Posted on 11/15/2010 3:06:08 PM PST by TCH
Idiocy has its claws in the TEA Party movement!
I am a founding member of the TEA Party Patriots of SW Nebraska. I sure as hell do not approve of the recently released letter demanding that Republicans jettison "social issues!" Our group was never informed and had no input!
Ditch "social issues," that we may better focus on the economic issues? Is that so? I believe it is time for a TEA Party reality check.
You cannot promote prosperity at the expense of morality. One requires the other. God is not mocked. The Constitution may be document of incredible insight, but it is not supreme over God’s Law. Freedom requires responsible behavior... Abortion and sodomy do not qualify, and ignoring the consequences of both will result in our downfall.
Everything that affects society is a "social issue," but we are allowing ourselves to be deceived by the utopian nonsense that is Libertarianism. We do so at our peril. These individuals use the term "Social issues." WRONG! We are arguing moral and ethical issues. So what these individuals are actually stating is they want a government bereft of ethics and morality. GIVE US BREAD AND CIRCUSES!
From the beginning I stated my group is not going to be hijacked by Libertarians, and for good reason: Only fools jettison morality and ethics from government. Libertarians claim to “restore” the Constitution, while they march lock-step with the tenets of the Communist Manifesto. Libertarianism is nothing less than veiled Utopianism—a deadly poison to any ordered society, because its precepts mock God’s Law. While the Libertarian advocates the Constitution, he simultaneously disconnects its FIRST CAUSE, as stated in the Declaration of Independence: All men are endowed by THEIR CREATOR with an inalienable RIGHT TO LIFE and LIBERTY. There we have the crux of the issue. Those who established our government did so with the understanding that we are “created beings,” owing our life and liberty to a Creator, and therefore our first allegiance resulting from those created gifts must belong to the higher power. That fact explicitly requires a recognition of and obedience to transcendent moral laws established by that same Creator. However, according to the submitted “letter” endorsed by our State TEA Party leader, we should now acquiesce not to the Creator, but to men who are double-minded and thus unstable in all their ways! Thinking themselves wise they became as fools!
Notice the top signatory to this letter of “demands:” GOProud ... PROUD homosexuals of the GOP! Nice company we keep for the sake of "filthy lucre." Sacrificing moral principles under the pretense of "fiscal conservatism" will not save this country... I doubt any man of sound reason would believe in such nonsense. Abortion and homosexuality cost money: increased healthcare costs, increased insurance premiums, lost tax base, etc.
If a man fails to understand the most basic right, life, then why should we trust him with power? Such a man will give his assent to anything. What this “letter” actually states is that we want our liberty, but we do not want to pay for the consequences of its abuse! That is not liberty, it is licentiousness.
Perhaps the signatories to this "compact" do not grasp the concept that “social” issues COST THE TAXPAYER MONEY! Who pays for abortion? How many abortions are covered by insurance or government welfare? How many more may we expect via Obamacare? Consider the loss of national productivity that must be attributed to the increase in abortions--We are barely maintaining replacement population (mostly through illegal immigration); so what happens when all the baby boomers retire, and America’s workforce (ages 17-60) is reduced to a mere 14 percent of the population? Thank you to all those who demand we not consider abortion a front and center issue! They are contributing to the destruction of our culture and the downfall of our country! Oh, but wait.... they will decrease the size of government in the process! Blind fools!
Now let us turn the focus on the costs of homosexual perversion. Yes, there is a defined “normalcy” in sexuality... homosexual acts do not fall within that scope. All sexual perversion causes disease, but the homosexual variety produces a plethora of fatal infections, and not just those associated with AIDS. A great many more “nasty things” inhabit the bodies of homosexuals and lesbians as a direct result of their perverted sexual practices. If we ignore “social issues, ” then how will the unobstructed rise of these diseases impact medical care and insurance costs for those who live within the bounds of normal sexual behavior--particularly with the advent of socialized medicine--and the insistence that “pre-existing conditions” not be excluded from coverage or considered a dis-qualifier?
Libertarianism is like the Siren who attempts to convince the sailor there are no jagged rocks beneath those calm waters... A nation cannot separate social from fiscal issues... one entails the other. You cannot separate morality from government... one requires the other. Amoral or immoral men cannot govern themselves:
In 'A Letter to a Member of the National Assembly,' 1791, Edmund Burke wrote: “What is liberty without wisdom and without virtue? It is the greatest of all possible evils; for it is folly, vice, and madness, without restraint. Men are qualified for civil liberty in exact proportion to their disposition to put moral chains upon their own appetites; in proportion as they are disposed to listen to the counsels of the wise and good in preference to the flattery of knaves.”
Edmund Burke continued: “Society cannot exist, unless a controlling power upon will and appetite be placed somewhere; and the less of it there is within, the more there must be without. It is ordained in the eternal constitution of things, that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters.”
Libertarians argue a "non-interference" perspective; but their rationale is a straw man argument. The issue is not about those who have an inclination to same-sex attraction. However unfortunate for them, it is a personal struggle, through which they must affect a strong combat for reasons of physiological, psychological and sociological necessity.
The issue is the propagation of an intrinsically destructive doctrine that opposes life and the common good. Even if we put aside the moral imperative—which act would constitute the greatest of errors, since the moral code is a product of sound reason and marks the boundaries of that singularly most quoted imperative “love thy neighbor”—it will still be proven that anything directed against its own natural purpose is contrary to right reason.
The two sexes are specifically designed so their physiological, biological and psychological aspects are mutually beneficial. Male and female complement one another, in all regards, to the natural end that their anatomy was specifically designed to affect: procreation of the species. This natural end logically supposes an intended purpose consistent with intelligent design.
Homosexual behavior is absolute in its destruction of that purpose. Understanding that “a house divided against itself cannot stand,” it is reasonable to state that Nature does not work against itself. By logical extension, and since all things must have a first cause, then neither would an intelligent supreme being create an natural order having as a component of its initial design a species directed to its own demise.
Reason and logic dictate that whenever any object is directed against its own natural purpose, then that object is intrinsically disordered. Since the design of male and female reproductive anatomy gives irrefutable evidence to its intended purpose, it is an attack on reason to presume that biology would be so rebellious of its own preservation as to willingly submit to an ends contrary to that which affords its greatest chance of success.
Homosexual behavior acts in direct opposition to the propagation of life, both directly in its physical acts, and psychologically by subverting the natural order of creation. It is anti-life, just as much as is abortion. Being unable to sustain itself through procreation, it may increase its numbers only by seduction--a point that the doctrine of libertarian thought purposely ignores, and which has a direct impact on society at every measurable level.
The argument that same-sex attraction is a product of genetic accident is easily refuted; for if such a gene were existent for any period of time, it would soon by its own actions render itself extinct, as do most unnatural mutations. Thus it is clear that the homosexual inclination is a product of external environmental stimulus and internal psychological impediments (intrinsically disordered desire). This distinction is important for reason that the state-enforced tolerance of intrinsically disordered behaviors (perversions) aligns perfectly with the anti-life philosophy that has imposed a literal death grip upon our culture. The rationale supporting this statement is the summation of those disorders, while still generally opposed, continue to advance, continue to realize great reinforcement through subversive indoctrination of the young, and thus continue to undermine true liberty with an emboldened narcissistic flattery that pretends itself tolerance.
Thus the libertarian argument of “non-interference” where willing parties engage in private acts not harmful to a non-interested party is a patently absurd and false doctrine. Such philosophy entails the shackling of human society in a suicide pact that is contrary to the development of a resilient culture, is destructive of a sustainable and prosperous economy, and exists in direct opposition to right reason and the moral imperatives derived through the Natural Law.
Ask the signers of this piece of libertarian trash if they are willing to sell their soul for 30 pieces of silver. If they are inclined to betray the common good, for the sake of "limited government and reduced taxes," then let them do so of their own accord; they do not speak for me, and I doubt they speak for most of the THINKING individuals within the TEA Party movement, whom understand the negative consequences connected with duplicity of mind on ethical and moral issues. I do not make deals with the Devil, and neither should the TEA Party do so in my name.
Here’s a real simple question. If you could have one, or the other - what would you take:
A flat 10% federal income tax across the board (just a simple tax code, no deductions, no need for 50-page tax returns, etc.)
Or...Abortion completely outlawed throughout the land
What would you choose?
I think it’s a no-brainer. Take the tax cut and continue to push via religous campaigns and otherwise against abortion.
False dilemma.
There is no reason why we can’t fight for both. You have to have the stomach for the conservative fight, like Reagan did.
Can anybody imagine the Leftists winning a big election and then saying, “OK, we can have domestic spending and Obamacare out the azz, but we have to stop having abortions right now.”
Get in the fight for real conservatism.
I've seen the FR blue screen of death even just the other day. It's still being used.
I think China Syndrome got his wish, more than he imagined.
All the zottees that I checked had white screens. I don’t think there’s been any more.
Therefore...
IBTZ!
Me, too.
Walts Ice Pick
Since Aug 30, 2010
IBTZ
Maybe it turns blue/purple after rigor mortis sets in. ;-)
I don’t think Walt’s Ice Pick is a s troll. They have seemed ok. Check their posting history.
That’s very true, well said.
Wanna borrow my flame suit?
You are a troll.
ROTFLOL! Rigor mortis! ha ha
White or purpley blue, maybe some zots have higher wattage than others? Or is it amps? Or decibels?
I wondered about the Ice Pick dude myself.
Yeah, money is SO much more important than stopping the slaughter of the unborn.
You are so right.
And heck, there’s money to be made from aborted fetuses, too - you know, ingredients for medicine, cosmetics and so on.
Double financial plus!
And I think that I need to go to bed. lol
Here I give you answer...
Matthew 19:14
Then were little children presented to him, that he should impose hands upon them and pray. And the disciples rebuked them. [14] But Jesus said to them: Suffer the little children, and forbid them not to come to me: for the kingdom of heaven is for such.
Matthew 22:17
[16] And they sent to him their disciples with the Herodians, saying: Master, we know that thou art a true speaker, and teachest the way of God in truth, neither carest thou for any man: for thou dost not regard the person of men. [17] Tell us therefore what dost thou think, is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar, or not? [18] But Jesus knowing their wickedness, said: Why do you tempt me, ye hypocrites? [19] Shew me the coin of the tribute. And they offered him a penny. [20] And Jesus saith to them: Whose image and inscription is this? [21] They say to him: Caesar’s. Then he saith to them: Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s; and to God, the things that are God’s. [22] And hearing this they wondered, and leaving him, went their ways.
Mark 8:36
For what shall it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his soul?
Matthew 16:26
For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?
Luke 9:25
For what is a man advantaged, if he gain the whole world, and lose himself, and cast away himself?
Mark 8:37
Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?
Galatians 6:8
For what things a man shall sow, those also shall he reap. For he that soweth in his flesh, of the flesh also shall reap corruption. But he that soweth in the spirit, of the spirit shall reap life everlasting.
John 16:21
A woman, when she is in labour, hath sorrow, because her hour is come; but when she hath brought forth the child, she remembereth no more the anguish, for joy that a man is born into the world.
Matthew 12:32
And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but he that shall speak against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, nor in the world to come.
Matthew 18:7
Woe to the world because of scandals. For it must needs be that scandals come: but nevertheless woe to that man by whom the scandal cometh.
Matthew 15:11
Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man: but what cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.
John 12:25
Itself remaineth alone. But if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit. He that loveth his life shall lose it; and he that hateth his life in this world, keepeth it unto life eternal.
Matthew 10:42
And whosoever shall give to drink to one of these little ones a cup of cold water only in the name of a disciple, amen I say to you, he shall not lose his reward.
Luke 6:49
But he that heareth, and doth not, is like to a man building his house upon the earth without a foundation: against which the stream beat vehemently, and immediately it fell, and the ruin of that house was great.
Romans 12:2
And be not conformed to this world; but be reformed in the newness of your mind, that you may prove what is the good, and the acceptable, and the perfect will of God.
Apocalypse 2:17
He, that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith to the churches: To him that overcometh, I will give the hidden manna, and will give him a white counter, and in the counter, a new name written, which no man knoweth, but he that receiveth it.
Philippians 3:7
But the things that were gain to me, the same I have counted loss for Christ.
Good night!
Guess I’m a 10-year troll. I’m merely trying to expound on the “pick your battles” theme earlier posted. IMHO the all or nothing approach will not succeed in the present political landscape. Yes, we can try to have it all. But we’re looking at the virtual fiscal an economic distruction of our country. That is what concerns me the most.
This is a philisophical question. I guess I could have worded it the other way. How about this: Would you take another 5 presidents just like Obama, higher taxes, open boarders, fiscal ruin, weak national defense etc, etc. But on the bright side, abortion completely illegal.
it’s a tough moral/philisophical question. Doesn’t make me a troll, just a realist.
A flat 10% federal income tax across the board (just a simple tax code, no deductions, no need for 50-page tax returns, etc.)
Or...Abortion completely outlawed throughout the land
What would you choose?
I think it’s a no-brainer. Take the tax cut and continue to push via religous campaigns and otherwise against abortion.
So, if you had to choose between:
A. A flat tax.
or
B. Saving the lives of more than 3500 babies EVERY DAY.
YOU would take the money and let the babies die.
Just out of curiousity, how much money do you figure you could save every year on the flat tax? I really want to know what sort of value you place on the lives of 52 MILLION slaughtered Americans.
I think you got the "no-brainer" part right, it just doesn't mean what you think it does.
“it’s a tough moral/philisophical question. Doesn’t make me a troll, just a realist.”
___________________________________________________
No, it’s not a tough question. Not for those of us who would never consider selling out our soul (and the soul of our Country) for a few measley bucks.
Please understand: We are facing a “virtual fiscal an economic distruction of our country” (sp) BECAUSE we gave up and accepted a moral and social destruction of our country. Until we return to our roots and the moral heritage we had for the 1st (almost) 200 years of our founding; we will NEVER have that fiscal and econonomic freedom.
Never.
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.