Canadianskibum1
Member
The scorn and vitriol heaped upon President Bush by his detractors during the three years plus of his presidency go far beyond political disagreements over how to best answer the pressing needs of the nation. There is little doubt that the president elicits a genuine and personal hatred from his critics, not only in this country but abroad as well. The question is, why?
In a strange dichotomy, President Bush is arguably one of the most decent men to have ever occupied the White House. He rarely has an unkind word to say about his critics even when they go after him with swords drawn. Insiders in the White House have nothing but good things to say about him and he comes from a respected, religious family that has endured decades of public life with nary a hint of scandal.
President Bush lifted himself up from an impetuous youth to the highest office in the land in no small part due to the mentoring of evangelist Billy Graham—one of the most admired men in the world—and his personal faith is a cornerstone in his life. This story alone should be the source of great praise and admiration, not derision. So why then is there so much hatred for George Bush?
Although some may say the hatred stems from the controversy over the Florida vote during the 2000 election, the reality is that the final analysis of the vote shows that George Bush won the election under any conceivable recount circumstance. Actually, the Gore campaign can be more faulted for its attempt to manipulate the Florida vote by insisting on a recount limited to three heavily Democrat counties.
Whether it is opposition toward some domestic political issue, his handling of the war on terror, or the war in Iraq, none can rationally account for the intensity of personal hatred leveled at President Bush as he seeks reelection. The answer to the “why,� is really part of an issue that simmers just below the surface but nonetheless evokes a level of hatred—and fear—that can only be understood in the context of the conflict between enduring truth and spiritless relativism. That is, a clash between two mutually exclusive worldviews—one driven by religious faith and the other driven by secular humanism.
Former Clinton labor secretary, Robert Reich, put this clash of worldviews in clear perspective in his July 1, 2004article entitled “Bush’s God,� which was published in The American Prospect. The article complains about a Bush campaign strategy that is designed to reach out to persons of faith. Mr. Reich says in part:
'In its eagerness to promote the teaching of creationism in public schools, encourage school prayer, support anti-sodomy statutes, ban abortions, bar gay marriage, limit the use of stem cells, reduce access to contraceptives, and advance the idea of America as a 'Christian nation,' the Bush administration has done more to politicize religion than any administration in recent American history…'
'The great conflict of the 21st century may be between the West and terrorism. But terrorism is a tactic, not a belief. The underlying battle will be between modern civilization and anti-modernist fanatics; between those who believe in the primacy of the individual and those who believe that human beings owe blind allegiance to a higher authority; between those who give priority to life in this world and those who believe that human life is no more than preparation for an existence beyond life; between those who believe that truth is revealed solely through scripture and religious dogma, and those who rely primarily on science, reason, and logic. Terrorism will disrupt and destroy lives. But terrorism is not the only danger we face.'
What nonsense! What about “Bush’s God' is Mr Reich so afraid of? In essence, Mr. Reich is saying that “Bush’s God� is more of a threat to modern civilization than fanatical terrorism. His description of the issues at risk because of the president’s faith—sodomy, abortion, gay marriage, embryonic stem cell research, and contraceptives—reveals that little imagination is needed to see that sexual liberation is at the heart of the clash between the opposing worldviews.
With sexual liberation as the goal, there is no doubt that homosexual affirmation is the instrument being used to undermine the values associated with “Bush’s God.� Hedonistic secularists realize that the legitimization of homosexuality—particularly legalization of gay marriage—is a dagger into the heart of the Christian faith and the institutions that shelter its values.
President Bush’s adherence to the principles of his faith represents a formidable obstacle to victory. That is the reason why he is at once hated and also feared, for as St. Paul said, the believer has “the aroma of death,� to the perishing. Therefore, his removal from the presidency must be accomplished at all costs. To accomplish this goal, the president’s detractors have mounted a fierce, personal attack on him through dozens of recently published books, several movies, numerous commentaries, and by a heavily imbalanced popular media.
Additionally, Mr. Reich suggests that the president is an “anti-modernist fanatic� and his religious views place him far out of the mainstream, but recent Gallup polls show the opposite: 68 percent of Americans favor teaching both creationism and evolution in the public schools; 78% of the American people favor a constitutional amendment to allow voluntary prayer in public schools; 68 % of the American people agree that partial-birth abortion should be banned; thirty-nine states have so far passed defense of marriage acts prohibiting gay marriage; and since the June 2003 decision by the Supreme Court that declared the Texas sodomy law unconstitutional, opposition to legalization of same-sex relations has increased to 49% compared to 43% who favor legalization.
One may debate Reich’s view that America should not be regarded as a “Christian nation,� but it should be pointed out that over 80 percent of the American people identify themselves as Christian; most of the founding fathers of our republic considered themselves Christians; and Christian-Judean values had a tremendous influence in the nation’s founding documents, laws, and rules of government. Although it is clear that the founding fathers avoided the establishment of a religious theocracy, it is equally clear there was no intent to insulate government from religious influence—and therein lies the rub.
Quite clearly, it has been the strategy of hedonic secularists to use homosexuality as a spearhead in its drive to marginalize the faith and infuse sexual freedom. To great extent, they have successfully invaded almost every institution in America with a message of acceptance toward sodomy as a lifestyle preference. Much of industry, government, media, and academia celebrate “gay pride,� require “gay� sensitivity training, offer domestic partner benefits, and prohibit contrary points of view.
It is readily apparent how important the infusion of unmitigated sexual “freedom� into the church and the culture is to the secularists, and why they are working so hard to defeat President Bush. A leader who believes in the existence of absolute truth, a president who seeks to apply his faith to his life, is a threat to a post-modern secularist in principle. In an age when the most grievous of sins is to interject your religious beliefs into the public debate, or to even have a strong belief in Anything at all, those in leadership positions who profess to know Truth set themselves up for fierce opposition.
WE TAKE THESE RISKS NOT TO ESCAPE LIFE, BUT SO THAT LIFE DOES NOT ESCAPE US
In a strange dichotomy, President Bush is arguably one of the most decent men to have ever occupied the White House. He rarely has an unkind word to say about his critics even when they go after him with swords drawn. Insiders in the White House have nothing but good things to say about him and he comes from a respected, religious family that has endured decades of public life with nary a hint of scandal.
President Bush lifted himself up from an impetuous youth to the highest office in the land in no small part due to the mentoring of evangelist Billy Graham—one of the most admired men in the world—and his personal faith is a cornerstone in his life. This story alone should be the source of great praise and admiration, not derision. So why then is there so much hatred for George Bush?
Although some may say the hatred stems from the controversy over the Florida vote during the 2000 election, the reality is that the final analysis of the vote shows that George Bush won the election under any conceivable recount circumstance. Actually, the Gore campaign can be more faulted for its attempt to manipulate the Florida vote by insisting on a recount limited to three heavily Democrat counties.
Whether it is opposition toward some domestic political issue, his handling of the war on terror, or the war in Iraq, none can rationally account for the intensity of personal hatred leveled at President Bush as he seeks reelection. The answer to the “why,� is really part of an issue that simmers just below the surface but nonetheless evokes a level of hatred—and fear—that can only be understood in the context of the conflict between enduring truth and spiritless relativism. That is, a clash between two mutually exclusive worldviews—one driven by religious faith and the other driven by secular humanism.
Former Clinton labor secretary, Robert Reich, put this clash of worldviews in clear perspective in his July 1, 2004article entitled “Bush’s God,� which was published in The American Prospect. The article complains about a Bush campaign strategy that is designed to reach out to persons of faith. Mr. Reich says in part:
'In its eagerness to promote the teaching of creationism in public schools, encourage school prayer, support anti-sodomy statutes, ban abortions, bar gay marriage, limit the use of stem cells, reduce access to contraceptives, and advance the idea of America as a 'Christian nation,' the Bush administration has done more to politicize religion than any administration in recent American history…'
'The great conflict of the 21st century may be between the West and terrorism. But terrorism is a tactic, not a belief. The underlying battle will be between modern civilization and anti-modernist fanatics; between those who believe in the primacy of the individual and those who believe that human beings owe blind allegiance to a higher authority; between those who give priority to life in this world and those who believe that human life is no more than preparation for an existence beyond life; between those who believe that truth is revealed solely through scripture and religious dogma, and those who rely primarily on science, reason, and logic. Terrorism will disrupt and destroy lives. But terrorism is not the only danger we face.'
What nonsense! What about “Bush’s God' is Mr Reich so afraid of? In essence, Mr. Reich is saying that “Bush’s God� is more of a threat to modern civilization than fanatical terrorism. His description of the issues at risk because of the president’s faith—sodomy, abortion, gay marriage, embryonic stem cell research, and contraceptives—reveals that little imagination is needed to see that sexual liberation is at the heart of the clash between the opposing worldviews.
With sexual liberation as the goal, there is no doubt that homosexual affirmation is the instrument being used to undermine the values associated with “Bush’s God.� Hedonistic secularists realize that the legitimization of homosexuality—particularly legalization of gay marriage—is a dagger into the heart of the Christian faith and the institutions that shelter its values.
President Bush’s adherence to the principles of his faith represents a formidable obstacle to victory. That is the reason why he is at once hated and also feared, for as St. Paul said, the believer has “the aroma of death,� to the perishing. Therefore, his removal from the presidency must be accomplished at all costs. To accomplish this goal, the president’s detractors have mounted a fierce, personal attack on him through dozens of recently published books, several movies, numerous commentaries, and by a heavily imbalanced popular media.
Additionally, Mr. Reich suggests that the president is an “anti-modernist fanatic� and his religious views place him far out of the mainstream, but recent Gallup polls show the opposite: 68 percent of Americans favor teaching both creationism and evolution in the public schools; 78% of the American people favor a constitutional amendment to allow voluntary prayer in public schools; 68 % of the American people agree that partial-birth abortion should be banned; thirty-nine states have so far passed defense of marriage acts prohibiting gay marriage; and since the June 2003 decision by the Supreme Court that declared the Texas sodomy law unconstitutional, opposition to legalization of same-sex relations has increased to 49% compared to 43% who favor legalization.
One may debate Reich’s view that America should not be regarded as a “Christian nation,� but it should be pointed out that over 80 percent of the American people identify themselves as Christian; most of the founding fathers of our republic considered themselves Christians; and Christian-Judean values had a tremendous influence in the nation’s founding documents, laws, and rules of government. Although it is clear that the founding fathers avoided the establishment of a religious theocracy, it is equally clear there was no intent to insulate government from religious influence—and therein lies the rub.
Quite clearly, it has been the strategy of hedonic secularists to use homosexuality as a spearhead in its drive to marginalize the faith and infuse sexual freedom. To great extent, they have successfully invaded almost every institution in America with a message of acceptance toward sodomy as a lifestyle preference. Much of industry, government, media, and academia celebrate “gay pride,� require “gay� sensitivity training, offer domestic partner benefits, and prohibit contrary points of view.
It is readily apparent how important the infusion of unmitigated sexual “freedom� into the church and the culture is to the secularists, and why they are working so hard to defeat President Bush. A leader who believes in the existence of absolute truth, a president who seeks to apply his faith to his life, is a threat to a post-modern secularist in principle. In an age when the most grievous of sins is to interject your religious beliefs into the public debate, or to even have a strong belief in Anything at all, those in leadership positions who profess to know Truth set themselves up for fierce opposition.
WE TAKE THESE RISKS NOT TO ESCAPE LIFE, BUT SO THAT LIFE DOES NOT ESCAPE US
