Rush Limbaugh takes on GOP critics

[Oceander]

I recommend we go back, way back to basic conservative principle.  1700s conservative issues.  I finished reading a couple of books by Edmund Burke.

I read Russell Kirks The Conservative Mind.  Chapter 2 was about Burke.  I read the chapter twice and then went to the Library to read some of his work.  Russell Kirk is excellent, but Edmund Burke is simply outstanding.

Most impressive was Burke's base statements in Reflections on the Revolution in France.

He lays plain the need for Religion as the basis for law, for Property rights, for respect of all that came before us.  Much of what France stood for was change for change sake.

He compares France with England in much the same way we would compare liberal to conservative.

Burke is unsurpassed political genius of the last 300 years.  Much of what he says should be carved into granite and into conservative minds.

Concepts discussed there are current to our situation.  The logic is flawless, direct and simple to follow.  Something that is useful when talking to the unwashed and confused that our public school systems is providing.  Read both Kirk and Burk and see if you agree.


I recommend not necessarily focusing on the book, but on the argument and logic in an educational mode for Republicans be they Conservative as I am or moderate.  We have to educate ourselves before we can hope to persuade another to back away from what they have been spoon fed.

I believe this strongly and have somewhat similar signatures on several forums.

Certainly this is true as a matter of historical fact.  However, the further fact remains that the Constitution was specifically drafted with the view that religion would not play a mandatory role in the country's political structure and that individuals were to be free to believe as they chose, including holding - and acting on - beliefs in non-Christian deities and even in atheism.

In short, this is not, never has been, and was not intended to be, a Christian nation, or a nation of any other religion for that matter.

[evadR]

"And when we've finished kissing every illegal's ass and every damned one of them still votes for Democrats because they give them things, what will we have accomplished?"

And here we have it, the absolute essence of the problem.

When are we ever going to realize that this is an evil plot by the Amish.

That makes as much sense as all the cockamamie equine effluence that been put out by all these pundits and spinners.

The only question I would like to have answered is WHY didn't the republicans didn't show up to vote.
All this other crapola about gays, immigrants, blacks, wemins...blah blah ad infinitum ...is like pissing in the ocean.
It ain't gonna raise the tide.

(To all you lazy assed republicans that didn't vote and turned this once great nation over to this marauder for another 4 years, God forgive your sorry butts because I NEVER WILL)

[Slide Rule]

No one who is familiar with Burke or Kirk could deny that religion and "conservativism" are inextricably linked.

When I was young I did not see the need for religion.  What was the purpose?  I though myself agnostic.

That changed when I was an adult.  The connection between religion and conservatism is the necessary bond and further is
the basis of law.

I plan on rereading both

  The Conservative Mind by Russell Kirk, and
  Reflections on the Revolution in France by Edmund Burk

on an annual basis to ingrain the thinking.  I recommend this for those vaguely familiar with them.

And this will provide the natural response that goes down easily.

[DCPatriot]

Certainly this is true as a matter of historical fact.  However, the further fact remains that the Constitution was specifically drafted with the view that religion would not play a mandatory role in the country's political structure and that individuals were to be free to believe as they chose, including holding - and acting on - beliefs in non-Christian deities and even in atheism.

In short, this is not, never has been, and was not intended to be, a Christian nation, or a nation of any other religion for that matter.

I submit the country was purposely founded on Christian principles.

The point is that no specific religion would be endorsed by the government.  Freedom FROM religious influence.

[Slide Rule]

Certainly this is true as a matter of historical fact.  However, the further fact remains that the Constitution was specifically drafted with the view that religion would not play a mandatory role in the country's political structure and that individuals were to be free to believe as they chose, including holding - and acting on - beliefs in non-Christian deities and even in atheism.

In short, this is not, never has been, and was not intended to be, a Christian nation, or a nation of any other religion for that matter.

Religion was so ingrained that it was felt unnecessary to write it into various founding documents.  Our founders were familiar with a state supported religion, and they did not duplicate it in our founding documents.  They were in error, first time I ever said our founders were in error, as we see in hindsight by what has happened in our parents and our own lives.

Whether a definitive statement is in our documents or not, it is in the basis of morality and law for our country.

[Oceander]

Religion was so ingrained that it was felt unnecessary to write it into various founding documents.  Our founders were familiar with a state supported religion, and they did not duplicate it in our founding documents.  They were in error, first time I ever said our founders were in error, as we see in hindsight by what has happened in our parents and our own lives.

Whether a definitive statement is in our documents or not, it is in the basis of morality and law for our country.

"Religion was so ingrained that it was felt unnecessary to write it into various founding documents."

With all due respect, that's a rather convenient conclusion.  One can apply it to all sorts of things that aren't there - sort of a pre-Constitutional penumbra to complement the penumbrae the Supreme Court has found over the years.

That being said, religion was not so ingrained that it was simply there, like water to fish, to be assumed into the Constitution.  Thomas Jefferson, at the very least, who was quite involved in the drafting of the Constitution, deeply questioned the role of religion in American political institutions and found that those institutions functioned best when religion was taken out of them.  That is the tenor of the Virginia legislation:  An Act of Establishing Religious Freedom, that Thomas Jefferson wrote.

Thus, while it is true that religion was deeply ingrained in the culture, it was not unquestioned and was not simply assumed into the Constitution.  The precepts that were learned from religion might have been incorporated, but only to the extent actually written into it, and not further.

[gogogodzilla]

Well, you just go out there, DC, without the social conservatives and see how many elections you win.

I can't believe you even believe some of the things you wrote above. 

They're just that galacticly stupid.

We woulda won if we'd focused on what Santorum wanted, government regulation of the internet to control online PR0N!!!

Oh yes, believe me, we'd have won in a landslide!

[gogogodzilla]

And when we've finished kissing every illegal's ass and every damned one of them still votes for Democrats because they give them things, what will we have accomplished?

I'm hunkering down.  No more money to charities that work with "the deprived" who voted for Obama, not a dime for those companies in blue states (like Lands End and Vermont Country Store or LL Bean), and all credit cards have been cancelled for financial institutions in blue states. 

That you think my pushing for religious liberty because I refuse to pay for contraceptives for women who can clearly afford them meant that I furnished ammunition for some fabricated "war on women"  indicates to me that you're just not very astute, DC. 

You're into blaming now, blaming those on your side instead of seeing just how dependent millions of people have become in this country.  The dependent class is always going to vote for those who give them things, and you're never going to change that until and unless they're brought to their knees by that dependency and they have nowhere else to go but to self-sufficiency and self-reliance.

Evidence of bipolar thought.  That if we aren't calling for the damnation of all illegals and their immediate deportation, execution, amputation, whatever... that it means we're calling for lip-to-anus brown-nosing and their inauguration as our new lords and masters.

Seriously, WTF?

[olde north church]

I'll toss my tuppence in.  These folks weren't too far removed from the Inquisition and the Salem Trials weren't really a couple of generations back.  The "Age of Reason" was a response to oppressive religion in every aspect in the Middle Ages.
Stop and think about the Colonies which were settled by the Protestants compared to South and Central America which was settled by the Catholics.  One is reminded of the Elizabeth I film where she warns about the Spanish Armada holding the Inquisition in their bellies.
America was definitely a product of science and a light hand of religion upon it.

[gogogodzilla]

I'll toss my tuppence in.  These folks weren't too far removed from the Inquisition and the Salem Trials weren't really a couple of generations back.  The "Age of Reason" was a response to oppressive religion in every aspect in the Middle Ages.
Stop and think about the Colonies which were settled by the Protestants compared to South and Central America which was settled by the Catholics.  One is reminded of the Elizabeth I film where she warns about the Spanish Armada holding the Inquisition in their bellies.
America was definitely a product of science and a light hand of religion upon it.

Not to mention that many of our founding fathers were, *GASP*, Freemasons.

[Slide Rule]

"Religion was so ingrained that it was felt unnecessary to write it into various founding documents."

With all due respect, that's a rather convenient conclusion.  One can apply it to all sorts of things that aren't there - sort of a pre-Constitutional penumbra to complement the penumbrae the Supreme Court has found over the years.

That being said, religion was not so ingrained that it was simply there, like water to fish, to be assumed into the Constitution.  Thomas Jefferson, at the very least, who was quite involved in the drafting of the Constitution, deeply questioned the role of religion in American political institutions and found that those institutions functioned best when religion was taken out of them.  That is the tenor of the Virginia legislation:  An Act of Establishing Religious Freedom, that Thomas Jefferson wrote.

Thus, while it is true that religion was deeply ingrained in the culture, it was not unquestioned and was not simply assumed into the Constitution.  The precepts that were learned from religion might have been incorporated, but only to the extent actually written into it, and not further.

Some founding fathers were not perfect.  Look into Jefferson's moral failings.  Having a national religion would be something else to spot his legacy.  Franklin had similar failings.

All in all their actions benefit us today.  I am grateful they were there at the time.  Excepting of course a disconnect from religion.

After reading Burke, the disconnect is much clearer.  Read Burke Reflections on the Revolution in France and you may agree.

It is a tight bond between conservative and religion.