Talk:Deaths directly attributed to the liberal media

(Difference between revisions)My point is that the Church itself has been known to be not exactly innocent in the slaying of the innocent. [[User:AlanE|AlanE]] 00:09, 23 June 2013 (EDT)My point is that the Church itself has been known to be not exactly innocent in the slaying of the innocent. [[User:AlanE|AlanE]] 00:09, 23 June 2013 (EDT):Surely some blame must be placed on the people whose actions were reported on by the media. If they had not done these things there would have been nothing to report. And I am quite sure all media, not just liberal, reported at least some of these actions, certainly Rodney King--[[User:Tomqua|Tomqua]] 03:17, 23 June 2013 (EDT)

The WWF is liberal media? I'd actually be willing to bet money that the majority of professional wrestling fans vote Republican...—The preceding unsigned comment was added by user:gtbob12 (talk)

I'll take your money. WWE is close enough, see the link [1] --Jpatt 15:49, 29 June 2011 (EDT) That's one interesting graph. BobSherman 19:21, 23 July 2011 (EDT)

While you did source your graph, I do find it very difficult to believe that WWE wrestling fans are almost as liberal as NBA fans. While I do concede that a large percentage of Independent wrestling fans are liberals, mainstream wrestling draws a decidedly conservative audience, even in the north. As a lifelong wrestling fan who is very active in the Internet Wrestling community, in my experience, as well as that of others, mainstream wrestling fans are overwhelmingly conservative. The WWE has run angles in support of the war on terror, has long relied on Patriotic faces (good guys), and rarely has to faces be members of racial groups outside of White, protestants. Wrestling still does it's biggest business in the overwhelmingly conservative south, and is based Connecticut, among the wealthy, fiscal conservatives in New England. Furthermore, it appears that all of the other deaths are related to reports of mainstream news outlets, not entertainment outlets. I could go on an argue that it was not the responsibility of the media to supervise, and teach those kids, rather it is the parents, as well as the fact that the WWE often sprinkles "don't try this at home" messages throughout their programming, but that is a whole different can of worms. I feel I would be remiss to go on an anti-Jack Thompson/Joe Lieberman rant here, plus, I believe it would divert attention from my original point. - Ckennedy 13:48, 22 June 2012 (EDT)

I think I can agree with your statement and it's more a play than a sport. Though the liberal media is the broadcaster of such events. They have a responsibility to show these matches past primetime and a TV ratings warning, which wasn't the case at the time. Ultimately, the parents lack of supervision is to blame.--Jpatt 13:59, 22 June 2012 (EDT)

How many children died at Beziers, JPatt? AlanE 23:06, 22 June 2013 (EDT)

I don't see mention of that in the content entry or this talk page. Please explain your point.--Andy Schlafly 23:29, 22 June 2013 (EDT)

My point is that the Church itself has been known to be not exactly innocent in the slaying of the innocent. AlanE 00:09, 23 June 2013 (EDT)

Surely some blame must be placed on the people whose actions were reported on by the media. If they had not done these things there would have been nothing to report. And I am quite sure all media, not just liberal, reported at least some of these actions, certainly Rodney King--Tomqua 03:17, 23 June 2013 (EDT)

View the original article here

Landmark Study Shatters Liberal Health Care Claims

During the health care debate, liberals argued that government had a moral duty to enact legislation that expanded health insurance among lower-income individuals. This was rooted in the assumption that obtaining health insurance translates into improved health. But a landmark study published in the New England Journal of Medicine dramatically undermines this assumption and shatters the rationale behind the law’s Medicaid expansion.

In 2008, Oregon expanded its Medicaid program, but because the state could not cover everybody, lawmakers opened up a lottery that randomly drew 30,000 names from a waiting list of almost 90,000 and allowed them to apply for the program. This created a unique opportunity for health researchers, ultimately allowing them to compare the health outcomes of 6,387 low-income adults who were able to enroll in the program with 5,842 who were not selected.

Contrary to liberal assumptions, researchers found that those who enrolled in Medicaid spent a lot more on medical care than those who weren’t able to enroll, but didn’t significantly improve their health outcomes.

Specifically, researchers found that those who received Medicaid increased their annual health care spending by $1,172, or 35 percent more than those who did not receive Medicaid. Those with Medicaid were more likely to be screened for diabetes and use diabetes medication and to make use of other preventive care measures. The study also examined health metrics including blood pressure and cholesterol.

Ultimately, the authors concluded that, “This randomized, controlled study showed that Medicaid coverage generated no significant improvements in measured health outcomes in the first two years, but it did increase use of health services, raise rates of diabetes detection and management, lower rates of depression, and reduce financial strain.”

So, the study suggests that expanding Medicaid is one way of reducing financial pressure on low-income groups, but it’s costly and does not improve their health.

Another interesting finding was that though medical spending increased among Medicaid enrollees due to more prescription drug usage and doctors’ visits, the study “did not find significant changes in visits to the emergency department or hospital admissions.” This undercuts another favorite talking point of liberals, which is that expanding insurance actually saves money by reducing costly emergency room visits.

Of course, this is just one study, and the authors offer some caveats. Among others, the study measured an average of about 17 months of health outcomes, so longer-run results may differ. Also, the study applied to Medicaid, rather than private insurance. But given that it had a sample size of over 12,000 and was so well designed, its conclusions will reverberate.

As the authors explain, “our study provides evidence of the effects of expanding Medicaid to low-income adults on the basis of a randomized design, which is rarely available in the evaluation of social insurance programs.”

Starting next year, millions more Americans will become eligible for Medicaid as a result of President Obama’s health care law. As Cato’s Michael Cannon put it, “There is no way to spin these results as anything but a rebuke to those who are pushing states to expand Medicaid. The Obama administration has been trying to convince states to throw more than a trillion additional taxpayer dollars at Medicaid by participating in the expansion, when the best-designed research available cannot find any evidence that it improves the physical health of enrollees. The OHIE even studied the most vulnerable part of the Medicaid-expansion population – those below 100 percent of the federal poverty level – yet still found no improvements in physical health.”

View the original article here

Liberal

(Difference between revisions)* Legalized [[same-sex marriage]] and homosexual adoption* Legalized [[same-sex marriage]] and homosexual adoption* Giving power to socialist labor unions rather than developing the economy* Economic sector regulationshttp://www.studentnewsdaily.com/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs* Economic sector regulationshttp://www.studentnewsdaily.com/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs* Spreading of [[political correctness]]* Spreading of [[political correctness]]Current dictionaries describe the liberal ideology by pretending that a liberal is "a person who favors a political philosophy of progress and reform and the protection of civil liberties" or "a person who favors an economic theory of laissez-faire and self-regulating markets,"http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=liberal&sub=Search+WordNet&o2=&o0=1&o7=&o5=&o1=1&o6=&o4=&o3=&h=00 or "open-minded or tolerant, especially free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc." or "favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties."http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/liberal In practical usage, the term "liberal" is more closely synonymous with "radical," "immoral," "anti-freedom," or "bad."Current dictionaries describe the liberal ideology by pretending that a liberal is "a person who favors a political philosophy of progress and reform and the protection of civil liberties" or "a person who favors an economic theory of laissez-faire and self-regulating markets,"http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=liberal&sub=Search+WordNet&o2=&o0=1&o7=&o5=&o1=1&o6=&o4=&o3=&h=00 or "open-minded or tolerant, especially free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc." or "favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties."http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/liberal In practical usage, the term "liberal" is more closely synonymous with "radical," "immoral," "anti-freedom," or "bad."First, Labor unions in the U.S., which are a key ally of liberals and their big government plans, were heavily infiltrated by Communist spies and sympathizers since the 1920's. Next, Liberal President Franklin D. Roosevelt's unsuccessful New Deal was inspired by European Socialism, much like the Soviets. In addition, Alger Hiss, who was a Communist spy, worked in the U.S. Department of State under Roosevelt. In addition, Senator Joe McCarthy, a conservative who rooted out Communist infiltrators in the 1950's, was denounced by liberal Communist sympathizers. In the 1980's, Conservative President Ronald Reagan's confrontational policy of "rollback' against the Soviet Union was opposed by liberals who supported the evil empire. Recently, our current President, who has been raised a liberal Communist, seeks to "spread [job creators'] wealth around".==Liberals and Uncharitableness====Liberals and Uncharitableness==

A liberal is someone who favors increased government spending, power, and control, as in ObamaCare, as well as censorship of Christianity. Increasingly, liberals side with the homosexual agenda, including supporting homosexual "marriage". Many liberals favor a welfare state where people receive endless entitlements without working. Liberals are often anti-Christian, or otherwise disagree with moral or social principles held by many American Christians. They prefer atheism over the Christian faith, as atheism has no objective morality to hinder their big government plans. The liberal ideology has worsened over the years and degenerated into economically unsound views and intolerant ideology. Some liberals simply support, in knee-jerk fashion, the opposite of conservative principles without having any meaningful values of their own.

Polling data has consistently shown that a decreasingly large percentage of Americans identify as conservative, rather than as liberal, currently by 38% to 21%.[1]

A liberal supports many of the following political positions and practices:

Spending money on government programs (the significant economic problems in the Eurozone due to government debt will no doubt increasingly discredit this aspect of liberal ideology and make things more difficult for advocates of liberal economic ideologies) Government's ability to solve economic problems[2] The belief that terrorism is not a huge threat, and that the main reason for Muslim extremists' hostility towards America is because of bad foreign policy [3] Taxpayer-funded and/or legalized abortion Cessation of teacher-led prayer in classrooms and school/state-sponsored religious events. Gun control Anti-Americanism Affirmative action[4] Opposition to government regulation or restriction of obscenity, pornography and violence in video games as a First Amendment right[5] Communism Government-funded medical care, such as Obamacare Belief in evolution Destroying the Christian foundations on which America was built on. Taxpayer-funded and government-controlled public education Placement of men and women in the same jobs in the military Legalized same-sex marriage and homosexual adoption Tax and spend economics Economic sector regulations[6] Spreading of political correctness Destroying liberty Ending Western morality Non-syndicalist labor unions Encouraging promiscuity through sexual education (the teaching of safe sex) rather than teaching abstinence from premarital sex[7] A "living Constitution" that is reinterpreted as liberals prefer, rather than how it is thought to have been intended. Government programs to rehabilitate criminals Abolition of the death penalty Environmentalism[8] Globalism Constitutionally mandated separation of church and state. Opposition to full private property rights.[9] Reinstatement of the Fairness Doctrine Opposition to domestic wire-tapping as authorized in the Patriot Act Opposition of Operation Iraqi Freedom, a major part of the War on Terrorism Opposition to the War on Terrorism and the War in Iraq Regulation of business rather than a laissez-faire capitalist economy Opposition to the Constitution. Liberals seek to expand federal power at the expense of local government and silence the conservatives who hold them back, violating the 10th and 1st Amendments respectively. Denial of traditional gender roles Support of financially irresponsible policies Advocating policies which are proven to be incorrect Encouragement of global warming alarmism Persecution of Christianity with deference to other religions, such as Islam.

Liberals currently use two Clauses of the Constitution to try to expand their power: the Commerce Clause and the General Welfare Clause. The General Welfare Clause mentions "promoting the general welfare". This to a liberal means taxing the rich at increased rates and redistributing that money. The Commerce Clause, on the other hand, says that Congress has the power to regulate trade with foreign nations, between the states and with the Indian tribes. Since the days of FDR this Clause has been interpreted very loosely and has resulted in the federal government expanding its power. The latest example is The Affordable Care Act (ACA), better know as Obamacare. In the ACA, the liberals justify the individual mandate by saying it regulates commerce between the states.

The decline in liberal principles can be illustrated by how Franklin Delano Roosevelt opposed and condemned public sector unions, stating that the idea of collective bargaining can't be transferred from the private to the public sector, as that would result in the government being unable to carry out its duties. Yet today, decades later, Democrats and liberals are in lock-step with public sector unions, as they "donate" money to the reelection campaign in exchange for more taxpayer money in their wallets and fluffed up pensions.

Current dictionaries describe the liberal ideology by pretending that a liberal is "a person who favors a political philosophy of progress and reform and the protection of civil liberties" or "a person who favors an economic theory of laissez-faire and self-regulating markets,"[10] or "open-minded or tolerant, especially free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc." or "favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties."[11] In practical usage, the term "liberal" is more closely synonymous with "radical," "immoral," "anti-freedom," or "bad."

if (window.showTocToggle) { var tocShowText = "show"; var tocHideText = "hide"; showTocToggle(); }

For more information please see: Liberals and uncharitableness and Atheism and charity

In March of 2008, George Will wrote at RealClearPolitics concerning the United States:

Sixteen months ago, Arthur C. Brooks, a professor at Syracuse University, published "Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism." The surprise is that liberals are markedly less charitable than conservatives....

If many conservatives are liberals who have been mugged by reality, Brooks, a registered independent, is, as a reviewer of his book said, a social scientist who has been mugged by data. They include these findings:

-- Although liberal families' incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).

-- Conservatives also donate more time and give more blood.[13]

Atheists and agnostics often reject Biblical morality (and therefore conservative Christianity ) and hold to moral relativism.[14] Therefore, it is not surprising that per capita atheists and agnostics in America give significantly less to charity than theists even when church giving is not counted for theists.[8][9][10]

The political magazine the American Spectator featured an article which focused on liberal politicians and uncharitableness exposing the hypocrisy of the liberal politicians it featured.[15]

In addition, Barack Obama has been criticized concerning his lack of charitable giving.

See also: Liberal Christianity and marital infidelity and Liberal Christianity

According to a 2007 study reported in the Journal of Family Issues, adherents of liberal Christianity are more likely to engage in marital infidelity than theologically conservative Christians.[16]

As noted above, liberals are more likely to adhere to evolutionary belief than conservatives. A study conducted by the Australian National University, revealed that belief in evolution is associated with moral permissiveness.[17]

See also: Liberalism and bestiality

Bestiality is the act of engaging in sexual relations with an animal. The atheist philosopher Peter Singer defends the practice of bestiality (as well as abortion, infanticide and euthanasia)[19]. Despite holding these immoral views the liberal and pro-evolution academic establishment rewarded his views with a bioethics chair at Princeton University (Princeton University is a very liberal school - see: Liberalism and bestiality).[20] Peter Singer was installed as the Ira W. DeCamp Professor of Bioethics at the University Center for Human Values at Princeton University in 1999 and in 2006 it was reported that he still worked part-time in that capacity. [21] In 2006, it was also reported that Singer worked part-time as Laureate Professor at the University of Melbourne in the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics since 2005.[22]

Joe Carter's First Things article entitled The Dangerous Mind declares concerning Peter Singer declared:

Singer has spent a lifetime justifying the unjustifiable. He is the founding father of the animal liberation movement and advocates ending “the present speciesist bias against taking seriously the interests of nonhuman animals.” He is also a defender of killing the aged (if they have dementia), newborns (for almost any reason until they are two years old), necrophilia (assuming it’s consensual), and bestiality (also assuming it’s consensual).[23]

On October 5, 2011, the British newspaper The Telegraph wrote an article which discussed how homosexuality "rights" have emboldened individuals to ask for so called bestiality "rights" (see: Homosexuality and bestiality).[24]

In 2010, the liberal state of Washington has the highest number of reported cases of bestiality in the United States even though it was merely the 13th most populous state according to the 2010 United States census. (for more information please see: Washington state and bestiality).[25][26][27]

In 2005, four legislators in the liberal state of Massachusetts tried to soften its bestiality laws.[28]

The Bible says that bestiality is a perversion and, under the Old Testament Jewish Law, punishable by death (Exodus 22:19, Leviticus 18:23, Leviticus 20:15 and Deuteronomy 27:21). The atheistic worldview does not lend itself to the establishment of morality within society and individuals (see: Atheism and morality and Atheism and deception). The atheistic worldview does not lend itself to the establishment of morality within society and individuals (see: Atheism and morality and Atheism and deception).

A study found that "Psychiatric patients were found to have a statistically significant higher prevalence rate (55%) of bestiality than the control groups (10% and 15% respectively)."[30] The atheist population has a higher suicide rate and lower marriage rates than the general population (see: Atheism and suicide and Atheism and marriageability and Atheism and health).

For more information please see:

See also: Occupy Wall Street and bestiality chant

Bestiality is the act of engaging in sexual relations with an animal. A crowd at Occupy Wall Street was led to repeat various chants which included a chant involving bestiality and the incident was videotaped.[31]

Below is an excerpt of the chant:

Everything seems to be possible. [Crowd Parrot Chant] You can travel to the moon. [CPC] You can become immortal [CPC] by biogenetics. You can have sex with animals, or whatever. [CPC].[32]

The Wall Street Journal reported: "A comprehensive new study released by Baylor University, shows that traditional Christian religion greatly decreases belief in everything from the efficacy of palm readers to the usefulness of astrology. [33]

Also, in September of 2008, the Wall Street Journal reported:

The reality is that the New Atheist campaign, by discouraging religion, won't create a new group of intelligent, skeptical, enlightened beings. Far from it: It might actually encourage new levels of mass superstition. And that's not a conclusion to take on faith — it's what the empirical data tell us.

"What Americans Really Believe," a comprehensive new study released by Baylor University yesterday, shows that traditional Christian religion greatly decreases belief in everything from the efficacy of palm readers to the usefulness of astrology. It also shows that the irreligious and the members of more liberal Protestant denominations, far from being resistant to superstition, tend to be much more likely to believe in the paranormal and in pseudoscience, such as evolution than evangelical Christians....

This is not a new finding. In his 1983 book "The Whys of a Philosophical Scrivener," skeptic and science writer Martin Gardner cited the decline of traditional religious belief among the better educated as one of the causes for an increase in pseudoscience, cults and superstition. He referenced a 1980 study published in the magazine Skeptical Inquirer that showed irreligious college students to be by far the most likely to embrace paranormal beliefs, while born-again Christian college students were the least likely.[34]

Democrats and most media outlets in the U.S. are blatantly liberal.[35] Liberalism in North America today practices three primary tactics to attack the Republican Party, and sometimes to attack American values in general. These three liberal tactics can be pronounced using the following acronym: SIN. Liberals (1) shift the subject, they (2) ignore the facts, and they (3) name call.[36][37]

Liberals typically support a "mixed" economy, a policy similar to that of fascism. [38] There's another goal, from my point of view, which is to try to lay the groundwork for a radical political force which would conceive of itself as distinctly to the left of moderate, reformist American liberals. And that has two aspects. One is to try to change that liberalism, to transform it by analysis, critique, and activism; the second is to build a radical movement which would be an autonomous force in its own right, which would be distinct from the traditional American liberal consensus. This radical part of the program involves not simply supporting the liberal students against conservative students and conservative professors, but trying to act on them, to push them to the left. It also involves trying to find and support, even trying to help create, networks of radical students in law school and of radical professors around the country — students and teachers who see themselves as wanting to go a lot further than most people want to go. [39]

The National Journal compiles the votes of each congress member each year and uses the information to create rankings[40] of how liberal each member of the United States Congress is. In addition to showing the voting records of each member and given an overall all ranking of liberalness, the National Journal also ranks congress members by liberalness in the areas of social, economic, and foreign policy.

See also: American atheism and Decline of atheism and Global atheism

Due to the explosive growth of global Christianity in traditional cultures and their influence on Western Christianity and the higher birth rate of conservative Christians and religious conservatives, social conservatism is expected to rise.

The Birkbeck College, University of London professor Eric Kaufman wrote in his 2010 book Shall the Righteous Inherit the Earth? concerning America:

High evangelical fertility rates more than compensated for losses to liberal Protestant sects during the twentieth century. In recent decades, white secularism has surged, but Latino and Asian religious immigration has taken up the slack, keeping secularism at bay. Across denominations, the fertility advantage of religious fundamentalists of all colours is significant and growing. After 2020, their demographic weight will to tip the balance in the culture wars towards the conservative side, ramping up pressure on hot-button issues such as abortion. By the end of the century, three quarters of America may be pro-life. Their activism will leap over the borders of the 'Redeemer Nation' to evangelize the world. Already, the rise of the World Congress of Families has launched a global religious right, its arms stretching across the bloody lines of the War on Terror to embrace the entire Abrahamic family.[41]

In Europe, on the other hand, parties that call themselves liberal are moderate in outlook, ranging from centre-left to centre-right, promote typically economic and business freedom. The Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe[42] is a party of the European Parliament that represents most liberal parties from European countries. Similar policies are promoted by many liberal parties throughout the world,[43] such as the Liberal Party of Australia.[44]

Trade unions and socialist parties often criticize politicians for promoting lower taxes on business, or more flexible hiring and firing laws, by calling them "liberals" or neoliberals. Thus, just as in the US, "liberal" may occasionally be used as a term of abuse. But when someone is called "liberal" in Europe, it has an entirely different meaning than in the US. In fact, the US meaning of liberal is more similar to the politics of European socialist or social democratic parties.[45]

In history, the word "liberal" has meant different things at different times, and was associated with individual liberty in prior centuries. In the postwar period, liberals supported government intervention in the economy and welfare state policies, as well as peaceful coexistence with the communist block, which are not liberal policies in the sense of classical liberalism. After the end of the cold war, with the demise of socialism and communism, many liberals embraced some ideas from economic neo-liberalism, and coined it the "Third Way". In the area of national security and foreign policy liberals in the U.S. failed to define a consistent stance, even after the events of 9/11 and the beginning of the war in Iraq. Liberals generally support affirmative action, gay marriage, and abortion.[46]

Liberalism is a political philosophy with freedom as its core value. The term was originally applied to supporters of individual liberties and equal rights, but, in America, the term has come to represent a movement of social change that often conflicts with conservative values such as moral values and traditions derived from Northern European Protestantism.

See Classical Liberalism. Compare Libertarianism.

See also: Infamous liberals

Source: The Politix Group

"I never use the words Democrats and Republicans. It's liberals and Americans." -James Watt, Secretary of the Interior under Ronald Reagan

? http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1042/winds-of-political-change-havent--shifted-publics-ideology-balance? http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs? http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs? http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs? The Warren Court, led by liberal Justices William O. Douglas, Hugo Black, Abe Fortas, William Brennan and Chief Justice Earl Warren issued 36 decisions granting First Amendment rights to obscenity and pornography. These decisions remain fully supported by liberals today.? http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs? Democrats Aim To Kill Abstinence-Only Program Funding, Fox News, Monday, June 25, 2007? and environmental organizations, for example Greenpeace? For example, the liberal wing of the U.S. Supreme Court issued the 5-4 Kelo v. City of New London decision authorizing the taking of private property by government in order to give the property to another private entity rather than convert it to a public use.? http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=liberal&sub=Search+WordNet&o2=&o0=1&o7=&o5=&o1=1&o6=&o4=&o3=&h=00? http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/liberal? http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html? http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html? http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=BarnaUpdate&BarnaUpdateID=152? http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=1c5_1238044128&c=1? Are There Religious Variations in Marital Infidelity?? Morals decline linked to evolution? ? ? ? The Basis of a Christian Worldview? The Basis of a Christian Worldview? The Dangerous Mind by Joe Carter, First Things? The dark side of sexual freedom: American 'zoophiles' take on the language of equality - October 5, 2011 - The Telegraph? Pet Abuse -2010? 2010 United States Census data? 2011 Political map - CNN? [Massachusetts bill to repeal fornication, adultery, and blasphemy, and to soften bestiality laws]? Study Finds TV Treats Marital Sex as Burdensome, Adultery as Positive? A prevalence study of bestiality (zoophilia) in psychiatric in-patients, medical in-patients, and psychiatric staff - Int J Psychosom. 1991;38(1-4):45-7.? The 10 Greatest Moments From The Occupy Wall Street Protests So Far? The 10 Greatest Moments From The Occupy Wall Street Protests So Far? [1]? http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178219865054585.html? Media Bias basics. Media Research Center.? Scott Baker. Did Herman Cain Give the ‘Don’t Miss’ Speech at CPAC?, The Blaze, February 12, 2011.? YouTube. Herman Cain: "Stupid People Are Ruining America", February 11, 2011.? Video discussion about how modern liberalism is actually fascist by author Jonah Goldberg..? Liberal Values in Legal Education Duncan Kennedy (professor at Harvard Law School)? http://nationaljournal.com/voteratings/index.htm? Why are 2012 and 2020 key years for Christian creationists and pro-lifers?? http://www.alde.eu? http://www.liberal-international.org/? [2]? [3]? "Political liberals tend, for whatever reason, to be ardent supporters of both gay rights and pro-choice programs." Greenberg and Bailey [4] ? http://s151.photobucket.com/albums/s151/candypop_02/Serial%20Killers/John%20Wayne%20Gacy/?action=view¤t=SERIAL_KILLER_John_Wayne_Gacy_In-1.mp4? http://www.digitaljournal.com/image/45527

View the original article here

Liberal

(Difference between revisions)* Legalized [[same-sex marriage]] and homosexual adoption* Legalized [[same-sex marriage]] and homosexual adoption* Giving power to socialist labor unions rather than developing the economy* Economic sector regulationshttp://www.studentnewsdaily.com/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs* Economic sector regulationshttp://www.studentnewsdaily.com/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs* Spreading of [[political correctness]]* Spreading of [[political correctness]]Current dictionaries describe the liberal ideology by pretending that a liberal is "a person who favors a political philosophy of progress and reform and the protection of civil liberties" or "a person who favors an economic theory of laissez-faire and self-regulating markets,"http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=liberal&sub=Search+WordNet&o2=&o0=1&o7=&o5=&o1=1&o6=&o4=&o3=&h=00 or "open-minded or tolerant, especially free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc." or "favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties."http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/liberal In practical usage, the term "liberal" is more closely synonymous with "radical," "immoral," "anti-freedom," or "bad."Current dictionaries describe the liberal ideology by pretending that a liberal is "a person who favors a political philosophy of progress and reform and the protection of civil liberties" or "a person who favors an economic theory of laissez-faire and self-regulating markets,"http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=liberal&sub=Search+WordNet&o2=&o0=1&o7=&o5=&o1=1&o6=&o4=&o3=&h=00 or "open-minded or tolerant, especially free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc." or "favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties."http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/liberal In practical usage, the term "liberal" is more closely synonymous with "radical," "immoral," "anti-freedom," or "bad."First, Labor unions in the U.S., which are a key ally of liberals and their big government plans, were heavily infiltrated by Communist spies and sympathizers since the 1920's. Next, Liberal President Franklin D. Roosevelt's unsuccessful New Deal was inspired by European Socialism, much like the Soviets. In addition, Alger Hiss, who was a Communist spy, worked in the U.S. Department of State under Roosevelt. In addition, Senator Joe McCarthy, a conservative who rooted out Communist infiltrators in the 1950's, was denounced by liberal Communist sympathizers. In the 1980's, Conservative President Ronald Reagan's confrontational policy of "rollback' against the Soviet Union was opposed by liberals who supported the evil empire. Recently, our current President, who has been raised a liberal Communist, seeks to "spread [job creators'] wealth around".==Liberals and Uncharitableness====Liberals and Uncharitableness==

A liberal is someone who favors increased government spending, power, and control, as in ObamaCare, as well as censorship of Christianity. Increasingly, liberals side with the homosexual agenda, including supporting homosexual "marriage". Many liberals favor a welfare state where people receive endless entitlements without working. Liberals are often anti-Christian, or otherwise disagree with moral or social principles held by many American Christians. They prefer atheism over the Christian faith, as atheism has no objective morality to hinder their big government plans. The liberal ideology has worsened over the years and degenerated into economically unsound views and intolerant ideology. Some liberals simply support, in knee-jerk fashion, the opposite of conservative principles without having any meaningful values of their own.

Polling data has consistently shown that a decreasingly large percentage of Americans identify as conservative, rather than as liberal, currently by 38% to 21%.[1]

A liberal supports many of the following political positions and practices:

Spending money on government programs (the significant economic problems in the Eurozone due to government debt will no doubt increasingly discredit this aspect of liberal ideology and make things more difficult for advocates of liberal economic ideologies) Government's ability to solve economic problems[2] The belief that terrorism is not a huge threat, and that the main reason for Muslim extremists' hostility towards America is because of bad foreign policy [3] Taxpayer-funded and/or legalized abortion Cessation of teacher-led prayer in classrooms and school/state-sponsored religious events. Gun control Anti-Americanism Affirmative action[4] Opposition to government regulation or restriction of obscenity, pornography and violence in video games as a First Amendment right[5] Communism Government-funded medical care, such as Obamacare Belief in evolution Destroying the Christian foundations on which America was built on. Taxpayer-funded and government-controlled public education Placement of men and women in the same jobs in the military Legalized same-sex marriage and homosexual adoption Tax and spend economics Economic sector regulations[6] Spreading of political correctness Destroying liberty Ending Western morality Non-syndicalist labor unions Encouraging promiscuity through sexual education (the teaching of safe sex) rather than teaching abstinence from premarital sex[7] A "living Constitution" that is reinterpreted as liberals prefer, rather than how it is thought to have been intended. Government programs to rehabilitate criminals Abolition of the death penalty Environmentalism[8] Globalism Constitutionally mandated separation of church and state. Opposition to full private property rights.[9] Reinstatement of the Fairness Doctrine Opposition to domestic wire-tapping as authorized in the Patriot Act Opposition of Operation Iraqi Freedom, a major part of the War on Terrorism Opposition to the War on Terrorism and the War in Iraq Regulation of business rather than a laissez-faire capitalist economy Opposition to the Constitution. Liberals seek to expand federal power at the expense of local government and silence the conservatives who hold them back, violating the 10th and 1st Amendments respectively. Denial of traditional gender roles Support of financially irresponsible policies Advocating policies which are proven to be incorrect Encouragement of global warming alarmism Persecution of Christianity with deference to other religions, such as Islam.

Liberals currently use two Clauses of the Constitution to try to expand their power: the Commerce Clause and the General Welfare Clause. The General Welfare Clause mentions "promoting the general welfare". This to a liberal means taxing the rich at increased rates and redistributing that money. The Commerce Clause, on the other hand, says that Congress has the power to regulate trade with foreign nations, between the states and with the Indian tribes. Since the days of FDR this Clause has been interpreted very loosely and has resulted in the federal government expanding its power. The latest example is The Affordable Care Act (ACA), better know as Obamacare. In the ACA, the liberals justify the individual mandate by saying it regulates commerce between the states.

The decline in liberal principles can be illustrated by how Franklin Delano Roosevelt opposed and condemned public sector unions, stating that the idea of collective bargaining can't be transferred from the private to the public sector, as that would result in the government being unable to carry out its duties. Yet today, decades later, Democrats and liberals are in lock-step with public sector unions, as they "donate" money to the reelection campaign in exchange for more taxpayer money in their wallets and fluffed up pensions.

Current dictionaries describe the liberal ideology by pretending that a liberal is "a person who favors a political philosophy of progress and reform and the protection of civil liberties" or "a person who favors an economic theory of laissez-faire and self-regulating markets,"[10] or "open-minded or tolerant, especially free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc." or "favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties."[11] In practical usage, the term "liberal" is more closely synonymous with "radical," "immoral," "anti-freedom," or "bad."

if (window.showTocToggle) { var tocShowText = "show"; var tocHideText = "hide"; showTocToggle(); }

For more information please see: Liberals and uncharitableness and Atheism and charity

In March of 2008, George Will wrote at RealClearPolitics concerning the United States:

Sixteen months ago, Arthur C. Brooks, a professor at Syracuse University, published "Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism." The surprise is that liberals are markedly less charitable than conservatives....

If many conservatives are liberals who have been mugged by reality, Brooks, a registered independent, is, as a reviewer of his book said, a social scientist who has been mugged by data. They include these findings:

-- Although liberal families' incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).

-- Conservatives also donate more time and give more blood.[13]

Atheists and agnostics often reject Biblical morality (and therefore conservative Christianity ) and hold to moral relativism.[14] Therefore, it is not surprising that per capita atheists and agnostics in America give significantly less to charity than theists even when church giving is not counted for theists.[8][9][10]

The political magazine the American Spectator featured an article which focused on liberal politicians and uncharitableness exposing the hypocrisy of the liberal politicians it featured.[15]

In addition, Barack Obama has been criticized concerning his lack of charitable giving.

See also: Liberal Christianity and marital infidelity and Liberal Christianity

According to a 2007 study reported in the Journal of Family Issues, adherents of liberal Christianity are more likely to engage in marital infidelity than theologically conservative Christians.[16]

As noted above, liberals are more likely to adhere to evolutionary belief than conservatives. A study conducted by the Australian National University, revealed that belief in evolution is associated with moral permissiveness.[17]

See also: Liberalism and bestiality

Bestiality is the act of engaging in sexual relations with an animal. The atheist philosopher Peter Singer defends the practice of bestiality (as well as abortion, infanticide and euthanasia)[19]. Despite holding these immoral views the liberal and pro-evolution academic establishment rewarded his views with a bioethics chair at Princeton University (Princeton University is a very liberal school - see: Liberalism and bestiality).[20] Peter Singer was installed as the Ira W. DeCamp Professor of Bioethics at the University Center for Human Values at Princeton University in 1999 and in 2006 it was reported that he still worked part-time in that capacity. [21] In 2006, it was also reported that Singer worked part-time as Laureate Professor at the University of Melbourne in the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics since 2005.[22]

Joe Carter's First Things article entitled The Dangerous Mind declares concerning Peter Singer declared:

Singer has spent a lifetime justifying the unjustifiable. He is the founding father of the animal liberation movement and advocates ending “the present speciesist bias against taking seriously the interests of nonhuman animals.” He is also a defender of killing the aged (if they have dementia), newborns (for almost any reason until they are two years old), necrophilia (assuming it’s consensual), and bestiality (also assuming it’s consensual).[23]

On October 5, 2011, the British newspaper The Telegraph wrote an article which discussed how homosexuality "rights" have emboldened individuals to ask for so called bestiality "rights" (see: Homosexuality and bestiality).[24]

In 2010, the liberal state of Washington has the highest number of reported cases of bestiality in the United States even though it was merely the 13th most populous state according to the 2010 United States census. (for more information please see: Washington state and bestiality).[25][26][27]

In 2005, four legislators in the liberal state of Massachusetts tried to soften its bestiality laws.[28]

The Bible says that bestiality is a perversion and, under the Old Testament Jewish Law, punishable by death (Exodus 22:19, Leviticus 18:23, Leviticus 20:15 and Deuteronomy 27:21). The atheistic worldview does not lend itself to the establishment of morality within society and individuals (see: Atheism and morality and Atheism and deception). The atheistic worldview does not lend itself to the establishment of morality within society and individuals (see: Atheism and morality and Atheism and deception).

A study found that "Psychiatric patients were found to have a statistically significant higher prevalence rate (55%) of bestiality than the control groups (10% and 15% respectively)."[30] The atheist population has a higher suicide rate and lower marriage rates than the general population (see: Atheism and suicide and Atheism and marriageability and Atheism and health).

For more information please see:

See also: Occupy Wall Street and bestiality chant

Bestiality is the act of engaging in sexual relations with an animal. A crowd at Occupy Wall Street was led to repeat various chants which included a chant involving bestiality and the incident was videotaped.[31]

Below is an excerpt of the chant:

Everything seems to be possible. [Crowd Parrot Chant] You can travel to the moon. [CPC] You can become immortal [CPC] by biogenetics. You can have sex with animals, or whatever. [CPC].[32]

The Wall Street Journal reported: "A comprehensive new study released by Baylor University, shows that traditional Christian religion greatly decreases belief in everything from the efficacy of palm readers to the usefulness of astrology. [33]

Also, in September of 2008, the Wall Street Journal reported:

The reality is that the New Atheist campaign, by discouraging religion, won't create a new group of intelligent, skeptical, enlightened beings. Far from it: It might actually encourage new levels of mass superstition. And that's not a conclusion to take on faith — it's what the empirical data tell us.

"What Americans Really Believe," a comprehensive new study released by Baylor University yesterday, shows that traditional Christian religion greatly decreases belief in everything from the efficacy of palm readers to the usefulness of astrology. It also shows that the irreligious and the members of more liberal Protestant denominations, far from being resistant to superstition, tend to be much more likely to believe in the paranormal and in pseudoscience, such as evolution than evangelical Christians....

This is not a new finding. In his 1983 book "The Whys of a Philosophical Scrivener," skeptic and science writer Martin Gardner cited the decline of traditional religious belief among the better educated as one of the causes for an increase in pseudoscience, cults and superstition. He referenced a 1980 study published in the magazine Skeptical Inquirer that showed irreligious college students to be by far the most likely to embrace paranormal beliefs, while born-again Christian college students were the least likely.[34]

Democrats and most media outlets in the U.S. are blatantly liberal.[35] Liberalism in North America today practices three primary tactics to attack the Republican Party, and sometimes to attack American values in general. These three liberal tactics can be pronounced using the following acronym: SIN. Liberals (1) shift the subject, they (2) ignore the facts, and they (3) name call.[36][37]

Liberals typically support a "mixed" economy, a policy similar to that of fascism. [38] There's another goal, from my point of view, which is to try to lay the groundwork for a radical political force which would conceive of itself as distinctly to the left of moderate, reformist American liberals. And that has two aspects. One is to try to change that liberalism, to transform it by analysis, critique, and activism; the second is to build a radical movement which would be an autonomous force in its own right, which would be distinct from the traditional American liberal consensus. This radical part of the program involves not simply supporting the liberal students against conservative students and conservative professors, but trying to act on them, to push them to the left. It also involves trying to find and support, even trying to help create, networks of radical students in law school and of radical professors around the country — students and teachers who see themselves as wanting to go a lot further than most people want to go. [39]

The National Journal compiles the votes of each congress member each year and uses the information to create rankings[40] of how liberal each member of the United States Congress is. In addition to showing the voting records of each member and given an overall all ranking of liberalness, the National Journal also ranks congress members by liberalness in the areas of social, economic, and foreign policy.

See also: American atheism and Decline of atheism and Global atheism

Due to the explosive growth of global Christianity in traditional cultures and their influence on Western Christianity and the higher birth rate of conservative Christians and religious conservatives, social conservatism is expected to rise.

The Birkbeck College, University of London professor Eric Kaufman wrote in his 2010 book Shall the Righteous Inherit the Earth? concerning America:

High evangelical fertility rates more than compensated for losses to liberal Protestant sects during the twentieth century. In recent decades, white secularism has surged, but Latino and Asian religious immigration has taken up the slack, keeping secularism at bay. Across denominations, the fertility advantage of religious fundamentalists of all colours is significant and growing. After 2020, their demographic weight will to tip the balance in the culture wars towards the conservative side, ramping up pressure on hot-button issues such as abortion. By the end of the century, three quarters of America may be pro-life. Their activism will leap over the borders of the 'Redeemer Nation' to evangelize the world. Already, the rise of the World Congress of Families has launched a global religious right, its arms stretching across the bloody lines of the War on Terror to embrace the entire Abrahamic family.[41]

In Europe, on the other hand, parties that call themselves liberal are moderate in outlook, ranging from centre-left to centre-right, promote typically economic and business freedom. The Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe[42] is a party of the European Parliament that represents most liberal parties from European countries. Similar policies are promoted by many liberal parties throughout the world,[43] such as the Liberal Party of Australia.[44]

Trade unions and socialist parties often criticize politicians for promoting lower taxes on business, or more flexible hiring and firing laws, by calling them "liberals" or neoliberals. Thus, just as in the US, "liberal" may occasionally be used as a term of abuse. But when someone is called "liberal" in Europe, it has an entirely different meaning than in the US. In fact, the US meaning of liberal is more similar to the politics of European socialist or social democratic parties.[45]

In history, the word "liberal" has meant different things at different times, and was associated with individual liberty in prior centuries. In the postwar period, liberals supported government intervention in the economy and welfare state policies, as well as peaceful coexistence with the communist block, which are not liberal policies in the sense of classical liberalism. After the end of the cold war, with the demise of socialism and communism, many liberals embraced some ideas from economic neo-liberalism, and coined it the "Third Way". In the area of national security and foreign policy liberals in the U.S. failed to define a consistent stance, even after the events of 9/11 and the beginning of the war in Iraq. Liberals generally support affirmative action, gay marriage, and abortion.[46]

Liberalism is a political philosophy with freedom as its core value. The term was originally applied to supporters of individual liberties and equal rights, but, in America, the term has come to represent a movement of social change that often conflicts with conservative values such as moral values and traditions derived from Northern European Protestantism.

See Classical Liberalism. Compare Libertarianism.

See also: Infamous liberals

Source: The Politix Group

"I never use the words Democrats and Republicans. It's liberals and Americans." -James Watt, Secretary of the Interior under Ronald Reagan

? http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1042/winds-of-political-change-havent--shifted-publics-ideology-balance? http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs? http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs? http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs? The Warren Court, led by liberal Justices William O. Douglas, Hugo Black, Abe Fortas, William Brennan and Chief Justice Earl Warren issued 36 decisions granting First Amendment rights to obscenity and pornography. These decisions remain fully supported by liberals today.? http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs? Democrats Aim To Kill Abstinence-Only Program Funding, Fox News, Monday, June 25, 2007? and environmental organizations, for example Greenpeace? For example, the liberal wing of the U.S. Supreme Court issued the 5-4 Kelo v. City of New London decision authorizing the taking of private property by government in order to give the property to another private entity rather than convert it to a public use.? http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=liberal&sub=Search+WordNet&o2=&o0=1&o7=&o5=&o1=1&o6=&o4=&o3=&h=00? http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/liberal? http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html? http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html? http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=BarnaUpdate&BarnaUpdateID=152? http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=1c5_1238044128&c=1? Are There Religious Variations in Marital Infidelity?? Morals decline linked to evolution? ? ? ? The Basis of a Christian Worldview? The Basis of a Christian Worldview? The Dangerous Mind by Joe Carter, First Things? The dark side of sexual freedom: American 'zoophiles' take on the language of equality - October 5, 2011 - The Telegraph? Pet Abuse -2010? 2010 United States Census data? 2011 Political map - CNN? [Massachusetts bill to repeal fornication, adultery, and blasphemy, and to soften bestiality laws]? Study Finds TV Treats Marital Sex as Burdensome, Adultery as Positive? A prevalence study of bestiality (zoophilia) in psychiatric in-patients, medical in-patients, and psychiatric staff - Int J Psychosom. 1991;38(1-4):45-7.? The 10 Greatest Moments From The Occupy Wall Street Protests So Far? The 10 Greatest Moments From The Occupy Wall Street Protests So Far? [1]? http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178219865054585.html? Media Bias basics. Media Research Center.? Scott Baker. Did Herman Cain Give the ‘Don’t Miss’ Speech at CPAC?, The Blaze, February 12, 2011.? YouTube. Herman Cain: "Stupid People Are Ruining America", February 11, 2011.? Video discussion about how modern liberalism is actually fascist by author Jonah Goldberg..? Liberal Values in Legal Education Duncan Kennedy (professor at Harvard Law School)? http://nationaljournal.com/voteratings/index.htm? Why are 2012 and 2020 key years for Christian creationists and pro-lifers?? http://www.alde.eu? http://www.liberal-international.org/? [2]? [3]? "Political liberals tend, for whatever reason, to be ardent supporters of both gay rights and pro-choice programs." Greenberg and Bailey [4] ? http://s151.photobucket.com/albums/s151/candypop_02/Serial%20Killers/John%20Wayne%20Gacy/?action=view¤t=SERIAL_KILLER_John_Wayne_Gacy_In-1.mp4? http://www.digitaljournal.com/image/45527

View the original article here

Video: Bozell Bashes Liberal Media Censorship of Bad News on ObamaCare

The liberal media "are deliberately censoring news and information from the American people" on ObamaCare that would cast the Obama administration in a negative light, NewsBusters publisher Brent Bozell charged on the April 11 edition of Varney & Co.

The Media Research Center president rattled off a few such developments that the liberal media completely ignored (watch the full segment below):

BRENT BOZELL, NewsBusters publisher: March 22nd, you have a situation where 33 Senate Democrats join with 40-some Republicans to vote against the 2.3 percent sales tax on medical devices. That is a huge setback for ObamaCare. Total network news stories: zero.

March 26. Another report comes out that says the health claims in the states are going to rise between 32 and 80 percent and that health care spending is going to double. A dramatic reversal for ObamaCare. Network news stories: zero.

March 26. You get a new report that comes out that says the Secretary of HHS, Sebelius herself, admits that premiums for new policies are going to go up. That is a complete contradiction to what the president told the American people when he sold it [ObamaCare] to them. Network news stories: zero.

April 3rd. You have another report that comes out that the system of exchanges in this country that were supposed to help small businesses are being put off for a year because it's a complete train wreck of a system. How many news reports on that? None.

April 4th, you have a poll -- this was a good one -- that says that two out of three Democrats now believe that ObamaCare will hurt them or not help them. Overall, 78 percent of the American people now believe that ObamaCare is going to hurt them, not help them. Only 15 percent of the American public believes that ObamaCare is going to help them.

Put them all together: No single network news story on any of that. Now, I rest my case, they're censoring information.

STUART VARNEY, host, Varney & Co.: No question, Brent. You've laid out the case and I'm buying it. There is deliberate censorship of information about ObamaCare.

View the original article here

Liberal creep

(Difference between revisions)*Many early scientists such as [[Isaac Newton]] and [[Galileo Galilei]] were heavily influenced by Christianity and would never have made their important discoveries without their faith in the [[Jesus Christ|Lord Almighty]], yet that faith has since been downplayed in [[liberal]] [[atheistic]] [[public school]] textbooks and [[Wikipedia]].For example, the Wikipedia entry on [[Isaac Newton]] completely omits how he was a devout Christian who read the Bible daily and derived his inspiration and motivation from it.[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Newton] Wikipedia has a comprehensive article detailing Newton's religious views that utilizes similar content and references. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Newton%27s_religious_views]*Many early scientists such as [[Isaac Newton]] and [[Galileo Galilei]] were heavily influenced by Christianity and would never have made their important discoveries without their faith in the [[Jesus Christ|Lord Almighty]], yet that faith has since been downplayed in [[liberal]] [[atheistic]] [[public school]] textbooks and [[Wikipedia]].For example, the Wikipedia entry on [[Isaac Newton]] completely omits how he was a devout Christian who read the Bible daily and derived his inspiration and motivation from it.[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Newton] Wikipedia has a comprehensive article detailing Newton's religious views that utilizes similar content and references. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Newton%27s_religious_views]*The ferocity and savageness of the Native Americans towards American settlers has gradually been downplayed, while the relocation of the Cherokee has been gradually inflated to the point that some liberal textbooks treat it as an atrocity comparable to the [[Holocaust]]. Similarly, there has been an increase in denial of the many technological and spiritual improvements the settlers brought to previous inhabitants.*The ferocity and savageness of the Native Americans towards American settlers has gradually been downplayed, while the relocation of the Cherokee has been gradually inflated to the point that some liberal textbooks treat it as an atrocity comparable to the [[Holocaust]]. Similarly, there has been an increase in denial of the many technological and spiritual improvements the settlers brought to previous inhabitants.*Liberals in Britain have tried to distort the image of [[Margaret Thatcher]] by point to massive cuts and claiming that she destroyed the British economy calling it a "Trainwreck of a Legacy" http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-cruel-legacy-of-margaret-thatcher-public-enterprises-privatized-jobs-lost-social-services-cut-and-communities-wrecked/5331383 This is a clear omission of the fact that there was a British economic boom from 1986-89http://econ.economicshelp.org/2008/10/unemployment-in-uk.html and the fact that it was  failed socialist economic policy forced massive cuts on the government.

Liberal creep is liberal bias that gradually creeps or distorts an entry, definition, explanation, description, or historical account.

Former Utah state Sen. Bill Wright may have been the first to coin this term in spring 2008 when he "warned of liberal creep — the 'education of indoctrination' — in which the media peddle "socialism and programs. We have been so dumbed-down, so indoctrinated with all this information we’re in a haze; we can’t see through it. We must find out for ourselves."[1]

Examples of liberal creep include:

Ronald Reagan left the White House with the best approval ratings of any president, up to that time, at the end of his term, yet the media and history books have since relentlessly tried to downplay and distort his political achievements. Reverse to the above example, Bill Clinton [2] left office after a failed impeachment attempt on perjury charges, yet liberal creep ensures that this is downplayed and distorted. Many early scientists such as Isaac Newton and Galileo Galilei were heavily influenced by Christianity and would never have made their important discoveries without their faith in the Lord Almighty, yet that faith has since been downplayed in liberal atheistic public school textbooks and Wikipedia.[3] [4] The ferocity and savageness of the Native Americans towards American settlers has gradually been downplayed, while the relocation of the Cherokee has been gradually inflated to the point that some liberal textbooks treat it as an atrocity comparable to the Holocaust. Similarly, there has been an increase in denial of the many technological and spiritual improvements the settlers brought to previous inhabitants. Liberals in Britain have tried to distort the image of Margaret Thatcher by point to massive cuts and claiming that she destroyed the British economy calling it a "Trainwreck of a Legacy" [5] This is a clear omission of the fact that there was a British economic boom from 1986-89[6] and the fact that it was failed socialist economic policy forced massive cuts on the government. ? http://www.slweekly.com/index.cfm?do=article.details&id=5450FFC0-14D1-13A2-9FC3560D929110B0? Clinton left office with a higher approval rating than Reagan. [1] ? For example, the Wikipedia entry on Isaac Newton completely omits how he was a devout Christian who read the Bible daily and derived his inspiration and motivation from it.[2]? Wikipedia has a comprehensive article detailing Newton's religious views that utilizes similar content and references. [3]? http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-cruel-legacy-of-margaret-thatcher-public-enterprises-privatized-jobs-lost-social-services-cut-and-communities-wrecked/5331383? http://econ.economicshelp.org/2008/10/unemployment-in-uk.html

View the original article here

Ben Carson blasts 'vicious,' white liberal critics as ‘the most racist out there’

Dr. Ben Carson on Tuesday blasted his critics for heat he’s taken recently over controversial remarks on gay marriage, calling his white liberal detractors “the most racist out there.”

“They want to shut us up completely, and that’s why the attacks against me have been so vicious,” Carson said on the Mark Levin radio show. “I represent an existential threat to them. They need to shut me up, they need to get rid of me, they can’t find anything else to delegitimize me, so they take my words, misinterpret them, and try to make it seem that I’m a bigot.”

Levin said Carson was being targeted for his race.

“You’re attacked also in many respects because of your race,” Levin said. “You’re not supposed to talk like this, and a lot of white liberals just don’t like it, do they?”

“They’re the most racist people there are because they put you in a little category, a box,” Carson responded. “How could you dare come off the plantation?”

The comments come after the rising GOP star apologized for remarks he made last week linking homosexuality to bestiality.

Carson said that marriage is “a well-established, fundamental pillar of society and no group, be they gays, be they NAMBLA, be they people who believe in bestiality — it doesn't matter what they are, they don't get to change the definition.”

NAMBLA is the North American Man/Boy Love Association.

Carson, a professor at Johns Hopkins University, initially defended the comments as taken “out of context and completely misunderstood,” but the furor provoked students at his university to petition to have him removed as this year’s commencement speaker. Carson has said he would step aside if that’s what the students wanted.

Carson became an overnight sensation on the right after criticizing President Obama, who was seated directly to his right, at the National Prayer Breakfast earlier this year.

View Comments

View the original article here

Liberal

(Difference between revisions)* Opposition to government regulation or restriction of obscenity, pornography and violence in video games as a [[First Amendment]] rightThe [[Warren Court]], led by [[liberal]] Justices [[William O. Douglas]], [[Hugo Black]], [[Abe Fortas]], [[William Brennan]] and Chief Justice [[Earl Warren]] issued 36 decisions granting [[First Amendment]] rights to obscenity and pornography.  These decisions remain fully supported by liberals today.* Opposition to government regulation or restriction of obscenity, pornography and violence in video games as a [[First Amendment]] rightThe [[Warren Court]], led by [[liberal]] Justices [[William O. Douglas]], [[Hugo Black]], [[Abe Fortas]], [[William Brennan]] and Chief Justice [[Earl Warren]] issued 36 decisions granting [[First Amendment]] rights to obscenity and pornography.  These decisions remain fully supported by liberals today.* Government-funded medical care, such as [[Obamacare]]* Government-funded medical care, such as [[Obamacare]]* [[evolution and liberalism|Belief in evolution]]. * Destroying the Christian foundations on which America was built on.  * Destroying the Christian foundations on which America was built on.  * Opposition to full private property rights.  For example, the liberal wing of the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] issued the 5-4 [[Kelo v. City of New London]] decision authorizing the taking of private property by government in order to give the property to another private entity rather than convert it to a public use.* Opposition to full private property rights.  For example, the liberal wing of the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] issued the 5-4 [[Kelo v. City of New London]] decision authorizing the taking of private property by government in order to give the property to another private entity rather than convert it to a public use.* Reinstatement of the [[Fairness Doctrine]]* Reinstatement of the [[Fairness Doctrine]]* [[evolution and liberalism|belief in evolution]]. * Opposition to domestic wire-tapping as authorized in the [[Patriot Act]]* Opposition to domestic wire-tapping as authorized in the [[Patriot Act]]* Opposition of [[Operation Iraqi Freedom]], a major part of the [[War on Terrorism]]* Opposition of [[Operation Iraqi Freedom]], a major part of the [[War on Terrorism]]

A liberal is someone who favors increased government spending, power, and control, as in ObamaCare, as well as censorship of Christianity. Liberals have a goal of turning America into a communist state, not unlike the USSR. Indeed, liberals have often pursued policies to benefit the Soviets. Increasingly, liberals side with the homosexual agenda, including supporting homosexual "marriage". Many liberals favor a welfare state where people receive endless entitlements without working. Liberals are often anti-Christian, or otherwise disagree with moral or social principles held by many American Christians. They prefer atheism over the Christian faith, as atheism has no objective morality to hinder their big government plans. The liberal ideology has worsened over the years and degenerated into economically unsound views and intolerant ideology. Some liberals simply support, in knee-jerk fashion, the opposite of conservative principles without having any meaningful values of their own.

Polling data has consistently shown that a decreasingly large percentage of Americans identify as conservative, rather than as liberal, currently by 38% to 21%.[1]

A liberal supports many of the following political positions and practices:

Liberals currently use two Clauses of the Constitution to try to expand their power: the Commerce Clause and the General Welfare Clause. The General Welfare Clause mentions "promoting the general welfare". This to a liberal means taxing the rich at increased rates and redistributing that money. The Commerce Clause, on the other hand, says that Congress has the power to regulate trade with foreign nations, between the states and with the Indian tribes. Since the days of FDR this Clause has been interpreted very loosely and has resulted in the federal government expanding its power. The latest example is The Affordable Care Act (ACA), better know as Obamacare. In the ACA, the liberals justify the individual mandate by saying it regulates commerce between the states.

The decline in liberal principles can be illustrated by how Franklin Delano Roosevelt opposed and condemned public sector unions, stating that the idea of collective bargaining can't be transferred from the private to the public sector, as that would result in the government being unable to carry out its duties. Yet today, decades later, Democrats and liberals are in lock-step with public sector unions, as they "donate" money to the reelection campaign in exchange for more taxpayer money in their wallets and fluffed up pensions.

Current dictionaries describe the liberal ideology by pretending that a liberal is "a person who favors a political philosophy of progress and reform and the protection of civil liberties" or "a person who favors an economic theory of laissez-faire and self-regulating markets,"[10] or "open-minded or tolerant, especially free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc." or "favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties."[11] In practical usage, the term "liberal" is more closely synonymous with "radical," "immoral," "anti-freedom," or "bad."

if (window.showTocToggle) { var tocShowText = "show"; var tocHideText = "hide"; showTocToggle(); }

For more information please see: Liberals and uncharitableness and Atheism and charity

In March of 2008, George Will wrote at RealClearPolitics concerning the United States:

Sixteen months ago, Arthur C. Brooks, a professor at Syracuse University, published "Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism." The surprise is that liberals are markedly less charitable than conservatives....

If many conservatives are liberals who have been mugged by reality, Brooks, a registered independent, is, as a reviewer of his book said, a social scientist who has been mugged by data. They include these findings:

-- Although liberal families' incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).

-- Conservatives also donate more time and give more blood.[13]

Atheists and agnostics often reject Biblical morality (and therefore conservative Christianity ) and hold to moral relativism.[14] Therefore, it is not surprising that per capita atheists and agnostics in America give significantly less to charity than theists even when church giving is not counted for theists.[8][9][10]

The political magazine the American Spectator featured an article which focused on liberal politicians and uncharitableness exposing the hypocrisy of the liberal politicians it featured.[15]

In addition, Barack Obama has been criticized concerning his lack of charitable giving.

See also: Liberal Christianity and marital infidelity and Liberal Christianity

According to a 2007 study reported in the Journal of Family Issues, adherents of liberal Christianity are more likely to engage in marital infidelity than theologically conservative Christians.[16]

As noted above, liberals are more likely to adhere to evolutionary belief than conservatives. A study conducted by the Australian National University, revealed that belief in evolution is associated with moral permissiveness.[17]

See also: Liberalism and bestiality

Bestiality is the act of engaging in sexual relations with an animal. The atheist philosopher Peter Singer defends the practice of bestiality (as well as abortion, infanticide and euthanasia)[19]. Despite holding these immoral views the liberal and pro-evolution academic establishment rewarded his views with a bioethics chair at Princeton University (Princeton University is a very liberal school - see: Liberalism and bestiality).[20] Peter Singer was installed as the Ira W. DeCamp Professor of Bioethics at the University Center for Human Values at Princeton University in 1999 and in 2006 it was reported that he still worked part-time in that capacity. [21] In 2006, it was also reported that Singer worked part-time as Laureate Professor at the University of Melbourne in the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics since 2005.[22]

Joe Carter's First Things article entitled The Dangerous Mind declares concerning Peter Singer declared:

Singer has spent a lifetime justifying the unjustifiable. He is the founding father of the animal liberation movement and advocates ending “the present speciesist bias against taking seriously the interests of nonhuman animals.” He is also a defender of killing the aged (if they have dementia), newborns (for almost any reason until they are two years old), necrophilia (assuming it’s consensual), and bestiality (also assuming it’s consensual).[23]

On October 5, 2011, the British newspaper The Telegraph wrote an article which discussed how homosexuality "rights" have emboldened individuals to ask for so called bestiality "rights" (see: Homosexuality and bestiality).[24]

In 2010, the liberal state of Washington has the highest number of reported cases of bestiality in the United States even though it was merely the 13th most populous state according to the 2010 United States census. (for more information please see: Washington state and bestiality).[25][26][27]

In 2005, four legislators in the liberal state of Massachusetts tried to soften its bestiality laws.[28]

The Bible says that bestiality is a perversion and, under the Old Testament Jewish Law, punishable by death (Exodus 22:19, Leviticus 18:23, Leviticus 20:15 and Deuteronomy 27:21). The atheistic worldview does not lend itself to the establishment of morality within society and individuals (see: Atheism and morality and Atheism and deception). The atheistic worldview does not lend itself to the establishment of morality within society and individuals (see: Atheism and morality and Atheism and deception).

A study found that "Psychiatric patients were found to have a statistically significant higher prevalence rate (55%) of bestiality than the control groups (10% and 15% respectively)."[30] The atheist population has a higher suicide rate and lower marriage rates than the general population (see: Atheism and suicide and Atheism and marriageability and Atheism and health).

For more information please see:

See also: Occupy Wall Street and bestiality chant

Bestiality is the act of engaging in sexual relations with an animal. A crowd at Occupy Wall Street was led to repeat various chants which included a chant involving bestiality and the incident was videotaped.[31]

Below is an excerpt of the chant:

Everything seems to be possible. [Crowd Parrot Chant] You can travel to the moon. [CPC] You can become immortal [CPC] by biogenetics. You can have sex with animals, or whatever. [CPC].[32]

The Wall Street Journal reported: "A comprehensive new study released by Baylor University, shows that traditional Christian religion greatly decreases belief in everything from the efficacy of palm readers to the usefulness of astrology. [33]

Also, in September of 2008, the Wall Street Journal reported:

The reality is that the New Atheist campaign, by discouraging religion, won't create a new group of intelligent, skeptical, enlightened beings. Far from it: It might actually encourage new levels of mass superstition. And that's not a conclusion to take on faith — it's what the empirical data tell us.

"What Americans Really Believe," a comprehensive new study released by Baylor University yesterday, shows that traditional Christian religion greatly decreases belief in everything from the efficacy of palm readers to the usefulness of astrology. It also shows that the irreligious and the members of more liberal Protestant denominations, far from being resistant to superstition, tend to be much more likely to believe in the paranormal and in pseudoscience, such as evolution than evangelical Christians....

This is not a new finding. In his 1983 book "The Whys of a Philosophical Scrivener," skeptic and science writer Martin Gardner cited the decline of traditional religious belief among the better educated as one of the causes for an increase in pseudoscience, cults and superstition. He referenced a 1980 study published in the magazine Skeptical Inquirer that showed irreligious college students to be by far the most likely to embrace paranormal beliefs, while born-again Christian college students were the least likely.[34]

Democrats and most media outlets in the U.S. are blatantly liberal.[35] Liberalism in North America today practices three primary tactics to attack the Republican Party, and sometimes to attack American values in general. These three liberal tactics can be pronounced using the following acronym: SIN. Liberals (1) shift the subject, they (2) ignore the facts, and they (3) name call.[36][37]

Liberals typically support a "mixed" economy, a policy similar to that of fascism. [38] There's another goal, from my point of view, which is to try to lay the groundwork for a radical political force which would conceive of itself as distinctly to the left of moderate, reformist American liberals. And that has two aspects. One is to try to change that liberalism, to transform it by analysis, critique, and activism; the second is to build a radical movement which would be an autonomous force in its own right, which would be distinct from the traditional American liberal consensus. This radical part of the program involves not simply supporting the liberal students against conservative students and conservative professors, but trying to act on them, to push them to the left. It also involves trying to find and support, even trying to help create, networks of radical students in law school and of radical professors around the country — students and teachers who see themselves as wanting to go a lot further than most people want to go. [39]

The National Journal compiles the votes of each congress member each year and uses the information to create rankings[40] of how liberal each member of the United States Congress is. In addition to showing the voting records of each member and given an overall all ranking of liberalness, the National Journal also ranks congress members by liberalness in the areas of social, economic, and foreign policy.

See also: American atheism and Decline of atheism and Global atheism

Due to the explosive growth of global Christianity in traditional cultures and their influence on Western Christianity and the higher birth rate of conservative Christians and religious conservatives, social conservatism is expected to rise.

The Birkbeck College, University of London professor Eric Kaufman wrote in his 2010 book Shall the Righteous Inherit the Earth? concerning America:

High evangelical fertility rates more than compensated for losses to liberal Protestant sects during the twentieth century. In recent decades, white secularism has surged, but Latino and Asian religious immigration has taken up the slack, keeping secularism at bay. Across denominations, the fertility advantage of religious fundamentalists of all colours is significant and growing. After 2020, their demographic weight will to tip the balance in the culture wars towards the conservative side, ramping up pressure on hot-button issues such as abortion. By the end of the century, three quarters of America may be pro-life. Their activism will leap over the borders of the 'Redeemer Nation' to evangelize the world. Already, the rise of the World Congress of Families has launched a global religious right, its arms stretching across the bloody lines of the War on Terror to embrace the entire Abrahamic family.[41]

In Europe, on the other hand, parties that call themselves liberal are moderate in outlook, ranging from centre-left to centre-right, promote typically economic and business freedom. The Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe[42] is a party of the European Parliament that represents most liberal parties from European countries. Similar policies are promoted by many liberal parties throughout the world,[43] such as the Liberal Party of Australia.[44]

Trade unions and socialist parties often criticize politicians for promoting lower taxes on business, or more flexible hiring and firing laws, by calling them "liberals" or neoliberals. Thus, just as in the US, "liberal" may occasionally be used as a term of abuse. But when someone is called "liberal" in Europe, it has an entirely different meaning than in the US. In fact, the US meaning of liberal is more similar to the politics of European socialist or social democratic parties.[45]

In history, the word "liberal" has meant different things at different times, and was associated with individual liberty in prior centuries. In the postwar period, liberals supported government intervention in the economy and welfare state policies, as well as peaceful coexistence with the communist block, which are not liberal policies in the sense of classical liberalism. After the end of the cold war, with the demise of socialism and communism, many liberals embraced some ideas from economic neo-liberalism, and coined it the "Third Way". In the area of national security and foreign policy liberals in the U.S. failed to define a consistent stance, even after the events of 9/11 and the beginning of the war in Iraq. Liberals generally support affirmative action, gay marriage, and abortion.[46]

Liberalism is a political philosophy with freedom as its core value. The term was originally applied to supporters of individual liberties and equal rights, but, in America, the term has come to represent a movement of social change that often conflicts with conservative values such as moral values and traditions derived from Northern European Protestantism.

See Classical Liberalism. Compare Libertarianism.

See also: Infamous liberals

Source: The Politix Group

"I never use the words Democrats and Republicans. It's liberals and Americans." -James Watt, Secretary of the Interior under Ronald Reagan

? http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1042/winds-of-political-change-havent--shifted-publics-ideology-balance? http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs? http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs? http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs? The Warren Court, led by liberal Justices William O. Douglas, Hugo Black, Abe Fortas, William Brennan and Chief Justice Earl Warren issued 36 decisions granting First Amendment rights to obscenity and pornography. These decisions remain fully supported by liberals today.? http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs? Democrats Aim To Kill Abstinence-Only Program Funding, Fox News, Monday, June 25, 2007? and environmental organizations, for example Greenpeace? For example, the liberal wing of the U.S. Supreme Court issued the 5-4 Kelo v. City of New London decision authorizing the taking of private property by government in order to give the property to another private entity rather than convert it to a public use.? http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=liberal&sub=Search+WordNet&o2=&o0=1&o7=&o5=&o1=1&o6=&o4=&o3=&h=00? http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/liberal? http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html? http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html? http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=BarnaUpdate&BarnaUpdateID=152? http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=1c5_1238044128&c=1? Are There Religious Variations in Marital Infidelity?? Morals decline linked to evolution? ? ? ? The Basis of a Christian Worldview? The Basis of a Christian Worldview? The Dangerous Mind by Joe Carter, First Things? The dark side of sexual freedom: American 'zoophiles' take on the language of equality - October 5, 2011 - The Telegraph? Pet Abuse -2010? 2010 United States Census data? 2011 Political map - CNN? [Massachusetts bill to repeal fornication, adultery, and blasphemy, and to soften bestiality laws]? Study Finds TV Treats Marital Sex as Burdensome, Adultery as Positive? A prevalence study of bestiality (zoophilia) in psychiatric in-patients, medical in-patients, and psychiatric staff - Int J Psychosom. 1991;38(1-4):45-7.? The 10 Greatest Moments From The Occupy Wall Street Protests So Far? The 10 Greatest Moments From The Occupy Wall Street Protests So Far? [1]? http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178219865054585.html? Media Bias basics. Media Research Center.? Scott Baker. Did Herman Cain Give the ‘Don’t Miss’ Speech at CPAC?, The Blaze, February 12, 2011.? YouTube. Herman Cain: "Stupid People Are Ruining America", February 11, 2011.? Video discussion about how modern liberalism is actually fascist by author Jonah Goldberg..? Liberal Values in Legal Education Duncan Kennedy (professor at Harvard Law School)? http://nationaljournal.com/voteratings/index.htm? Why are 2012 and 2020 key years for Christian creationists and pro-lifers?? http://www.alde.eu? http://www.liberal-international.org/? [2]? [3]? "Political liberals tend, for whatever reason, to be ardent supporters of both gay rights and pro-choice programs." Greenberg and Bailey [4] ? http://s151.photobucket.com/albums/s151/candypop_02/Serial%20Killers/John%20Wayne%20Gacy/?action=view¤t=SERIAL_KILLER_John_Wayne_Gacy_In-1.mp4? http://www.digitaljournal.com/image/45527

View the original article here

Liberal Christianity and marital infidelity

(Difference between revisions)In July of 2000, [[Creation Ministries International]] reported:In July of 2000, [[Creation Ministries International]] reported:{{cquote|For years, many people have scoffed at any suggestion that the evils in society could be linked with the teaching of the theory of evolution. But new research has confirmed what Bible-believers have known all along—that the rising acceptance of Darwin’s theory is related to declining morality in the community.{{cquote|For years, many people have scoffed at any suggestion that the evils in society could be linked with the teaching of the theory of evolution. But new research has confirmed what Bible-believers have known all along—that the rising acceptance of Darwin’s theory is related to declining morality in the community.

According to a 2007 study reported in the Journal of Family Issues, adherents of liberal Christianity are more likely to engage in marital infidelity than theologically conservative Christians.[1]

Liberal Christianity also embraces the evolutionary paradigm (see also: Evolution and liberalism).

In July of 2000, Creation Ministries International reported:

For years, many people have scoffed at any suggestion that the evils in society could be linked with the teaching of the theory of evolution. But new research has confirmed what Bible-believers have known all along—that the rising acceptance of Darwin’s theory is related to declining morality in the community.

The research survey of 1535 people, conducted by the Australian National University, revealed that belief in evolution is associated with moral permissiveness. Darwin himself apparently feared that belief in evolution by the common man would lead to social decay. The survey showed that people who believed in evolution were more likely to be in favour of premarital sex than those who rejected Darwin’s theory. Another issue which highlighted the contrast between the effect of evolutionary ideas and that of biblical principles was that Darwinians were reported to be ‘especially tolerant’ of abortion.

In identifying the primary factors determining these differences in community attitudes, the author of the research report, Dr Jonathan Kelley, said: ‘The single most important influence after church attendance is the theory of evolution.’[2]

? Are There Religious Variations in Marital Infidelity?? Morals decline linked to evolution

View the original article here

Liberal Christianity

(Difference between revisions)According to a 2007 study reported in the ''Journal of Family Issues'', adherents of [[liberal Christianity]] are more likely to engage in marital infidelity than theologically conservative Christians.[http://www.sagepub.com/hillhsstudy/articles/Chapter10_Article%2001.pdf Are There Religious Variations in Marital Infidelity?]  According to a 2007 study reported in the ''Journal of Family Issues'', adherents of [[liberal Christianity]] are more likely to engage in marital infidelity than theologically conservative Christians.[http://www.sagepub.com/hillhsstudy/articles/Chapter10_Article%2001.pdf Are There Religious Variations in Marital Infidelity?]  == Liberal Christianity, Darwinism and sexual immorality ===== Liberal Christianity, Darwinism and sexual immorality ===Liberal Christianity also embraces the [[evolution]]ary [[paradigm]] (see also: [[Evolution and liberalism]]).  Liberal Christianity also embraces the [[evolution]]ary [[paradigm]] (see also: [[Evolution and liberalism]]).  In identifying the primary factors determining these differences in community attitudes, the author of the research report, Dr Jonathan Kelley, said: ‘The single most important influence after church attendance is the theory of evolution.’[http://creation.com/morals-decline-linked-to-belief-in-evolution Morals decline linked to evolution]}}In identifying the primary factors determining these differences in community attitudes, the author of the research report, Dr Jonathan Kelley, said: ‘The single most important influence after church attendance is the theory of evolution.’[http://creation.com/morals-decline-linked-to-belief-in-evolution Morals decline linked to evolution]}}== Demographics and waning future influence of American liberal Christianity ==== Demographics and waning future influence of American liberal Christianity ==

Liberal Christianity or Theological Modernism is a broad term which basically refers to a movement within American Protestant denominations to stress the social role of Christianity, as in the Social Gospel of the early 20th century. This movement is characterized by a lack of emphasis on or denial of the plenary Divine inspiration and authority of the Bible, and commitment to doctrinal purity. Prevalent Biblical themes such as repentance from personal moral sin, hell and damnation for those who reject Christ, His blood atonement and His future literal reign are minimized, or militated against. In 1937, H. Richard Niebuhr summarized their basic gospel message as preaching that "A God without wrath brought men without sin into a kingdom without judgment through the ministrations of a Christ without a Cross."[1][2]

Theologically, Liberal Christianity stresses a basic continuity between man and God, emphasizing the immanence of God rather than His transcendence. It tends to see religious knowledge emerging from research and the use of reason, as superior to Biblical revelation. Thus the liberal idea of religion as a personal relationship with God is one which is not necessarily bound to a Biblical doctrinal basis. This stands in in contrast to salvation resulting from faith in the Biblically substantiated gospel of grace, and in conformity with orthodox theological beliefs.

if (window.showTocToggle) { var tocShowText = "show"; var tocHideText = "hide"; showTocToggle(); }

The most influential liberal Christian theologians were 19th century Germans: Friedrich Schleiermacher and Albrecht Ritschl.

Schleiermacher emphasized that religion was a personal relationship with God, and downplayed historical Christian doctrines such as the doctrine of creation, doctrine of Incarnation, doctrine of eternal life, etc.

Schleiermacher sought to re-establish the importance of Christianity using Christian religious experience rather than scientific knowledge. Ritschl revised Schleirmacher's idea and tried to re-establish their authority using Kant's idea of moral experience and in the fulfillment of the Kingdom of God. [3]

Doctrines that did not relate well to religious experience or moral experience tended to disappear.

Liberals view the Bible as the witness of God rather than the word of God. Strangely the view looks for support by a type of literal interpretation — though this should not be confused with the form of Biblical literalism found in fundamentalist and conservative churches — of the words of Paul in his second letter to Timothy:

All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,... 2_Timothy 3:16

Here some see Paul conveying that that scripture is a direct result of the authors contact with God ("witness"), whilst stopping short of claiming actual divine authorship ("word"). Conservative Christians would answer that Paul states here that the words which make up scripture are God-breathed, and that the Bible records God's promise to preserve His words, not merely His ideas.[4][5]

As a result Liberal Theologians view the Bible as a text to be interpreted in its historical context but through liberal critical analysis.[6] As a result, many hold that texts such as Genesis’ early chapters or Old Testament miracles are poetry or fables — having a message, but not to be taken literally (in spite of thew New Testament referring to such as literal events).[7] This approach began to dominate most Protestant denominations in the early 1900's, and was challenged by Neo Orthodoxy and Fundamentalism after 1940. Examples today include some churches within Anglican/Episcopalian, Lutheran, Methodist, Presbyterian, and United Church of Christ churches.[8] The word "liberal" in liberal Christianity does not refer to any political agenda or set of beliefs, although liberal theological beliefs will often form the basis of liberal political beliefs.

In addition, liberal Christians are seen taking an unwarranted pick-and-choose approach to the Bible, declaring that passages which they favor were intended by God to be followed today, while other parts are outdated or need to be reinterpreted, in order to conform with current trends. As needed, the spirit of the Bible is emphasized in such a way that its specific wording can be ignored or negated. As Machen comments,

Admitting that scientific objections may arise against the particularities of the Christian religion—against the Christian doctrines of the person of Christ, and of redemption through His death and resurrection—the liberal theologian seeks to rescue certain of the general principles of religion, of which these particularities are thought to be mere temporary symbols, and these general principles he regards as constituting "the essence of Christianity.[9]

Rather than the Bible being wholly inspired by God, many liberal Christians believe that the Bible was the work of numerous editorial redactors[10][11] — homophobic ones in cases where pro-homosexual writers wish to see homoeroticism positively portrayed between Bible characters — or even that certain parts of the Bible that do not agree with liberal theology are later additions that do not belong in the Bible at all.[12] In extreme cases, some liberal Christians even engage in politically correct censorship against those who quote Bible verses that tend to disprove a liberal Christian position. It may also esteem other books as works of God as well as the Bible. Some liberal Christians argue that correct Christian doctrine is whatever each individual believer deems it to be.

Most of those within mainline denominations evidence beliefs and its effects which are at variance with Biblically based historical Christian faith.[13] Two issues usually indicative of liberal denominations are support for abortion and homosexuality. For a more detailed treatment, see Homosexuality and Christianity.

In terms of economics, liberal Christianity emphasizes Testament eschatology towards the Kingdom of God into the liberal "law of progress." History does indeed show a growing maturity in technology, thought, and social relations, but conservatives argue there is nothing within the forces of history to suggest that good will triumph over evil. Conservatives say liberals deemphasize sin, i.e. evil triumphing over good.[14]

The Liberal Christian scholar Edgar S. Brightman said, "I believe in God because I believe that history represents a steady, moral progress." This was turned around by the neo-orthodox scholar Langdon Gilkey when he stated "I believe in God because to me history precisely does not represent such a progress."[15]

Strong elements in liberal Christianity have opposed Zionism since 1920, while at the same time combating intolerance and social hostility toward Jews inside the United States. Support for Zionism is a core belief of Fundamentaliam.

In American Protestantism and a Jewish State (1973) an Israeli government official Hertzel Fishman analyzed several years (1937-1967) worth of Christian Century and concluded that the magazine consistently and historically opposed a Jewish State in Palestine, obstructed immigration of Jewish refugees, minimized the Holocaust, tried to reduce Israel's boundaries and supported Arab 'rights'." Although Dr. Fishman found instances of the magazine denouncing individual acts of anti-semitism, he found that the magazine was consistent in its intolerance and opposition to collective acts of a Jewish "peoplehood."[16]

Espousing a liberal view of Christianity invalidates a person's Christian witness. If a self-proclaimed Christian does not take the entire Bible seriously, unbelievers will assume that they need not do so, either.

The first-quarter 20th century neo-orthodoxy movement was a renewal of Christian doctrines that had been neglected by liberal Christianity within the American and European academy. At the heart of the neo-orthodox renewal appeals to symbolic and aesthetic interpretations of long forgotten Christian doctrines can be found in the works of Karl Barth, the Niebuhr brothers, and Paul Tillich.

See also: Liberal Christianity and marital infidelity

According to a 2007 study reported in the Journal of Family Issues, adherents of liberal Christianity are more likely to engage in marital infidelity than theologically conservative Christians.[17]

Liberal Christianity also embraces the evolutionary paradigm (see also: Evolution and liberalism).

In July of 2000, Creation Ministries International reported:

For years, many people have scoffed at any suggestion that the evils in society could be linked with the teaching of the theory of evolution. But new research has confirmed what Bible-believers have known all along—that the rising acceptance of Darwin’s theory is related to declining morality in the community.

The research survey of 1535 people, conducted by the Australian National University, revealed that belief in evolution is associated with moral permissiveness. Darwin himself apparently feared that belief in evolution by the common man would lead to social decay. The survey showed that people who believed in evolution were more likely to be in favour of premarital sex than those who rejected Darwin’s theory. Another issue which highlighted the contrast between the effect of evolutionary ideas and that of biblical principles was that Darwinians were reported to be ‘especially tolerant’ of abortion.

In identifying the primary factors determining these differences in community attitudes, the author of the research report, Dr Jonathan Kelley, said: ‘The single most important influence after church attendance is the theory of evolution.’[18]

See also: American atheism and Global Christianity

The Birkbeck College, University of London professor Eric Kaufman wrote in his 2010 book Shall the Righteous Inherit the Earth? concerning America:

High evangelical fertility rates more than compensated for losses to liberal Protestant sects during the twentieth century. In recent decades, white secularism has surged, but Latino and Asian religious immigration has taken up the slack, keeping secularism at bay. Across denominations, the fertility advantage of religious fundamentalists of all colours is significant and growing. After 2020, their demographic weight will begin to tip the balance in the culture wars towards the conservative side, ramping up pressure on hot-button issues such as abortion. By the end of the century, three quarters of America may be pro-life. Their activism will leap over the borders of the 'Redeemer Nation' to evangelize the world. Already, the rise of the World Congress of Families has launched a global religious right, its arms stretching across the bloody lines of the War on Terror to embrace the entire Abrahamic family.[19]

Christianity is the world's largest religion and it has seen tremendous growth over its 2000 year history.[21] Christianity has recently seen explosive growth outside the Western World which often has cultures which are very traditional and conservative.[22] In 2000, there were twice as many non-Western Christians as Western Christians.[23] In 2005, there were four times as many non-Western Christians as there were Western World Christians.[24] There are now more non-Western missionaries than Western missionaries.[25]

In 2011, the American Spectator declared concerning research published in the International Bulletin of Missionary Research:

The report estimates about 80,000 new Christians every day, 79,000 new Muslims every day, and 300 fewer atheists every day. These atheists are presumably disproportionately represented in the West, while religion is thriving in the Global South, where charismatic Christianity is exploding."[26]

see also: Internet evangelism and Atheist population

It is thought that given the increase in the availability of public's access to global communications that the more theologically conservative non-Western Christianity could influence Western Christianity to move into more theologically conservative direction.[27] For example, non-Western Anglicans are exerting influence in the worldwide Anglican communion as far as the Anglican Communion's policy concerning homosexuality.[28][29]

Ahlstrom, Sydney E. A Religious History of the American People. (1972), the standard scholarly history. Excerpt and text search Luker, Ralph E. "Liberal Theology and Social Conservatism: a Southern Tradition, 1840-1920." Church History v 10#2 1981. pp 193-207 p online edition Marty, Martin E. Modern American Religion, Vol. 1: The Irony of It All, 1893-1919 (1986); Modern American Religion. Vol. 2: The Noise of Conflict, 1919-1941 (1991) Noll, Mark. A History of Christianity in the United States and Canada (1992), by a conservative historian. Excerpt and text search Machen, J. Gresham (1881-1937), Presbyterian theologian. Christianity and Liberalism (1923). Online edition M. James Sawyer, Liberalism. Web page ? The Kingdom of God in America (1937), New York: Harper and Row, 1959, p. 193? http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=15-09-011-c? Langdon Gilkey, Naming the Whirlwind: The Renewal of God-Language, (1969), 73, 74, and 75? God's promise to preserve His Word? All Scripture Is Given By Inspiration? http://home.earthlink.net/~gbl111/liberalism.htm? http://www.gotquestions.org/liberal-Christian-theology.html? What Liberal Protestants Believe Beliefnet. Accessed 15 March 2008? J. Gresham Machen, Christianity and Liberalism; Introduction? Documentary Hypothesis? http://www.ukapologetics.net/docu.htm? Is it true that 1 John 5:7...?? Revealing Statistics: Differences Between Denominations? Basic idea for this paragraph is from April 26, 1939 The Christian Century, Reinhold Niebuhr, "Ten Years That Shook My World", pages 542-546 ? Washingtonpost Obit of Langdon Gilkey ? [http://books.google.com/books?id=-BPjHQAACAAJ David A. Rausch, Zionism Within Early American Fundamentalism 1878-1918: A Convergence of Two Traditions (1979) pp 23-25 ? Are There Religious Variations in Marital Infidelity?? Morals decline linked to evolution? Why are 2012 and 2020 key years for Christian creationists and pro-lifers?? Is Christianity taking over the planet?? 2000 YEARS OF CHRISTIAN INCREASE? ? Is Christianity taking over the planet?? Is Christianity taking over the planet?? Is Christianity taking over the planet?? Thriving Christianity? http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=18774? http://www.maravipost.com/malawi-politics/district/5751-bishop-mw-anglicans-totally-against-homosexuality.html? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2156406/Anglican-church-schism-declared-over-homosexuality.html

View the original article here