The religion that wasn’t there for a God who Is

Liberalism, secularists, and intolerance


Intolerance is an funny thing. When you hear people brandishing the word, it’s usually coming from someone foaming at the mouth, accusing someone of being a fascist over issues about immigration or culture. It is defined as “unwillingness or refusal to tolerate or respect contrary opinions or beliefs, persons of different races or backgrounds, etc.” As an immigrant and a visible minority I’ve certainly experienced it first hand. However, contrary to contemporary mythology, intolerance is usually an experience I’ve encountered when talking to white liberals.

Originating in Hollywood, rigid stereotypes about the various political classes are embedded in discourse.  The conservative spectrum of the political divide is charactured as being a bunch of people who take a ‘my way or the highway’ attitude with people who come from different backgrounds.  All people to the right of centre are racists, militarists, and long for a society in which flag burning can be punished with the death penalty.  Nothing could be further from the truth. The thing that liberals don’t understand about conservatives is that they value individual freedom more than any other ideal. The conservative mindset can best be described as ‘I have my way of doing things, you have yours.’ It is about being true to oneself. Because if you can’t be honest about what beliefs you hold dear to your heart, how can you call yourself an authentic human? In contrast people who paint themselves as “progressives” often have no beliefs of their own. Their opinions reflect what the New York Times, the Guardian, or the Globe and Mail tell them to think.  Left wing politics is as much about fashion as  anything else. 

One belief absent amongst the left is the notion of national exceptionalism – American or otherwise. Patriotism in general is a virtue found in greater quantities among conservatives. I myself am fiercely nationalistic, and proud of it.  There is no rationalized reason for my position, it is just based on feeling. Every time I set foot on my homesoil after long absences I experience something that no poet could ever describe. Mine is the greatest nation in the world. And if anybody challenges me about why, or whether I should feel about my country the way that I do, it won’t be long before rational debate goes out the window and someone gets a black eye. To some, such positions are absurd. But for myself, it is essential to the core of my being. When I’m in a foriegn country I always feel like a part of my soul is missing. As if the most important pieces of the puzzle are missing from the box. Why is it that way? I don’t know. Socrates and other philosophers have extolled the social contract, and the importance of honouring ones country…but in the end it is always going to be impossible to explain perfectly. One explicable component of this feeling is of being washed over by something great, far greater than oneself. It leaves me slightly awed and quite humbled. 

And this is where the deficiencies  of many modern “progressives” arise.   It isn’t that they are incapable of feeling what patriotism is. I know that loving ones nation is something that applies to people of all political stripes. When a liberal sees something great about their country, it is in a relation to their own personalized glorification of themselves.

It is humility that is absent from such people.

Humility is the thing that is lacking in the thought process of liberals, socialists, communists, and other types of degenerates. Post-modernism is based upon the delusion that the ‘world is simply what we make of it’.  There’s no such thing as objectivity, good, or evil. Closely tied to this worldview is atheism. The atheist is incapable of humility because they are their own judge and jury, they are the final authority. Around this rejection of objective morality is built most modern philosophies. These are the principles which Marx and Nietzsche both started with. And even though history has proven the inherent evil of such paradigms, the self-appointed intellectual elite of today refuse to see these ideas for what they are.

The original deadly sin is pride.  It is the pride the modern intellectual that leads them to think that humans are malleable and can shaped into something better. Whether this be the proletariat of communism, or the superman of nazism, or the mindless secular pluralist of today.   

At it’s worst such ideas result in genocides. In smaller situations they manifest in any number of ways, the example par excellance is religious intolerance.  The secularist priestesses ram home the mantra that all religions are equal, that they believe all religions have an equal share of the truth, and that all religions should be tolerated. Except for Catholicism.  Because Catholicism claims  to be the one true faith, the only church established by God himself, Catholics just aren’t hip to times. Under the banner of tolerance Catholics are therefore regarded as second-class people. Such renegades against “inclusion” are usually thought of as being ignorant, and with just the right amount of education will come around to the politically correct way of looking at this.

I’ve been a Christian my whole life, but I’ve always tried to take a ‘softly, softly’ approach when discussing matters of faith. My religious beliefs are the single most important thing in my life. An individual’s relationship with God is an inheritably complex, and deep concern, which can’t always be easily summed up in casual conversation. For this reason I try not preach to others who do not share my view, and allow for respectful differences to exist. However, it is inevitable  that eventually in the course of discussions concerning politics, gender etc., that I must make explicit reference to teachings of the church. When this situation arises, I tend to do one of two things: state my position bluntly and honestly, or passively lay out view in a way which will appease the party I’m talking to.  Placating people who are “open-minded” is actually quite difficult, as they are always eager to tell you that you are not open-minded because you do not share their views. And so I often find myself compromising for expediencies sake.  More and more, I can see that when I do the latter, I’m really just lying to myself. Each time I do this, I betray my faith and logic. I am no longer the person I really am simply because I want to avoid conflict.

And conflict is something I see too often when people of faith tell it like it really is. This year saying that God made man and woman for a purpose will tar you as a bigot. To state that the life of an unborn child is sovereign and should be protected by law can only mean one thing : you are “anti-woman”.

When two people of faith are in disagreement on an issue, the nature of the discussion tends to be a debate in which the intelligence of both parties are acknowledged and respected. It matters not if the exchange be between protestant and catholic, or christian and muslim. Religion naturally instills some degree of humility in the believer .But when a person of faith is in disagreement with someone who “believes in science”, I can start counting to ten in full knowledge that sly, disrespectful remarks will be uttered before I finish counting. In popular culture the unwarranted condescending attitude I’m referring to is epitomized by Richard Dawkins. For instance his branding of anyone who does not accept the principles of Darwinian theory is automatically dismissed as an ignorant lout. It is lost on such people that strong cases can be made in metaphysics, mathematics, and epistemology that the basis of their “science” is incorrect. Blithely ignoring history, and the fact that all of modern science comes from men who believed in God , they say religion and reason are incompatible. 

As a child growing up in a nearly all-white environment I occassionally had to hear such racial slurs as ‘nigger’ and ‘pakki’. As hurtful such words are, I find it more offensive when someone derides my religious beliefs. It is also incredibly frustrating that less educated and intelligent people than myself would write off my opinions because I’m a Christian.  When someone makes a racial slur, they are only insulting what a person appears to be. The very notion of race has been proven to a myth. Skin colour does not make me who I am. Whereas being a Christian IS who I am. It’s impossible to seperate the identity of myself (Stephen) from what I believe in (God). Do that and Stephen no longer exists. The self-appointed liberal intellectual elite, who so kindly come down to the level of the coloured person are really the most oppressive group of people that I know.

Tagged , , , ,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

The Xcollektiv

A collaborative creative dialogue between visual-artists, writers, filmmakers, performers and the public.

Hillsdale Natural Law Review

Applying Hillsdale's Learning to the World

David Gaughran

Let's Get Digital

Truth to Ponder

Considering realities


"Teach what I have commanded you to teach."

Southern Reformation

Reforming the Churches of the South...


Striving to live Bible-based & Gospel-centered


Everything football from a 10 year old boy = FOOTY10

Classical Music Fan

Just another weblog is the best place for your personal blog or business site.