Posted by
NAlcoba on Wednesday, September 02, 2009 7:26:19 PM
CAUTION: This article mentions the terms RELIGION, and CHRISTIAN. Contents are volatile. Do not read this next to a liberal as they may spontaneously combust.
Mentioning ANYTHING remotely religious (i.e. "Christian") to a liberal is like exposing the Wicked Witch of the West to water. The reaction is pretty much the same: they writhe and screech, spitting curses at you as they sizzle and melt right before your eyes.
Think I'm wrong? Go to ANY liberal website, blog, or facebook page...post "scripture says...." or "...in church we....", sit back, and watch the invectives come back ten fold in the form of lines from a David Mamet play rinsed in arsenic.
Better yet, bring up Sarah Palin. No other figure in popular politics conjures up, to the left, the image of the Christian hypocrite, than does that crusading she-devil in glasses and a skirt. It doesn't even have to be in relation to any political issue, you can simply say it subliminally: "This morning I had a bagel (sarah palin) and black coffee..." You want to hear cusswords you won't hear Al Swearengen saying, say "hockey mom from Wasilla" or "pitbull with lipstick". The left hates Sarah Palin the way The Inquisition hated the Cathars.
It's odd, just a year before Palin was thrust into the spotlight, the few liberals that knew OF Palin liked what they saw. They saw an independent woman who took on the GOP and big oil. Why the change of heart? We know liberals are fickle and inconsistent, dumping facts and history as aribitrarily as Madonna hops from bed to bed, but why the 180 degree shift from glowing praise to anathema?
Two things: Obama, and God. The two are interchangeable in this argument, but in no way am I saying that God has an Obama-complex.
Firstly, Obama. Sarah Palin stood in the way of Obama's historic journey to the White House. How dare she deny him what was entitled to him! She had to be destroyed, facts be damned, whatever it takes, take no prisoners, admit nothing and deny everything. Ends justify the means--and if the ends involved Obama in the White House, then all means (including ridiculing an infant with down syndrome) were not only justified, but worthy of a Nobel nomination. So burn her at the stake of public opinion.
Secondly, God. Sarah Palin is an outspoken woman of faith. Because of this faith, she committed not so much a SIN in the eyes of the liberal left, but an act of betrayal to feminism's number one cause...Sarah Palin chose not to abort a down syndrome child. Sarah Palin believes in abstinence (though, contrary to leftist spin, she does NOT advocate abstinence-ONLY taught in schools). To the left, that the equivalent of larceny. She believes intelligent design should be taught (not exclusively as her detractors say) side by side with evolution. She's a Christian, and Christianity stands for everything that stands in the way of what liberals believe is social and cultural progress.
In other words, Sarah Palin has become, today, the face of religious fundamentalism, in the context of political discussion. She's Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, George W. Bush. To the left, "Sarah Palin" and "Bible Thumper" are synonymous. Is it fair, reasonable, or well argued that she's given that role? No, but it's convenient to the left, who will choose convenience over well thought out discourse at any given time.
On the advice of a friend, I visited the discussions on the Facebook page of Contessa Brewer, journalist Joan of Arc of the left, dominated by posts of a leftist persuasion. I noticed how a discussion NOT related to Sarah Palin, eventually became about Sarah Palin, once the term 'religion' was mentioned. From that point on, every anti-religious talking point that has become so commonplace and chic on the left got thrown out (separation of church and state, religion has no place in politics, Christianity is a myth) with Sarah Palin as the focal point, all succinctly and brilliantly articulated in the statement "Sarah Palin is a religious nut!"
Though it's not my custom to argue with intellectual turds, I couldn't help but bring up a 'religious nut' from the sixties that did in fact have a huge place AND impact on politics: Martin Luther King, Jr. He often cited the early church as the inspiration for his crusade for civil rights "the non-violence of the early Christians...shook the Roman Empire." He urged those that followed him to meditate daily on the life and teachings of Jesus Christ, and to pray daily. His public activism was motivated by his deep faith in the Christian God, of whom he was not ashamed to be vocal about. He was a Baptist minister first, a civil rights leader second.
Imagine how the left and the media would react if Sarah Palin cited the early church, or urged her staff to meditate on the life and teachings of Jesus! Imagine if she was a Baptist preacher! If you hear any hissing, that's a liberal melting at the thought!
I also couldn't restrain myself from bringing up a bunch of religious nuts from the 18th century, the abolitionists, who shaped public policy. Their outspoken faith in the Christian God compelled them to fight slavery. It was the anti-religious intellectuals of the time, like David Hume, Voltaire, and John Locke that saw blacks as inferior creatures.
These facts of history are an inconvenient truth to the left, especially since they are so invested in the Marxist notion that religion is the opiate of the masses. They will readily accept falsehoods about Palin, and make no effort to verify anything that villifies her, just to further confirm their anti-religious bigotry. Palin is a Christian, Christianity is for morons, therefore ANY newstory that makes her look like a moron, whether or not it is factual...is obviously factual, case closed, Palin is an idiot. Facts don't matter, their beliefs do. And the sooner they can rid themselves of having to talk about religion, the better it is for them. Saying "Sarah Palin is a religious nut" is as far as they have to go. To the left, or to the intellectually lazy (they're interchangeable), that's all they need to say, because it's an argument ender. And if there's anything they love more than themselves, it's to have the last word.