Tuesday, December 16, 2008

Why I Can't Stand Christian Conservatives

The motto for the Religious Right is similar to that of Corporate America: what's good for us (anti-chioce, discriminating against the fags, creationism being taught in schools), is good for America becasue God and Pat Robertson told us so. And therein lies my beef with religious fanatics like Mark Noonan: what works for you doesn't necessary mean it will work for everyone else.

In my battle for conservatism, I’m battling for freedom of worship; life; the family; individual liberty; respect for private property; local control of affairs…all of these are Judeo-Christian ideals. Unfortunately, too many conservatives have come to the conclusion that conservatism means the defense of things like capitalism (brought to us by liberalism), individualism (brought to us by liberalism - and something different from individual liberty, but that’s another post); the bastard child of individualism, a right to privacy (brought to us by liberalism), strict immigration controls (brought to us by liberalism); legally sanctioned usury (brought to us by liberalism); fiat money (brought to us by liberalism), etc, etc, etc. Liberalism has also, of course, brought us things like socialism, so a conservative battling for capitalism will find himself hotly engaged with liberals battling for socialism, but both of them are battling for liberalism, just different interpretations of it…and that they are so starkly different highlights the basic incoherence of liberalism which grows out of its fundamental flaw, the conception that mankind is perfectible by human agency. And just as conservatism is fooled or fools itself into fighting for liberal things, so is conservatism incoherent.

When did the religious right claim a monopoly on these kind of ideas? They're beliefs and values Americans have to some extent or another.

Earth to Mark: the rest of Americans do not believe what you believe, nor do they share you ideas! You need to come down off that white horse you came in on and join the human race.

4 comments:

Count Istvan said...

Why is Noonan so paranoid? Other than the fact he is nuts.

Sergei Andropov said...

The key to understanding Noonan's conception of politics is that he does not understand that the word "right" has more than one meaning. Since he does not distinguish between its meanings, everything that is right is right, and vice versa. The opposites are also true: everything that is wrong is left, and vice versa. Thus, if Mark agrees with something, it is conservative, since conservative by its definition means right.

wee nelson said...

I'm sure that at one time Mark Noonan said that a belief in free markets was conservative.

Since the stock market crash, of course, it's liberalism.

et said...

In my battle for conservatism, I’m battling for freedom of worship; life; the family; individual liberty; respect for private property; local control of affairs…all of these are Judeo-Christian ideals.

Well, first, I'll be right up there in line to be fascinated to hear him differentiate between "individualism" and "individual liberty." The imagined parsing he'll have to engage in is already dizzying!

"Freedom of worship" is a Judeo-Christian ideal? Really? When its proponents are so quick to quote the axiom that "Thou shalt have no other gods before Me"?? There's freedom of worship for you.

"Life" is a Judeo-Christian ideal? Remarkable, given all the Biblical passages under which conditions are given for someone to be put to death by any number of creative methods, and from which the fundies cheerfully cherry-pick to support whatever position suits them at the time.

"The family" is a Judeo-Christian ideal? Even though according to the O.T. you can marry your brother's widow, sell your daughters into slavery, beget legitimate children on your servants, et. al.? There's family values for ya.

"Individual liberty?" We'll have to see about that when we hear Noonan's treatise on how it differs from "individualism," but I don't hold out great hope.

"Respect for private property" is a Judeo-Christian ideal? When in the Sermon On The Mount believers are exhorted not to store up treasures on Earth, but instead treasures in Heaven? And to give away more than is asked for from what they have? But, wait! I could have it all wrong. Maybe Noonan has an extra-special Jesus-endorsed Christmas Club account full of Blessed Private Property.

"Local control of affairs" is a Judeo-Christian value? Oh, yeah, because "rendering unto CAESAR" according to the prevailing tax law of the day, was Oh-So-Local-to-Judea, and had squat to do with Rome.

Noonan's basic flaw is in conflating the language of faith with the language of politics, and assuming they are one and the same. It's like confusing poetry with prose. They're both made of words, but the composition is as different as night and day. Or, as Inigo Montoya would have said, "He keeps saying that. I do not think it means what he thinks it means."

Total Pageviews