing] it within the law". He could've drunk like a fish, and never would that have been breaking the law (unless he drove, but that charge is very serious, has never been made, and can't simply be assumed). He could've smoked 50 packs a day, and that wouldn't have been breaking the law. He could've gambled every last cent he had away, and that wouldn't have been breaking the law. Sorry. I just still don't see any known way in which he "skirted around the law". But you retracted including him in that sentence, so I won't push the point anymore. Thanks again.

Now as to Rush... I am not a regular listener (in fact, have listened very rarely), but I do check out his website a lot. I've never seen or heard of him make any religious references whatsoever except during his confession yesterday, and that was minor. Many religious people here have actually lamented the fact that he doesn't mention religion.

I think you have "religious" and "conservative" inextricably linked in your mind - which is understandable in a way, as the Left does so love to demonize "the Religious Right" any time it's appropriate and when it isn't as well.

But take this as an example - I am agnostic. I attend no church and I do not consider myself religious, although I do have a great deal of respect for religion and none of the animosity and amazing hostility toward it that is prevalent amongst most agnostics and atheists of the Left. I am also very very conservative, including socially. I am pro-life, pro-2nd amendment, I don't believe that the 1st amendment was ever meant to cover pornography, I don't believe there's a constitutional right to sodomy (and while I don't care much about any implied immorality in it, I kinda think it was a bit WRONG that in all the political correctness no one even -discussed- the tremendous health dangers it poses), I do believe the institution of marriage should be reserved for a man and a woman for the health of society, and I would vote for a FMA if it was proposed... and yet I'm not religious. I arrive at all these conclusions from a purely secular analysis - to me, they just make sense with or without a Greater Being to command them. And frankly, I don't think Rush is particularly religious either. He probably is to some extent - he did ask people to pray for him, and if I was in that much trouble I might too, can't hurt! - but I don't think he "approaches" his conservatism "from a religious perspective" any more than I do. Admittedly, I don't listen to him regularly, so I could be wrong on that. But I think it's just as likely that you feel that way because there's been a massive propaganda campaign for decades underway to make you react exactly that way - "conservatism" = "religious zealotry". It just ain't true.

Qwinn

"yet the use of addictive substances is not a sin. "

By the way - I believe at least according to the Catholic Church, it IS a sin when you let it interfere or affect the lives of those who depend on you. The same rule that applies to gambling would apply to alcohol and cigarettes in that respect, I believe. If you "spent the milk money" to support your habit, basically (which Bennet didn't), then it would be a sin.

And IMHO, since Rush did not seem in any way particularly effected in doing his job (other than the breaks he took once in a while which were apparently to go to rehab), I don't know that he really "spent" the moral "milk money" either, necessarily. It didn't seem to affect his job performance or his mental faculties, at least when he was on the job. Barring any family problems it may have caused that we don't (and shouldn't) know about, I don't think from a "sin" perspective you could nail him for much more than the time he lost going to rehab (and even that is in an attempt to get cured).

It's an interesting question. I got a Catechism around here somewhere, I'll see what it says. You'd be surprised how often it makes some excellent secular arguments, as well.

Qwinn