Friday, August 03, 2012

Christ Muslims Gays Double Standards

Radical imam OK but not Chick-fil-A -

There is only one true radical, the risen savior, Christ Jesus. All questions ultimately come down to Christ.

Case in point. Boston Mayor Tom Menino had no trouble assisting a Muslim in development of a mosque as well as speaking at its ribbon cutting, even though the official position of Islam, stated by one of the leaders of that mosque is that Gays must be put to death.

We all know of his comments on Chick-fil-A, and the comments of many on the left about a Christian owned business that clearly practices what it preaches by being closed on Sunday, yet is the highest profit per store fast food outlet.

WHY is this true and what does it mean???

  1. It is strong evidence of the primacy and radical effect of Jesus and Christian teachings / life. What the Gays, atheists and left hate is not "religion", or even "radical violent fundamentalist religion". What they really hate is CHRIST and CHRISTIANS!! The left's willingness to "forgive and forget" Muslim violence, doctrine and treatment of women is limitless. The swiftness and vehemence of their anger and intolerance to any display of Christian belief or doctrine is a strong proof of the primacy of Christ. 
  2. "The enemy of my enemy is my friend". Many of the left mostly secretly mourned the loss of the USSR. They WANT the power of US to be "counter balanced" and reduced, at least to extent that the US is seen as "a Christian Nation". Todays counter balances are Islam and China, but China is less loved by the left than most communist nations as it has embraced a lot of capitalism and competition. Capitalism and competition mean individual initiative and differential outcomes. The left demands that individual lives be meaningless and only the "state collective" matter. Christ, capitalism, competition and the Constitution ALL celebrate the dignity and meaning of the life of the individual. This is anathema to left-statist-collective thought.
  3. "Liberalism - Progressivism" are of course both lies. "Liberal" is in fact a label of the RIGHT, which is LIBERTARIAN. "Progressive" is allusion to the  myth that "newer is better / modern is smarter / old is bad / etc".  The USSR, Nazi Germany and Maoist China ought to have been enough to bury these foolish thoughts forever, but "false hope springs eternal". The left thinks that we are "better / smarter" than what has gone before and that there is an "arrow of evolution" that is "upward / better". Some tiny creature that just consumes organic matter, breeds prodigiously, is resistant to extermination and consumes the entire biosphere leaving only a "gray goo" would be the ultimate, but species costly "we told you so" rebuttal. If evolution means that we are just getting better, how did we end up with Obama/Carter/Franken/Pelosi/etc ... or for the lefties Bush/Reagan/Bachmann/Palin ... Seems like we ought to be able to easily determine the fallacy of the progress myth very easily without exterminating ourselves ... but maybe not. 

I could go on, but the REAL issue here is that a "christian / conservative / true liberal / libertarian / fact based / transcendent / etc" world view is not actually able to understand the inconsistencies of a "statist / atheist / progressive / vision based / materialist" world view. And of course, vice-versa!!

Which means that we generally CAN'T just "all get along" unless we actually decide that facts are more important than visions, or liberty is more important than "fairness", etc.

But if liberals were going to make those changes, then they would no longer be "liberals". Or conservatives would just have to decide that God is dead and facts don't matter.

Two things are "hopeful" -- aging tends to move people to the right, as do massive disasters -- natural, political, financial. "Reality has a way of creeping up on you", or "liberalism only seems to work until you run out of other peoples money" to say it even more simply.

No comments:

Post a Comment