Very well then, I'll take my contributions and my votes someplace else.
That's not what he said, but I don't guess you've read his column yet.
....or you could tell yourself “is it really so bad being in the tent with Mr. Gaffney and people who believe in God”?
After all, the alternative could be more of Imam Obama, he has a soft spot for Allah.
You can see this both ways.
Nope. People who believe in God are happy to have the votes of people who don’t. Its called natural law, the belief that even atheists and agnostics, if they are rational, and most are, must acknowledge the real boundaries of the universe as God created it. As long as we can agree on those boundaries, we are happy to work together to set public policy, because conservative public policy is, if nothing else, based on recognizing the hard limits of reality.
However, as a rule, those who believe in God also tend strongly to believe in sanctity in general, and therefore sanctity of life, and therefore inalienable human rights, out of which all major facets of conservative political thought flow, whether fiscal, social, or international relationships are involved. If an atheist prefers to use Rand or some other mechanism to arrive at those values, so be it. We see it as natural law at work and are happy to have the help.
Only we do see it as an irrational leap on the part of the atheist, for whom logically Nietzsche must be closer to the gospel than Jesus. That’s where most hardened leftists are, and that’s why we are naturally reluctant to formally welcome that belief into the “tent.” IMHO.
“So if I don’t believe in God, Mr. Gaffney wants me out of the tent.”
If you feel that way you certainly are on the wrong website.
If you don't support our founding principles (spelled out in the Declaration of Independence), get out.
There is only one way to have unalienable rights (aka the SELF-EVIDENT TRUTHS). Government's only legitimate function is to "guard them". The Constitution was put in place to do just that - it is a meaningless document otherwise.
Undermining the Foundation of Our Unalienable Rights
Scipio: 'The most earth shaking event in secular world history was the creation of the United States of America. It was quite literally “conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.” Nothing like it had ever come about. From the start she presented to the world a frightening thing, the possibility that the citizens of a nation might actually control the levers of power in a state. If she succeeded she would become a “dangerous nation” and a threat to tyranny around the world. Thus the hatred that European nations had for the new nation. None of them even believed that the US could possibly survive. It was a good thing for them that she did.
'The United States did indeed become a dangerous nationdangerous to tyrants, that is. Here is a list of nations freed by herand some of these were freed more than once: France, Germany, Norway, Finland, Poland, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Algeria, Morocco, Romania, Kosovo, Panama, Serbia, Croatia, Bulgaria, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Czechoslovakia, Afghanistan, Denmark, Kuwait, Iraq, Egypt, Montenegro, New Guinea, Indonesia, Thailand, Greece, Tunisia, Ukraine, Albania, Hungary, Belgium, Austria, Libya, Korea, Japan, Italy.
'As a comparison, take a look at some of the players upon the stage of the world who are in the news today -- China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, Cuba, Nicaragua, Venezuela. How many nations have they freed? None. And why should they free any nations? They are not in the business of freedom. They are in the business of slavery.'
Bottom line -- there are really only two kinds of countries in the world: those whose asses we saved, and those whose asses we kicked. And two kinds of people: those who know it, and those who deny it for whatever crazy reason.
Saving the World, One Assoul at a Time
"...America's founders knew that man only derived his value by virtue of his relationship to the Absolute. This is a fine example of how metaphysics -- the eternal science -- is enfolded in religion. For to see -- and it is a seeing, not a mere "knowing" -- that men are endowed by their Creator with life and liberty is to affirm that life and liberty have an absolute and infinite value. They are "unalienable." Anything short of this makes our rights quite alienable indeed, meaning, among other things, that we can surrender them to liberals for cash and other valuable prizes. ..."
Dull minds make for good slaves; and a moral vacuum needs to be filled. bttt
A complete misread of the entire point. This article responds to the Grover Norquist's of the world that want 'SoCons' out of the tent (or at least to shut up). Not happening. The Reagan Coalition, the three-legged stool of authentic conservatism, is the only winning strategy to beat 0bama. Like it or not, we need each other.
The idea that SoCons aren't also rock-ribbed FiCons is rubbish. The 'social justice' Christians (think Rick Warren) are libs, not conservative.
The libs can support each other's vices ..... why can't we support each other's virtues in the same way?!