In search of the right answer today, we are compelled to conclude that there "is a famine in the land," with nearly all sides of the debate muddled up to their necks in poor history, poor politics, poor reasoning, and, all too often, poor religion–having nothing better to offer than a multifaceted deliberation where few seem to know where religion and morality are appropriate and where they are not.

The unspoken consensus, though few will admit it, goes something like this: "It is appropriate to inject religion and morality into political debate and into public policy just so long as the moral slant parallels my moral view of the universe, and it is highly inappropriate if it does not."

One popular point of contention on the issue, Modern Liberalism, favors the relative ethics of Humanism and Socialism sprinkled creatively with Judeo-Christian teach- ings. Its cardinal dogma is that "the ends justify the means," or in other words, "anything goes, just so long as the political goals of the revolution are served."

It is a flexible creed, which turns a blind eye to any dilemma of conscience that a constant round of moral reversals ought to cause, one which fights against all reli- gious involvement in public life, while aggressively campaigning for a broader and broader interpretation of just what is public–yet one which applauds any decidedly Liberal professor of religion, insuring that just such ministers are honored with No- bel Peace Prizes, idolized with public statues, glorified by children by way of public school mandates, and held true to the faith throughout their lifetime via obligatory cultural awareness seminars for all adult "public" employees.

Recognizing the religious nature of most human beings as a fact, while publicly de- nouncing the same as "mere speculation," the creed of Liberalism employs other strategic uses of religion, such as placing a constant parade of victims before our eyes, hoping that the moral sensitivities every human possesses might be misdi- rected into seeing a logical link between the biblical invitation to "love thy neighbor as thy self" and the Marxian mandate to "rob from the rich to give to the poor."

Further, while this creed has banned our forefathers' Judeo-Christian based teach- ings from the classroom, it has mandated (in many places) the teaching of the reli- gious traditions of indigenous peoples who, consistent with the creed of Modern Liberalism, view property and natural resources in terms of collective ownership.

The truth is Modern Liberalism does not oppose moral law; rather it haughtily be- lieves that it has a fresher, higher, smarter moral perspective than that contrived by the rough and puerile rabble. Thus, the advocates of this creed feel compelled to share it, to order it, to mandate it–and with the power of the state behind them, they have met with great success in decreeing their religion throughout the land. Among this creed's leading precepts, we find the following moral peculiarities, among many others:

1. Unborn babies do not possess the inalienable right to life; but fungi, fruit flies, and convicted murderers do.

2. Ranchers and farmers do not have the right to control, develop, and utilize their private property as they please; but rodents, predators, and desert tor- toises do.

3. Business owners who have put blood, sweat, tears, and a great deal of fi- nancial risk into engendering an enterprise, do not possess the right to man- age their employees creatively, as per their best interest; but distant bureau- crats do.

4. Religious fundamentalists, heterosexuals, capitalists, and white males do not have the moral right to equality before the law; but hedonists, gays, So- cialists, and minorities of every stripe do.

5. Since the advocates of this creed believe in arbitrary law and in the Hitleri- an principle of collective guilt, gun manufacturers, gun dealers, and parents who legally produce, sell or own private firearms do not have the right to le- niency and protection before the law for crimes committed with those weapons (by others); but criminals who choose to misuse those same weapons do.

6. The children of industrious and intelligent parents who have labored a life- time to provide property, finances, employment, and education for their family members do not have the right to be eligible upon their parent's death to in- herit what is rightfully theirs; but unrelated children of indolent and ignorant parents do. (1)

7. Finally, because this creed defends the utilitarian moral position that the good of the group and the rights of the group always exceed the good of the individual and the rights of the individual–except when the curators of this creed say that they don't–its proponents are fully in favor of the state being fully in charge of every businessman's social responsibility, every school teacher's curriculum and every parent's children, and the state being fully trusted and fully the dictator of every fine point of moral conduct (except de- viant conduct, which must be protected at all costs)–and thus in favor of the state on the one hand and hedonism on the other being fully worshipped.

That is, traditional Christians and Jews do not have the right to worship as they please; but Humanists, Statists and Communists do. (2)

This is the ideology of Modern Liberalism--what some call dysfunctional morality, or Statism, or the moral force of the coming "civil society." It is in fact, "The State Church of the Left," a heavy-handed religion whose ministers, would if they could, "cleanse the earth" of the most virtuous elements of traditional Christianity and American culture. The fact that roughly 50 percent of all America worship before this alter of the sovereign state, begging for free food, unjust privileges and endless moral accommodations, stands as a sad testimony of the pathetic state of religion, morality, and education in the United States of America today.

Footnotes:

1. Via inheritance taxes and wealth redistribution.
2. Revealingly, Liberalism added the following to its strange list of whose morality counts and whose does not: Islamic fundamentalists, who were granted special pray- er privileges on public school property during public school hours by the Liberal school establishment in several key Liberal cities, post-9/11, as a display of Liberal- ism's "blessed tolerance" for those who, in the name of God, would attack America. Christians and Jews, hurting and horrified, were denied the same privilege.

Sierra Times columnist Steven M. Farrell is the author of Dark Rose, an inspirational novel reviewers are calling a modern classic.

Steve Farrell may be contacted via email. His email address is as follows:

This is not a commercial website. The sole purpose of the website is to share with interested persons information regarding civics, civic and social education, political science, government, politics, law, constitutional law and history, public policy, and political philosophy and history, as well as current and recent political developments, public issues, and political controversies.

POLITICAL EDUCATION, CONSERVATIVE ANALYSIS

POLITICS, SOCIETY, & THE SOVEREIGN STATE

Website of Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr.

Government, Politics, Public Policy, Legal Issues, Constitutional Law, Government & the Economy, Cultural Values, Foreign Affairs, International Relations, Military Defense & National Security, Geopolitics, Terrorism & Homeland Security, American National Interests, Political Systems & Processes, Political Institutions, Political Ideologies, & Political Philosophy

INDEX FOR THE ENTIRE WEBSITE

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

---

THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA

An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis

Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor

Conservative & Free-Market Analysis of Government, Politics & Public Policy, Covering Political, Legal, Constitutional, Economic, Cultural, Military, International, Strategic, & Geopolitical Issues

Conservative Government Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity