Home  •  Forum  •  Blogs  •  E-Mail  •  Support Categories
MyCopper Categories Finance Travel Real Estate Games Autos Entertainment
Nearly Relevant
Nonsense, Fiction, and Miscellaneous Things

Haiti, Pat Robertson, and Rush Limbaugh
I don't like writing social commentary.  I end up sounding like a raving lunatic.  Also, I usually see two sides of an issue and can't support either fully.  That said, I still have an opinion.  The events surrounding Haiti, Pat Robertson and Rush Limbaugh are an example.

The earthquake that struck Haiti created a disaster.  Pat Robertson's comments created an uproar.  Rush Limbaugh's comments seem headed in the same direction. 

Many, many people have commented on the social networks about these events.
Ah yes! Limbaugh and Robertson: The two biggest bigots and racists on the planet!  http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2010/01/limbaugh-obama-using-haiti-to-build-credibility-with-black-community/comments/page/3/#comments  
Remember, almost every lawyer in the Bush Adminstration graduated from the Pat Robertson School of Law. No kidding he has a law school. They teach a corse in Defending satanic contracts  http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2010/01/limbaugh-obama-using-haiti-to-build-credibility-with-black-community/comments/page/3/#comments 

w.c. browne - vaughanT - Um, are you an idiot??? We're talking about people who just got nailed by an earthquake that measured 7.0 on the Richter scale. And you're bytching about the government helping out people who need it right now??? Your dumb a/s/s better pray to your God that something catastrophic like this doesn't happen to your family members. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2010/01/15/2010-01-15_rush_limbaugh_haiti_earthquake_comments_are_really_stupid_says_white_house_press.html


Now, I get it. Mr. Limbaugh and Mr. Robertson,
politically speaking, are considered far right. Mr. Limbaugh and Mr. Robertson are expressing their more faith-based views.  The liberals, through offense-is-the-best-defense strategy, are  attacking them in defending their more equalitarian views.  What I don't understand, here comes the hard part, is the outright dismissal of the possibility of divine judgement. 


I'll admit it sounds crazy and I don't know how to make it sound sane.  In this day and age, with so many interpretations, questions, and doubts surrounding religion, plus the continued scientific explanations for many things, religion has,
philosophically, taken a back seat to modernism.  Yet, for thousands of years  mankind believed in the power of dieties to cause natural events.  Eclipses, the moon, the sun, and more were regarded as divinely controlled.  Why should anyone believe that scientific and moral progress have made divine intervention obsurd?  Why would anyone want to stifle religious faith?  Yet, that is exactly the effect of these attacks.  Religion becomes so much nonsense.  The only "real" view of things is the majority's.

The liberal attacks are sounding prejudiced. As if those crazy, wacko religious zealots couldn't possible be correct about divine judgement. Has our modernism been setting The Bible on the back shelf?  I'm not sayin' He did and I'm not sayin' He didn't, but I am saying disregarding faith as harebrained is dogmatic. 

The advances of the liberal equalitarianism are apparently not void of prejudice.

There are many people whose faith doesn't need me or anyone else to validate it.  There are probably just as many, maybe more, whose philosophy only develops through the social mores of the time.  Admitting to being a dunce regarding facts in the matter, I don't think it is unfair to say that much of the wrong in mankinds' history has been a result of majority inspired social mores. 

Fortunately, in modern political governing, there are "stops" on majority inspired oppression.  But apparently,
we still require a doormat for our own subtle bias; a victim to our stoning; a counter-example to our expertism. And this doormat or counter-example is religion.  We are still willing to dismiss rather than consider.  Still willing to casticate first, understand later.

Maybe my own liberal tendencies are deteriorating.  Maybe that's the problem of my perspective; becoming conservative without a proper conservative foundation.

 Maybe with time I'll understand that differences are just that; differences. That they cannot be unified into a single viewpoint without automatically creating an absolutism leading to chauvanism.

Maybe instead of a topical, relevant title; Haiti, Pat Robertson, and Rush Limbaugh, I should have entitled it; How Can People Be So Sure of Things.




   
Blog Search
Go