So, according to Maher, what exactly is “Puritanism?” It
seems that anyone or anything that would stand in the way of the sexual desires
of any consenting adult would be guilty of Puritanism. For example, France has been
in the headlines recently because “the boring guy they elected president last
year turns out not to be so boring” (Maher’s words).
It turns out that President François Hollande never married
the mother of his four children. He broke up with her a few years ago for a
younger woman. As happens so often (amazing that so many first-time
“mistresses” don’t figure this out—because if a man will leave the mother of
his children, why wouldn’t he leave the next woman) in these matters, the
younger woman was then dumped for an actress.
So what? concludes Maher, “the French just shrug and go back
to eating snails.” Maher wonders why America
can’t be more like France
as he then gets to the point of his rant. He points out that newly elected
Mayor of New York, Bill de Blasio was shamed into firing Lis Smith, who was in
line to become de Blasio’s communications director.
Maher, oblivious to his moral ignorance and hypocrisy, asks,
“Was it that she lied on her résumé? Or accepted gifts from a lobbyist? Or
injected Alex Rodriguez with steroids? Nope. It's that she's dating Eliot
Spitzer, America 's
evilest, horniest man.” Evidently in Maher’s perverted world, lying on a résumé,
illegal gifts from lobbyists, and steroid use are bad things; but abandoning
the mother of your children, whoring around with whatever is your current
fancy, same-sex marriage, pot use, and the like are okay.
I wonder what moral
code
Maher and his like-minded pagan friends are using to reach these bizarre
conclusions. (Actually, I don’t wonder at all, but I want you to think about
it.) I also wonder how Maher would have felt if his father took the path of
Hollande and abandoned him and his mother and sister during his youth. Or are
such things okay only when they happen to someone else?
Maher’s morality is not only illogical and inconsistent, but
is a great example of what happens when morality is defined by infallible (and
ignorant, and foolish) humans. When it comes to de Blasio’s former aid, Maher
asks, “[W]hat exactly is the sin here? She's an adult in a consensual
relationship with another adult who’s in the process of divorcing his spouse.”
Well, the sins are fornication and adultery, for starters. I
suppose at least it is encouraging that the word “sin” is still in Maher’s
vocabulary. Of course, if we follow Maher’s morality (that whatever is done
between “consenting adults” is okay) to its logical conclusion, prostitution,
gambling of almost every form, polygamy and polyandry, pornography, almost
every form of drug abuse, illegal payments—political and otherwise, and the
like, should be not only legal, but moral as well.
Most of today’s liberals, at least those who craft and coach
modern progressivism, are little more than present-day pagans. They are
fulfilling well what occultist, bisexual, and habitual
drug user Aleister Crowley described as the creed of
modern paganism: “Do What Thou Wilt.”
Much to the thrill of today’s liberal, the great lure of
paganism is that the moral demands are few. Such demands are decided by each
individual, and thus we have the chaos that stems from moral relativism. What
was once deemed
shameful is now celebrated. Tragically, the secularism that is the fruit of
modern liberalism has given us a culture that is bereft of shame.
Thus it is a bit of a wonder that Maher and his pagan
liberal friends have a problem with “slut shaming.” In fact, given today’s
American culture, it’s a wonder that any form of “shaming” has an effect at
all. Also, just like a “twerking” Miley Cyrus, males such as French President
Hollande, or the NFL star with multiple children by multiple women, or the nice
looking college boy out to hook-up as often as possible, should have their
slutty behavior called out for what it is as well.
What’s more, not only can Maher be described as a pagan, but
like
his editorial friends at The New York
Times, he is a fool. And I mean
a fool in the Old Testament book of Proverbs sense of the word. In this sense,
liberals like Maher are not feebleminded idiots; instead, they are morally
corrupt and despise true wisdom. Being wise in their own eyes, in almost every
way possible they have rebelled against God and His Word.
Such liberals have knowledge, and they crave the political power
necessary to put it into practice. Sadly, too many Americans have given them
this opportunity. Thus, many of us have learned the hard way what a British
rock band (horribly) sang over 15 years ago, “Knowledge is a deadly friend,
when no one sets the rules. The fate of all mankind I see is in the hands of
fools.”
(See this column on American Thinker.)
Copyright 2014, Trevor Grant Thomas
Copyright 2014, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
Trevor and his wife Michelle are the authors of: Debt Free Living in a Debt Filled World
tthomas@trevorgrantthomas.com
Trevor and his wife Michelle are the authors of: Debt Free Living in a Debt Filled World
tthomas@trevorgrantthomas.com
No comments:
Post a Comment