During my lifetime I have seen organized, vocal and sometimes violent crusades to change everything that ties America to its foundational roots. We have heard cries to eliminate or restrict, as examples
- the pledge of allegience
- prayers - even non-sectarian or generic prayer in all public forums
- "In God We Trust"
- marriage, as it has always existed (a pretty radical change in foundational basics)
- the Washington Redskins
- the confederate flag
- the playing of Dixie
- immigration laws
- nationalism and patriotism
- the observance of Sunday
- Christmas
- Easter
- all "religious holidays"...... on and on
I suppose if you wanted to put the diverse motivations and dreams of these modern people into one word, the best word would be "progressive." The term "secular progressives" is more definite. They like to play on the root word "progress," although I'm quite sure that their definition of "progress" amounts merely to radical change. Their rallying cry is "Change, change, change." Will the change be good, bad or indifferent? Their idea of change is destruction of what now exists. The most essential definition of a conservative is 'someone who believes that there is good in society which needs to be conserved or kept.' By contrast, the liberal, progressive, secularist or radical sees no good in the past and wants to destroy everything. That alone can explain the odd direction toward which we see America marching today (not drifting, marching. We drifted in the 1980s and 90s, we are marching today)! The old order must be completely destroyed so they can establish the new one. (You see these principles in the writings of Karl Marx, Joseph Stalin, John Dewey and Horace Mann, for instance).
There are two powerful tools which will ultimately help the radicals achieve this goal. They are American public education and the liberal media, both possessed of nearly omnipotent powers that have already paved the way for the destruction of traditional marriage, public prayer, much of our national sovereignty,* etc. Both the education establishment and the media have one power in common: they shape how the public thinks, the values we are willing to accept. (Forty hears ago, the idea of homesexual marraige would have been totally unacceptable to the public. What changed our minds? The media and the eduction establishment, that's what). More is to come if we are to believe our eyes and the dictates of the Supreme Court. Both our progressive, secular education systems and our liberal media are controlled lock stock and barrel by radical interests. (And most Americans don't even know it). This is why the American people have been conditioned to accept the brutally ridiculous philosophies handed down by President Obama and the Supreme Court in recent years. It's why they can light up the White House in pink lights and Americans have been conditioned not to be offended by it-- or to believe that is merely an innocuous symbol of tolerance, having no important impact on the country or our civilization. Thank you public media and public education for "re-educating" us to be so tolerate to the destruction of our civilization. (I am not a huge fan of Ann Coulter, either, but her new book Adios America! - The Left's Plan to Turn Our Country into a Third World Hellhole, is worth reading).
Rush Limbaugh, of whom I am not a tremendous fan or follower, says that the next target will be the American flag. I do not doubt that. The American flag is, after all, traditional, American, part of our culture, our past and it is a reverenced symbol. Progressives or secularists cannot stand to see anything referenced unless it is one of their radical ideals.
________________________
*If you want one example of the loss of our national soverignty, look at the recent treaty with Iran which allows them, in effect, to continue their nuclear development while having economic sanctions removed. The president of the United States permitted two secret side agreements that compromised our ability to verify Iran's nuclear activities at any military installation in Iran. Iran would be required to provide soil samples to demonstrate that they are not involved in nuclear bomb development. These side deals provide that Iran can provide their own soil samples. The US Congress approved the deal without even knowing about the two side deals or the compromise in our ability to verify safeguards. President Obama obtained the approval of the United Nations for these deals, not the US Congress. National sovereignty? No such thing.
No comments:
Post a Comment