Monday, July 25, 2016

Concerning That Last Post

For those who only scanned the article, Euripides isn't saying that we're stupid, he's just mentioning studies done by liberals trying to prove that we are. The problem that liberals can't fathom is that conservatives and liberals disagree mostly on social and therefore (anymore) political issues. Though the liberals probably wouldn't admit it, nearly all of these issues are MORAL issues at heart. Unfortunately, moral issues require morals on the part of those involved to be wisely decided, and a large segment of society no longer has morals of ANY kind. Liberals will, of course, be offended by that statement since it will by nature include THEM. Liberals like to think that they are the most moral folks on the planet, but they're actually the LEAST, by and large. The reason that I say that is that there ARE no morals without GOD!

How does that figure in, you may ask? Well liberal morals are based solely on the opinions of man, or what is called humanism. These embrace the idea that man is basically good and that he can solve all moral dilemmas by applying what is good for the greatest number of people or "the common good"
to every problem.

The problem is that so many folks disagree over what really constitutes the common good. Naturally, each liberal person thinks that they have a corner on the market on what makes the common good, because they have such high moral standards! But, I state again that barring GOD from the equation leaves no morals at all. Liberal "morals" are simply their OPINION of right and wrong. They don't agree even among themselves, proving once again that they have opinions only, not morals. Opinions are a dime a dozen. In fact, there's an old vulgarism about opinions that states that "opinions are like _ssholes, we all have them and they all stink."

They'll say that something is wrong because it hurts other people. The weakness with that argument is that they often can't even agree among themselves what hurt is, plus, they deny (or don't care) that the situation may cause much good for others. Even if it does cause hurt, why would someone who believes that man is inherently good believe that the robber's or rapist's "needs" don't matter. Obviously THEY didn't see anything wrong with what they did. Once again, we have conflicting opinions!

The only way to have a moral decision is, firstly, it must come from an unbiased source. Anyone who either benefits or suffers from a situation CANNOT make an unbiased decision. Secondly, it needs to come from a higher source than man, or it remains JUST AN OPINION. Only the One who created those on both, or every, side of an issue has the moral high ground to decide right and wrong - Almighty GOD! Conservatives generally acknowledge this fact, liberals do not. For proof, look only at the 2012 Democratic Convention when booing began EVERY time that God was mentioned.

In essence, liberals are in rebellion against God, Therefore, they have no position from which to make ANY moral decision. © 2016


Pumice said...

It always amazes me how well informed and articulate people can be who do not have a Ph.D. I think we could change a generation if we would have you do a series of pod-casts on Philosophy 101 and require every freshman to watch it.

Well said.

Grace and peace.

deborah harvey said...

otherwise it is the childish scuffling for the upper hand, regardless of consequences.

Gorges Smythe said...

Thanks, Pumice, my mama always told me that I was "special." ;-) , as for the freshmen, they'd just be fooling with their phones anyway.

Exactly, dh!