First judgment: "The link was filled with hate." (It wasn't. It called homosexual behavior depraved which is true and disease ridden - also true. Some of the comments were rude and profane, but the initial post was not hateful.) The second judgment was that no one can decide what "love" between any two people is. It is an "enigmatic emotion" different for everyone Actually, that is two judgments that contradict each other. I.e., no one knows what love is because it's different for everybody who loves, but nevertheless it is an "enigmatic emotion." Another judgment was that posting the link showed "prejudice." Now that is a critical and derogatory judgment. Further, when I posted about Muslim men having the right to rape their wives (Is that love?), I was also judged to have made a "racist" comment. So my non-judging critic judged me to be a prejudiced racist who is judgmental. Wow! What a judgment!
This is the problem with liberal argument. It is inherently illogical and self-contradictory. It begins with, "It's wrong to judge!" which is a judgment. It moves on to "You don't have the right to judge others," and immediately moves on to judging those to whom they have just denied the right to judge. Another judgement that is typical in liberal argument is their judgment that morality is completely individualist. However, the individual who is, dare I say, judged to have the wrong morality (i.e., traditional, Christian) is labeled with all kinds of, dare I say, judgmental terms like "homophobic, prejudiced, intolerant, racist, and ugly (well, in a manner of speaking).
The entire Facebook conversation would have been amusing if it weren't so sadly illustrative of the mindless propaganda taught to young people raised in the public school system. John Dewey, the Father of modern education, would be thrilled since he saw the role of schools as teaching conformity to secular value. Many young people today exemplify what Huxley wrote about in Brave New World. We are living more and more in the nightmare of that politically correct, drug and sex-numbed dystopia. The difference for Christians is that we will continue to live and speak the truth to a culture and a population who increasingly hate us for it, unlike the "savage" of the brave new world who hangs himself in despair.
Making judgments is as natural and essential to humanity as breathing. The Founding Fathers judged that they wanted a government different from what they experienced in England. They made numerous important judgments leading up to the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia. Our intellect is called the "seat of judgment" and is rooted by our Maker in the natural law. Babies begin to make judgments from birth learning about the world by experience and then making rational choices based on judgments of what tastes good, appears beautiful, feels good, and sounds lovely. If you scream at a baby, the little one will cry; if you croon a lullaby, he'll nestle into your shoulder and go to sleep.
It is human and wonderful to use our intellect and free will to make judgments that are good, true, and beautiful. Pentecost Sunday is a good day to exercise that wonderful gift from God. So make some excellent judgments today and rejoice in your capacity to do so!
This is the problem with liberal argument. It is inherently illogical and self-contradictory. It begins with, "It's wrong to judge!" which is a judgment. It moves on to "You don't have the right to judge others," and immediately moves on to judging those to whom they have just denied the right to judge. Another judgement that is typical in liberal argument is their judgment that morality is completely individualist. However, the individual who is, dare I say, judged to have the wrong morality (i.e., traditional, Christian) is labeled with all kinds of, dare I say, judgmental terms like "homophobic, prejudiced, intolerant, racist, and ugly (well, in a manner of speaking).
ReplyDeleteIn a word, "liberal argument" (or maybe it should be liberal "argument") is just a polite term for: hypocrisy.
You have the right to think and believe whatever you want. But so does everyone else. We happen to disagree on a number of key issues. The difference is that I am OK with you believing and behaving how you want but you want others to change the way they believe and behave.
ReplyDeleteCome on, Anonymous. Are you okay with someone who believes it's okay to break in and rob your house? How about someone who believes it's okay to rape you or steal your identity or empty your bank account?
ReplyDeleteHow about killing an unborn baby?
I'm sure you would agree with me on the firs three things, but maybe not the last. It's easy to defend your own "rights" and let others be abused and murdered if it doesn't affect you personally or if you consider the immoral behavior in your interest.