I'll admit that I don't read or listen to enough liberal bloggers/talk show hosts as I should to be as outspoken as I am in the other direction. But maybe it's because it's so obvious that Mark Levin would rip any of those guys to shreds. Regardless...just finished reading my first article for the day, called, "Wasn't Jesus a liberal?"
I just about threw up.
I can't really think what to type, but basically there is just a lot of yelling going on in my head of various sorts.
Here's how the article started...
"Liberalism as defined by Webster’s Third New International Dictionary: 'a political philosophy based on belief in progress, the essential goodness of man, and the autonomy of the individual and standing for tolerance and freedom for the individual from arbitrary authority in all spheres of life…'
I am not sure why anyone would feel threatened by Liberalism as defined by the dictionary."
That is so ridiculously bogus. You are saying that because this dictionary term sounds so friendly, you are not sure how ANYONE could be against liberalism. Maybe it's not our fault that your stupid dictionary term has no substance. You can't explain liberalism in a dictionary definition because it's all bogus. Define these for me:
1. What is progress, according to liberalism? (Free to kill babies, forced to give the majority of your earned money to a failing government to spend as they see fit)
2. What is the essential goodness of man? (We came from monkeys right? That's what our tax dollars are paying to teach our children)
3. Tolerance of what? (And upon what basis? Certainly not the bible, which is slowly being eradicated in our schools, courts, and legislature)
4. What is Arbitrary Authority? (You mean we all give all our money to the government and they deal with everything how they see fit? That's what you mean right? Why not say it? So we all throw our money in a giant dysfunctional pot, and that takes care of everybody?)
Make a definition that states your principles and then let Christians decide if that's what Jesus would stand for. God will judge me based on what I did with what I was given. Being placed in such a great country, given plenty of money, skills, family and friends, I obviously will be held accountable to a lot. And if I have the choice to give more money to a government that uses much of it for things that God does not desire, or to keep the money and use it how God desires, I choose the latter. If I am greedy with my money and fail to use it for good, that is between me and God. And I will be judged accordingly. But God doesn't need me to save the world.
This is already long...done for now.
3 comments:
I think you mean you choose the "latter". Choosing the "ladder" would be something you would do while hanging some streamers for a 4th of July party.
I have a new blog if you'd like to read!
The problem really is that you don't know what the definition of liberal is. The protesters in Tiananmen Square were liberal because they wanted progressive change and the rest of what would define them as liberals. Keep in mind they were pro-democracy and pro-market. What we label as liberal here in the states isn't liberal in other parts of the world. That's why the definition must be so relative.
Post a Comment