Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Saturday, December 08, 2007
Doug Giles :: Townhall.com Columnist
Seven Ways Young People Can Keep Our Country from becoming Officially Screwed
by Doug Giles
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
 
Poll
Will Congress pass Obamacare by the end of the year?

If America continues to

• diss God

• follow cultural coarsening Tila Tequila types

• whiz on traditional values

• weaken in our chutzpah

• stop spitting out babies

• say “muy bien” to this insane illegal immigration invasion . . .

then as a super power we will be in more trouble than a naïve, giggly good-looking drunk chick sportin’ a mini skirt at a Tommy Lee keg party. We will be toast. Period. End of story. The universe will be against us, and we don’t want to tick the universe off.

No civilization has lasted long as King of the Hill when there was a death of faith, a degeneration of morals, contempt for traditional values, a collapse of culture, a paralysis of the will, a decline in its native born population, and foreign invasion that wasn’t resisted. Google it if you don’t believe me, as the aforementioned is well known 411 regarding nations that have Gary Busey-ed their being into cheesy tourist spots.

Hey America . . . we’re not invincible. I know it looks like it, but believe it or not there have been powerful civilizations that are now a cartoon of what they use to be, and it would be the height of hubris to think that this party will never end no matter what we do.

Look, silly fool, if we forego the foundations upon which our country was built and start winging it with “progressive” principles instead of our old school traditional values, substituting God’s eternal blueprint for some secularist wizard’s ideas for a better mañana, then we officially put ourselves in line for historical butt kicking. And we have plenty of enemies hoping that we will blissfully blow off the very nitty-gritty that got us to this place of global greatness. Fo’ shizzle my nizzle.

I think God, in his crazy patience, is giving Americans (at least those who still give a flip about our country) a brief window to cowboy up and go back to the basics. If we do—great. I believe that with a lot of work we can still salvage this thing. If we don’t . . . then we shouldn’t gripe when we see our motherland turn into tripe.

In addition, I believe young people who embrace traditional values are principle players in this momentary stay of execution.

So what can the young God- and country-loving dude do? Well, you (and 45 year old guys like me) can do the opposite of what the secularist weeds want us to do, namely:

1. Embrace our faith like never before.

2. Revolt against the immoral vomit.

3. Cheer on traditional values.

4. Applaud and own our culture.

5. Quit being squishy wusses and steel up our will.

6. Spit out babies.

7. Tell foreign invaders to come here correctly or go back to their sucky countries.

To be continued . . .

* Logon to ClashRadio.com and check on Doug’s interview with Composer and Conductor Andrew T. Miller as they discuss his new DVD & CD, The Birth of Christ, narrated by Liam Neeson.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Doug Giles’ new book “If You're Going Through Hell, Keep Going!" is now available. Ann Coulter says "Doug Giles is a substantive and funny tour de force for traditional values.” Doug’s talk show and video blog can be seen and heard at www.ClashRadio.com.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Predicting the future
This is a good article. Can't wait for some liberal's to come along and disrespect religion, mock morality, give us a lecture about multiculturalism and tolerance, give us another lecture about contraceptives, and accuse Doug of racism towards Hispanics.

Then we will know liberals lack reading comprehension.

Mark my words ;)

Go Brudder!
Go Brother Giles!

Nice article.
King Liberal:

dictionary.com "satire"

America's Future


In 2008 we must make the candidates address border security and immigration enforcement.
20-30 million citizens of other countries are in our country illegally, 55% from Mexico, most of the rest from other Central and South American countries. Let's not ignore the leftward voting trends of these countries. It is notable that they picked May Day, an old communist day of celebration for their marches.

Most polls show at least half of the American citizens of Hispanic descent want the borders and laws enforced. Republicans will not win by alienating their current voters to get 40% of a new small block that will grow very large, very fast if amnesty is granted. That will grow the Democrats vote larger and faster as the influx increases exponentially as the result of another amnesty. It will spell the end of the Republican Party. The people who used to vote Republican will stop voting or form a new party. Conservatives will lose political influence and we will slide inexorably towards socialism (it has already started).

Most of what you hear about this issue is political propaganda that tries to convince you to give up your country without a fight, including on Fox News. The big money players are all on board the cheap labor express, they care not that American citizens do not want another amnesty. We know the last one resulted in 10 times the number of illegal aliens and a general disregard of our laws. The next one will be equally successful.

Comprehensive Immigration Enforcement

We need Comprehensive Immigration Enforcement, not reform. We need to restore respect for the law and the faith of the American people that their government is not selling them out. Amnesty for the illegal aliens is also amnesty for the corrupt companies who have been employing them. Money trumps everything, including love of country. Multi-nationals have no loyalty to country by definition, they see us as a market, not a nation. They see people as workers, documented or undocumented, no difference. If they can't send the work to where the labor is cheaper, then they want to bring the cheap labor here. Citizenship is meaningless.

If we love our Constitution and our representative Republic and we intend to keep it we must not surrender our sovereignty or abandon the rule of law. Profits must not supercede security. We should not create a new path to citizenship. We have a path to citizenship, more generous than any other country, illegal aliens have ignored it and bad choices do have consequences.

Sooo
We all need to:

1. Repent and follow White Jesus

2. Institute American "interrogation techniques" on all supporters/members of the ALCU, PFAW, NOW, and the Democratic Party.

3. Follow the Old Testament word for word. Let's make Saudi Arabia look liberal!!!!!

4. Celebrate Eurocentric culture. Bring back Virgina Dare day, build a national memorial to William J Simmons, and show "The Birth of a Nation" on FOX NEWS as the replacement for the now canceled 1/2 News Hour.

5. Enlist Fred Phelps and Joe Jackson (Michael's crazy abusive dad)to help us gain some backbone

6. Throw away the condoms Suzy. We going all natural!!!!!! Let's get to making Sunbeam lookalikes!!!!!

7.Gather all peolpe who look "Latin" as some would say, put them on trains to concentration camps down in Texas, and build a 150ft high fence along our whole entire border. That's right Florida, kiss those beaches goodbye. Yeah Maine, we can't have those Canadians sneaking across our lines. Hey Hawaii, every seen "Escape to New York".

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sometimes I think Townhall is the sister site to The Onion. LOL!!!!

Oh roberto: Don't be so foolish!
.

landofconfusion

Looks as if Ralph has fulfilled your prophecy; now HOW did you know??? ;-)


Ralph Ellison
Unfortunately for the readers here, The Onion succeeds where you fail. Otherwise, there would be more people able to type "LOL".

I would add to your list the need to rid political discourse of specious, nonsensical hyperbole and straw man arguments, but then...what would you be left with for material?

We'd never enlist Fred Phelps for anything. He's a Democrat. Check his record. Biggest fundraiser in Kansas for Gore's first Presidential run in 1988. Ran at least three times for office on the Democrat ticket. If you look at WHY he was supporting Gore, you'd start to like Gore a lot less...


Will do.
As a 15 year old...

1. Embrace our faith like never before.

I'm LDS and stand up for my faith very much, God should be in our country.

2. Revolt against the immoral vomit.

Most definatly will do.

3. Cheer on traditional values.

Heck yes! This counrty did well before the Liberals took over and have messed up everything. Need to go back to what the Founders wanted.

4. Applaud and own our culture.

I know what it means to be an American, and I'm proud of it.

5. Quit being squishy wusses and steel up our will.

hmm...

6. Spit out babies.

If you are meaning kids... No problem, I plan on being a stay at home Mom as much as possible. ATLEAST 4 kids :P


I try to bring the other kids of my generation to the right side, but the public school system pretty much warps 'em into being Bush hating, don't care what goes on Liberals. So I don't have much luck.

landofconfusion: Yup! All of 45mins.

And then quickly followed up by roberto!

Another excellent column by Giles. No doubt this will draw a lot of liberals filled with hate!






Lee
What are you talking about!!!!

I'm a conservative!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


We've arrived...
at an age of moral absurdity and absolute stupidity.

Ralph Ellison, please tell me that you in a position in which you cannot possibly influence anyone. I'm willing to bet you consider yourself enlightened or progressive. Good grief....


We've arrived...
at an age of moral absurdity and absolute stupidity.

Ralph Ellison, please tell me that you in a position in which you cannot possibly influence anyone. I'm willing to bet you consider yourself enlightened or progressive. Good grief....


Yuck!!!!!
5 minutes of claiming to be a con made me feel dirty!!!!! No Lee, I don't have the stomach nor the necessary low IQ nor the right "background" to be a con.

Citizen Carrier,

I find it funny that on a site with respected columnists like Sowell and Krauthammer Douglass here has a spot. Kind of odd don't you think??? Then again, the pride of Gonzaga High still has a place on TH.

As for the Phelps thing, you are correct. However, you forgot to add in how Phelps noW hates Gore with such a strong passion. He even picketed the funeral of Gore's father.

Remember too that David Duke is a Republican. You must be so proud.

PS: I love your mayor. Michael B. Coleman is a rising political star.

wayward1
Nice double post.

Even with the multiple posts, I don't understand this sentence,

"please tell me that you in a position in which you cannot possibly influence anyone"

Huh??? Do you mean "are"?

Please tell me you are not an English teacher.

PS: Charlie Brown called. He wants his phrase back.


Gotta go
Anne,

I still luv you long time.

Got church in the morning. May Allah bless you and keep you.

Ralph and Knight
"Of course, since he supposedly is a 'democrat', he doesn't count, right?"

No, he doesn't "count" as a Christian because he has yet to conduct himself or his followers in a Christian manner.

That is seperate from his political affiliation. Of course, for me it is enough that he is a Democrat in order to dismiss him. His cultish kookery is just more grist for the mill.

But I'm still wondering if Ralph Ellison can do a point by point disagreement with the Doug Giles column WITHOUT the crutches of hyperbole, straw man, and reductio ad absurdum.

I understand this is a tall order. To leave aside the poor man's Jon Stewart act and argue without irony. To be earnest. Frank. Concise.

For example, just exactly what part of celebrating our own culture do you find objectionable? And why?


Ralph Ellison writes:
Please tell me you are not an English teacher.

Pardon me, I forgot that the liberal moral compass suggests that punctuation trumps all.

Can't form an argument, find a typo. That will fix 'em.

Run along sheeple before my second hand smoke gives you an aneurism....

Easy answers....
1. Vote Democratic
2. Vote Democratic
3. Vote Democratic
4. Vote Democratic
5. Vote Democratic
6. Vote Democratic
7. Vote Democratic


and those who vote Repugnant, please check in at your nearest army recruiting office - we need you immediately in Iraq to relieve the overburdened soldiers you are voting to keep in harm's way.

talisman
I'm suprised you can afford internet service seeing as how you're in dutch with the IRS for refusing to pay your taxes.

You are in dutch with the IRS for refusing to pay your taxes, right?

If you expect us to join the Army (I'm already in) to "back up" our political beliefs, then surely you have made some equal sacrifice for your beliefs?

Some gesture equivalent to a three year enlistment and going in harm's way?

That leaves stuff like protest tax evasion. Like Thoreau did to protest the Mexican War.

You have made some sacrifice like that, haven't you? Please don't tell me you are continuing to fund waterboarding and Gitmo. Because if you haven't made a similar sacrifice in the service of your beliefs, you would be...hypocritical in suggesting that others should do so for theirs.

Hey Allen

I hear there's a great place for pseudo-intellectuals with no unelightened attachments to old-fashioned values, but you'll have to drop that bravado if you do move to France.

Do you brag about your "neices" because you don't have your own children? I DO have my own children to brag about - and they're solid conservative teens that love G-d, love our country, and love their fellow citizens. Oh, and every chance I get, I share with them columns by Doug Giles, Mike Adams, Ann Coulter, etc.

Katie, hang in there young lady...you're not alone.

Ah,
I have to consider him a Christian because he considers himself a Christian? We get to be whatever it is we declare ourselves to be even though we don't live up to the standards most of the adherents live by? It is for the likes of you to determine who Christians are?

As I already pointed out, he also calls himself a Democrat. Are there any Democrats here that will claim him as one of your own?

Anyone? Any takers?

Don't blame you. I wouldn't want a guy like that calling himself a Republican.

Knight, if Karl Rove started referring to himself as a libertarian, yet still conducted himself as a neocon, would he be a libertarian?

a comment wanting to say a long time...
Its something I cant begin to understand with conservatives. Why are people judged for how they perceive the universe and how are they "evil" because of this. It was not a conscious decision on my part that the "god" concept never made any sense to me. As an adolescent became more interested in philosophy than theology. Reading Nietzsche it just made much more sense to me that what I was told in religion class at school. I went on to study physics and the universe as single rationally understandable self contained structure makes sense to me. Thats as far as it goes. I pay my taxes, obey the laws etc... but somehow I am a threat to be abused shouted down and threatened and excluded from public debate in every concievable form. I dont get it. why me? What have I done? Why must I accept my status as second class citizen? what is it about me the only minority that it is polite and acceptable to discriminate against? Why is it that I dare not mention this with my real name attached for fear of how my children will be treated at school and that if this fact is known about me anything viewpoint I express on any issue is to be ignored? This article and Romneys speech are two good examples of what I am talking about.

tahssard
Perhaps if you tried reading some of the works by scientists who have discovered through modern science, particularly micro-biology, the hand and heart of God in the universe, you would not find yourself in such a depressed state of mind. I recommend "The Hidden Face of God" by Dr. Gerald Schroeder to people like you as a starting place. If you like science, then let science tell you about your Creator. It is extremely convincing and exciting to an old ex-athiest like myself. Whoda evah thunkit?

for tahssard
Man, it must be a real bummer being you. You sound so oppressed, depressed, distressed, dismissed. Ever think about counselling? My faith in God, keeps me. Every where I look I see the hand of God. You will never convince me this is all happenstance. I feel sorry for you and those who are abusing you and shouting you down and treating you like a second class citizen. They must be those enlightened people who go to The Minuteman events and Ann Coulter and Newt Gingrich speeches and cause such a ruckus.

ColinCody...
you just dont begin to get it do you?!

ok you used to be an atheist you read a book and now are not. fine. great. congradulations. wonderful. I accept you the way you are though you are different than me and your right to get joy from what you believe. I have no desire to try to convert you or your family. This has not happened to me. I am happy with myself the way I am. My aesthetic sense is different from you.
To me the idea of a universal authority that can never be destroyed is horrible. To believe this for me would feel like being trapped in a universal North Korea. I realize this is just me, my will to power is much to strong for me to like this. For you and Dougy Giles its different, you find an idea of univeral sky daddy wonderful. Fine. I grant you your joy and accept living in a society with you feeling this way. I instead believe in the inherent goodness of humanity and human progress as humanity (not Americans, Slovenians, Ugandans, Equadorians, etc...) through unbound unconstrained and uncensored art and science. I have faith and really believe in humanity actually Humanity with a capital H as a single entity progressing though a dialectic spiral. This belief and thinking of this spiral gives me same joy your christianity gives you. the only difference is I as a joyous believing secular humanist suffer discrimination that you as a christian do not. I have faith you have faith.
You said GOD! I say HUMANITY! Why cant it be like you like vanilla I like chocolate? Why must I be abused for the faith I have? Why is every faith except mine accepted? This trying to convert me and convince me of your stance through reason COMPLETELY misses the point. Would you be so arrogant as to speak to me this way if I told you I was a Buddhist Muslim or Sikh? Unless you are even more provincial than I have judged you to be I think not...

But the greatest of these is...Faith?
Who is this Faith person Giles refers to? Is she cute? Before I embrace her, especially if I'm going to embrace her in the traditional way, I'd like to see her picture...

I saw an
article not long ago that said that Tila Tequila was actually a big square in her private life and that everything on the MTV show was made up cr*p.

Gee, who would have thunk it???

Good and #1
Jiles' article builds everything around the premise of a nation being "king of the castle".

I noted the recent U.N. evaluation of the "best nations in the world in which to live", where Iceland and a number of other Nordic nations are at the top and the U.S. is around 10th.

No longer the mighty Vikings and hardly models of religious fervor, these places prosper and their citizens live longer than ours, with lower rates of infant mortality.

Do we really believe that those living in many European nations were better off under Kings with their "Divine" rights, or as colonialist powers, or as number ones due to their stretch of colonies?

Being "good" and being "#1" are not necessary the same thing. Ask Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union or the Roman empire.

yall still miss the point.
last post here:

I have no idea where anyone gets the idea that I am some sort of missionary or in any way out to convert anyone to "prespectivism" or any other viewpoint. Maybe yall just project and assume everyone is out to save souls like your evangelical selves.
I posted this here because in wake of Romney speech this article really incapsulated something I fundamentally dont understand about conservatives. This wierd contradiction that you call all be united,
all people of "faith in god" and this can unite but it is all about excluding me. I really wanted to understand why I am seen as a threat that must be cast out and excluded when people like me are harmless and peaceful both historically and socialogically (low crime and divorce rate, dont tend to fly planes into buildings etc... ). I just dont get it so I wrote to TH to see how people would respond. The reaction was less condemnation than expected but also startlingly less comprehension of the very simple message I am trying to project. What makes me less worthy of inclusion into american society than a moderate Muslim or Sikh? Why use strong language such as Romney does that specifically singles the small harmless subgroup of people like me, while including people with arguably beliefs that cause a far greater clash with american society.

Spit out Babies?
Do you not realize that one of the biggest problems we are only beginning to resolve is the number of teenaged girls spitting out babies? Not to mention the number of twenty-somethings doing the same, with no idea or plan about what to do next? Are you not paying attention to the hammer, hammer, hammer at this time of the year about TheMostVulnerableAmongUs who are young women *spitting out babies* in the happy delusion that somebody else will feed, clothe, transport, educate, entertain, teach and ultimately jail them, that their own duty ended when they *spat them out*?

Personally I believe the only thing you need to tell Generation Whine and their GrabbyBaby offspring (not to mention that 5% of the Baby Boom who have joined the Peter Pan Club) is GROW UP.

What this country needs is ADULTS. Fortunately it has some -- but is it a critical mass? Time will tell.

tahssard
"To me the idea of a universal authority that can never be destroyed is horrible. To believe this for me would feel like being trapped in a universal North Korea."

The central characteristic of God as revealed in his unique "son," Christ Jesus, is love, in fact, a very special kind of love that is totally unselfish and completely self giving while also being just and fair by our human standards. God's kind of love always seeks the very highest and greatest benefit of those He loves--His people made in His own image and likeness who have freely chosen to live in perfect harmony with Him. He desires that we become all that we can be as men created for greatness in fellowship with Him.

The Kingdom of God is not repressive or boring. It is governed by the principle of unselfishly seeking the highest and greatest benefit of all who are God's friends. Living in His Kingdom means living supernaturally, i.e., living with an amazing array of possibilities available to me and always with very special divine assistance.

I'm a Christian systematic theologian nowadays, but I'm also a professional actor, singer, dancer, painter, sculptor, writer and clown (Professor Newton P. Fluffy and Snooter, the singing wonder dog) seen by approximately 200,000,000 people around the world. God says that He has blessed me with many talents, and I am to do the most I can with those blessings for the betterment of mankind as opportunities present themselves. He doesn't tell me exactly what to do; He leaves that up to my own discretion as a mature son of my loving God.


Tahssard continued---
I spoke to you as I did only because, according to what you said, you seem to be extremely unhappy. I was simply trying to show you a way to use your own interest in science to find the escape hatch into a happier, more harmonious way of thinking and being. And, yes, I would have spoken to you in some kind of helpful way regardless of whatever your particular religious philosophy. If that makes me provincial in your estimation, then so be it. May you soon find a higher level of happiness than you now enjoy.

tahssard
Just what form does this exclusion you are experiencing take? The only institutions i know of that exclude atheists are AA and the Masons which both require acknowlegement of a "Higher Power". Perhaps you a referring to people who disagree with you about religion, and thus you feel "unaccpted"? Well, join the party. Any one professing ANY religious belief can certainly find somebody with another belief, virtually anytime, anyplace, including while attending the church of their choice. As you deal with these crushing and unfair blows, perhaps it might help you bear up under the strain by researching other places that would treat you with more tolerance.

AudiR10
You are quite correct. Doug should have stated "When married, spit out babies" (rather than butchering them).

Quotes from Thomas Jefferson
"Every citizen should be a soldier. This was the case with the Greeks and Romans, and must be that of every free state."

"The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive."

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

"A little rebellion now and then...is a medicine necessary for the sound health of government."

Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God. - Thomas Jefferson (Motto on his seal)

Interesting viewpoints
Tahssard, from where you sit, you believe to be in a small minority that is regularly and systematically persecuted for your beliefs (or un-beliefs).

I think many people of faith - however manifested - feel the same way, especially since the "experiment" begun in the 60's.

In my opinion, it really comes down to this:

Do you believe in a power greater than yourself? Greater than "humanity"?

If not, then I submit to you that it is precisely this belief in humanity as the highest authority that is the source of your feelings of persecution.

50 years ago, you could ask most scientists if they believed in a higher power (God, if you will), and the majority would respond, "Of course not, I am a scientist."

Now, you'd find an increasing number who would say, "Of course I do, I am a scientist."

Einstein himself went through this metamorphose.

I'll take you at your word that you are happy in your beliefs, even if the tone and tenor of your posts tend to sound contrary to such happiness.

It has taken a long time for me to arrive at where I am spiritually, but it started when I became convinced that the Universe and life could not possibly exist by accident - and I knew it wasn't me or other humans that were responsible.

I am most definitely NOT the highest power.

When married AND EMPLOYED
It is no use telling people to get married and spit out babies if they are incapable of or unwilling to (or unaware that they must) support them and care for thm 24/7 for the next 18 years if not forever in some cases.

FIRST GROW UP. Then make a plan. Then spit out the babies.

Savage99
Good morning, Savage99.

It is quite seldom I find the need to correct you, but there is no requirement for belief in a higher power to be in AA.

The only requirement for membership is a desire to stop drinking.

It IS suggested that one develop a belief in a power greater than one's self, but that power doesn't need to be "God" in a traditional sense. It can simply be the "power" of the fellowship of AA. The word "God" is used in a generic way to identify such a power - thus the confusion.

Cheers!

This seems appropos
"One of the painful signs of years of dumbed-down education is how many people are unable to make a coherent argument. They can vent their emotions, question other people's motives, make bold assertions, repeat slogans-- anything except reason." -- Thomas Sowell

And Another Thought
"Having a child you can't afford to feed, clothe and educate is the moral equivalent of a drive by shooting" -- Larry Elder

tahssard writes
"yall still miss the point"

I thought I was beginning to get your point 'til you came up with that "Universal Sky Daddy" crack.

You're right: I don't get it. We have believers who don't understand unbelievers, whites who don't understand blacks, catholics who don't understand protestants, women who don't understand men and, oh yes, liberals who don't understand conservatives (and vice-versa to all of the above).

And we're ALL victims! Poor me - Nobody knows the trouble I've seen.


Well, tahssard, it's always been that way, so you might as well get over it. If you are to believe the commentary here at TH, there are not many who really want to understand. "I'll make my point, and if anyone disagrees, I'll call him a name or put him down or talk over his head."

Tahssard, you slipped-up and revealed your true colors. I was truly interested in hearing where you were coming from in your first post. And then you just had to go and insult the faith of millions of believers.

The good news is: It's never too late to change - it's all part of growing up. (I'm referring to your attitude toward those who disagree with you, NOT to your atheism. That's between you God.)

BTW: Before anybody reminds me that I too am guilty of being a "victim" - I know. I'm workin' on it.

Katie
You are a breath of fresh air! As long as this country has young people like you, there is hope for our future.

Good article,Doug! I'll be looking forward to many more.

Keep spitting out babies
...as long as they are little clones of each other, right?

It strikes me as ironic that the most prolific child-bearers in the USA are underaged illiterate thug-ettes and "Evangelical Christians."

Yeah. I'd love to see some normal, mainstream type couples produce families. On the one hand you have the children giving birth to children in the 'hood. And on the other hand, you have the obedient little barefoot-and-pregnant, one-step-behind Papa types. Neither of which represent the America I knew and loved, sixty years ago.

Stan47
Wow...

Do you really believe Doug Giles is advocating spitting out babies to be "obedient little barefoot-and-pregnant, one-step-behind Papa types"?

I guess it depends on what you mean by "normal, mainstream type couples", doesn't it?

In this era of "cultural relativism", seems to me "normal" and "mainstream" is impossible to define.

Ward, June, Wally and "Beaver", perhaps?

I guess I am a bit hooked...
I find it fascinating that there is such an acute negative reaction to my "Universal sky daddy" comment. it was not meant as insult in any way. I am only trying to express what I percieve in language I am familiar with, the concept is so alien to me that I guess I really am working on eggshells to me so its very difficult. sorry if anyone percieves insult in this. I frankly am so removed from any belief that it is impossible for me to comprehend the concept of insulting beliefs. people can be insulted beliefs can only be challenged. This all is so strange to me. The only thing I am acutely away from is the active discrimination I regularly suffer. and it is real and it is strange that it is just people like me. maybe its something that all faiths have certain common understanding that makes it easier for them to accept and not offend each other.

tahssard
Don't worry about it. The God Squad has no problem insulting non-believers, as evidenced in Giles' initial claim that if you "diss God..The universe will be against us. Period. End of story."

I'm not sure what the phrase, "diss God" even means, but it's all too clear that most believers have to resort to the fallacy that unless one has a definite description of God(based on dogma), they are a person without morals or ethics, regardless of how they live their life.

Doug Giles talking about the universe being against us ranks as one of the most ridiculous statements of all times.
Additionally, Giles warns against saying “muy bien” to this insane illegal immigration invasion . . .but expects Iraqis to welcome an insane military invasion of their country.
I'm just amazed anyone takes this guy seriously.

Why I have hope for our nation

1) Activist Lefties murder their own off spring before they are born, so a higher percentage of children are raised in loving, normal, conservative families.

2) Conservatives are "on to" the wiles of the Leftie Wolves in Sheeps Clothing, and can prepare their children in advance for the onslaught in college.

3) When kids or raised well, they may experiment for a while in their teens with stupid notions, but they return to the foundations when they regain their senses. This happened to most of the Baby Boomers, which is why the virulent Left is so hot to separate you from your children.

4) The Left is no longer to hog every information outlet, like they used to. Those of us who have commonsense and a clue can make our opinions known, and can band together. We can see that we are not alone in our conservatism, and besides that we are many in number.

5) Because of #4, people with clear eyes and a pure heart can see that we are not like the stereotype that the Left has painted, that the nonsense the Left spews is a pack of lies, and can turn away from the foolishness toward the good decent values they have always longed for.

Pancho
Do people like you intentionally miss the point because you don't like what you see when the mirror is held to your faces?

Of all the words that have been written or spoken over thousands of years, do you really believe Giles comment about the universe "ranks as one of the most ridiculous statements of all times"?

Giles uses the term "God" precisely four times in his column. He makes reference to "traditional values" which even most non-believers admit have their root in spirituality.

Do you really believe Giles is talking about non-believers who live their lives within the framework of "traditional values"?

And do you not see the pretzel you have to twist yourself into to make a comparison between illegals overrunning a border with the intention to stay because it is better than the way they have it versus a military action to effect regime change and confront people who are sworn to kill the infidel?

Doug Giles
"No civilization has lasted long as King of the Hill when there was a death of faith, a degeneration of morals, contempt for traditional values, a collapse of culture, a paralysis of the will, a decline in its native born population, and foreign invasion that wasn’t resisted. "

Rome lasted a thousand years doing just that... I guess you were deprived of a classical education? Anything else you wrote is nonsense given the above absurd statement.

Real lesson from History?
Stagnate and die; not changing and adapting equals death

Pancho presents a logical fallacy
It is typical of the Left to make inflammatory statements about conservatives, not at all descriptive of our position, and then they argue with THAT instead of arguing with our real positions.

This is a form of the "Straw Man" Falacy, and also a form of lying.

When you put words into your opponent's mouth which they did not say. you are LYING.

Case in point: Pancho, in his above post says, "most believers have to resort to the fallacy that unless one has a definite description of God(based on dogma), they are a person without morals or ethics, regardless of how they live their life."

There is nowhere that I have ever read that believers think there can be a definate description of God made by a human.

In fact, we believe that the God of the Universe is unfathomable by our tiny little human brains, and that we can only know what He has revealed to us in His Word.

Because Pancho is a lazy thinker, he is not willing to find out what his opponent really thinks, and instead invents positions that we do not hold. Perhaps, as many Lefties, Pancho is afraid to find out what we really think out of fear that it might make too much sense, and that he would have to change from his own indefendable position.

Primus54
"Do you really believe Doug Giles is advocating spitting out babies to be obedient little barefoot-and-pregnant, one-step-behind Papa types'?"

In a word, YES. In context with everything else he writes.

And as someone who has reached the age of sixty without having fathered children (for reasons both personal and probably medical--I don't swim well, and I suspect my little tadpoles don't either) I am up to HERE with people who get all self-righteous because they've conceived and given birth to a line of little ducklings. Raise children that you can be proud of, for sure. But realize that it's a long, hard fall to the ground off that high moral plateau that parents of the "Christian" variety so often attempt to occupy.


Mountain Rose
"1) Activist Lefties murder their own off spring before they are born, so a higher percentage of children are raised in loving, normal, conservative families."

Actually if they are not born, they are not offspring. Second, moderates use of birthcontrol means that most children are wanted and are raised in loving homes.

"2) Conservatives are "on to" the wiles of the Leftie Wolves in Sheeps Clothing, and can prepare their children in advance for the onslaught in college."

Teaching people to think for themselves is certainly dangerous that is why I thought you folks created your own "colleges"

"3) When kids or raised well, they may experiment for a while in their teens with stupid notions, but they return to the foundations when they regain their senses. This happened to most of the Baby Boomers, which is why the virulent Left is so hot to separate you from your children."

LMAO, good try Rose LOL

"4) The Left is no longer to hog every information outlet, like they used to. Those of us who have commonsense and a clue can make our opinions known, and can band together. We can see that we are not alone in our conservatism, and besides that we are many in number."

yes you are about 20% of the Republican party and falling

"5) Because of #4, people with clear eyes and a pure heart can see that we are not like the stereotype that the Left has painted, that the nonsense the Left spews is a pack of lies, and can turn away from the foolishness toward the good decent values they have always longed for. "

Decent values? Torture? executions? No healthcare? No husbanding the earth's resources? No compromise and progress? See you are far more like the left's sterotypes than you realise

The Pretzel
> do you not see the pretzel you have to twist yourself into to make a comparison between illegals overrunning a border with the intention to stay because it is better than the way they have it versus a military action to effect regime change and confront people who are sworn to kill the infidel?<

Talk about pretzels. We effect regime change, then end up with a regime led by people who are sworn to kill the infidel, or do you think the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq, the #1 political party in Iraq means something other than what it says?

As for the intention to stay, if you were an Iraqi, and you saw a foreign country buliding permanent military bases, as well as seizing several square miles in the middle of the capital city to build the largest(and most expensive) foreign embassy in the history of mankind, you might think the foreign invaders had every intention of staying.

Now, hold the mirror to your face, and tell me how comfortable you are with your "traditional values," while supporting the military occupation of a sovereign nation that never posed a threat to our national security.

Hal "Phil" Donohue writes:
"Rome lasted a thousand years doing just that... I guess you were deprived of a classical education? Anything else you wrote is nonsense given the above absurd statement..."

No, Hal. What is absurd is viewing "a thousand years" as a "long time" historically.

Funny, I didn't think you were one of those "believers" that the earth is only 6,000 years old.

Do you ever stop and critically read what you just wrote before you hit the "post" button?

Were you deprived of a classical education?

Keep offending one another!
I read Townhall articles and I have an opinion. Before stating that opinion I usually read the various comments. More often than not many or even most of the comments are unrelated to the general message of the article.
You people call each other names and insult one another. Many of you are so committed to your beliefs you find it necessary to insult others with with your opposing views.
The Doug Giles article:
In my opinion this is a poorly written article and some parts of it are downright offensive. However, I think the general theme of the article is a statement of fact.
If the citizens of this nation continue to disavow our heritage, traditions, and foundational principles, this country as we know it is doomed.
Many of you would like to redefine our Constitution, re-write our history books, modify our laws, and remove any evidence of faith from public life. So far you have been very successful in accomplishing this goal.
Sooner or later I am hoping and praying the rest of us decide we have had enough, and we decide to stand up and fight for our beliefs.

Hal Donahue
Rome began to swirl the bowl when it became morally soft.

Certainly, they were pagans, but the early Romans were heavily enfluenced by the Athenians and the Spartans. They were Grecophiles, disciplined in mind and body, following the intellectual lead of the people who invented logic, and the physically disciplined lead of the Spartans.

It is therefore no coincidence that the New Testament, which was written during the reign of Rome, has enfluences from the best of the ancient Greek Civilization. Particularly the logic of the Apostle Paul reflects this in his sharp Athenian logic, and in his imagery when he called us to "put on the full armor of God."

But in later years, Rome elected leaders who were physically soft, insane in their minds, and morally decadant.

It was this moral and mental decay that made their civilization decline, and made them vulnerable to attacks from maurading barbarians.

For many eons, it was widely thought that when homosexuality became rampant among the Roman elites, the end drew near.

Because of the activist Left, this process of decay has accelerated, so that in less that 250 years, the greatest country that ever lived is in danger of decline.

Our ship of state is being eaten from within by the termites of the Left, and we are too afraid to spray spiritual DDT on them for fear of being called meanies.

Since you asked...
"Normal" and "mainstream," to me means:

- Everyone in the household having the same surname. And none of that hyphenated equivocation allowed.

- Mom raising her children, as nature intended, instead of shipping them off to a day-care center run by some unemployable loser the moment the scab falls off the umbilicus.

- All the members of the household sitting down to supper together, every night of the week.

- Parents having their children's behavior under control before inflicting them on the innocent public at every restaurant, shopping mall and movie theater.

- Parents having enough authority with their children that the occasional slip in public behavior can be handled without resorting to something that looks to a bystander as though the parent harbors a deep resentment for the child and the inconvenience it represents.

- Children being trustworthy enough to play among themselves without overbearing adult supervision and structure, even after they have reached the age of puberty.

Y'know. Radical stuff like that.

utahnotmormon
Yes, utah, our brave men and women in the military are secretly planning to stay in Iraq because the jobs, health care and schools are better, not to mention welfare, social security, et-al.

By your logic then, we should leave Germany, S. Korea, Kosovo and about 45 other locales around the world that we "occupy", yes?

You're a little off your game today, utah. You forgot to mention Haliburton, Cheney, Rove, "Bush lied, kids died", etc.

How quaint
> Mom raising her children, as nature intended, instead of shipping them off to a day-care center run by some unemployable loser the moment the scab falls off the umbilicus.<

Nature must have been napping that day when it decided that a female lion could actually raise her young and do the hunting to feed them.


Skipping... and please tell me
how you are any different?

It seems to me that your post has an insulting manner as well.

For example, instead of saying that Doug Giles article was "poorly written" and "downright offensive," you could have said that his article could have been better written and should have been more diplomatic. See how much kinder that was?

The truth is, you hant to get down here in the mud with the rest of us and sling away, but you just don't want to admit it!!!

Stan47
By your definition of "normal" & "mainstream", I'd call you a "conservative". You've definitely described the "Cleavers".

I completely agree with your list - 100%.

And I'd even go so far as to say Doug Giles would agree that what you define would be a return to "normalcy".

Unfortunately, in the world of "moral relativism", you (and I) would be considered judgmental and on a "moral" plateau for wanting to return to such a state of being.

What our critics cannot (or will not) see is "cause" & "effect" or the law of unintended consequences. To do so requires abandoning their narcissistic belief system.

Stan47
You will be happy to know about this story.

Yesterday I was in Frys, and as I walked inside, I heard a toddler screeming as loud as he could.

I cringed, thinking that my shopping trip was going to be miserable, but as I turned to look, the dad was carrying his writhing little monster out the door!!!

Hooray that there are still parents with a clue that the misbehavior of their brats effects everyone in earshot.

In fact, a couple of months ago I wrote a piece in my blog about this. Just look for the article called "Hey Honey, Do You Do That Back At The Double Wide?"

Drop by and comment!

utahnotmormon
Darn!

I keep thinking your name is UltraHotMormon, and I keep hoping that it is Mitt Romney posting, since he is the Ultra Hot Mormon.

Then I read your post and see how wrong I was.

utahnotmormon writes:
"Nature must have been napping that day when it decided that a female lion could actually raise her young and do the hunting to feed them."

And nature must have been napping when it was decided that reptiles would eat their young?

What's next? Man = lion = reptile = amoeba?

I'll give you this, utah, you get the award for the most ridiculous comment of the day thus far.

Do not despair - "Robert" is sure to show up sooner or later.

Mountain Rose
"Rome began to swirl the bowl when it became morally soft."

Actually Christianity has been blamed for creating that moral softness. I do not agree but that argument has been made.

"Certainly, they were pagans, but the early Romans were heavily enfluenced by the Athenians and the Spartans. They were Grecophiles, disciplined in mind and body, following the intellectual lead of the people who invented logic, and the physically disciplined lead of the Spartans."

Which has no ties to Christianity at all. The early Christian leaders saw themselves opposing all that the Greek and Roman society stood for

"It is therefore no coincidence that the New Testament, which was written during the reign of Rome, has enfluences from the best of the ancient Greek Civilization. Particularly the logic of the Apostle Paul reflects this in his sharp Athenian logic, and in his imagery when he called us to "put on the full armor of God."

Paul actually rewrote most of what Christ stood for and imposed a Roman Hierarchy on it. That is when women were excluded etc

"But in later years, Rome elected leaders who were physically soft, insane in their minds, and morally decadant."

Define later years. Augustus roared against all that you do but changed nothing

"It was this moral and mental decay that made their civilization decline, and made them vulnerable to attacks from maurading barbarians."

Romans would agree with you I suspect but the decay they would cite is the very morals you advocate

"For many eons, it was widely thought that when homosexuality became rampant among the Roman elites, the end drew near."

Greeks always liked there men and boys. Romans were always what you call homosexual it was only seen as "bad" if you were the submissive one

Mountain Rose

"Because of the activist Left, this process of decay has accelerated, so that in less that 250 years, the greatest country that ever lived is in danger of decline. "

You really need to read history real history. Every growing, great power in history grew because of all the ideas, change and growth streaming into that culture. Everyone.

"Our ship of state is being eaten from within by the termites of the Left, and we are too afraid to spray spiritual DDT on them for fear of being called meanies "

You are meanies but far more important for the country you are incompetent of leading or ruling

Strawman alert
>Yes, utah, our brave men and women in the military are secretly planning to stay in Iraq because the jobs, health care and schools are better, not to mention welfare, social security, et-al.<

Our brave men and women in the military aren't part of any planning process as you well know. They enlist, then take orders from civilian commanders.

And yes, by my logic we should leave those locales around the world where we have military bases, except where we work in conjunction with our allies to discourage belligerence, and then primarily in a supportive role.

Primus: roberto has already dropped

a few of his stunningly stupid comments on Colson's and Zito's threads.

But, I have to admit that utahmoron is still clearly in the running.


utahnotmormon writes:
"Our brave men and women in the military aren't part of any planning process as you well know. They enlist, then take orders from civilian commanders."

Yes, utah, I well know this.

Which is precisely why a comparison between Iraq and illegals crossing our borders is ridiculous in the extreme.

Geesh - I'm not even breaking a sweat here. You really ARE off your game.

You feeling okay, utah?

Lazy Thinking
Lazy thinking is that there's a correlation between a leftist and one's religious or non-religious beliefs.

Lazy thinking is labeling someone a leftist without any knowledge of their views on free market capitalism, wealth distribution, the power of the state and entitlement programs tied to taxation.

I didn't invent any position about Giles. He clearly shows with his cartoon that he feels America is being screwed by secularism. Just because there are many on the right that agree with this position doesn't mean that it falls into the category of a left/right political dichotomy.

There are millions of conservatives who embrace secularism, but are moral, ethical, principled and stalwarts of the community.

It's the lazy thinkers who fool themselves into thinking otherwise.

AudioR10
AudiR10 writes: Sunday, December, 09, 2007 7:05 AM
"Spit out Babies? Do you not realize that one of the biggest problems we are only beginning to resolve is the number of teenaged girls spitting out babies? Not to mention the number of twenty-somethings doing the same, with no idea or plan about what to do next?"
********************************************

I agree with you that there are many girls "spitting out babies" without a plan, and without marriage.

Instead of discouraging girls having babies, we should be encouraging them to get married.

And married young, when the hormones are raging.

It is unpopular to say this, but the happiest marriage I ever saw was between my uncle and aunt, who were 18 and 16 respectively when they got married. They lived happily "'till death did them part," and my aunt lived to see five generations in her family. My first cousin (old enough to be my mother) took care of her parents in their last days, and now her daughter is taking care of her in her declining years. Everyone in the family pitches in to help, and no one is left to face the world alone.

My Leftie mom, ahead of her time, had only two children, later in life. Although her husband kept her at home, my brother didn't visit her for the last few years of her life, and I only saw her frequently when it became clear that she was near the end.

Listening to the Lefties, I had NO children, by choice. Now I am middle aged with no family nearby, and I realize too late how the end of my life will be.

There is a reason why people say that their family is the most important thing in the world to them, but many of us don't see the value of having a large, happy family until it is too late to create one.

No one is giving this message to young women, because the activist Left wants to create ZPG or RPG, and the rest of us have swallowed their lies.

Primus54
"No, Hal. What is absurd is viewing "a thousand years" as a "long time" historically."

Actually it is in terms of civilizations. You really ought to try opening a good history book

Pancho
Pancho writes: Sunday, December, 09, 2007 12:05 PM "...There are millions of conservatives who embrace secularism, but are moral, ethical, principled and stalwarts of the community..."
********************************************

I hate to break the news to you Panch, but people who are morally liberal and fiscally conservative are called LIBRATARIANS.

Notice the root word : "LIB."

This is not a coincidence.

The Comparison
>Which is precisely why a comparison between Iraq and illegals crossing our borders is ridiculous in the extreme.<

Except that you have distorted the original analogy, which was:

You decry the invasion of America by illegal immigrants.

You wonder why Iraqis decry the invasion of their country by the US.

It's the opposition to invasion(your word), not the method, or even the popularity.

Just as there are some Iraqis(primarily the Kurds) who have welcomed the US, there are some Americans(primarily employers of low-skilled, hourly employees) who have welcomed the illegal workers.

I'm suprised that an intelligent guy like you would have to have me explain such simplicity - or are you just being obstinate for the sake of being obstinate?

Mountain Rose
I pity you and I mean that. You can create your own family you can have very close friends anywhere. You are wallowing in "the road not taken". You really, really do need help please seek it. You don't have to live with such bitterness...

Folks be well I am out of here

Mtn Rose
I hate to break the news to you, but religion, or lack thereof, doesn't make a person morally liberal. Beliefs are beliefs, actions are actions.

And, you have made it quite clear what you believe, even though you attempted to obfuscate your beliefs with:

"When you put words into your opponent's mouth which they did not say. you are LYING.

Case in point: Pancho, in his above post says, "most believers have to resort to the fallacy that unless one has a definite description of God(based on dogma), they are a person without morals or ethics, regardless of how they live their life.""

Maybe I'm confusing what you mean by morally liberal, but it sure looks like you mean lacking morals.

Hal Donahue- you must be younger than
me. I have the advantage of having read history books before the Lefties got a strangle hold on the schools and the publishing companies.

It is the Left who are rewriting history, to try and sell their pack of lies.

Until the last 20 or so years, it was well known that the moral decay in the Roman Empire hastened its decline, and this is the reason why they were too weak to stave off the Huns and other mauraders who were determined to pull the Empire down.

If you watched the HBO fictionalized series on ROME, you probably noticed that homosexuality was considered mainstream.

What they don't tell you is that this moral decadance occurred later, after Rome had become rich, lazy and soft. They became more interested in their comforts, entertainments and pleasures, and less inclined to guard their properties.

This is what has been happening to America, at an unfortunately accelerated rate, because the Left has been deliberately brainwashing our society in that direction.

Why?

Because they want the United States as we know it to become a paper tiger, easily defeated from within and without, so they can replace it with their Marxist "Paradise" that they all "Imagine."

Hal "Phil" Donohue
Nice try, Hal. I love how you "back into" explaining your inanities.

Mountain Rose has already shredded your Roman argument better than I could, so I'll let that one go.

As to reading history books, I've read hundreds - but I admit to resisting the "revisionist" books you libsquirts attempt to pass off as "history".


the number one thing to do
Is tell the Main stream Liberal,
the main stream Republican medias and the money people to go to hell!!! Take the country back by voteing for Ron Paul. We want liberty from government control.
The very fact that the possiblility of government run heath care is mentioned in a presidential debate tells us how long we have been like a frog sitting in a pot of water. They keep slowly raising the temperature hopeing we will not notice until it is too late.

Hal- Just because I want to warn
young women not to swallow the lies that the Lefties are spewing forth does not mean I am bitter.

I believe instead that I am wiser for having a lot of life experience.

When women are young, they don't have the perspective to know what life will be like when they are past child-bearing years, when their fertility declines, and their beauty declines, when men their age are persuing younger women.

It is when they are at the height of youth and beauty that they are intended to have their children, when they have the pheremonal power to bind a spouse to them, when they have a better choice of men for their husbands, and when they have the energy to raise children.

Nobody is telling them this simple truth, because even conservatives have been brainwashed to believe that it is better to wait.

The reality is that it is NOT better to wait to marry, and NOT better to wait to have your family.

The Left is lying to you, ladies, because they know it will keep the population down.

Meanwhile, Latin American immigrants are popping out babies like rabbits. This the Left likes because they have a network of Marxists in the Latino community, ready and waiting to brainwash the unwashed.

utahnotmormon
This is really simple, but I see I'm going to have to talk r-e-a-l-l-y s-l-o-w-l-y for you here.

A majority of US citizens view what is happening with our borders as an "invasion" by lawbreakers and wants the government to a) secure the borders, and b) not grant amnesty. The last poll I saw put this number at around 70%.

There is absolutely no poll that shows that 70% of Iraqis want us to pull out of Iraq NO MATTER THE CONSEQUENCES.

In other words, I do not accept your original analogy because you are trying to compare apples & oranges... or is that humans & lions?

I'm suprised that an intelligent guy like you would have to have me explain such simplicity - or are you just being obstinate for the sake of being obstinate?

Hey Primus54!
Thanks for the "thumbs up!"

Ron Paul has no defense against
terrorism, the WW IV of the time.

More REAL history needs to be taught instead of the social studies pap that emphasizes all the terrible the US and West have done to women, American Indians, people of color through colonialism (of which the US was never a serious participant), and the less achieving.

Have we done terrible things? Yes. Have we freed 1.5 billion since Lincoln freed the slaves? Yes.

These should be emphasized, as NO civilization in history has given freedom to as many people as the United States of America, and the West in general.

Lincoln freed 3.94 million slaves in 1863.

In emulation, Alexander II Russia then freed his serfs (2/3/-3/4 of Russia's 67 million population in 1860). A round number is 45 million.

In 1898, America freed all the slaves of the Spanish Emp. by winning the Spn.-Am. War. That was 10-12 million in South America alone. The real number of all Spanish-Empire slaves would be much higher.

We freed Europe in WW I, approx. 358 million and in WW II, we freed 738 million. Then, after WW II, we created the Marshall Plan to rebuild Europe and immediately keep the ravaged population from starving to death, saving innumerable millions.

In Korea, we saved 2.36 million in the south from being conquered by a northern dynasty whose major ec. policy is starving its population.

And in Iraq, 150,000 US soldiers freed 24,000,000 Iraqis in a country twice the size of CA.

Our biggest failure was the 5.5 million lost in SE Asia after Vietnam fell. Approx. 2 million were "re-educated" in Vietnam by the communist North, and approx. 1.5 million fled by foot and boat. In Cambodia, Pot Pol killed 2 million--the killing fields. These numbers lay at the feet of the nitwit liberals/Dems. who inveighed against the Vietnam War and abandoned Indochina in 1975 and are true darkest hour.


Mountain Rose
"Until the last 20 or so years, it was well known that the moral decay in the Roman Empire hastened its decline, and this is the reason why they were too weak to stave off the Huns and other mauraders who were determined to pull the Empire down."


Sorry, Rose, reading your interpretation on ancient history is like listening to fingernails scratching a blackboard.

I know that the Mel Gibson - MGM - HBO versions are satsfying, but using them for a source is like buying Hallmark card to understand the true meaning of love.

Scottie
contributed the following quote:

""Having a child you can't afford to feed, clothe and educate is the moral equivalent of a drive by shooting" -- Larry Elder"

Is this a case for Roe vs. Wade?

Go figure.

Touj.
Yes, moral decay ISN'T why the Roman Empire fell, according to libs around here.

Yet, drive through any "fallen" neighborhood in our inner cities right now and tell me that moral decay had nothing to do with it.

Tell me it is for some other reason than moral decay. Tell me it isn't because of deadbeat dads and single parent families on welfare. Drugs. Hip hop culture.

No. Obviously not moral decay. Must be some other reason...

tahssard
If you're still out there, I get you.

There was a very good reason why the 'seraration of church and state' was so one of the first issues the founders tackled.

Ironically, for the party of 'strict constructionists', they can't try hard enough to put force religion into politics.

Everyone is free to pray in school, prayers are said before each day of congress. Christians love to claim the destruction of culture because of the lack of God in daily life. No one is stopping them.

Question for the Christians. If public schools were to allow religion, whose religion would be acceptable? Wouldn't that be a major problem?

Touj writes to Mountain Rose:
"I know that the Mel Gibson - MGM - HBO versions are satsfying (sic), but using them for a source is like buying Hallmark card (sic) to understand the true meaning of love..."

Wow, Touj., that's weak even by your low standards. Did you read Rose's entire post - or are you following the teachings of the "Clinton Institute of Parsing & Obfuscation"?

I know we should ALL bow down to the impeccable sources at Kos, moveon and Wikipedia like you libs, but what's the fun in that?

Lincoln freed Am. slaves,
and Lincoln was the model for Alexander II of Russia, who freed the Russian serfs of nearly 50 million, and said he did so to emulate Lincoln.

When the US conquered the Spanish Empire in 1898 (when we acquired Puerto Rico, Cuba, and the Philippines), we freed the slaves of the Spn. Empire.

The Roman Empire fell partly from the generous practice of taking in the conquered and offering outlying tribal men 20 years' service in the Roman army, to be followed by the granting of citizenship and farm land to retire on.

Eventually, Rome had millions more "foreigners" as citizens than even Italians, of which Romans were a very small bunch. Something pro-immigrationists should study.

Knight
"btw: Lincoln didn't free any slaves at all. His directives had no standing in a foreign country (which the CSA was)."

Funny, most of us don't consider the CSA to have any standing as a foreign country.

And Abe's directives didn't free any slaves?

Ever heard of Major General David Hunter?

After Union forces had smashed the Confederate forces at Fort Pulaski, in Savannah, Georgia, Hunter issued General Order No. 7.

General Order 7 freed all slaves in Georgia, Florida and South Carolina. Hundreds of those freed slaves made their way to Fort Pulaski and ENLISTED in the Union Army.

They became the 1st and 3rd South Carolina Volunteers.

http://www.nps.gov/fopu/historyculture/underground-railroad .htm

As Hunter worked for Lincoln, one could argue that yes, Lincoln did free slaves.

Saying Lincoln didn't is a ridiculous argument in legalese, which I understand appeals to libertarians.

Lincoln was the Commander in Chief of the Army which destroyed the Confederacy and it's institutions of slavery. Therefore, yes, his policies as Commander in Chief DID free the slaves BECAUSE his ARMY destroyed the institutions and government that upheld slavery.

My mistake
in thinking Primus was actually an intelligent guy.

>A majority of US citizens view what is happening with our borders as an "invasion" by lawbreakers and wants the government to a) secure the borders, and b) not grant amnesty. The last poll I saw put this number at around 70%.

There is absolutely no poll that shows that 70% of Iraqis want us to pull out of Iraq NO MATTER THE CONSEQUENCES.<

I purposely stated that popularity wasn't an element in the analogy.

And to what polls do you refer? Was that 70% number a product of the Mexican media? If not, you certainly can't compare that with an Iraqi poll conducted by the American media.

Apples and oranges indeed.

Citizen Carrier
I'm no expert, history is only a hobby for me, but I can bet the farm when I say that the decay of cultures, empires, countries, cities and neighborhoods is far more complicated than whether people have babies out of wedlock or take drugs.

I often notice on these posts that most people thing every result has one cause, every cause has one result, everything happens in linear progression.

Rome last 7oo years and it didn't fall because people were too busy having orgies to answer the door when the barbarians were knocking.

Rome suffered from an economic decline, for one thing, that was he result of their diminishing slave population, several serious plagues, problems with the importation of wheat, etc. By 390 Their armies were about 90 per cent non-Roman mercenaries, and were increasingly unreliable.

As far as morals, Rome became Christian during the reign of Constantine. Also, many of the pagan religions that are characterized in Sunday School as immoral and degenerate were often more circumspect and rigid than the Christians, and more religious.

Finally, the head of the Roman Government eventually moved to Turkey, where the seat was named Constantinople - it there flourished in wealth and power until the invasion of the muslims.





utahnotmormon
What part of "I reject the premise of your analogy" didn't you understand?

Intelligent, indeed.

Thanks for playing.

MountainRose
Just got back from your site. Life's so simple when everything's a Liberals fault. I wonder if your 'two large women' were Christians, or if they voted for Bush? Does it matter?

Anyway, I ran into similiar situation at the grocery store. Wailing, or at least grabbing, grumbling kid at the check-out.
Instead of creating a adversarial situation I chose instead to give the Mom something USEFUL to think about.
I suggested I had same problem with my four year old previously and told her how I solved it by telling my girl she'd get her choice of candies if she 'helped' me throughout the shopping. By giving her a 'big girl' job to concentrate on and something to anticipate, she caught on without any kicking and screaming.
Had she not 'gotten with the program' the first time, I was prepared to leave the store at any time, back to the car where we would start over, or go home if necessary.

Hopefully the woman, who obviously was a little rattled and over worked, would have a better experience the next time out. Calling her an animal, or insinuating superiority would have made SOME feel better, but that's just not my style. I'm liberal like that.

This part
>What part of "I reject the premise of your analogy" didn't you understand?<

The part where you failed to understand a simple analogy. Duh.



Citizen Carrier
The point I am trying to make to you is that it seems more likely that the drugs, crime, and family degradation that we see in some communities has more to do with other conditions that existed there to begin with. It's unlikely that if all the people who live in the South Bronx originially lived in Pasadena they would have resorted to drug economies, addiction etc.

If you presume that their problems are the result of moral decline then you are saying that 1., they are less than human or 2., that people just wake up and decide one day to let their lives and neighborhoods fall apart because they prefer it either to lives of order and security or, there is something so appealing about crime, drugs and promiscuity that they just couldn't resist.

Devout
I agree.

I my post about the Roman downfall, I should have added that one of the biggest contributing factors was a succession of leaders who were incompetent and corrupt, and made a series of decisions from which the decline of Rome could not be turned around.

touj
Nothing like some actual 'facts' to give them nothing to say!

And I say "them" like they say "them" for 'liberals'. Meaningless label when it comes to actual governing or debating details of policies.

"Dissing God"--real handy when proffering actual details and solutions.

god and the survival of empires
The Roman empire was great and mighty a democracy for part of its tenure and it lasted for 12 centuries. I recall they were the ones that fed the Christians to the lions. The US has put in only two measeley little centuries.

It will not be God who wrecks havoc on the nation but the folks who believe that we don't have to address climate change. That one phenomena that can wreck havoc on the US, the other is Nuclear bombs. Farming is at best an iffy proposition. Toss in changing rainfall patterns, floods and droughts like we've never seen before. Large sections of the country that permanently becomes more arid, then add to the mix sea levels that will rise high enough to flood out Miami, New York and any other low lying terraine.

Keep going blightly down this road and we will be smacked down with a real knock out blow. I daresay God helps those who help themselves.


Knight
Except that the colonies did not break away from the British Empire because they felt the institution of slavery was imperiled.

They had far more noble reasons.

If you look at the Declarations of Secession by the confederate states (Texas' is particularly deplorable), you'll find that they weren't motivated by natural rights, the Age of Reason or John Locke.

They state in no uncertain terms that they were doing it over slavery.

And if I recall, the Southerners considered two thirds of their slave population "legitimate" enough to determine their states representation in Congress.

You don't suppose they asked two thirds of their slave population if THEY wanted to leave the union, do you?

Illegitimate is illegitimate, no matter which way you cut it.

And it never fails to shock me when current day libertarians defend one of the most un-libertarian entities in American history (the Confederacy) for no better reason than the proper legalisms and parliamentary procedures were followed to create it.

Why any libertarian of any stripe would defend an entity with the most UN-LIBERTARIAN institution as it's CORE reason for existence is beyond my ability to comprehend...

utahnotmormon
I suggest you go to your favorite web dictionary and look up the definition of "reject" and then "understand". Only a rudimentary knowledge of the English language is needed to comprehend the difference.

You "intellectual, elitist" moonbats crack me up (duh?)- always confusing "intellect" with common sense.

It would seem common sense just isn't so common anymore.

Gotta run - taking my oldest to dinner to celebrate his 23rd.

Y'all be nice now!

Suzerose and Chicaree
Thanks - I also thought the silence was kind of interesting.

Chicaree: I'm not disagreeing with your post, but I had to add this just because I was recently reading about it:

The picture of Christians being led by the dozens into the Roman Colliseum isn't exactly what happened. Christians were certainly martyred, but arena executions usually happened in the outlying provinces. In larger cities, it was usually connected to other crimes of sedition or events which required a blood lust for blame, not unlike the lynching and town burnings that happened against African Americans in the late 1800s and early 1900s here. The biggest problem for Christians was not that Christianity was illegal (it wasn't) but that unlike the Jews, there were no laws protecting them. In many areas they were hugely unpopular and were considered to be troublemakers.

I once read in a pamphlet while visiting Rome in the '70s, that there is no written record of Christians ever having been killed at the Colliseum. I never checked out that statement, and even if it were true then I don't know if records have been turned up since.

tahssard
I don't care if you are an athiest. Our country was founded by Christian ideals and by God-fearing men. Deal with it.

You aren't a second-class citizen because of your beliefs or lack of belief.

As a matter of fact, you are the first person I've seen claim fear of speaking out for your views because they aren't theistic.

All Doug is saying is that we have a foundation based on morality gleaned from the Ten Commandments in this country. We believe in freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM relgion...as it is called out in our Constitution.

As long as you don't make it impossible for me to worship in my own way, I don't care if you do not. OK?

What is this Christophobia (for lack of a better word) that is happening? Sheesh!

Mrs. Paddy
Another history lesson:

re: Mountain Rose
Mountain Rose wrote:

"I hate to break the news to you Panch, but people who are morally liberal and fiscally conservative are called LIBRATARIANS.

"Notice the root word : 'LIB.'"

>>

I hate to break the news to you Rose, but...

(1) The word is "LIBERTARIAN".

(2) The root word is NOT "Lib" as "Lib" is NOT a word (except in derragatory slang for liberals).


The ROOT of the word "Libertarian" is "Liberty". The root of the word "Liberal" is, well, "Liberal".


You really ought to know what you're speaking of before you type lest your ignorance grant you the appearance of being an moron.

Mrs. Paddy

"All Doug is saying is that we have a foundation based on morality gleaned from the Ten Commandments in this country."

Are you saying that our constitution is just an enhancement of the Ten Commandments? Or Are you talking about an unwritten "social" foundation?

Just curious.


Knight of Baawa
"didn't break away solely and only because of slavery, either."

I don't know if you read my earlier post about Rome, but this notion is the "one cause = one result, one result = one cause" Mel Gibson school of history that is so popular on TH.

Don't try to go any deeper, you'll hit a rock.

Rejection
This what Primus supposedly rejects.

The US is invaded(his words) by Mexicans. Many US citizens are upset.

Iraq is invaded by the US. Many Iraqis are upset.

What's to reject? That either country has been invaded? That citizens of each country are upset by the invasions?

He doesn't reject the premise. In reality, the term invasion more closely resembles US action in Iraq than Mexican action in the US.

Instead we get feeble arguements about polls, occupations of Germany and Kosovo, and ridiculous semantical exercises designed to obfuscate definitions.


Got to go
for ahile before Jimmy James (heh) sees my name on the RH column and comes looking for me. (heh heh.)

Thanks for your call to Responsibility!
Mr. Giles, you have said some important things today that the younger generation should pay attention to. Your style made it fun to read about something so heavy as Responsibility. Some of the liberal types that post to this article do not understand what it means to be responsible. They want to either be a pessimist; in which case, they have given up; an optimist, in which case, they have their heads in the clouds and will eventually give up. The alternative is to be a realist and see things as they really are and WORK, with a united front, to make things better and to support the things you have mentioned here today which will only elevate our country. Thank you for your very good advice and admonitions to elevate the country!

Oh. My. God.
I didn't want to predict that you'd bring up tariffs next as the reason for secession for fear that you wouldn't then follow through.

Do you guys have like a "Civil War Causes Script" you follow? Your next step will likely be to sight a contemporary history author who backs up your assertions.

How about we take a path that is SURE to appeal to a Ron Paul guy like yourself. What do you say we go right to the source? You know, like Ron Paul whipping out a copy of the Constitution and saying, "Nope, I just can't find any of that in there..."?

Here we go.

http://www.civil-war.net/pages/georgia_declaration.asp

Georgia's declaration. In the second sentence they identify slavery as the main reason. This is similiar to when we say the 2nd Amendment is so important the Framers put it close to the front of the Bill of Rights.

http://www.civil-war.net/pages/mississippi_declaration.asp

Mississippi's. Second sentence.

"Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery - the greatest material interest of the world."


Knight - Still here
Thanks. As Suzerose said, there's nothing like a few facts when you want to clear the room.


Unsupportable
>All Doug is saying is that we have a foundation based on morality gleaned from the Ten Commandments in this country. We believe in freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM relgion...as it is called out in our Constitution.<

Where do you come up with such nonsense? The Constitution is completely at odds with many of the 10 Commandments, not accidentally.

Sorry to Quote
The following. Anyone who is offended my skip on by.

To Knight of Bawaa

Since you quote John 3:16 maybe you would be interested in the following.

Matt 7 21-23 Not everyone that saith unto me Lored, Lored, shall enter into the kindome of Heaven; but he that doeth th will of my father which is in heaven.
Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in they name? And in thy name cast out devils? And in thy name done many wonderful works? And then I will profess unto them, I NEVER KNEW YOU: DEPART FROM ME, YE THAT WORK INIQUITY.

To that I add: Only God knows the heart of men. He will deal with those like Phelps, just as he will deal with all of us: believer, and non-believer alike. I don't presume to know what that judgement will be...Just as you cannot presume to know the heart of Phelps based on anyhthing he says.

Utahmoron is on something AGAIN!
That is one of the more ridiculous
comments you've made in some time....



Pardon me while I tweak Touj who says:
""Having a child you can't afford to feed, clothe and educate is the moral equivalent of a drive by shooting" -- Larry Elder"

Is this a case for Roe vs. Wade?
============================
Actually, NO it is a case for Abstinence!

Texas
http://www.civil-war.net/pages/texas_declaration.asp

Third paragraph, third sentence. If memory serves, it took the Texans a LONG time to get around to discussing tariffs in that document. If they do so at all.

http://www.sonofthesouth.net/leefoundation/Alabama_secessio n_Ordinance.htm

Section 2. Alabama identifies itself with the other "slaveholding" states of the Confederacy.

Finally, before I at last go to lunch and smoke this cigar, I wanted to again address this "you are just like the British in the Revolutionary War" bit.

Problem with that is that the colonies didn't have representation in Parliament. We were justified in doing what we did because of that.

The Confederate states DID have representation in Congress and the Senate.

They weren't leaving over any high ideals.

They left because they lost an election and saw their hateful little un-libertarian way of life threatened by a bunch of people who believed that all that equality and "rights" stuff in our founding documents might actually mean ALL human beings.

As Ron Paul is fond of saying, I looked in the Constitution and I didn't see anything that says you can leave whenever you lose an election fair and square.

Matter of fact, when the Confederates drew up their own Constitution their delegates pointedly decided NOT to include language authorizing states to leave the Confederacy if THEY didn't like the way an election turned out.

Damn. If you can't secede from the Confederacy, just who in the heck CAN you secede from?

Christianity and America
http://www.faithofourfathers.net/index.html

Last week, I heard it again: That oft-repeated urban legend that we’ve heard so often. This time, to my horror, I heard it from a well-educated pastor: “Our founding fathers were not Christians. They were deists, atheists, and agnostics.”

Au contraire!

The pilgrims, as you will recall, were, Christians fleeing Europe in order to escape religious persecution, and they literally began their stay in their new land with the words, “In the name of God, Amen.”



The pilgrims were followed to New England by the Puritans, who created bible-based commonwealths. Those commonwealths practiced the same sort of representative government as their church covenants. Those governmental covenants and compacts numbered more than 100, and were the foundation for our Constitution.

New Haven (Connecticut) and Massachusetts were founded by Puritans who wanted to reform the Church of England, who later became known as Congregationalists. Roger Williams founded the colony of Rhode Island based on the principle of freedom of conscience. Pennsylvania was established by William Penn as a Quaker colony. Maryland was a haven for Catholics from Protestant England.

America was indeed founded by bible-believing Christians and based on Christian principles. When they founded this country, the Founding Fathers envisioned a government that would promote and encourage Christianity.


Christianity and America, Part 2
All but two of the first 108 universities founded in America were Christian. This includes the first, Harvard, where the student handbook listed this as Rule #1: “Let every student be plainly instructed and earnestly pressed to consider well, the main end of his life and studies is to know God and Jesus Christ, which is eternal life, John 17:3; and therefore to lay Jesus Christ as the only foundation for our children to follow the moral principles of the Ten Commandments."

In 1777. Continental Congress voted to spend $300,000 to purchase bibles which were to be distributed throughout the 13 colonies! And in 1782, the United States Congress declared, “The Congress of the United States recommends and approves the Holy Bible for use in all schools.

So, let us take a look at some of the lives and words of our Founding Fathers to see whether they were Christians or whether history has been revised


Who would have thought???

My God,
When I was working on that last post you DID go and cite a contemporary author in order to back up your assertions.

I predicted you'd do that.

Nevermind what the people who voted to secede put down on paper!! This is what I AM TELLING YOU they did it for!

Funny how "originalism" goes out the window when we talk about secession and the Confederacy. Then you turn into the most "elastic interpretation" guys this side of Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

And again, you earlier stated that Lincoln didn't free any slaves.

I wrote that Lincoln's army destroyed that institution, thus de facto freeing anyone held in bondage by that institution.

(your next move will be to say that Lincoln's intent was not to abolish slavery, that he toyed with shipping the slaves to Liberia, that he fought to preserve the Union, etc., etc.)

The fact remains that Lincoln's army destroyed slavery. Doesn't matter if that wasn't his main intent or if abolition wasn't the main flavor of the conflict in the early days.

You cannot say that Lincoln didn't free the slaves. A lot of the slaves sure seemed to think so.

Knight of B
I'm happy to eat the word of God. Fortunately, it is more than just one verse of the Bible.

Mrs. Paddy: Big difference, huh?


No repsonsibility for one's own behavior...

Abstinence -v- Abortion

They just don't get it, do they?

Interesting Quote
"Why...must government be neutral about religion? Because,we are told, the First Amendment demands it by forbidding any 'establishment of religion.' But this is nonsense.

The First Amendment says nothing of the sort, and I wish atheists wouldread it as literally as they think most Christians read theBible. 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof' means something very different from 'Government must be neutral about religion.'

It bars the Congress of the United States from legislation that either establishes a religion or prohibits its free exercise. This left the states free to do both, and for a long time they did. Several states had official religions as late as the 1830s. You may deplore this, but don't say the Constitution bans it, because it plainly doesn't.

Now we are told that the Constitution forbids everything from a moment of silence in the classroom to the phrase under God in the Pledge of Allegiance!" ---Joseph Sobran

Sophia
Actually, you have an equal choice whether or not to bow during the prayer when it is in conjunction with your job.

You choose not to offend your boss. You choose to comply with the tradition.

No different than your respect for your relatives prayer before dinner. Nobody is forcing you to do it either place.

More Confusion
Giles thinks the US will be screwed by secularism(see the cartoon), but supports secularism in Iraq.

Primus54
Thank you. Nothing like precision from one more knowlegeable than myself. Looking back, i cannot say where i picked up the impression that a "higher power" is part of the 12 steps. Probably from someone even more ignorant than i. 12 steps is part of AA, right? I wouldn't even swear to that. So now Tahssard is down to one outfit picking on him.

3:00 o'clock Annie
You jumped right from Puritan/witch burning to the completely level-headed rationale of the Founders who based their thinking on the study and understanding of human nature. Specifically human nature and how it responds to Power.

The "Founders" is usually always referring to the writers of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, not the earliest settlers of Mass.

Also it might be noted that the earliest schools were not the "public" schools we now have but tuitioned univerities, founded, built,and taught by the organized religions who could afford them-- many Catholic.
Government financed public schools came later