Wednesday, December 16, 2009

OOH! Jeremiah Nerve Touched! Response Rendered! Film at 11.

'Allo, Mes Amis! Apparent "Clueless Liberal" here, addressing Jeremiah's rebuttal. By the way, Jer, thanks for confirming that you read Count Istvan's blog and that it touches a nerve. All to the good, IMO.

Now, to the chase!

immigrants from England to America in the 1500s-1600s

Did I restrict the time period? Oh, no. You presumed that I placed it in Puritan terms, Jer, when in fact my comment on "successive waves" of immigrants suggested a greater progression across time. Consider the bias and prejudice that the Irish immigrant population initially encountered during the heyday of Ellis Island, for instance. If you think that your Puritanical thinking governed in that day, then you are delusional.

Thus, without God, there is no reason, purpose or meaning in governing bodies, or life in general for that matter. It becomes chaos, which I will explain later on in more detail.

Oh, please do.

On to the larger question of the humanities. Jer states:

What gives art, music, drama, and literature their meaning? What, ultimately, is the driving force behind the things he's listed? When we look at today's "artistry, musicals, dramas, and literature" we can see that, in all of it, to some degree or another, it has been touched by atheism.

I could tell right from the start, that what was being depicted by the minds of these paintings was a sense of meaninglessness. Which is what atheism really does, it creates in the minds and hearts of individuals who've indulged in every pleasure and then come away totally empty of any true meaning, in essence, devoid of a conscience, and therefore, they could not comprehend the purpose of their existence., Jer, any artwork that doesn't cry out to you glorifying Jesus is devoid of merit? Why am I not remotely surprised at this?

Yes, indeed they (Herbert Marcuse, Margaret Sanger, and Madalyn Murray O'Hair) spoke their minds...but now they tell a different story, and if only RalphyFan could listen to their story...he might have a different outlook on things. All three of them died lonely souls, and all because they chose to use their limited authority to satisfy themselves and their worldly pleasures, and it robbed them of the only gift they would ever have, eternal life. Pity!

How do you know in what state of mind they died, Jer?

Seriously. I'd be interested to know.

Take the scenario then, that RalphyFan puts forward for us...he says, "tolerating multicultural points of view works well in Canada," instead of using logic and facts, we see RalphyFan resorting to mere reaction, because he has an agenda, or desired outcome in mind, and what might this outcome be? If you look at it on eye level with the atheist himself, you can see very clearly that the answer is for that subversion to radical egalitarian philosophy that liberals use in the forefront to their ultimate goal of a communist society...we see this taking place in a variety of places that encompasses the globe, most notably here in the U.S., in Canada, and in Europe...and Europe has gone so far now that they're on their way out. But more to the point, where does each culture fall into the line of multiculturalist society? We have to remember that the pecking order is different under the governance of multiculturalist ultimately becomes the centerpiece for all philosophying, governing and most all decision making in general, and dictates that all systems of thought or governing are "equal," but when we look deeper, just underneath the surface we see that this isn't true, those of us who are the most tolerant so to speak, are the ones who then become targets by the government and other agencies of earthly authority, object of ridicule, hate and a conceited effort to place man on a pedestal "higher than God."

Wow. That's even a bigger run-on sentence than in your prior post, Jer. Maybe a refresher course in English is needed?

Notice then the particular faith that RalphyFan wishes to level the bulk of his critique against...yep, you guessed it, none other than an atheist would, at Jesus and His followers. Why? It is for the fact that they recognizes the truth of Jesus' message, and they can't stand that with all passion. Suffice it to say, RalphFan goes off onto a hysterical rant about how he thinks I view other religions. It's evident that he has found pleasure in the material world of which he builds his worldview, yet he is empty inwardly. Devoid of a conscience. I don't know, maybe it's a waste of time to debate such farcical ramblings, but clearly, RalphyFan is a good example of dire situation that our world and especially our own world is in.

Jer, you are a fool and a tool. You have not the remotest notion of my spiritual point of view, nor my conscience. You filter everything through your own narrow lens of your personal point of view. I see you for what you are - a religious bigot who chooses to marginalize anyone who disagrees with his personal, restrictive, retrograde viewpoint.

Thank goodness most sane denizens of the Internet(s) don't subscribe to your view.


Anonymous said...

He might have posted here twice yesterday. It was in all caps and made no sense so I erased it.

Anonymous said...

I see Jerry also flunked Biology.

Jonathan said...

What was Jer's point about pornography? I didn't get it...along with the rest of his rebuttal.

RalphyFan said...

And allow me to add...

You can sense the pain, can't you? Derelict, and without hope, he lashes out the only way a poor soul know how to spew hate and vitriol. However, he raises an interesting point ... he says "faith-blind," I'd say it's one thing to be faith-blind, but then it's quite another to be forced by the government to act as though you were "faith-blind." And in that, he is trying to defend the indefensible, trying to short-cut an All-Powerful Creator who deserves all praise and glory and honor.

I think it would be better to teach children in the admonition of the Scripture than it would be ... to promote these very immoral lifestyles that Kevin Jennings supports would lead to demonic forces overtaking the families of the children who are in the public schools, leading them into further into a life that would end their precious lives short of the mark to a sexually transmitted disease. So, it's false pretense to assume that our government run institutions of learning are delivering a "decent" education to children, and a very phony concept of what education is truly about.

Here we find it: the empty core of Jeremiah's paranoia. Because even while he waxes loud and long (and often) about his "All-Powerful Creator," he gets his shorts in a knot at the very notion that any institution should be enjoined against shoving said A-P.C. down kids' throats. News flash, Jer! An all-powerful god doesn't depend on human organizations' support. Any god that does is a PR construct, not a genuine force in the cosmos.

I meant what I said by "faith-blind." Civic institutions have by definition the responsibility to treat ALL citizens - a class which you must admit includes many who do not share your beliefs - equally and evenhandedly: that is, without deference to any one faith over another. Ergo, faith-blind. Jewish kids don't get preference over Episcopalians. Baptists don't rule the roost over Catholics. And nobody better pick on the Muslim or Pagan kids.

I mean, once you start down this "admonition of the Scripture" path, doesn't it splinter even further? Whose version thereof? Whose preferred Bible? Does the hellfire come with or without the brimstone? Recipe for schism within your own camp.

And, in any case, this was what the home milieu and Sunday School were always supposed to instill, isn't it? Seemed to work well enough, for generations in which I don't recall kids praying the day away in schools; where reading, writing, math, science and history were, you know, kind of the agenda. Government didn't then, and still doesn't, come marching into your house or church to dictate what you can and cannot teach your kids in spiritual terms. Why isn't that sufficient latitude for anyone to communicate one's faith and values to one's family? I really don't get it. How come, nowadays, Jer and his crowd aren't happy with ANY dish that isn't served with a garnish of their preferred interpretation of Jesus? What's next? Prayers printed on the napkins at McDonald's? Chapter and verse on your ATM receipts?

As for any approach other than Jeremian Theocracy leading to "demonic forces overtaking... families" and young lives by default ending in "sexually-transmitted disease," I can't even begin to address such baldfaced nonsense without my head exploding before I begin. The logical leaps are dizzying and make no sense at all.

Eh, but what do I know? I'm apparently "derelict and without hope."

Please keep reading here, Jeremiah. You might learn something. One thing being that not everyone whose world view disagrees with yours is miserable or desolute - in fact, most of us are happy, well-adjusted people contributing positively to our families and communities.

I think your Jesus would find things to approve, in that circumstance. So sad that - especially at this season of the year - you fail to.

Total Pageviews