crazylibertarian Loc: Florida by way of New York & Rhode Island

Why Christianity Must Be Destroyed
And Why Liberalism Must Do It

Christians accept that we are all flawed. As part of our flawed status, we realize that at some point we will have to face judgment for our offenses. Those offenses range across the full spectrum of human sins, from taking the Lord’s name in vain to murder.

Progressives labor under no such illusion. They know that they are beyond reproach; their hearts are so good. Since Progressives have no flaws, they face no judgment and have nothing to answer for. They are entitled to reject our forgiving Christian God because they have no sins. They are their own gods & that entitles them to despise Christians.

It also entitles them to their intolerance, judgmentalism and self-righteousness. They have relied on satire and ridicule and their condescension turns to outrage when it is turned around on them. Hence their hatred of Donald J. Trump, Rush Limbaugh & Joseph McCarthy.

Joseph McCarthy investigated the extent of c*******t penetration of the American government. Extreme left-wingers and outright c*******ts had been shepherded into The Franklin D. Roosevelt administration throughout his twelve-year presidency. Joseph Stalin had wanted them in the administration to influence decisions and as sources of information. It wasn’t hysteria. There were c*******ts.

During World War II, it had become clear that there were many N**i sympathizers in the United States. There was concern that the same mistakes not happen again with the new Satan, c*******m. McCarthy became a point man for the new efforts. The American Left, realizing that the c*******ts were fellow ideologues in the movement to replace the worship of God with the worship of government, defended them and started the anti-McCarthy hysteria, just like what is going on today, with Donald J Trump.

In retrospect, it was kind of odd anyway. On the one hand, American progressives would say there’s nothing wrong with being a c*******t then rail at being called one or if one of their own was. William F. Buckley, Jr. once remarked that he never heard McCarthy say anything that matched in viciousness the things that liberals said about him. I have never heard of Trump saying anything that matched in viciousness the things his opponents say about him.

Rush Limbaugh was another example. The Left always thought that satire was its sole province. They relished subjecting religion and conservatives to their satire that was often mean & sacrilegious. Rush turned it around on them & they howled in furious indignation. They accused him of the h**e that they harbored, something the Left has always done. How dare anyone use their methods against them? Rush was never mean nor vicious but the liberals certainly were and as Buckley had said about McCarthy, Limbaugh never said anything that matched in viciousness the things that were said about him.

Bill Raspberry was a great liberal (in every sense of the word) columnist. He’d been saying the same things about Rush as other liberals when someone challenged him as to whether he ever had listened to him. He admitted that he hadn’t, and to his credit, he did. In a subsequent column he said that Rush didn’t satirize women and minorities; that he was an entertainer and that he satirized liberals. Then as now, liberals can give it but they can’t take it.

And now we have the case of Donald J. Trump. Whereas Ronald Reagan also espoused conservatism, he nevertheless believed in making nice with liberals. They did not care. They were constantly hostile to him & did everything they could to block his moves. The take home lesson is that you don’t make nice with liberals. Liberals do not reciprocate. Their agenda to direct society remains and anything is permissible to achieve that goal.

Donald J. Trump must have gotten that message somewhere along the line. He never even tried to get along with them. They are outraged. Hell hath no fury like a liberal scorned and they’ve reacted. They tried to impeach him twice, once meaninglessly and was a complete waste of time.

They have now unleashed a barrage of legal actions against him without precedent & unjustified. What they don’t realize is that it can be turned around and used against their own, such as Joe Biden. These new precedents, if left unchecked, will likely result in permanent damage to the office of the presidency that will resonate to the detriment of the country & possibly lead to its destruction. It is that serious.

Understand, that the thought that we will eventually face judgment is a brake on our worst impulses. We know that we will be called to answer for our sins. By thinking there is no God, liberals get off that hook in their minds. Wh**ever system they foist on the public, they can just walk away and think there are no repercussions.

And that is what leads to their excesses. C*******m, F*****m & German National Socialism are ultimate progressivisms and all were & are atheistic. As Mussolini said, “All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state,” and that included churches. Gulags, K*****g Fields, Auschwitz and the Cultural Revolution all targeted religion and churches. It is no accident that church attendance is much lower among progressives.

They can conceive of no power in the universe that is beyond their comprehension. They have no God but themselves; they are their own judges, juries and executioners and they have executed; 21 million under National Socialists Workers’ Germany, 20-40 million in the USSR, 65-75 million in China, 1.5 million in Cambodia. They were all atheistic, either officially or functionally.

And so it continues. Liberals have been the driving force in moving America to secularism, a very dangerous journey.

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn was the most prominent Soviet dissident. He’d published several books with the horrors of Soviet Socialism as a background but when he published The Gulag Archipelago in December 1973, he was stripped of his Soviet citizenship and forced into exile. It the emergence and horrors of the Soviet political prison system. He first went to Germany but came to the United States, Vermont, in 1978. Under Josip Stalin, he would likely have been executed but the Soviet government of the 1970s didn’t chance it. They knew it would cause an international uproar.

After the Soviet Union collapsed, Solzhenitsyn returned to Russia in May 1994, and said that he could not recommend American society because we had lost our spirituality. John Paul II said much the same thing. So do I.

Christianity has been our salve. Secular liberalism, whether f*****m, socialism or c*******m, needs the populace to replace Christianity with the worship of government. They need to destroy it. They are succeeding.

LogicallyRight Loc: Chicago

A very good analysis of a lot of what is happening today. Well done.

Milosia2 Loc: Cleveland Ohio

Two dummy posts in a row !

Sonny Magoo Loc: Where pot pie is boiled in a kettle

Some people are so blind they wouldn't know wisdom from foolishness.
You're right there.

crazylibertarian Loc: Florida by way of New York & Rhode Island

Thank you, LogicallyRight. I don't often doe lengthy posts but this has been bouncing around in my head for months.

I just began reading Gary North's Conspiracy in Philadelphia that dovetails somurious ewhat with this. I just finished the Foreword and Preface and have begun the body. It is shaking me to my core.

I will only say that it has forced me to the conclusion that our vaunted and idolized Constitution that replaced The Articles of Confederation was not properly ratified and, legally, we should be operating under The Articles.

It's free and clearly written and requires only rare review to understand. Keep an open mind and let me know your reaction.

I care about basic assumptions not window dressing. Remember, the entirety of mathematics rests upon some basic assumptions, none of which can be proved.

Our assumptions about government are in The Declaration & Thomas Jefferson was reportedly upset when he read it.

crazylibertarian Loc: Florida by way of New York & Rhode Island

No one with more than a room temperature IQ and a sixth grade education would expect anything better from you.

saltwind 78 Loc: Murrells Inlet, South Carolina

Crazy, Comparing Christianity, which is a religion, and liberalism which is a political ideology makes no sense to me. I know plenty of Protestant Ministers that are liberals. I know a few people that tell me that they are atheists but conservative politically. It runs the whole ideological and religious beliefs.

keepuphope Loc: Idaho

What is a religion but an ideology that directs your thoughts and actions,someone bigger than yourself. Liberalism is no different and could be categorized as a religion also when it guides all your thoughts and actions and takes the place of God as their ideology differs from Him and they override His authority,thus making themselves god and the final authority in matters.

Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON

Gary North is full of s**t. At least he was, he died two years ago.

Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence, why would he be upset when he read what he had written?

The Stylistic Artistry of the Declaration of Independence

by Stephen E. Lucas
The Declaration of Independence

The Declaration of Independence is perhaps the most masterfully written state paper of Western civilization. As Moses Coit Tyler noted almost a century ago, no assessment of it can be complete without taking into account its extraordinary merits as a work of political prose style. Although many scholars have recognized those merits, there are surprisingly few sustained studies of the stylistic artistry of the Declaration.1 This essay seeks to illuminate that artistry by probing the discourse microscopically--at the level of the sentence, phrase, word, and syllable. By approaching the Declaration in this way, we can shed light both on its literary qualities and on its rhetorical power as a work designed to convince a "candid world" that the American colonies were justified in seeking to establish themselves as an independent nation.2

The text of the Declaration can be divided into five sections--the introduction, the preamble, the indictment of George III, the denunciation of the British people, and the conclusion. Because space does not permit us to explicate each section in full detail, we shall select features from each that illustrate the stylistic artistry of the Declaration as a whole.3

The introduction consists of the first paragraph--a single, lengthy, periodic sentence:

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.4

Taken out of context, this sentence is so general it could be used as the introduction to a declaration by any "oppressed" people. Seen within its original context, however, it is a model of subtlety, nuance, and implication that works on several levels of meaning and allusion to orient readers toward a favorable view of America and to prepare them for the rest of the Declaration. From its magisterial opening phrase, which sets the American Revolution within the whole "course of human events," to its assertion that "the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God" entitle America to a "separate and equal station among the powers of the earth," to its quest for sanction from "the opinions of mankind," the introduction elevates the quarrel with England from a petty political dispute to a major event in the grand sweep of history. It dignifies the Revolution as a contest of principle and implies that the American cause has a special claim to moral legitimacy--all without mentioning England or America by name.

Rather than defining the Declaration's task as one of persuasion, which would doubtless raise the defenses of readers as well as imply that there was more than one publicly credible view of the British-American conflict, the introduction identifies the purpose of the Declaration as simply to "declare"--to announce publicly in explicit terms--the "causes" impelling America to leave the British empire. This gives the Declaration, at the outset, an aura of philosophical (in the eighteenth-century sense of the term) objectivity that it will seek to maintain throughout. Rather than presenting one side in a public controversy on which good and decent people could differ, the Declaration purports to do no more than a natural philosopher would do in reporting the causes of any physical event. The issue, it implies, is not one of interpretation but of observation.

<SNIP>

manning5me Loc: Richmond, Va.

A comprehensive post on our current insidious problems with cultural Marxism, socialism, secularism, atheism and the progressive gaggle that thinks they can run America. Three claps of the hand!

BIRDMAN

🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪

crazylibertarian Loc: Florida by way of New York & Rhode Island

I meant to write that Jefferson was upset with The Constitution when he read it.

dbirch

too bad it's spot on. Must have hit a nerve.

Radiance3

===============
My final conclusion decides that among the three Founding documents, the Declaration of Independence, ranks first that was brilliantly written, broadly covering the entirety of human needs and discipline. Thomas Jefferson had authored it.

The emphasis on the Creator, who endowed all our needs to live in peace and harmony with God, and among each other. Proving that America was born under God.

The divergence of Atheists, c*******ts, and various godless people do not belong. These are the various elements of
greed, human desires and behavior, contrary to the Founding principles carried on by God. Thus, we are now having various conflicts, and violence, attacking each other.

Big dog

Excellent bit of writing, spot on and true!