>And I consider some elements within the religious right part of that sleaze. And I'm not comfortable with it. Though I accept it as the reality today. Which is why I'll take the opportunistic, shallow Yuppie narcissism of a Clinton over the overbearing, sanctimonious piety of your Ayatollahs in a hearbeat.<
The matter is philosophical and cannot with reason be judged by the failings of those who claim to embrace a particular belief. It is not the Ayatollahs that I embrace, nor their "overbearing, sanctimonious piety". I strive toward (sometimes feebly) the ideals of integrity, "restraint, honor, respect for my fellow persons and the freedoms bestowed upon them by God...", and these ideals by definition require I summarily reject "the opportunistic, shallow Yuppie narcissism of a Clinton" that you so flippantly embrace.
>In my personal and public life, I practice restraint, honor, respect for my fellow persons and the freedoms bestowed upon them by God, whatever you may call It. I don't really give a damn if the president wants to have a dalliance with an intern.<
There is little integrity here, and the flagrant contradiction causes me to doubt whether one who so vociferously ignores moral corruption in a President, can seriously aspire to personal integrity and honor. Honor and respect for one's fellow man require one to reject a President's "dalliance with an intern". These virtues would ever inform one that an intern is a charge of the President and that as such, she should not be used sexually by him. A rule of honor and respect has been broken, and the moral sensibilities of those with Integrity and Respect for their fellow man are grossly offended because they have discovered another in their society flagrantly lying to the courts and breaking the rule of common decency, this, apparently without being held accountable for his actions. Respect and Honor has informed them that a serious breach of trust has occurred. They instantly recognize that that foolish intern could well have been their daughter, that the woman the President asked to "kiss it" could well have been one of their wives. In a nutshell, they see that it is vital that they give quite a bit more than "a damn".
>Given the atrocities and crimes committed by presidents past, I can't really muster up any outrage that he lied about it.<
Of course you can't. Nevertheless Honor and Integrity would have one reject "the atrocities and crimes committed by presidents past" as well as those committed by the current President. Merely because past presidents have done wrong presents us no logic allowing a cavalier dismissal of the wrongs committed by the current president.
>As long is it doesn't cost me more in taxes or force me to watch my friends die in war or in illegal abortion clinics, I don't care if someone wants to devote their life to studying and living in accord with the Bible, the Koran, the Torah, Das Kapital, or even the 12 Steps of AA. To each his or her own. So long as they don't try to impose their teachings upon me or the people around me.<
The typical empty-headed liberal notion of "impose their teachings upon me or the people around me" equates to one's exercising one's right to free speech to proselytize on behalf of religion, particularly on behalf of Christianity. These same liberals have no problem with true impositions, so long as they happen to Christians. They have no problem at all with literally forcing Christians to pay via taxes for works depicting Christ suspended in a vat of urine.
>By definition a pluralistic society will have some elements that some other element will consider sleaze.<
Well of course, just as long as "that some other element" are not members of the non-thinking indecent left. When I see the NEA funding works such as "Piss Faggot", or "Kill Homos", then I will entertain the veracity of your statement. Until then, I will dismiss it as more non-thinking liberal nitwittery.
>If you don't like it, may I suggest you consider moving to a nation founded upon pure religious principles such as the Islamic Republic of Iran or North Korea.<
I have a few better suggestions. We could divide the country down the middle. Those of the Left get the left side (pleased to be rid of California!), and those of the Right will possess the right. Or perhaps a better idea would be for the liberals to simply move to France and other morally bankrupt countries. Failing this, we could simply have another Civil War (winner takes all), or decent people could work more diligently within the system to influence our country away from the moral lunacy of the left. |
