Why Liberals Channel Lucifer

Posted: Oct 15, 2006 12:00 AM
Why Liberals Channel Lucifer

Thinking they are like the very angel of light, liberals have taken to forked-tongue talk of late. And though they drone in pleasant tones, the bile their words create are some of the fiercest deceptions ever spoken.

Biblically literate people understand that before Satan fell, he shared an exalted place in close communion with God. But through his pride and lust for power he foolishly attempted to think himself equal to God. He so deceived himself in the matter that ultimately he believed that he himself might be able to manipulate God. In my brand new book MuscleHead Revolution: Overturning Liberalism with Commonsense Thinking, I argue that these are the exact same tactics used by modern liberals.

Where they disagree with the Almighty - they simply dismiss Him.

As I first reported last week in this column, Ms. Magazine went on a national campaign this past Tuesday to get women who've had abortions to "come out" and talk about what a great thing it was. They asked some 6000 women to make public their act of butchering, stabbing, or washing in acid their innocent children - and worse yet - to call it good. Ms. Magazine also made it perfectly clear that they had no interest at all in hearing from the millions of women who now regret just such an experience.

Responding to some of the controversy surrounding this declaration of murder and the supposed liberation it brought to women's lives, Eleanor Smeal, the magazine's publisher was asked in an interview this week with Fox News' Bill O'Reilly, "Forty-five percent of the American people favor banning abortions in their states, except to save the life of the mother. Forty-five percent, that's a lot of people. Are those people, in your opinion, bad people?"

Her answer said it all, "I think we should get away from good and evil and talk about public policy."

Also on the O'Reilly Factor this week the "Reverend" Barry Lynn, of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State in promoting his new book Piety and Politics argued for the definition of marriage to be returned to "individuals, who are making choices, based largely on their own 'theological' views about what marriage is."

Both Smeal and Lynn sat with smirks plastered on their faces enduring what I'm sure they felt were pedantic questions from the host on the morality of such issues. And in their calm and calculated ways they attempted to make the arguments in bold faced lies that defy reason.

But the rationale for both is easily revealed in Smeal's remarks.

For both Lynn and Smeal to even begin to make the case an important step must be taken - the removal of morality. To "get away from good and evil" is more than half the battle. To remove the moral boundaries about which an issue as vital to the stabilization of society as what defines a human being, and furthermore what defines a family unit is the hugely necessary step for their arguments to even begin to hold water.

Yet it is an impossible act to perform. Every decision we make has moral consequences to it. Every policy we advocate for does as well. Smeal does not wish to even mentally entertain the issue of good and evil as it relates to abortion because every abortion would be deemed an evil act - that takes the life of an innocent living human being.

We are to understand that school shootings are murder for the same reason - and all agree. Yet when it comes to the taking of even more vulnerable innocent life - we must not discuss the morality involved. For to do so would to be to heap far too much guilt upon Smeal for misleading so many thousands of women into the taking of their own child's life.

Lynn's remarks, while they sound even downright democratic, falsely portray the ultimate outcome of tearing down the one institution free society is dependent upon for its survival - heterosexual marriage.

Not that liberals have any interest in truly understanding people of faith in America, because they don't. But if they did, they would never be able to handle the structure of rational, truth-based, commonsense thinking that pervades the communities of the devout today.

So all that's left is to call us "stupid bible thumpers" or "zealous right wingers."

But that's okay, because the false prophets - which is in essence what liberal spokespeople are today - called Jesus much worse.

What is important for we "thumpers" to remember is that our convictions, standards, beliefs, and morality are standing upon something much longer lasting than the latest politically correct wind.

And if we wish to leave behind a decent and moral world for our children it is important that we not waiver when the name-calling begins.