Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Liberals love the sin and hate the sinner

  1. #1
    Elite Member JamieElizabeth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    San Jose, California, United States
    Posts
    2,895

    Default Liberals love the sin and hate the sinner


    Liberals love the sin and hate the sinner
    By Star Parker
    Monday, September 10, 2007

    Star Parker is a regular commentator on CNN, MSNBC, and FOX News as well as author of White Ghetto: How Middle Class America Reflects Inner City Decay.
    Be the first to read Star Parker's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.







    Coverage by the mainstream media of the Larry Craig scandal confirms again that liberals love the sin and hate the sinner. They've got both the Idaho senator and the conservative values that he has supported in their crosshairs.
    Perhaps it's relevant to take a moment and recall that the need for biblical guidance comes from the proclivity to sin. You don't need a map if you're hardwired to know where you're going.





    But, for those on the left, a map isn't necessary because it doesn't matter where we are going. For them, a man going astray is proof that having a destination, and rules for getting there, is hypocrisy. The problem is not the fallen man but having rules to begin with.
    Typical is Newsweek's Jonathan Alter, who writes with ironic sanctimony about GOP claims to moral superiority. Alter can hardly contain his glee at the prospect that the Craig scandal will undermine the family-values agenda of conservative Republicans. He goes on, with great haste, to write its obituary.
    "In the long term, though, the end of the family-values agenda may be a blessing in disguise for the GOP. It has tied its fortunes too closely to evangelical Christians ..."
    But what does Craig's personal behavior have to do with the validity and relevance of traditional values?
    Might we recall a basic rule of logic that points to the fallacy of the ad hominem argument? The issue is the substance and truth of the argument and not the person making it.
    Let's consider the relevance of traditional values as a practical matter and see where the most damaging hypocrisy lies.
    Democratic politicians, who now are quietly luxuriating in the Craig scandal and Republican Party woes, will tell us that what they're about is fairness, income gaps, two Americas and the poor.
    Now suppose that the family values that they are so anxious to usher out the door are key to addressing these very issues that Democrats claim to be their concern.
    In fact, they are.
    The Census Bureau has just released its latest data on poverty in America. The intimate connection between family structure and poverty is undeniable.
    Five percent of homes headed by married couples are poor. Over 35 percent of homes, seven times as many, headed by single mothers are poor.
    Data, as reported by Douglas Besharov of the American Enterprise Institute, show that, in 2005, the average income for all American families with children under age 18 was $56,793. For those households headed by a married couple, the average income was $71,010. For those households headed by single women, the average income was $26,705.
    The most healthy and prosperous American families are those in which traditional values are intact.
    In an article in the latest issue of Commentary Magazine, Lawrence Mead, a professor of politics at New York University and author of seven books on poverty and welfare reform, surveys thinking over the last 50 years about the causes of poverty and concludes:
    "Although impediments to working may still affect some people, poverty is overwhelmingly a result of dysfunctional patterns of life. Families are poor in America in 2007 typically because unmarried parents have children and then do not work regularly to support them. ... It has become difficult to avoid the conclusion that serious poverty in America is rooted in the culture of the poor."
    It's not news that poverty is disproportionately high among blacks. At 25 percent, the incidence of black poverty is double the national average.
    Corresponding with this are disproportionately high black out-of-wedlock births and homes headed by single women.
    When Daniel Moynihan wrote his famous report in 1965 identifying the warning signs of the breakdown of the black family, black out-of-wedlock births were a third of what they are today.
    Do family values matter? You bet they do.
    They may be a matter of principle for conservative Republicans. But they are a matter of life and death to America's poor and particularly to America's poor blacks.
    Whatever Larry Craig was doing in a men's room in the Minneapolis airport has little to do with the relevance of these truths and their importance in our country today.
    Democrats and the left may enjoy exploiting Craig's misfortunes and using this incident to try and undermine the traditional-values agenda that he supported for 20 years in the U.S. Senate.
    But by so doing, they hurt this country and the very communities that they claim to want to help. So, then, where does the most damaging hypocrisy really lie?

    Townhall.com::Liberals love the sin and hate the sinner::By Star Parker

    Last edited by JamieElizabeth; September 11th, 2007 at 06:06 PM. Reason: double article

  2. #2
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,372

    Default

    Hooray, another dumbass article by some neocon who just doesn't get it.

    LIBERALS HATE WHEN SANCTIMONIOUS NEOCON RETARDS PREACH HATE AND INTOLERANCE, AND THEN GET CAUGHT DOING EXACTLY WHAT THEY WERE BITCHING ABOUT.

    How can you preach about family values when you have none yourself? It's hypocrisy. The entire gamut of "family values" is utter horseshit anyway, it's just a stupid facade, a beaver cleaver fairy tale that nobody lives up to.

    Hell, most conservatives don't even try! Which states have the highest incidents of abortion, murder, infidelity and divorce? The so called red conservative states.

    The difference between Liberals and conservatives is this:

    Liberals know people do these things and acknowledge that it happens, has always happened, and WILL always happen and incorporate it into daily life because it's not going to smply 'go away' or be repressed.

    Conservatives stick their fucking heads in the sand, only acknowledge that these things happen when they need something to bitch about, and pretend they don't do them until they're caught red handed, and then they bleat about "forgiveness".

    Liberals deal with issues, conservatives pretend they dont exist until caught doing them.

    conservatives are hypocrites. period.
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  3. #3
    Gold Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    1,190

    Default

    Wow, biased article. Or, just not my bias I guess. And I agree with the above post, entirely.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 13
    Last Post: September 6th, 2007, 04:07 PM
  2. Married With Children: Love it or hate it?
    By DitaPage* in forum Television and Movies
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: March 21st, 2007, 05:19 PM
  3. Rachael Ray, hate her or love her?
    By CherryDarling in forum Food and Cuisine
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: February 8th, 2007, 03:34 AM
  4. Replies: 13
    Last Post: June 8th, 2006, 03:00 PM
  5. Replies: 6
    Last Post: March 24th, 2006, 01:52 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •