Wednesday, July 7, 2010

You go, Ann Coulter and Glenn Beck --on Kagan "What a Sack of Sacrosanct!"

The following are two quoted pieces by Ann and Glenn --nothing by me. I don't use the block quotation mechanism here because it's a less readable, fainter blue. Perhaps if I tinkered with it....but for assured this is all Ann followed by all Glenn.

Ann Coulter
What a Sack of Sacrosanct

"In The New York Times’ profile on the family of Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan, her aunt was quoted as saying: “There was thinking, always thinking” at the family’s dinner table. “Nothing was sacrosanct.” "

"Really? Nothing was sacrosanct? Because in my experience, on a scale of 1-to-infinity, the range of acceptable opinion among New York liberals goes from 1-to-1.001.

How would the following remarks fare at a dinner table on the Upper West Side where “nothing was sacrosanct”: "Hey, maybe that Joe McCarthy was onto something." " What would prayer in the schools really hurt? " "How do we know gays are born that way?" "Is it possible that union demands have gone too far?" "Does it make sense to have three recycling bins in these microscopic Manhattan apartments?" "Say, has anyone read Charles Murray’s latest book?"

Those comments, considered “conversation starters” in most of the country, would get you banned from polite society in New York. Also, unless you want the whole room slowly backing away from you, also avoid: "May I smoke?" "I heard it on Fox News" and "Merry Christmas!"

Even members of survivalist Christian cults in Idaho at least know people who hold opposing views. New York liberals don’t.

As Kagan herself described it, on the Upper West Side of New York where she grew up, “Nobody ever admitted to voting Republican.” So, I guess you could say being a Democrat was “sacrosanct.”

Even within the teeny-tiny range of approved liberal opinion in New York, disagreement will get you banned from the premises."


Glenn Beck

"When, as dean of the Harvard Law School, Kagan disagreed with the Bill Clinton policy of “Don’t ask, don’t tell” for gays in the military, she open-mindedly banned military recruiters from the law school, denouncing Clinton’s policy as “discriminatory,” “deeply wrong,” “unwise and unjust.”

From this, I conclude that having gays serving openly in the military is “sacrosanct” for liberals.

Having gays NOT serve in the military is a position held by lots of people in other parts of the country, but I do not recall any Christian colleges banning military recruiters because the schools believed “Don’t ask, don’t tell” went too far the other way.

Not only is every weird, shared delusion of the New York liberal deemed sacrosanct, but what ought to be sacrosanct — off the top of my head, human life — isn’t.

As Stan Evans says, whatever liberals disapprove of, they want banned (smoking, guns, practicing Christianity, ROTC, the Pledge of Allegiance) and whatever they approve of, they make mandatory (abortion-on-demand, gay marriage, pornography, condom distribution in public schools, screenings of “An Inconvenient Truth”).

When liberals say, “nothing is sacrosanct,” they mean “nothing other Americans consider sacrosanct is sacrosanct.” They demonstrate their open-mindedness by ridiculing other people’s dogma, but will not brook the most trifling criticism of their own dogmas.

Thus, for example, liberals sneer at the bluenoses and philistines of the “religious right” for objecting to taxpayer-funding of a crucifix submerged in a jar of urine, but would have you banned from public life for putting Matthew Shepard in a jar of urine, with or without taxpayer funding. [Barb--not that anyone should condone cruelty or ridicule of the Matthew Shepards either --but Jesus Christ vs. Shepard??? Is there a reason why Jesus shouldn't be respected by liberals as Shepard is?]

These famously broad-minded New Yorkers — “thinking, always thinking” — actually booed Mayor Rudy Giuliani when he showed up at the opera after pulling city funding from a museum exhibit that included a painting of the Virgin Mary plastered with close-up pornographic photos of women’s vulvas.

(The New York Times fair-mindedly refused to ever mention the vulvas, instead suggesting that the mayor’s objection was to the cow dung used in the composition.)

Has a decision to fund or not fund “art” ever gotten a politician in any other part of the country booed in public? And how might the Times refer to citizens booing a mayor who had withdrawn taxpayer funding for a painting of Rosa Parks covered in pornography?

If New York liberals insist on bragging about their intellectual bravado in believing “nothing is sacrosanct,” it would really help if they could stop being the most easily offended, P.C., group-think, thin-skinned weanies in the entire universe and maybe ease up on the college “hate speech” codes, politically correct firings, and bans on military recruiters.

With that in mind, here are some questions it would be fun to ask a New York liberal like Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan at her hearings next week:

– Roughly one-third of Americans are Evangelical Christians. Do you personally know any Evangelical Christians? Name two.

– In 1972, Richard Nixon was elected president with more than 60 percent of the vote, winning every state except Massachusetts and the District of Columbia. How many people do you know who voted for Nixon?

– Appropriate or inappropriate: Schools passing out condoms to seventh-graders? Schools passing out cigarettes to seventh-graders?

– Who is a greater threat to America, Sarah Palin or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad?"


"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible


Jeanette said...

I had to read this twice as I was confused as to whether these were your words summarizing Coulter and Beck, or if they were their words.

Admittedly, the first reading was during one of my insomnia moments and I was not able to pay much attention to it.

I know see it is a word for word post with the words of the aforementioned people.

First, Ann Coulter can make some good points but has made herself irrelevant by her silly way of conducting herself. She is sarcastic and not funny, though she would like to be seen as making a funny point on any given topic.

Beck is a thinker and is trying to make us think. I had never even heard of him until a few months ago and have recently watched about two of his programs. He gets a bit dramatic, but his insight seems to be spot-on and he does his research.

I would say these things said about New York apply to every liberal in the country. You and I know of one right where you live.

I put no stock in having a crucifix dipped in urine in order to infuriate me because I see a crucifix as an idol. Jesus came down off the cross and the Catholics seem, for some reason, to like to keep Him there. He had to come down from the cross to go to the grave and be resurrected and ascended into Heaven to present our pardon to the Father.

Keeping Him on the cross shows they believe He's still there. At least in my mind.

Barb, if you could make it easier for someone like me to differentiate your words from someone else's by using the command blockquote the same as you would for any other command with the less than and more than symbols being sure to put a slash, /, to close blockquote, it would make it much easier to determine your thoughts from those of people you quote.

Barb said...

It IS hard to distinguish me from the professional pundits! Ha!
So I put my disclaimer and rationale for not always using the auto-block quote on my blog since you pointed out your difficulty. Perhaps if I did the manual block quote method it would keep the same font and color....

Ann Coulter is not irrelevant to me because her points are good.

Likewise, Glenn Beck --who is over the top in his drama on air. Obviously Coulter is a thinker, too. And I like her clever wit. Sometimes her on-screen personna is over-the-top with sarcasm --and I read a self-conscious vulnerability in her, too --that she doesn't really enjoy being unpopular with and criticized by people who share her ideology. She is occasionally defensive. But she's not an evangelical with our idea of what it is to come across as "spiritual." I believe she is Catholic, like Bill O'reilly, but I'm not sure.

As for the urine art work, it should be offensive to all Christians as intended --because the artist's point is hatefully anti-faith, anti-Christ --rather than just anti-Catholic crucifixes with which protestants would agree --but we would never offend the idea of Christ on the Cross with such an art piece. Christ on the cross does depict His suffering and what He did for us --though protestants note that the act was "finished" on the cross -and thus we don't keep crucifying Christ in the mass as Catholics do --nor have crucifixes in our churches and on our necklaces.

Protestants know that the Mass is not needed for the atonement of our sins --only our faith in the completed work on the cross. As you point out, the atonement occured 2000 years ago --our job is to believe, repent and follow Him, living lives of service as in matt. 25.

Cousin David said...

To be a Catholic is to believe first and foremost that Jesus is the only Son of God who became man, suffered, died and was buried, rose again and then ascended into heaven -- all so that the sins of man could be forgiven.

We believe that because we are Christians who, of course, do not think Jesus is still on the cross. That would make no sense at all for any number of reasons.

And I don't want to start any debate on Catholicism vs. anything - my argument is we're all Christians, there are more important things to worry about. I take a pretty definitive stand on it and won't be swayed.

And, besides, you can't argue about what it means to be Catholic anymore, it is ever more personal, especially in America. Vast numbers of Catholics do not agree on many of the "classical" tenets of Catholicism from church to church, parish to parish, priest to priest, country to country -- but you can hang your hat on they all believe the words set forth in the Nicene Creed or the Profession of Faith - which is pretty simple and straight forward.

Anyway, I agree that there is a problem with the crucifix. It's representative of Catholicism's historical tendency to focus on the negative. A crucifix is a constant reminder that Jesus suffered and died for your sins (and that is ALL it is).

I think the church itself would rather you focused on the fact that He is risen, (_I_ would rather focus on the fact that He is risen!) but the crucifix is a tradition and its not going away any time soon, and Catholicism still, too often, has that negative focus tendency, which is kind of summed up in our use of the crucifix.

Barb said...

Welcome, Cuz --though you are my nephew and Rob's Cuz.

Missed you last weekend --hear you are coming home soon. We are proud of you. If you have time, come see us -go to our zoo and art museum and restaurants.

YOu have passed the "microphone test" --as Bill Hybels called it when we were in Chicago and attended Willow Creek Church recently--the grandpappy and founder of many of today's evangelical "mega churches."

How to "absolutely know you are saved." was his theme --or "some things you should be absolutely sure of."

The "microphone test," he says, is passed when you state your faith in the risen Christ -as in the Nicene Creed --and tell others of your faith. Because of the verse where Jesus says He will confess us before His father in Heaven if we confess Him before men --and that He will not claim us before His Father if we will not profess our faith in Him before men. When you join a church, or get baptized --or simply tell others --as on a blog -- you are making such a public profession.

The other two ways to know you are saved is by the witness of His Spirit, the sense of His leading, promptings, PRESENCE. A Presence God wants to give --as when Jesus said, "if an earthly father knows how to give good gifts to his children, how much more will the Heavenly Father be willing to give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him." "Draw near to God and He will draw near to you."

Your great grandfather was indeed a Man of God's Spirit --a jolly, joyful, sweet-natured man--I wish we had tapes of his sermons. He was in demand in evangelical circles, as a revival speaker. He was funny --deeply emotional --and wise. He'd be glad to know of your faith. Perhaps he does know.

and then thirdly, God removes the fear of death, etc. because He gives us the spirit of sonship. And if we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive and cleanse. (cont)

Barb said...

(cont.) We can be absolutely sure of our salvation because of His promises and our faith which gives us "sonship." "For you did not receive a spirit that makes you a slave again to fear, but you received the Spirit of sonship. And by him we cry, "Abba, Father."

Jeanette and I have both at different times in blogging defended devout believing Catholics as Christians --even though we are not Catholics ourselves. We know you can belong to ANY church or faith tradition and be a true believer and follower of Christ --or not.

YOu are right that the crucifix, with or without Christ on it, is not a significant difference between our respective churches. It is a visual reminder of His sacrifice which saved us.

You have embraced the protestant take on the subject, however --seeing the cross without Christ on it being more of a symbol of his resurrection and ascension.

Catholics are like Methodists --in that the individual churches vary in their spirituality and fervor -according to their priests or ministers and their people. Some are very Bible-bound and conservative; others more liberal and re-interpreting the Bible on the nature of good and evil, sin and righteousness.

Come visit now and then. I wonder if you are the serviceman reader who shows up on my Site-Meter as a serviceman on the equator south of Liberia?

Jeanette said...

I wasn't knocking Catholicism. I just stated that Jesus on the cross today represents an idol to me. Mary is an idol when put inside the building of a church. And all others.

I know many Catholics I believe will be in Heaven with the rest of us. It is not an exclusively Protestant or Baptist or Methodist etc. club. It is for all of mankind who confess with their mouths that Jesus Christ is Lord.

Roland Hansen said...


Cousin David said...

Well, I should certainly not show up as South of Liberia! I don't think I've ever been South of Liberia, in either hemisphere...

Sometimes our internet overseas is routed through Virginia, so that even though you are in Iraq or Afghanistan it looks like you are computing in VA, but there are surely Soldiers out there somewhere...

I mostly show up for stories about Grandma from time to time, but I enjoy browsing through your blog.

I told Derrick the other day that she may not be the Grandma we knew, exactly, but its like that sweet lady that would be surprised by a kiss and say, "Oh! Well, thank you..." is all that's left. There was always a kind of wide-eyed innocence and sweetness in that response that tickles me to this day and now she is like the embodiment of that side of her personality -- and that really isn't so bad.

And I'm sure Grandpa Mason knows...

Barb said...

Hi Roland! Nice to hear from you. I'll have to stop in at your blog and see what you are up to.

David, I haven't been waxing philosophical about your grandma lately --I don't want to be thought disrespectful -- it's really a sad thing, dementia, and the decline of one's mental being, but she tends to amuse. She is not suffering, basically, is just confused and trying to hang on to autonomy which is so hard with that darn Barbara!!! She packed her suitcase --and was so agonized that I opened it up and started to undo her progress --but she had packed not one pair of slacks to go to your folks house --but a lot of wooly sweaters. She actually got HOT at your folks home --outdoors anyway. Mom smuggles her things away --I know not where! She is constantly "archiving" her wardrobe --and letters she had received. Doesn't remember who those folks are, however.