Three Enemies of Liberalsm

[ClayBarham]

In the past 60 years, the pressure against individual self-interest has increased, along with the assaults on anything Christian and the family as founding parts of our culture. These three components of our American culture are targeted for dilution and destruction, as they stand in the way of a change to a more liberal, community based culture.

The individual is the primary roadblock to the complete rule of liberals in America who favor a sculpted community-oriented system. Individuals with strong values based in faith, chasing their own interests and aspirations, using their own talents and personally honed skills, get in the way of liberal progress. The independence of mind and spirit Americans demonstrated in almost 400 years is a roadblock to the acceptance of the ideals of liberalism by the rest of Americans. Legitimate individual self-interest has been under constant assault in schools, entertainment and the media since the middle of the last century. It is finally paying off for the liberals now as they position themselves to take control of the political rudder of America.

It is not enough to strike down individualism in America, however. It is necessary that the two pillars of an individual’s life also be debased. First is his or her belief in God and Christ. Christians believe they and God have a personal relationship, as individuals, and not as groups. Individuals who accept Christ believe they are responsible for their personal behavior, and that behavior is well defined. Second is the family. A man and woman joining and producing children, each give up some of their interests for the good of that small family community. Liberals want all people to give up all their self-interests for the larger community they will rule. They want the entire community, as a tribe or nation, to be the central focus of all human interests.

The importance of the family is minimized in many ways. First, children are encouraged in schools, movies, music and media to disregard their mentoring parents in favor of community standards. Second, family itself is being redefined for same-sex unions that cannot produce or properly rear children to be successful individuals. Third, encouraging children in the family community to oppose Christian influences further degrades the strength of family and individuals responsible for them. Finally, welfare assistance to single parent homes encourages incomplete and irresponsible interests in family.

Legitimate individual self-interest, Christianity and the wholesome family are the three main roadblocks to the rule of modern American liberalism. They have always been in the way of systems based on the rule of the few over the many. How will you vote?

[Deadshot]

Three enemies of the Neo-Cons (i.e. not ALL conservatives!...I'm a little more selective then Clay)

http://thmg.photobucket.com/albums/v416/hdawn07/th_freedom.jpg
.
FREEDOM
http://thmg.photobucket.com/albums/v280/sukihana04/th_lesbian.jpg
.
EQUALITY
http://thmg.photobucket.com/albums/v411/Flippin_gosh/th_101_0101.jpg
.
PEACE

[ClayBarham]

And it is obvious you accept your position as a warrior of the left doing battle against the three enemies cited in the post. You are a hero to Che?

[Deadshot]

http://thmg.photobucket.com/albums/v297/bluefirec306/th_104_0408.jpg

http://th97.photobucket.com/albums/l224/cyn_aguilera/th_4a2be611.gif

[AnnEsthesia]

Now now, Dead. He has written books, for God's sake!

[Deadshot]

http://thmg.photobucket.com/albums/v412/laverge/th_jesus.jpg

[Elrathin]

Now now, Dead. He has written books, for God's sake!


Yes, but "See dick run" and "Run spot run" don't count :lmao:

[Red Dragon]

In the past 60 years, the pressure against individual self-interest has increased, Really I say that the ammount of oppresion against indivduals and the Agora are relatively the same. It's just that more people are opening their eyes to the state's oppresion.

along with the assaults on anything Christian and the family as founding parts of our culture. Really I've always seen it as the other way around. These three components of our American culture are targeted for dilution and destruction, as they stand in the way of a change to a more liberal, community based culture. Can you explain more on this conspiracy of your's here?


The individual is the primary roadblock to the complete rule of liberals in America who favor a sculpted community-oriented system. Elaborate on this more.
Individuals with strong values based in faith, chasing their own interests and aspirations, using their own talents and personally honed skills, get in the way of liberal progress. The state always suppresses individuals, why are you so taken back by this? The state is always trying to control or destroy an individual'ss self intrests by a law of some kind. Now as for values based on faith, I don't really see the point of these, why does what a god thinks on a subject make something moral?

The independence of mind and spirit Americans demonstrated in almost 400 years is a roadblock to the acceptance of the ideals of liberalism by the rest of Americans. We've had independence, you could have fooled me. Legitimate individual self-interest has been under constant assault in schools, entertainment and the media since the middle of the last century. It is finally paying off for the liberals now as they position themselves to take control of the political rudder of America. Examples would be nice.

It is not enough to strike down individualism in America, however. Thew state imprisioned indivdualism long before the middle 20th century. It is necessary that the two pillars of an individual’s life also be debased. First is his or her belief in God and Christ. So only christians are indivduals, because to me all humans regardless of their faith are indivduals. But thank you so much for that collective statment.

Christians believe they and God have a personal relationship, as individuals, and not as groups. God must have a really sad social life if it wishes to communicate with humans. Individuals who accept Christ believe they are responsible for their personal behavior, and that behavior is well defined. I thought that's what indivduals in general believe.

Second is the family. A man and woman joining and producing children, each give up some of their interests for the good of that small family community. Liberals want all people to give up all their self-interests for the larger community they will rule. They want the entire community, as a tribe or nation, to be the central focus of all human interests. So why is the family exempt from your disdain?

The importance of the family is minimized in many ways. First, children are encouraged in schools, movies, music and media to disregard their mentoring parents in favor of community standards. I think both should be disregarded, how does that sit with you? Second, family itself is being redefined for same-sex unions that cannot produce or properly rear children to be successful individuals. Liar (http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_mar13.htm) Also we all know that machines are better at rasing children then liquidous fleshbags. When do I get to enfore my thoughts on a group of individuals in a given geographical area? Also the state should not be supporting a coupledom of any kind, whether it be hetrosexual, homosexual, or whatever.

Third, encouraging children in the family community to oppose Christian influences further degrades the strength of family and individuals responsible for them. Again how does christianity increase the strength of a family and why shoud I care? Finally, welfare assistance to single parent homes encourages incomplete and irresponsible interests in family. And all this time I thought welfare was bad because it was founded on taxation (theft). Also how is single parenting incomplete?

Legitimate individual self-interest, Christianity and the wholesome family are the three main roadblocks to the rule of modern American liberalism. They have always been in the way of systems based on the rule of the few over the many. How will you vote?

I wont be voting for six reasons.
1. I'm not old enough to vote
2. not-voting is the popular thing to do
3. It's a waste of time
4. It's dangerous
5. voting is immoral
6. voting directly and necessarily violates human rights.
Also as for Liberalism On the left wing in the political spectrum; liberal is a broad term usually lost in the flurry of stereotypical distinctions like Democrat, Anarchist, Libertarian, Green, or Socialist. Though something all Liberals typically value is personal freedom of some kind. Although if used in a non-political sense, "liberal" simply means "a lot." Yet because of a brilliantly ineffectual two-party system, Clay uses the term to mean the "enemy of democracy". Although I suppose this does fit me.

[ViolaLee]

Liberals want all people to give up all their self-interests for the larger community they will rule. They want the entire community, as a tribe or nation, to be the central focus of all human interests.

Lies and ignorance.

Clay reminds me of someone living on Ruby Ridge stockpiling weapons and teaching his kids some religious cult doctrine.

[ClayBarham]

VL, perhaps you should inform the democrats, you know, the IT TAKES A VILLAGE kind who openly claim the community interests are superior to self-interests. Let 'em know. I'm sure they'll be glad to hear your views.

[Red Dragon]

VL, perhaps you should inform the democrats, you know, the IT TAKES A VILLAGE kind who openly claim the community interests are superior to self-interests. Let 'em know. I'm sure they'll be glad to hear your views.


Clay I have to ask what is with your use of blanket collectivist statements, and yet at the same time attempting to claim yourself as an individualist? You really need to choose one and get it over with, instead of posting the same rhetoric again and again and again until we all go insane and start ramming our heads against the wall in frustration.

[AnnEsthesia]

I wonder how Clay can claim to be the champion for individualism all the while championing christianity and the christian collective, lol.

[Kamehameha34]

It's fine for any individualist to be part of a collective. What makes a difference is whether or not is a voluntary collective.

[AnnEsthesia]

Ah, but in many of Clay's posts, he feels people should *only* be christian, or he would also include other religions. He wants all these individuals to fold into his favorite collective.

[Kamehameha34]

Does he advocate government legislation enforcing his beliefs?

[preservanation]

Does he advocate government legislation enforcing his beliefs?
Clay, IMO never has.
I read nearly all he posts.
If my interpretation is flawed, I'm sure others can give me examples where he has advocated this.
I'll sit here and wait....

[Buck Laser]

One of the common signs of insanity is repeating the same actions over and over in the hope of a different outcome. Clay's devotion to radical individualism and his repetitive panegyrics on its divine virtues seems to me to be pretty clear evidence that he's gone around the bend, to use the scientific term. :drool:

[preservanation]

and wait...
I need a shave.

[ViolaLee]

What exactly are you waiting for preserva? Are you claiming that someone has claimed something and needs to prove it?

If so, please lead me back to that post.

I missed it.

[preservanation]

Yeah, it's about five posts up.
I never heard clay advocating the US gov mandate his beliefs on others.
and I agree. Our constitution guards against that.[hr]
Ah, but in many of Clay's posts, he feels people should *only* be christian, or he would also include other religions. He wants all these individuals to fold into his favorite collective.

Oh, that's your partner in crime.

[AnnEsthesia]

Have you read his posts? All he posts about are Christians and Christian values. He wants this nation to be all christian. He has posted nothing that would suggest otherwise. But please, I would love for his next post to be about the wonderful qualities of other religions and I will offer the proper apology.

But i won't bother holding my breath.

[ViolaLee]

Yeah, it's about five posts up.
I never heard clay advocating the US gov mandate his beliefs on others.
and I agree. Our constitution guards against that.


No actually Kamehameha34 asked if Clay advocates government legislation enforcing his beliefs?

You said you were waiting for someone to say he did.

And I was wondering why you think someone has claimed that, so you don't have to keep waiting for the mystery person to show up.

[Kamehameha34]

Have you read his posts? All he posts about are Christians and Christian values. He wants this nation to be all christian. He has posted nothing that would suggest otherwise. But please, I would love for his next post to be about the wonderful qualities of other religions and I will offer the proper apology.

But i won't bother holding my breath.


I like debating online, does that mean I'd support legislation requiring everyone to participate?

It seems to be a peculiar concept to some that someone could support a concept and still be against encoding it into law.

[preservanation]

Well, I understand your concerns.
America was founded on Judah/Christian beliefs. I know some don't like this, but it is demonstrable.

No one is advocating the concept that religion should be encoded into the gov and everyone should participate. That would be unconstitutional

But,...what was the point again?
I'm willing to call it a draw...if you will agree with clay and I.
Ball's in your court.

[AnnEsthesia]

Where did I say he wanted it legalized? However, I think it fair to say that he would not be out picketing if someone tried to do so.[hr]Gee preserv.. and here I thought it was founded on freedom of religion and seperation of church and state.. silly me. ;)

[Kamehameha34]

If he doesn't want it legalized, then he wants Christianity to remain a voluntary collective, which would bear no conflict with his individualist views - which was your original concern.

[Pookie]

Interesting. I'd like to see Clay explain the military. They train you to be yourself, an individual (therefore choice of MOS) and they also teach you how to be a team member AND a leader. So you have the individual thing and the collective/community thing going on at the same time.
Mind-boggling, eh?
Purrs,
Pookie

[preservanation]

Where did I say he wanted it legalized? However, I think it fair to say that he would not be out picketing if someone tried to do so.[hr]Gee preserv.. and here I thought it was founded on freedom of religion and seperation of church and state.. silly me. ;)
No...America was not founded on the separation of Church and state. That originated with one obscure letter written by Jefferson which the left glommed onto. Gov can't establish a religion...that's it.
America was founded on the individuals right to practice their religion and freedom to do so without interference by gov.
The conventional idea of the popular concept of the separation of church and state is mostly a myth.[hr]How else can you explain the literally hundreds of references to God in our founding documents and even in our nations Capital?

[Deadshot]

Jefferson, Washington, Franklin and MANY to MOST of the Founders were Deists. That is they believed in a higher power, but it was not Jesus per se.

So Preserv, if it were a truly "Christian nation", can you tell me why, not ONCE, is our Lord and Savior JESUS CHRIST not mentioned, but GOD is mentioned everywhere?

If it's a Judeo/Christian country, where's Jesus? If you want to actually prove something with the documents, or with the plaques and such all over the 13 colonies it would look like a nation founded on JEWISH, not Christian values. Look at all the plaques of the Ten Commandments. Also, it's "In God we Trust", not Jesus. Wouldn't Jesus on the money simply scream "WE ARE CHRISTIAN!"?

I see the All seeing eye of the Creator above an unfinished pyramid on some money. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1e/Eye.jpg/180px-Eye.jpg

On the seal it says, from Wiki, "Two mottos appear: Annuit Cœptis signifies that the Eye of Providence has "nodded at (our) beginnings." Novus Ordo Seclorum, freely taken from Virgil, means "a new order of the ages".

So, to recap, we have the "Eye of Providence", God - but not Jesus and people still screaming about how this is a "Judeo/Christian" country. Where's the proof, Where is Jesus?

[preservanation]

I never said anything about Jesus.
I said it was founded on Judea/Christian principals and beliefs.
I think your post makes my point well.
We don't seem to disagree.
This might bother you and your propeller beanie brigade membership might be in jeopardy because of it...but I think Deadshot and preservanation agree.[hr]Furthermore isn't that eye thing attributed to the Free Masons?
But that's a whole nother subject.

[Deadshot]

Preserv, my beanie is just fine. But where does the Christianity thing come into play?

That God could be Yaweh and not include Jesus, just like with Orthodox Jews. In 100 years, if the nation became all Muslim, couldn't they interpret the God mentioned on the Money and in our official docuements as a Muslim God?

Remember, in 1776, there was slavery, women were not emancipated either so, in the begining, the USA did not have the same view of life, and therefore not the same view of God as we do now.

So couldn't God be ANY God?

[preservanation]

You have Jesus on the brain.
Our founders reference "God" not Jesus.

A higher power, greater than ourselves, if that makes you feel better.[hr]RE: Three Enemies of Liberalsm
1) Father
2) Son
3) Holy Ghost

[Deadshot]

You have Jesus on the brain.
Our founders reference "God" not Jesus.

A higher power, greater than ourselves, if that makes you feel better.


Preserv, you said "I said it was founded on Judea/Christian principals and beliefs." Can you please explain to me, just what one of the main, some would say THE main, tennant of the Christian religion is? (HINT: check out the name, the word to help you is in there, Christian religion)

How can we be founded on Christian principals and beliefs, if God is simply a "Higher Power"? By that logic, couldn't ANY religion claim that the USA was founded on THEIR God? Aren't ALL God(s) "A higher power, greater than ourselves"?

When people talk about the USA being founded on a Judea/Christian principals and beliefs, I'm forced to ask about J.C. (i.e. Jesus). Jesus is what Christianity is all about!

One last thing, why would the Father, Son and Holy Ghost be Liberal enemies?

[preservanation]

This is getting silly, did you miss Judea?
The old testament does not reference Jesus, for a very obvious reason.
I think you are making a mountain out of a mole-hill and engaging in some Quixotic endevour.
I think we agree on more than we think.

[Deadshot]

Then why did you said "Judea/Christian"?

The Jews aren't screaming and hollering about the Founding Fathers and their intentions. C'mon Preserv, it's the Christians who are hollering.

I'm simply pointing out that if this nation is supposed to be all about the Judea/Christion beliefs and principals, why no mention of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost...Where's Jesus?
.
http://craptaculus.com/eac/wjesus.jpg

[preservanation]

No one is screaming and hollering.
All you have to do is read our founding documents to understand my position.
Unless you have managed to edit and alter them to suit your argument...they are quite clear.
It is what it is and it is what was written.
If you have a problem with what they say take it up with the dead white men in powdered wigs...not me.

[Deadshot]

But Preserv, you have no proof that this is a Christian, that's the other half of the word "Judea/Christian". I have read the documents (Declaration, Constitution - both pre-1787 and the one we have now and the Bill of Rights), it talks about God, Providence, the Creator, never Jesus or Yaweh.

You have no proof of a Christian influence other then those old powder wigs biography's. The Jews might have a point, but certainly not the Christians.

[preservanation]

You have no proof of a Christian influence other then those old powder wigs biography's.Ok, you win.
There is no proof that will satisfy you that our nation was founded by Christians or that Christianity played any roll at all in the thoughts or writings which founded this country.
God is mentioned numerous times but we can't be sure that they were refering to a Christian God, a Muslim God or a Buddhist God. I think that was the point.
But the reference to and their belief in a higher power was key to forming this great nation.

[AnnEsthesia]

There is a difference (which I am sure you know) between "This country was founded by Christians" and "This country was founded as a Christian Nation."

You could also say this country was founded by white male europeans and therefore is a White Male European nation. But then you would get laughed at.

[preservanation]

There is a difference (which I am sure you know) between "This country was founded by Christians" and "This country was founded as a Christian Nation."

You could also say this country was founded by white male europeans and therefore is a White Male European nation. But then you would get laughed at.
Well said, AE.
Sometimes it takes a third party to come in and make it all better.
Thanks.

[Deadshot]

There is a difference (which I am sure you know) between "This country was founded by Christians" and "This country was founded as a Christian Nation."

You could also say this country was founded by white male europeans and therefore is a White Male European nation. But then you would get laughed at.


That's a good point, and I agree with it. But, many Christians, claim the latter - i.e. since the USA was founded by Christians it makes it a "Christian Nation." Which, as you point out, is simply not true.

Hence when you see the words God or Providence or Creator, it is being put there by someone who might have been Christian but was secular enough to know that he couldn't put Jesus or Christ there, ergo, while he wanted to keep his own beliefs, he did not want them enforced on others. They seperated Church and State by making God ambiguous, allowing all Religions to see their God as the God of America!

[preservanation]

There is a difference (which I am sure you know) between "This country was founded by Christians" and "This country was founded as a Christian Nation."

You could also say this country was founded by white male europeans and therefore is a White Male European nation. But then you would get laughed at.


[color=#0000FF]That's a good point, and I agree with it. But, many Christians, claim the latter - i.e. since the USA was founded by Christians it makes it a "Christian Nation." Which, as you point out, is simply not true.

Maybe some say that, but I, preserva, never did.
Most people in America are Christians, up around 90%. But our Gov is prohibited by our Constitution to establish a "national religion".
I think we all understand this.
I tried to agree with you earlier on this but you just kept yammering about Jesus.
We, I think, DS, are on the same page with this.
Can you take yes for an answer?

[AnnEsthesia]

Try 78% dear P.

[preservanation]

Try 78% dear P.
I did, and you are right.
I should know better to throw out numbers like that without checking them first, but it doesn't alter my point one iota.
Thanks, though, AE.

[Deadshot]

Fine, Preserv, I'll take "yes". But you have to understand that it is the Right, the GOP and the Conservatives that consistently use the role of Christianity in the Founding Fathers as weapons and it simply isn't true.

Glad to see you came over to the Left on this one...:love:

[preservanation]

Glad to see you came over to the Left on this one...:love:

Oh, Pffft.
I never did any such thing

[Deadshot]

Glad to see you came over to the Left on this one...:love:

Oh, Pffft.
I never did any such thing


Oh sure you did, :love: welcome to the Good side of the Force, my young padewon!:thumbsup:

[ClayBarham]

Well, great exchanges, except everyone has gone far from the intent of the post, i.e., the three enemies of liberalism, of which Christianity is only one. You have all bogged down on Christianity. One would get the impression that use of that word, or the name Jesus, is like yelling fire in a crowded theater. The hatred of Christians and their beliefs is obvious for you, the usual suspects, but what about Family and Individual self-interests? These are also blocks to liberal rule that must be subverted at all costs, and is being done quite well. No comment on those?

[Deadshot]

I commented when an actual intelligent subject was brought forward.

Clay I am a Christian. I don't find anything wrong with believing in God or following religion, just don't force your beliefs on me or others through laws.

As to the attack on your other two topics, that's just a joke. I am a Liberal and have a Family that I want protected...from NEO-CON's! As to Individual Self-Interests, when the GOP and far Right acknowledge the rights of homosexuals, then maybe we can talk. Until then, the Conservatives are all about supressiong individuals, interests and everything else!

[moses2792796]

Three enemies of the Neo-Cons (i.e. not ALL conservatives!...I'm a little more selective then Clay)

http://thmg.photobucket.com/albums/v416/hdawn07/th_freedom.jpg
.
FREEDOM
http://thmg.photobucket.com/albums/v280/sukihana04/th_lesbian.jpg
.
EQUALITY

.
PEACE


I like the second picture, but I think two...three can play at this game.

3 enemies of democracy

Realism
http://aboutfacts.net/Strange/Strange6/Corpse.jpg

Environmentalism
http://www.old-picture.com/europe/pictures/village-Lion.jpg

Traditionalism
http://www.mnsu.edu/emuseum/prehistory/egypt/government/tutankhamun.jpg

[ClayBarham]

So, then, I can assume traditionalism, as it relates to America, is a problem, and if so, are not the three positions I cite the foundation of American traditions?

[Elrathin]

VL, perhaps you should inform the democrats, you know, the IT TAKES A VILLAGE kind who openly claim the community interests are superior to self-interests. Let 'em know. I'm sure they'll be glad to hear your views.


Clay the democrats in office have claimed both individual rights and community rights. Again the fact you try to pin people to one of only two categories shows you are not a psychologist (at least not practicing with a license) and show perhaps your user handle is not the true clay as well.

Clay, NO PSYCHOLOGIST, I know that is currently licensed and practicing would limit an ENTIRE country to one of two categories other than male and female. You maybe able to fool others, but do realize that you can't fool me.

[AnnEsthesia]

Elrathin, most psychologists would not even place people in two categories, (male and female) since they deal with transgendered and gay people as well.

[Shintao]

In the past 60 years, the pressure against individual self-interest has increased, along with the assaults on anything Christian and the family as founding parts of our culture. These three components of our American culture are targeted for dilution and destruction, as they stand in the way of a change to a more liberal, community based culture.

Yes indeed! Individual interest is not even part of the equation in 2007 American society. The idea of "individual" went with the caveman, an ol prehistoric mythical idea still found in the deepest recesses of the Candian forest or deepest jungles of Africa. And Christians are supposed to be trashed according to their own scriptures, so there is a sign from their volcano god. Yep, the replugs and their capitalistic system have been hell on the family for years. Shameful it is.

The individual is the primary roadblock to the complete rule of liberals in America who favor a sculpted community-oriented system.


Really? I don't see how the guy shivering in a cave in Alaska is providing any road block to public utilities, roads, subways, and social relief in America. In fact I see all these dreamer "individuals" using all the community resources while running their jaw muscles. What individual fought a war by himself? Nah, I ain't seen any individuals in my lifetime. They were Americans, part of WE THE PEOPLE ofthe community.

Individuals with strong values based in faith, chasing their own interests and aspirations, using their own talents and personally honed skills, get in the way of liberal progress.

How do you know their values were based on faith? Maybe their values were based on philosophical views, or community views. And they got their skills from the society and education they received in the commune, that is, if they aren't a Christian preacher. :worship:

The independence of mind and spirit Americans demonstrated in almost 400 years is a roadblock to the acceptance of the ideals of liberalism by the rest of Americans.

Damn few have not embraced liberalism, so I guess yu are talking of that small percentage of Libertarians, minus those nonChristians, minus those nongovernment workers, minus those who do not use the community for roads, utilities, relief, social security, etc. Not much of a road block left after that, more like a roadside sign with one of those lil blinking yellow lights.

Legitimate individual self-interest has been under constant assault in schools, entertainment and the media since the middle of the last century. It is finally paying off for the liberals now as they position themselves to take control of the political rudder of America.


Boy are you behind the times. Rudder? Rev that Johnson power horse up and prepare for 200+ bay cruise!!! Yes, Liberals have destroyed the last vintages of the individual and National Health Care will be the final nail in the conservative coffin. The anchor dragging right are going to be left in the bottom of the ocean with their sunken ship.


It is not enough to strike down individualism in America, however. It is necessary that the two pillars of an individual’s life also be debased. First is his or her belief in God and Christ. Christians believe they and God have a personal relationship, as individuals, and not as groups.

Really? I thought Jesus was a Liberal? Can you give me 1 [one] quote from the Bible to support your view? Because I can give give you plenty to supportt eh view that Jesus was a Liberal. Now I know Rush Limbaugh & a few of those heathen evangelists on TV have went off the conservative deep end and appraently taken you with them, but then it is recognized they are doing the work of the devil. Enough said about that neoconish cult.


Individuals who accept Christ believe they are responsible for their personal behavior, and that behavior is well defined.

Are you saying Conservatives are not Christians? They never accept personal responsibility for anything. Ask Bush!

Second is the family. A man and woman joining and producing children, each give up some of their interests for the good of that small family community.

Oh yes! Final the "Community" word comes out. Care to share your individualist definition of "Community" with us, because it smells a whole lot like a Liberal socialist word I hear a lot. And the Right has already caved in to toe tappers and Lesbians in the family and besides getting abortions like crazy they even have a speaker who was profitting from the mutilatings deaths at the abortion clinics. I belive that was Frisk. So once again you are way behind the times, and your thoughts, while entertaining, speak of a hundred years ago.


Liberals want all people to give up all their self-interests for the larger community they will rule. They want the entire community, as a tribe or nation, to be the central focus of all human interests.

Indeed!! We want a WE THE PEOPLE America, and thank gawd or your pet rock that it is coming!!! :ecstatic:

The importance of the family is minimized in many ways. First, children are encouraged in schools, movies, music and media to disregard their mentoring parents in favor of community standards.

Yeah, I remember how neocons faught school lunchs, fought drug programs, fought sex education, and wanted the kids to come dressed as commune soldiers. Then they wanted every parent working and latchkey children, opposed public school fundng and were insisting on private school vouchers (socialist huh?). Wanted corporate advertising to pay for school books. Wanted Christ in the classroom. Of course I have yet to see where parents were not wnated in their childrens school lives, and liberals provided the PTA, after school programs to be a baby sitter for working moms in the capitalist system.


Second, family itself is being redefined for same-sex unions that cannot produce or properly rear children to be successful individuals.

Yeah, that does seem to be catching on among Christian families. Lots of child molestation, toe tapping, Lesbians & Gays, and the necons have the largest pervert orgranization in America, the Log Cabin club, in all 50 states. Hard telling how many are Christian perverts or married or living in Christian sin & damnantion and brimstone and the lake of fire and all that jazz. :innocent:


Third, encouraging children in the family community to oppose Christian influences further degrades the strength of family and individuals responsible for them.

You maybe on to something there when you say "Christian influences." The Christian has done more to destroy America than any other group. Trying to influenece their way into government by destroying the separation between church ans state, by influencing a "crusade" against the innocent Islamic people of the ME, by trying to put their god into the classrooms & text books. They really are degrading the American family by not keeping their nose inside their church, and off the battlefield where family members are being murdered, and disabled and discarded.

Finally, welfare assistance to single parent homes encourages incomplete and irresponsible interests in family.

What? Ya want them to move in a pimp-your-ride dude to be a father figure for the kids? Welfare is a capitalist disease of the conservative right. Fix it and stop wailing about welfare. :sick:


Legitimate individual self-interest, Christianity and the wholesome family are the three main roadblocks to the rule of modern American liberalism.

Your unAmerican roadblocks are failing you, and there is no sign in reality that they even exist, if they ever existed. Just a dream I guess.

They have always been in the way of systems based on the rule of the few over the many. How will you vote?


How can that be?? Do you know the definition of Capitalism? I suggest you go read it, because it isn't a Liberal thingy, and is based on the rule of the few over the many. :clapper:

[Elrathin]

Elrathin, most psychologists would not even place people in two categories, (male and female) since they deal with transgendered and gay people as well.


Good point, that is why I don't claim to be a psychologist unlike some people here. /cough Clay /cough

I do, however, need to get the slight cold I have checked though, I'm sure it will be found I have a bad case of reality check LOL.

[Shintao]

Elrathin, most psychologists would not even place people in two categories, (male and female) since they deal with transgendered and gay people as well.


How preceptive of you to notice. Gender & sexual preference lay along a continuum line, and there is a little of everything for everybody. My studies indicate it is related to the size of the hypothalamus, by whatever was introduced to the organ while in the womb. More importantly, it is related to oxytocin production IMO.

[AnnEsthesia]

Can you tell I took sex ed studies in college?

[Shintao]

Fine, Preserv, I'll take "yes". But you have to understand that it is the Right, the GOP and the Conservatives that consistently use the role of Christianity in the Founding Fathers as weapons and it simply isn't true.


You are not suggesting that the GOP would Jesus as a tool against the Lefty Liberals do you? Wouldn't that be blasmy? And how come Ann Coulter looks like her head is bigger than her butt? Whats with that? :nana:

[moses2792796]

So, then, I can assume traditionalism, as it relates to America, is a problem, and if so, are not the three positions I cite the foundation of American traditions?


America was spirually bankrupt from the outset, it was simply a manifestation of a long period of decline. America is the final victory of materialism and secularism over anything truly spiritual and as such will be very close to the end of the decline, chronologically speaking, and precedes the beginning of another cycle. Either that or humanity will just disappear of the face of the earth.

[ClayBarham]

So, you are saying the Jamestown settlement, which was spiritually bankrupt, set the tone for the following 400 years, or the Plymouth settlement, with its Christian emphasis set the tone for spiritual bankruptcy? I would agree that, if Jamestown set the tone, we'd never have become much more than a second-world nation, but the thread of American history from Plymouth forward was a different story and one that led to the greatest happiness for the greatest number, and prosperity never known anywhere else in the world, so I have to assume that is what you believe is the decline from the outset. I guess it makes sense if you admire someone like Po Pot and the Cambodian reds.

[moses2792796]

America has brought happiness to the greatest number? Don't make me laugh, people are more depressed in modern western countries than ever before.

[preservanation]

You are a freak, moses.
Why would your opinion seem in any way relevant?
http://www.freakoutincucamonga.com/trailer.html

[piratemonkey]

You are a freak, moses.

Wow! Great name-calling.

4. No flaming or personal attacks of any kind will be tolerated.



American history from Plymouth forward was a different story and one that led to the greatest happiness for the greatest number, and prosperity never known anywhere else in the world, so I have to assume that is what you believe is the decline from the outset. I guess it makes sense if you admire someone like Po Pot and the Cambodian reds

So if I disagree with your unsupported assertion, I must admire Pol Pot?

Great logic from conservatives on this thread. :rolleyes:

Just to provide some actual facts to the conversation:
In this paper, Blanchflower and Oswald question the soundness of this measure when the 2004 Human Development Report places Australia at third in the world, ahead of all the other English-speaking countries. The top-ten countries, in order according to that index, are: Norway, Sweden, Australia, Canada, Netherlands, Belgium, Iceland, United States, Japan, and Ireland.
http://www.nber.org/digest/jan06/w11416.html

So, apparently, by this measure we are the 7th happiest country in the world.

Sorry, I know. Facts get in the way of your opinions sometimes.

[ClayBarham]

The utilitarianiists of the John Stuart Mill variety used to look at a society from the position of the greatest happeness for the greatest number. I'm sure if you were to go into a pub in England and ask the people gathered there, you would find a higher proportion of happy people that are, for the most part, separated from reality by being gassed. Part of being happy is having a good self-image, feeling of self-worth, something to live for and being able to make one's own decisions without some bureaucrat having to weigh in first. Being happy by being able to accept a welfare check and getting gassed everynight is not the same this, so when you put socialist nations filled with people living meaningless lives against America, I have to question your standards. If greater happiness is freedom from work, effort, want and that sort of thing, then I would assume America would score even worse, and if liberals here have their input, we certainly would.

[piratemonkey]

Did you look at that link I posted?

They based their happiness scale on:
1) lifespan
2) educational attainment
3) adjusted real income

Using the above criteria, the United States ranks 7th in the world.

This isn't drunks in a bar who are happy because they are wasted, Clay.

[Shintao]

I never said anything about Jesus.
I said it was founded on Judea/Christian principals and beliefs.

So you are saying the all seeing eye of Egyptian God Ra and his temple are now Judea/Christian principals? My good man, the Egyptain god Ra was here some 4,000 years before the idol jesus was conceived. How could his beliefs be founded on the idol jesus who came after? :madlaugh:[hr]Part of being happy is having a good self-image, feeling of self-worth, something to live for and being able to make one's own decisions without some bureaucrat having to weigh in first.

So why do you support the American government with weighed in constitutional laws?

Being happy by being able to accept a welfare check and getting gassed everynight is not the same this,

Huh? We are in a capitalist society, so it seems welfare is the same as this capitalist America as welfare elsewhere.

so when you put socialist nations filled with people living meaningless lives against America, I have to question your standards.

But American is filled with people living meaningless lives Clay, and I have to question your flawed logic.


If greater happiness is freedom from work, effort, want and that sort of thing, then I would assume America would score even worse, and if liberals here have their input, we certainly would.


LMAO! I guess you will be turning down social security because working is a good thing all the days of your life? That you will prefer straining on the rope and cast aside all the wealth because you won't be needing it to make your life eaiser. And since you don't want for anything, you can just send your paychecks to people who do want. Maybe you didn't notice Clay, but "want" is part of the capitalist ideals. A man "wants," so he works to obtain he wants. Geeze Clay.

And we already know that American scores worse when conservatives are in control, because they can't make it on their own without handouts.

[underdawg]

Well Clay I have nothing against Christians or conservatives living their lives any way they want as long as they don't make laws that restrict my personal individual freedoms as well as other individual persons who tend to want to live their lives differently from a traditional Christian or conservative. I am all for the freedom of individual woman to choose the direction they want to take for their lives without having society make laws telling them what they can and can not do to their own personal bodies. Also as a liberal I do not think that the government should be able to dictate what drug a person may choose to put into his or her body or not. I expect from our government that all citizen be treated equally and no individual be denied equal rights or privileges because or ones race, faith, sex , or sexual orientation.

I also believe in being resonsible for one's debts. Many white weathy people in this country became rich off the free, forsed labor of black slaves, and from the stolen land of native American's. It seems to me that the ancestors of those slaves and the ancestors of those native Americans be compensated for last wages and stolen property. It seems just that we as a nation at the very least make sure that the ancestors of the oppressed be compensated by the best education we can give them. Or either that the rich white families that benefited from stolen property or free labor personally pay them all back with interest.

I mean, what Christian value did our ancestors have in the fact that we took the land From the Native peoples and forsed innocent black people bought from Africa to do all our dirty hard labor? A lot of conservatives will argue that we do not owe the poor anything in this country, but that is not exactly true. We owe them a lot.

Clay you also talk about the virtues of our founding fathers, but they were also illegal aliens to this country. The native peoples were here first and and justly owned all the land. Our founding fathers deprived the native peoples of their livelyhood by taking their land, and now our country is all in a huff over illegal aliens crossing our borders. How are illegals of today any different than our ancestors? Well they don't steal our land. They don't kill the ones already here to displace them from our land. They do jobs here that most people would not do for under the minimum wage and we bitch.

The traditions of our white Christian ancestors in this country have not really been quite so virtuous, in fact the have been quite corrupt. Many white Christians in this country have benefited from the ill gotten weath being passed down from generation to generation in this country through a better education, access to inherited land and money, and even how jobs are gotten. Even today the evangelical/conservative block tries to impose their brand of Christian rules upon everyone else. Tolerance might not be a Christian virtue, but it is supposed to be an American virtue.

[Pookie]

Very interesting and thought-provoking. Thank you for posting that, I have quite a bit to think about before I get to the point where I can make a rational decision.
I'm sorry folks, sometimes I have to think things over and do some searching before I can have an answer -- at least, maybe an answer I can defend. I am not the brightest bulb on the porch and sometimes I have to think about stuff.
I know I'll come under fire for being a wimp and wishy-washy and a coward and I understand why. I just need to think about stuff sometimes.
Purrs,
Pookie

[ClayBarham]

Pookie, you differ from most of the others who post responses, like Underdawg who takes a wealth of inconsistent positions, most of which are written in the more recent, anti-American history books, such as Howard Zinn. It is interesting that, without really reading the histories of Jamestown, Plymouth (separatists) and the Puritans, closer to the actual time they were here, how they related to the Indians and what they suffered, gained, learned and contributed to America that they can be so easily dismissed with the wave of a hand. The Pilgrims and the Puritans gave America its legacy, yet are written about today by those who despise America and, in doing so, deprive Americans of their heritage. You can tell when you are dealing with a shallow mind captured by those who so easily hate what is good about America when compared to the Old World. That's what our schools turn out.