Posted on 05/05/2007 2:27:01 AM PDT by Clive
For many years now, Canadian politicians and journalists have warned us about what they refer to as "fundamentalists." Harsh and unbending people who will impose their will on the country and accept no opposition.
They meant Christian fundamentalists of course. They couldn't define what one was, they'd never really met one and they had no idea that genuine Christian fundamentalism is minimal in Canada. It was just a way to discredit those with whom they disagreed and make them seem, well, nasty and American.
Thing is, fundamentalism is alive and kicking in Canada and we saw a fine example of it from Green Party leader Elizabeth May last week. She spoke in a United Church, part of the most rapidly declining denomination in North America. A national church, by the way, that has largely been ruined by liberal fundamentalism.
She gave a speech in which she found her emotions getting the better of her and began to cry at the dangers faced by the environment. Then, when the tears were apparently under control, she argued that the Canadian government's position on climate change was, "a grievance worse than Neville Chamberlain's appeasement of the Nazis."
A fascinating case study. First comes the absurd emotion, illustrating instability, extremism or mere false histrionics. Then the dismissal of all opponents as monsters, akin to those we think most evil in society, such as people who refuse to oppose genocidal murderers and racist fiends.
The wording here is important. It is standard for May's allies in the green movement to describe anybody who has even mild doubts about fashionable thinking concerning global warming as "deniers." The term is, of course, usually applied to people who refuse to acknowledge the Holocaust. Mostly neo-Nazis.
Elizabeth May, however, is prepared to blithely exploit that same Holocaust and condemn her critics, including Jews and others who lost family members to the Nazis, as appeasers and worse. Which surely makes her the real "denier" in all of this.
Or perhaps not. The word used by serious students of the Nazi regime is "Holocaust Minimizer." Yes, let us be kind and generous to the leader of the Green Party and describe her as sounding like a Holocaust Minimizer.
If she merely misspoke, if she was enraptured by the Sacraments of climate control, if she was inebriated by the spiritual euphoria of recycling, then she only has to apologize. But after more than four days of criticism the best she could offer was, "I deeply regret that the inflamed rhetoric around this issue has caused pain or offence" and a few words about the evils of the Nazis.
It was a long time coming and all it really said was that others had got it wrong and it was their reaction and not her comments that were at fault.
Another example of the arrogance that makes such fundamentalists so dangerous. But at least she's not Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson. Mind you, both men have over the years made public apologies and begged forgiveness.
What makes those fundamentalists different from the Elizabeth May variety is that they do not have fashion on their side and have few friends in media. Which is not the case for anybody who weeps and splutters about lonely polar bears and dying trees. It may be an inconvenient truth Ms. May, but you are unfit for public office.
-
So have to ask. . .if God is so uncessary in their life; to 'believe' considered an intellectual insult. . .then WHY 'praytell'. . .do they as Liberals imagine they have the right to assume much less imagine. . .a God-like superiority? How can they assume a 'right' that has no qualifyer - no moral authority. . .no basis 'in fact'?
By WHAT authority, can they assume that they have the right to tell everyone else how to live. . .and how to eat. . .breathe. ..raise and educate their children. . .what kind of car one should drive; what kind of house the family should live in. . .where one should shop OR. . .'where thou shalt not shop'. . .
And now. . .worse; their latest infringement. How much toilet paper should be used per 'sittiing'. . .I mean who died and left them in charge?
If these Libs do not need God; then why should WE need Libs playing one?. Funny, that as far as they are concerned; God can leave them alone; and has. . ..why cannot they follow 'that' example; and do the same for us? . . .
Who do they think they are? Taking over for someone they said never 'was' to begin with. . .
corr: “The more Libs are referrred to as ‘fundamentalists’. . .”
Please send me a FReepmail to get on or off this Canada ping list.
“WHY ‘praytell’. . .do they as Liberals imagine they have the right to assume much less imagine. . .a God-like superiority?”
Liberalism—in fact, all leftism—is a reverberation of Original Sin.
In the guise of a serpent, the evil one told Eve, “You will be as gods.” Allegory, I believe, but illustrative of important truths: this strategy plays on a major weakness in human nature, and the evil one has great success with it.
What are liberals, after all, but those who have followed the serpent’s malicious advice? They have eaten of the tree of knowledge of good and evil—that is, they have rejected God as the ultimate authority on those questions and set themselves up in His stead—and believe themselves competent to decide all sorts of matters that only God is competent to judge—which is to say that they believe they are as gods.
The perversion of the Church, and now Science, has all been brought to us by the Father of Lies.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.