I want to share something with you, my reader that has been on my chest for some time now. But before I begin, as I always do with rather serious matters, allow me to make a preface:
Whether you agree with what I am about to say or do not, I do not care. I still have the freedom to say what I wish and how I wish and your opinions cannot change that blessed freedom. Some things I will say may be offensive to some and although I do not intend the offense in any aggressive or vicious manner, I will not censor what I say just because it makes certain people feel “icky”. If deep down I believe something to be true, it is morally wrong for me to then be silent on the basis of a shaken tranquility of my neighbor. Truth is not always pleasant and the need for change does not always feel like a warm hug and a tender kiss. So if you are expecting this post to be filled with the blindfolded notion of “political correctness” and the self-contradictory concept “there are no absolutes”, then leave this blog and go back to your world of secularism, that religion which masks itself under the philosophical “neutral” as it parades around in its hypocritical anti-religious regime, spoon feeding you it’s lies as you allow it to tell you what and how to think.
___________________________
I have been noticing several disturbing things in America. Like the nature of all things “bad”, they tend to creep up on people in small increments, even over generations until what is “bad” is believed to be good and acceptable. In the words of a wise philosopher, what is unthinkable tomorrow is now thinkable today. To make this statement more explicit, what many people would think would never be seen as “commonplace” in our society, is now commonplace. To start with a couple: abortion and homosexuality. Not more than 50 years ago (I could hear some saying even less than that), such notions of human action were considered abominable. Now? The mass murdering of millions of children and the growing legislation for legalizing homosexual union witnesses to an entirely different scene. Now don’t get me wrong, I’m not one of those crazy “bible thumper” people that is condemning people. I have my beliefs, I believe they are justified and the beautiful freedoms in America allow me to express that. If you think I hate homosexuals just because I am against the act of homosexuality, then you are horribly mistaken. I have many gay friends and they are fantastic people. Take this into consideration: I have a family member who does drugs and I am completely against drugs. Do I somehow hate this relative just because I hate the action they are doing? On a similar note, I am just as much against pornography as I am against homosexuality (notice the “ity” at the end indicating the “action” and not the “person”). Which lends me to say that pornography is also a big issue that is so highly indulged in today, a fact which didn’t exist a few decades ago.
I could just anticipate a reader saying that that happened because so many where “Christians” or “religious” back then and that is why such actions were so aggressively condemned. Although I would agree with this, I still have to say “SO?” What kind of arrogant, blind-sighted people think that just because people condemn certain actions that stem from religious convictions have any less logic behind such beliefs, than someone who bases their sets of morals upon the ever shifting tides of cultural “opinion”?!
(Side tangent: Not to mention that “religious” people don’t always vote based on religious conviction but what they believe is good for society. I would say that homosexual marriage should not be promoted because it encourages a type of behavior that I believe unhealthy in the family structure where children need both mother and father figures for ideal psychological growth. Tell me, does that sound religious? Or does that sound like an answer based on psychological analysis of the prepubescent? Therefore I do conclude that when it comes to legislation the issue should not be based on religious convictions that result in the restriction of particular tastes of other people. It should be based on what is good for society. My facts say homosexuality has its flaws.)
But that is just my point. [Since I am not going to write some 50 page paper on this post with oodles of citations for the support, I will feel free to blurt out facts and if you wish me to back it up, I will post citations for you on the comment section] Liberals tend to have done a great job in making any religious notion that goes against their ideas as “intolerant”, “ignorant”, or “close-minded”. Yes, I said “Liberals”. And considering most of the media is liberal, they too have done a good job in delivering the punch home by making the “right” or “religious wing” (mainly Christianity) seem highly close-minded people. This is why I think many liberals (and if you are a liberal who does not fall in this category, then naturally I am not talking about you) are two-faced and deceptive. Instead of fighting fire with fire (aka, being fair), they deceive the public by making their opposing views titled “intolerant”, thus creating a lie by redefining a group incorrectly, which makes the liberals themselves the most hypocritical people. They claim to be opened-minded by accepting all these “new lifestyles and morals” (abortion, homosexuality, etc…take your pick), but somehow condemn the beliefs, lifestyles, and morals of conservatives and Christians. How in the world is that being tolerant of ALL views??? I disagree with their notions of morality, but I am “tolerant” (man!….being a conservative Christian myself, let me say that again….T O L E R A N T) of their views. So who is being hypocritical now? Who is really the close-minded, manipulative group?
The sad thing about all of this is people like me are being made out to be bad, outdated, and irrelevant. We are the “close-minded” people and the liberals are the ones who are “free thinkers” (except anything relating to conservatives or the right wing Christian group….or anything that opposes their views)….and thus a hindrance to society. Eventually, legislation begins to reflect that hindrance as key positions in politics are controlled by those liberals, and laws get instituted that are offensive to conservatives and Christians alike. Why did the Ten Commandments get taken out of the court in Alabama and not a question was raised about the Greek mythological figurines that line the wall? I believe it is a small example of how Liberals view the “Church and State” issue. It is EXACTLY that, “Church” and State not “religion” and State. Targeting a group like I am beginning to see in America is what you see in a country where Tyranny is growing. Certain group(s) are squeezed out until they are made the enemy. This brings me back to the legalizing of homosexuality in California. The majority of people still ruled that they did not want it…and the most disturbing thing happened….a few judges overturned it. I don’t care what topic it could have been over, the fact that the people had their power stripped from them and it was placed in the hands of the few “high powers” is Tyranny. THAT IS TYRANNY!
Our founding fathers understood tyranny well. The Second Amendment played and still does play a huge role in that. And it is to this topic that my post has been pointing at. In DC the courts ruled 5 to 4 in favor of the people. I am absolutely ecstatic our Second Amendment stands true and wasn’t manipulative redefined by the trickery of liberals…but to a certain extent it was. How sad is it that 4 voted against the people. Somehow these liberals actually thought that our founding fathers did not have in mind the concept of self-defense with a firearm. We have the right to bear arms! Not just for a militia but for our right to defend ourselves. It is criminal to keep someone from defending themselves. I can’t stress this enough, IT IS CRIMINAL TO KEEP SOMEONE FROM DEFENDING THEMSELVES! If the government takes away our guns, being law abiding citizens we will not have them and the robbers, rapists, and murderers who sneak into my house at night will. They will because they do not care about the law and they will find a way. So where does that leave me in protecting my wife? So where does that leave me when the government finally outlaws Christianity and decides to bust down my door and all I have is a knife? I’m sure they would still take me down easily if I had a gun but at least I have some chance. Our founding fathers knew this too. At the time, technology was equal all around and if the government decided to be tyrannical, the people had the same weapons to match the people who would wish to stifle their freedom. Governments had more fear of their people then. I strongly believe governments should fear their people and thus act the correct part of a servant. Therefore, having a firearm is so much more than a toy. It is more than a piece of metal. If the government decided to take away my guns, would I stand for it? The patriot in me says I would not and I would die fighting against that terrible act of tyranny. Of course, that is easy for me to say behind a computer screen and far removed from such a scenario. As such, I will not make some bold statement like that. But I can express what my heart would want and it wants to stand firm behind that symbol of protection. That symbol of freedom. The freedom to protect my family. The freedom to band together with the people and make a stand, no matter how frail against the modern weapons of our government, and say we will not succumb to fear and we will not allow our government to take our only chance of keeping our homes safe from evil men and the governments who would wish to do us evil!
Whether you agree with what I am about to say or do not, I do not care. I still have the freedom to say what I wish and how I wish and your opinions cannot change that blessed freedom. Some things I will say may be offensive to some and although I do not intend the offense in any aggressive or vicious manner, I will not censor what I say just because it makes certain people feel “icky”. If deep down I believe something to be true, it is morally wrong for me to then be silent on the basis of a shaken tranquility of my neighbor. Truth is not always pleasant and the need for change does not always feel like a warm hug and a tender kiss. So if you are expecting this post to be filled with the blindfolded notion of “political correctness” and the self-contradictory concept “there are no absolutes”, then leave this blog and go back to your world of secularism, that religion which masks itself under the philosophical “neutral” as it parades around in its hypocritical anti-religious regime, spoon feeding you it’s lies as you allow it to tell you what and how to think.
___________________________
I have been noticing several disturbing things in America. Like the nature of all things “bad”, they tend to creep up on people in small increments, even over generations until what is “bad” is believed to be good and acceptable. In the words of a wise philosopher, what is unthinkable tomorrow is now thinkable today. To make this statement more explicit, what many people would think would never be seen as “commonplace” in our society, is now commonplace. To start with a couple: abortion and homosexuality. Not more than 50 years ago (I could hear some saying even less than that), such notions of human action were considered abominable. Now? The mass murdering of millions of children and the growing legislation for legalizing homosexual union witnesses to an entirely different scene. Now don’t get me wrong, I’m not one of those crazy “bible thumper” people that is condemning people. I have my beliefs, I believe they are justified and the beautiful freedoms in America allow me to express that. If you think I hate homosexuals just because I am against the act of homosexuality, then you are horribly mistaken. I have many gay friends and they are fantastic people. Take this into consideration: I have a family member who does drugs and I am completely against drugs. Do I somehow hate this relative just because I hate the action they are doing? On a similar note, I am just as much against pornography as I am against homosexuality (notice the “ity” at the end indicating the “action” and not the “person”). Which lends me to say that pornography is also a big issue that is so highly indulged in today, a fact which didn’t exist a few decades ago.
I could just anticipate a reader saying that that happened because so many where “Christians” or “religious” back then and that is why such actions were so aggressively condemned. Although I would agree with this, I still have to say “SO?” What kind of arrogant, blind-sighted people think that just because people condemn certain actions that stem from religious convictions have any less logic behind such beliefs, than someone who bases their sets of morals upon the ever shifting tides of cultural “opinion”?!
(Side tangent: Not to mention that “religious” people don’t always vote based on religious conviction but what they believe is good for society. I would say that homosexual marriage should not be promoted because it encourages a type of behavior that I believe unhealthy in the family structure where children need both mother and father figures for ideal psychological growth. Tell me, does that sound religious? Or does that sound like an answer based on psychological analysis of the prepubescent? Therefore I do conclude that when it comes to legislation the issue should not be based on religious convictions that result in the restriction of particular tastes of other people. It should be based on what is good for society. My facts say homosexuality has its flaws.)
But that is just my point. [Since I am not going to write some 50 page paper on this post with oodles of citations for the support, I will feel free to blurt out facts and if you wish me to back it up, I will post citations for you on the comment section] Liberals tend to have done a great job in making any religious notion that goes against their ideas as “intolerant”, “ignorant”, or “close-minded”. Yes, I said “Liberals”. And considering most of the media is liberal, they too have done a good job in delivering the punch home by making the “right” or “religious wing” (mainly Christianity) seem highly close-minded people. This is why I think many liberals (and if you are a liberal who does not fall in this category, then naturally I am not talking about you) are two-faced and deceptive. Instead of fighting fire with fire (aka, being fair), they deceive the public by making their opposing views titled “intolerant”, thus creating a lie by redefining a group incorrectly, which makes the liberals themselves the most hypocritical people. They claim to be opened-minded by accepting all these “new lifestyles and morals” (abortion, homosexuality, etc…take your pick), but somehow condemn the beliefs, lifestyles, and morals of conservatives and Christians. How in the world is that being tolerant of ALL views??? I disagree with their notions of morality, but I am “tolerant” (man!….being a conservative Christian myself, let me say that again….T O L E R A N T) of their views. So who is being hypocritical now? Who is really the close-minded, manipulative group?
The sad thing about all of this is people like me are being made out to be bad, outdated, and irrelevant. We are the “close-minded” people and the liberals are the ones who are “free thinkers” (except anything relating to conservatives or the right wing Christian group….or anything that opposes their views)….and thus a hindrance to society. Eventually, legislation begins to reflect that hindrance as key positions in politics are controlled by those liberals, and laws get instituted that are offensive to conservatives and Christians alike. Why did the Ten Commandments get taken out of the court in Alabama and not a question was raised about the Greek mythological figurines that line the wall? I believe it is a small example of how Liberals view the “Church and State” issue. It is EXACTLY that, “Church” and State not “religion” and State. Targeting a group like I am beginning to see in America is what you see in a country where Tyranny is growing. Certain group(s) are squeezed out until they are made the enemy. This brings me back to the legalizing of homosexuality in California. The majority of people still ruled that they did not want it…and the most disturbing thing happened….a few judges overturned it. I don’t care what topic it could have been over, the fact that the people had their power stripped from them and it was placed in the hands of the few “high powers” is Tyranny. THAT IS TYRANNY!
Our founding fathers understood tyranny well. The Second Amendment played and still does play a huge role in that. And it is to this topic that my post has been pointing at. In DC the courts ruled 5 to 4 in favor of the people. I am absolutely ecstatic our Second Amendment stands true and wasn’t manipulative redefined by the trickery of liberals…but to a certain extent it was. How sad is it that 4 voted against the people. Somehow these liberals actually thought that our founding fathers did not have in mind the concept of self-defense with a firearm. We have the right to bear arms! Not just for a militia but for our right to defend ourselves. It is criminal to keep someone from defending themselves. I can’t stress this enough, IT IS CRIMINAL TO KEEP SOMEONE FROM DEFENDING THEMSELVES! If the government takes away our guns, being law abiding citizens we will not have them and the robbers, rapists, and murderers who sneak into my house at night will. They will because they do not care about the law and they will find a way. So where does that leave me in protecting my wife? So where does that leave me when the government finally outlaws Christianity and decides to bust down my door and all I have is a knife? I’m sure they would still take me down easily if I had a gun but at least I have some chance. Our founding fathers knew this too. At the time, technology was equal all around and if the government decided to be tyrannical, the people had the same weapons to match the people who would wish to stifle their freedom. Governments had more fear of their people then. I strongly believe governments should fear their people and thus act the correct part of a servant. Therefore, having a firearm is so much more than a toy. It is more than a piece of metal. If the government decided to take away my guns, would I stand for it? The patriot in me says I would not and I would die fighting against that terrible act of tyranny. Of course, that is easy for me to say behind a computer screen and far removed from such a scenario. As such, I will not make some bold statement like that. But I can express what my heart would want and it wants to stand firm behind that symbol of protection. That symbol of freedom. The freedom to protect my family. The freedom to band together with the people and make a stand, no matter how frail against the modern weapons of our government, and say we will not succumb to fear and we will not allow our government to take our only chance of keeping our homes safe from evil men and the governments who would wish to do us evil!
