Posted by
Andrew on Thursday, December 13, 2007 9:55:25 AM
I keep trying to come to an understanding of the Liberal mindset, and I think some of my recent reading may have helped me reach a conclusion. (Although, now that I've reached it, I can recall the multitudinous times I have seen it stated in a variety of ways previously.)
I think that Liberals are paranoid (or simply "afraid", if you prefer) about the apocryphal "religious right" imposing their beliefs on those who believe differently. To my mind, this explains a great deal. (Although, admittedly, not the lies, deceit, and general corruption of Liberal politicians, but at least some of their rhetoric and hysterical anger.)
And the idea that the "religious right" desires to impose its beliefs on others explains why atheists and Liberals (if there is a distinction) are so full of invective and anger towards believers and Conservatives who espouse belief.
And now, the more that I think about it, the more I recall the numerous times I have heard Liberals complaining about believers trying to "cram" their doctrine down Liberal throats.
A number of things seem to be misunderstood here. One is this concept of "belief" which, in a way, is all that God requires. (Or, at least, it's a cornerstone of having a relationship with God.) "Involuntary belief" is something of an oxymoron. One can't be forced to "believe". One can be forced to act, or speak in a certain way, but no one can be forced to "believe". It just doesn't work that way. I might be able to get you to say that the sky is green if I put a gun to your head, or to bow every time the sun goes down, or something, but that wouldn't mean you believed the sky was green or that you believed the sun was deserving of worship.
Now, if the problem is that God requires believing--that He's unfair and discriminatory or something by making that a requirement, I can't really address that. That's something you'll have to take up with Him. (Although I would offer that this concept, too, is somewhat oxymoronic on several levels. One, why would anyone want to participate in something they didn't believe in? And, two, the idea is that one is supposed to believe in something "unseen", hence the requirement of "believing", rather than just "accepting" what is evident in the physical realm. So it's less of a "requirement" than a sine qua non.)
It appears that Liberals and atheists fear that, if "really" in power, Christian leaders would try to force them to "believe". That ain't gonna happen. That is, simply, not how believing works. When we say you "have" to believe, we're not saying we are requiring you believe; we're saying that "you 'have' to believe (if you want to have a relationship with God)". Or maybe they fear that we would force them to go to church. Or recite the Lord's Prayer. Or get baptized. Again, without "believing" none of those actions have any meaning, so why would we want to force anyone to do them?
Or maybe they fear that Judeo-Christian "values" (e.g., the Ten Commandments) will be enacted as laws. I've got news for ya: a number of them already are. And some which are not laws per se, are societally accepted "norms". (E.g., not working on "the sabbath".) And no believer is going to force you to worship God. (We're back to that "believing is voluntary" thing.) And while we might prefer to not have our tax dollars spent on images of the Virgin Mary decorated with vaginas and dung, I doubt that we're going to do a lot of legislating with regard to "graven images". (If this is your fear, might I suggest that you "get a grip"?)
But, while we're on the subject, there seem to be a lot of people who have a problem with use of the "N-word". (Unless, of course, the word is being used by a Liberal, in which case it's acceptable.) (And, I've just discovered, it can't even be used in this post unless written as a euphemism.) Personally, I am extremely offended by the offhand use of "God" and "Jesus Christ" as expletives. Who do I talk to about getting those banned from public discourse?
But, again, unless we can get it banned as "hate speech" against some minority, I doubt that "taking The Lord's name in vain" is going to get a lot of legislative action.
I think that what they truly fear is that believers in power would result in a society where people with beliefs are free to express and discuss them publicly. Now, wait a minute. I know you're thinking that this is an absurd position for me to take. That this is some sort of hyperbolic overstatement intended to make a point. It's not.
I think that what Liberals and atheists fear from "believers in government", the true basis of their railing against a Christian "theocracy", is wholly premised in their fear that the Bible and believers would be given the sort of preferred treatment that homosexuality, secularism, promiscuity, and minorities currently enjoy in our society.
Can you imagine a society which would allow government hiring to be premised on whether or not someone believed in Jesus Christ? (Just a quick note: A belief in Jesus Christ was a requirement to holding public office in several of the original colonies.) Yet we do exactly that with minorities.
Or a society which allowed schools to teach Creationism or, at least, point out the logical and factual failures of "Evolution"? Or schools which were allowed to teach that lots of people think that homosexuality is not a good thing?
How about a prime time television show which doesn't portray gun owners, Christians, or Conservatives as right-wing nuts?
My point here is that I believe atheists and Liberals are afraid that believers in government would result in a nation which is, culturally, pretty much the exact opposite of what has been accomplished by decades of Liberal power. Their "freedom" and "tolerance" have been a matter of limiting exposure to, and debasing, anything other than their own point of view. And that power, that "Liberal theocracy", is what they are so vehemently and savagely attempting to preserve. So, naturally, they accuse believers of trying to establish a theocracy.