CPAC, Potty Mouth Bloggers, and the 10 Commandments

by La Shawn on 03.01.07

in Bloggers, Faith

Monday, March 5: I may chime in on the Ann Coulter hoopla. Or not. I’m allowing commenters to discuss Coulter’s remarks in this thread.
———————————————————————————–

CPAC

The Conservative Political Action Conference is upon us. But I won’t be there. I was invited to blog from Bloggers Row, as I’ve been since the first row in 2005, but it wouldn’t fit into my schedule this year. Too bad. Lots of high-profile people there and plenty of networking opportunities. I met Michelle Malkin at CPAC 2005. That was a cool day. :)

Check out my CPAC posts from 2005 and 2006.

Charmaine Yoest has a list of CPAC bloggers (and here and here.), in case you want to check their blogs over the next three days for photos and live-blogging.

Potty Mouth Bloggers

Here’s a news flash: liberal bloggers use more profanity than conservative bloggers.

Patrick Ishmael at The News Bucket performed searches on the top left and right bloggers, according to TTLB, and a list of “dirty” words. He found that liberal bloggers have an 18 to 1 advantage over conservative bloggers in the profanity department. Nothing surprising there. But according to Patrick’s results, 39 pages on LBC contain at least one of the dirty words. I demand a recount!

rank

OK, I’ve written “sh**” a few times in certain rant posts and may have quoted someone else’s use of the f-word, which I usually write like this: “fu**”. I found one instance of piss where I excerpted a news quote with the word in it. But I’ve never used it. I know it’s all in fun, but…39 pages? :?

Note: There’s a better way to determine which side uses more profanity. Blog size should factor in, as well as context. Why would merely quoting a cusser count? More reax: Bob Krumm, Blue Crab Boulevard, Classical Values, Wizbang…

Why Liberals Hate the 10 Commandments

Michael Medved’s column (met at CPAC) is raising the collective blood pressure of the liberal blogosphere. He theorizes why leftists are so hot to remove the Ten Commandments from the public sphere: “[E]ach one of the commandments contradicts a different pillar of trendy liberal thinking.”

He lists each commandment and offers his perspective on why the left hates it. My favorite is Medved’s response to the 10th commandment (emphases in response added):

“You shall not covet your fellow’s house. You shall not covet your fellow’s wife, his manservant, his maidservant, his ox, his donkey, nor anything that belongs to your fellow.

“Among many other problems, this commandment outrages PETA with its unacceptable suggestions like animal companions like oxen and donkeys can ever “belong” to their human friends. Meanwhile, the ban on coveting involves a restriction on a feeling, a desire, and it’s politically incorrect to suppress or deny or stifle authentic emotions, Blaming yourself for coveting can only undermine self-esteem, and the emergence and liberation of your precious inner child. Moreover, the entire leftist project is largely based on covetousness: resenting the “filthy rich” for what they’ve earned, rather than feeling grateful for your own achievements. The implacable liberal focus on the “gap between rich and poor” – as if impoverishing the wealthy worked in any meaningful way to actually enrich the poor – represents covetous attitudes at their irrational worst. The sacred leftist goal of “redistribution of wealth,” mandating heavy taxes on “haves” for the purported benefits of “have-nots”, depends on coveting for its energy and rationale. On the other hand, the Bible’s unmistakable emphasis on the sanctity of private property (“You shall not covet your fellow’s house”) clearly contradicts the left’s emphasis on a communitarian and collectivist outlook, in which the state becomes the ultimate owner of everything.”

While I don’t like politicizing the Bible, I’ve always maintained that Scripture properly interpreted lends more support to a politically conservative view than a liberal one. For example, left-leaning Christians don’t quite understand the differences between charity and welfare. (I received several “hypocrite” e-mails and an ad hominem entry in the Urban Dictionary because I solicited readers to contribute to my sister’s graduate school fund. Deficient synaptic activity prevented them from understanding that asking for private, voluntary donations is not the same as feeding on the government’s teat.)

Some actually believe it’s a politician’s “Christian duty” to demonstrate his faith by taking people’s money and giving it to others! Perhaps their version of the Bible is different from mine.

Certain folks masquerading as ministers of the Gospel cite Jesus’ physical feeding and healing ministry out of context to support their socialist/communist political agenda, while misleading people by failing to mention the whole point of the ministry and glossing over Jesus’ role as deliverer of God’s wrath and judger of sin.

The so-called social gospel is misguided and unbiblical. Nowhere in the Bible does God command Christians to take from one man to give to another. He calls each of us to give out of love and charity. But left-leaning folks would have us believe it is “Christian” to covet our neighbor, envy him, take his property, and give it to “the poor,” despite clear biblical teachings to the contrary.

Update: Blogging about religion always generates strong and sometimes erroneous responses. So that I don’t feel compelled to reply to every offensive and/or error-filled comment, I’ll simply point to related posts listed below and other posts in the Faith category. Somewhere in all that text is a response to specific questions and concerns you may have. I have no time to reinvent the microchip today, so I ask that dissenters read at least a few related posts in the archives before commenting.

People usually don’t read beyond one post, but in the words of prophet Jesse, I “keep hope alive.” :?

Update II: This is why I rarely blog about Scripture (or open up commenting when I do). For centuries, men have been grappling with textual meaning of Scripture and documenting their findings. There are millions of books and articles published that deal with questions about the Christian faith, from the most basic to the most profound. But posts like this bring all sorts out of the woodwork who’ve never read any of those books and articles or even the Bible. Yet, they come on to this blog, issuing “challenges” that have been asked, answered, and dealt with thousands of times over.

Not only do I wish I were a biblical scholar, I wish biblical scholars would flock to my blog whenever I wrote about faith just to address wrong-headed and disingenuous assertions that surely will follow. It’s very frustrating that people don’t even want to learn; they only want to be contrary. (The worst of these comments aren’t being approved).

Well, all I can do is pray that God will use me to reach the lost, that such posts help people understand my faith, and direct those who really want to understand the faith, as opposed to simply trolling, to the Faith category, where they’ll find dozens of links to outside sources, including the following (some of which are on the “Christian Resources” sidebar – please visit the sites):

Not that contrarians would ever consult these sources, I link to them anyway because they provide answers to the same old questions I see showing up in comments (or in the moderation queue) every time I blog about this topic.

Related posts:

Related Posts with Thumbnails

Previous post:

Next post: