CNN Barr slams attacks on religious values, says 'moral upheaval' leading to societal ills
The Hill Barr bemoans 'moral upheaval' that has brought 'suffering and misery'
However having Barr preaching moral behavior as he enables a guy who lies, cheats, pays off porn stars, etc seems incredibly hypocritical. I mean is he saying that religious people needing to provide flowers for LGBT events will somehow damage our society? Women having the right to access and use all birth control methods is somehow bad?
The folks on the Religious Right simply amaze and somewhat disgust me. They preach morals and religion while resisting helping young children learn, and forcing parent(s) to fulfill their obligations to the kids.
The Hill Barr bemoans 'moral upheaval' that has brought 'suffering and misery'
""The campaign to destroy the traditional moral order has coincided and I believe has brought with it immense suffering and misery. And yet the forces of secularism, ignoring these tragic results, press on with even greater militancy," Barr said."
"Among the militant secularists are many so-called progressives. But where is the progress?" Barr asked. "Those who defy the creed risk a figurative burning at the stake: social, educational and professional ostracism and exclusion waged through lawsuits and savage social media campaigns."Now I agree that the war on poverty had some pretty terrible results. It is rarely good to give people something for nothing for a long period of time. And it is even worse to give them something for doing something that is bad for them, their children and society. (ie more single moms with more babies getting more welfare)
However having Barr preaching moral behavior as he enables a guy who lies, cheats, pays off porn stars, etc seems incredibly hypocritical. I mean is he saying that religious people needing to provide flowers for LGBT events will somehow damage our society? Women having the right to access and use all birth control methods is somehow bad?
The folks on the Religious Right simply amaze and somewhat disgust me. They preach morals and religion while resisting helping young children learn, and forcing parent(s) to fulfill their obligations to the kids.
18 comments:
I was really amused by the idea of Donald Trump's attorney general lecturing the rest of us about morality. I thought the one upside of Trump's election was that Republicans realized that they couldn't tell us for four years about how moral they are without being laughed at.
--Hiram
So, we ignore the log in our own eye because Barr (according to your blighted vision) has a splinter in his? Are we going to ignore the obviously correct diagnosis of millions because one person is showing (again, supposedly) slight symptoms? Do the initials TDS ring any bells with you?
If you see 3 wives, countless mistresses, sexual assaults, bankruptcies, fraudulent business operation, etc as a splinter... I do worry about your judgment...
Hiram,
Yes it amazes me that Barr and Jerry can preach about the evils of others while praising and protecting a man who openly bragged about grabbing women by their pussies...
"Trump: "Yeah that's her with the gold. I better use some Tic Tacs just in case I start kissing her. You know I'm automatically attracted to beautiful... I just start kissing them. It's like a magnet. Just kiss. I don't even wait. And when you're a star they let you do it. You can do anything."
Bush: "Whatever you want."
Trump: "Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything."
Trump Transcript
The guy with the splinter in the eye isn't the one whose vision you would want to depend on. Barr's babbling about solutions seems to be oblivious to the fact that he is what's wrong with our politics and our public life. It would be a lot more amusing if it weren't also so profoundly sad.
--Hiram
TDS = TDS is an acronym for Trump Derangement Syndrome, a term applied to people who express deep loathing and fear of President Donald Trump. It's usually used by Trump supporters for liberals.
Jerry,
Since you seem at peace with Trump's sinful nature and welching on his commitments.
What in particular do you think the "secular government" has done to create this supposed disaster?
How would you change things?
The splinter is NOT in Barr's eye, it's in mine. YOU have the log. You seem willing to ignore the sins of millions because one single individual has violated your moral code, and because you have a deranged obsession with that one individual. Barr's analysis is correct, and unfortunately each of us must individually correct our behavior before trying to sort out what others may be doing.
I think that 1 individual violated "the moral code" multiple times in multiple ways.
Ten Commandments list
1.You shall have no other gods before Me.
2.You shall make no idols.
3.You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain.
4.Keep the Sabbath day holy.
5.Honor your father and your mother.
6.You shall not murder.
7.You shall not commit adultery.
8.You shall not steal.
9.You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
10.You shall not covet.
But you will deny this so let's move on...
What in particular do you think the "secular government" has done to create this supposed disaster? How would you change things?
Please note that younger people seem to have less interest in organized religion.
And does one have to believe in God to have a firm moral life style?
Last one first. If you don't have a religion-based moral code passed down over thousands of years, then where do you get your "firm moral life style" or even the desire to HAVE one? The problem with "liberal morality" is that everybody gets to make up their own moral code, and how is that NOT entirely self-serving? Without some external standards, you have essentially no "standards" at all.
The problem with "secular government" is not that it causes moral corruption, but that it does not stand against it and, in recent years has actually stood AGAINST each of us individually expressing what our standards are.
It was long ago, but welfare workers used to make surprise visits to see if there was a "man in the house." If there was, said man became responsible for the household, and a new pregnancy was accepted as proof positive there was a man in the house. Illegitimate children were frowned upon by society in general. Then some government do-gooder decided this sort of judgement was unfair, and the visits stopped. illegitimacy exploded.
As linked above, Laurie's Universalists seems to do fine without a GOD.. In fact probably better than many Christian churches.
You are correct that you are not allowed to treat other citizens differently because they choose to love a man, woman, etc. Just like you don't want to be treated differently for being a Christian.
How again were you going to fight "illegitimacy" without harming the child(ren)?
If you don't have a religion-based moral code passed down over thousands of years, then where do you get your "firm moral life style" or even the desire to HAVE one?
Hard question to answer, but does the answer matter? isn't the important thing to have a moral code? It's not as if there ever has been or ever will be a widespread agreement on where such a thing comes from.
We have always had a secular government. Unlike many European countries, we don't have a state religion yet somehow we manage to pass laws against stuff. Indeed, we lock up more people than many countries that do have state religions.
--Hiram
"you are not allowed to treat other citizens differently because they choose to love a man, woman, etc. " What kind of morality is it that says I must tolerate any and all behaviors to which I have some moral/ethical/legal/commonsense objection? I don't wish them killed, but I want to hold my moral viewpoint just the same as everybody else. You are free to do as you want, in your own life, and I am free to disapprove of it. You cannot ask tolerance for yourself and then deny tolerance to me.
I think it's a good alternative to tolerate people who are different from us because the alternative seems to be fighting in the street. And this is in reality what people do mostly. Maybe that is the basis for morality. I disapprove of lots of people, but I have no idea why they should care.
--Hiram
Jerry,
I agree with you...
"You cannot ask tolerance for yourself and then deny tolerance to me."
Those words are said by LGBT+ people daily.
Unfortunately folks like yourself would rather be intolerant and judging.
You seek 1st amendment cover to allow you to be prejudiced and treat these other citizens negatively for loving and having a relationship with another like minded adult.
The freedom to reject giving them housing, jobs, healthcare, etc...
So are you for tolerance and letting others live their lives free of government controls, or do you want a government that follows religious law?
It is ironic that Christians fear Sharia law while seeking to impose their own form of it...
As a reminder... I have the Teaching Values site linked to the right for a reason. The morals taught in most religions have a lot in common.
The hubris of the religious right does puzzle me. Only ~32% of humans are Christian and some how they have the nerve to assume they are better than everyone else.
Post a Comment