Rejection of Moral Absolutes Continues to Plague the Modern Left

If death—anyone’s death—brings you joy, you should intently re-examine your worldview. Even the just execution of a mass murderer—which I support in every case—should not bring anyone joy. As a Christian, I often find myself opposed—spiritually, politically, and otherwise—to those outside of my faith. However, I take no joy in anyone’s death, especially those outside of my faith. Christianity teaches that “each one of us will give an account of himself to God.” Any death that results in eternal separation from God is always particularly tragic.

However, for those who have put their faith in the things of this world, who are determined to rule their own world, death usually has no such significance. Thus, for such people, like the death of an “inconvenient” child, the death of an enemy is often something to celebrate. The most recent case in point is the death of the wealthy philanthropist David Koch. After Mr. Koch died, many on the left again found themselves in a celebratory mood. We shouldn’t be surprised that those who engage in or promote the evil “shout-your-abortion!” movement would celebrate the death of a political enemy.

Nor should we be surprised that the hate-filled American left would promise political—and perhaps other forms of—apocalypse if President Trump gets the opportunity to replace Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg with someone who will actually follow the Constitution. Liberals dancing with joy over the death of Mr. Koch were soon brought back to earth with the same-day news that Justice Ginsburg underwent a fresh round of treatment for a cancerous tumor on her pancreas.

Despite our political, legal, and moral differences, I admire Justice Ginsburg for her strength and determination to do her job. As another recently noted, she has survived pancreatic cancer twice, lung cancer once, and colon cancer once. And she’s 86 years old. Many Americans—no matter their political stripes—would be very interested in getting the names of her oncologists.

In an interesting bit of irony probably lost on Justice Ginsburg and her like-minded ideologues, if the U.S. had Medicare-for-all, or some other version of single-payer healthcare—a dream of the American left—almost certainly Mrs. Ginsburg would’ve long ago departed this world. Thank God for the U.S. medical industry, right libs? (The U.S. has the world’s best cancer survival rates.)

In their foolish efforts to create “heaven on earth”—Utopia—modern liberals have often relied on the courts to give them what they could not otherwise gain by actually winning elections and passing legislation. Of course, this is why the left in the mainstream media—I repeat myself—and the U.S. Senate engaged in media malpractice and political treachery in their evil efforts to derail the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh.

Many have implied that if President Trump has the opportunity to name Ginsgurg’s replacement, the battle that would erupt would make the Kavanaugh confirmation look like the Mayberry City Council debate on whether to hold a Founder’s Day parade. This shouldn’t be the case—because, as long as Senate republicans have his back, there is simply nothing democrats can do to stop President Trump from nominating and having confirmed any judge he wishes.

However, today’s Democrat Party is as far from rational as they are from moral—which is totally unsurprising as those two extremes often go hand-in-hand. Even more so than the vengeful tweets over a dead philanthropist or the angry threats over a potential Supreme Court vacancy, few things illustrate this as well as the gender debate the modern left insists we have.

After (frequently) pointing out—and being far from alone—that the stupid, evil notion of “gender fluidity” most harms females—including young girls—I keep thinking that the left will soon abandon this wickedness. Silly me. I forget how blindly stupid those corrupted by evil can be.

Recently the GOP candidate in Louisiana’s governor’s race, Ralph Abraham, made headlines—headlines!—because he ran a 30 second ad that included the phrase “as a doctor, I can assure you, there are only two genders.” They were so aghast at MSNBC that host Chris Jansing declared that Abraham’s comments were “incendiary.” According to Newsbusters, Jansing’s guest—because, of course, the left must have their “experts” explain to us why there are not only two genders—went even further and said that to declare that there are only two genders is now “despicable” and “un-American.”

In other words, a statement that, just a few years ago, the vast majority of us would’ve considered so obvious that it was patronizing is now “incendiary” and “despicable.” Orwell was indeed a prophet.

Thus, it should come as little surprise that those who can’t tell the difference between who is a male and who is a female would choose to fight crime with euphemisms, still believes that “Hands Up, Don’t Shoot!” really happened, still thinks that man-made climate change is a real problem with a political solution, believes that widespread institutional racism still exists in America, and would conclude that “Seattle Has Figured Out How to End the War on Drugs.”

The latter bit of editorial “brilliance” was recently proffered by The New York Times’ Nicholas Kristoff. I guess Kristoff missed the fact that Seattle is Dying largely because of rampant drug abuse (and because, of course, “liberalism is killing it”). If he truly didn’t know this before, he does now because many of the 1300+ comments following his piece told him as much. Many of the comments were from Seattle residents.

SKM from Seattle wrote,

I live here and you don’t have the slightest idea what you’re talking about. Downtown Seattle is a classic example of when inmates run the asylum. Downtown Seattle frequently feels like “Night of the Living Dead.” Quality of life issues here are outright dismissed, all in an effort to help drug addicted zombies that walk our streets. Sleeping in doorways, public defecation/urination, shooting up right in the open, blatant drug dealing w/ out any fear of incrimination, verbal abuse, etc. I can more easily get a summons for jaywalking here than dealing Fentanyl.

Another Seattle resident, “robofaust,” added,

As a 26 year resident of Seattle (and a x2 time voter for Ralph Nader and Obama), I couldn't disagree more. This city is littered with homeless drug addicts. Seattle’s choice to “decriminalize homelessness” is just another term for enabling the self-destruction of thousands of people… 

Every few days I come across people who are passed out, or worse yet, who are actively shooting up, at the foot of my home. Petty crime is rampant, and it is no longer possible to get the police to respond to a stolen bicycle or smashed car windows… 

The city’s drug addicts live in a parallel subculture that is disconnected from the lives of the locals who tolerate it in the name of social virtue. This subculture is a law unto itself, and is rife with predators who prey on the weak with violence, theft, and sexual abuse… 

There will be political reckoning in the city for this, sooner or later. Mr. Kristof’s analysis is deeply flawed.

In not just Seattle, but all over America, liberals have become “a law unto themselves.” Thus, the nastiness in Seattle is only the tip of the iceberg. Liberals think that Seattle is doing a good job with criminal drug users, that there are more than two genders, that marriage is whatever we define it to be, that killing the unborn is merely a “choice,” and so on, because the left in America long ago abandoned the idea that some things are settled for all time.

I certainly hope there is soon a political reckoning. There will certainly be a spiritual one.

(See this column at American Thinker.)

Copyright 2019, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
www.trevorgrantthomas.com
Trevor is the author of the The Miracle and Magnificence of America
tthomas@trevorgrantthomas.com

What is “Sacred” to the Modern Left?

I think that the most telling thing about General John Kelly’s press briefing last week was when he lamented the things no longer held “sacred” in our country today. When speaking of American soldiers dying on the battlefield, General Kelly rightly declared,

And I thought at least that was sacred. You know, when I was a kid growing up, a lot of things were sacred in our country. Women were sacred, looked upon with great honor. That’s obviously not the case anymore as we see from recent cases. Life—the dignity of life—is sacred. That’s gone. Religion, that seems to be gone as well. 

Gold Star families, I think that left in the convention over the summer. But I just thought—the selfless devotion that brings a man or woman to die on the battlefield, I just thought that that might be sacred.

The secular usage of “sacred” is derived from its religious meaning. In Scripture, something sacred was something “set apart” or “holy”—something like God, and apart from the world (or the “profane”). As most familiar with the English language well know, “sacred” in the secular sense—which is the usage employed by General Kelly—simply means that which is highly valued, or important, or that which is held in high esteem. As General Kelly implies, you can tell much about a person by what he or she rejects as sacred.

Women, life, religion, marriage, family, hard work, the military, et al are no longer widely held sacred in American culture because the values that demand such have largely been abandoned and attacked by the modern left. Rejecting the laws of the Law Giver, the left long ago decided it was time for human beings to write their own rules and decide for themselves what was and was not “sacred.”

Especially targeted are any values deemed “Christian.” Never mind the actual words and deeds of the Founding Fathers, and the words and deeds of the early Americans who actually lived in that era, references to God and His Word in the public square have been under assault in the U.S. for generations. Hollywood, the mainstream news media, and the kindergarten-through-university government school system in the U.S. at least ignores, and more often mocks, what is truly sacred.

Entertained by the vulgar, informed by the ignorant, and educated from a godless Darwinian worldview, it should come as little surprise that tens of millions of Americans have little to no idea what is supposed to be sacred. How can a culture that’s been taught to slaughter—or at least support the slaughter of—the most helpless and innocent among us expect to honor those who’ve made the ultimate sacrifice on the battlefield? What can a foolish clown of a woman who has long reliably supported “sacrificing” an unborn child in the selfish name of “choice” know about real sacrifice?

What can those who kneel for a lie understand about truth and justice? How can we trust those who have waged a relentless war on the oldest and most sacred of all human institutions to grasp what is truly holy, healthy, and good for humanity? How can we trust the precious fourth estate to individuals who rarely hesitate to lie and distort in order to keep those of like mind in power? How can we expect those who peddle goods for votes in order to maintain power to serve sacrificially and keep the nation’s best interests at heart?

Even more revealing than what one rejects as sacred are the things that a person actually holds as sacred. To find out what is sacred among today’s liberals, look no further than the “deeds of the flesh.” Whether supporting and promoting fornication, pornography, homosexuality, transgenderism—and virtually any item from the sick LGBT agenda; whether killing children in the womb and demanding that employers pay for such; whether waging war on the family, and—through judicial fiat and, again, with little to no regard for the lives of children—redefining the oldest institution in the history of humanity, the left has abandoned truth and taken the profane and made it “sacred.”

If you want to find out just how sacred, take a public stand against what is “set apart” by the left, or refuse to allow your business to participate in what used to be deemed perversion, or speak out—or attempt to speak out—on a college campus against modern liberalism. Do so and you might just face violence, massive fines, lose your job, lose your business, and so on.

In addition to undoing the work of our founders—often “interpreting” the U.S. Constitution beyond recognition— for decades the Democrat Party has worked hard to ensure that Americans were governed according to what modern liberals hold as “sacred.” Aided and abetted by the efforts of their like-minded allies in the media and academia, through the courts, congress, and the White House, American democrats have given legal legitimacy and political cover to the profane.

Unable to take comfort in or direction from any righteous power beyond this world, political power has been the dominant instrument by which today’s leftists have forced those unwilling into acquiescing to sacred leftist dogma. Whether a minority or a majority, American leftists have been able to implement their agenda. While constantly lamenting the “legislation of morality,” liberals have forced (especially through the courts) their immorality upon hundreds of millions of unwilling Americans. Thus, along with the pleasures of the flesh, political power is of utmost importance to contemporary leftists.

C.S. Lewis was right. In the end, there are only two kinds of people: “those who say to God, ‘Thy will be done,’ and those to whom God says, in the end, ‘Thy will be done.’” To find out in which camp an individual currently resides, look at the things he or she finds sacred.

(See this column at American Thinker.)

Copyright 2017, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
www.trevorgrantthomas.com
Trevor is the author of the The Miracle and Magnificence of America
tthomas@trevorgrantthomas.com