From Godfather
Politics.
Bill
O’Reilly Bloviates Against Bible Thumpers
Bill O’Reilly stepped in
it the other day when he called those in opposition to homosexual marriage and
who use the Bible to make their case Bible Thumpers. This is typical of
O’Reilly. Christians who oppose same-sex sex don’t just “thump the Bible.” Do
Christians just “thump the Bible” when they argue that murder, rape, incest, stealing,
and other crimes are also found in the Bible?
I suspect that O’Reilly would argue that everybody knows
those behaviors are crimes. Everybody? How does anybody know? Where is it
written other than in our nation’s law books? These “crimes” certainly can’t be
observed in nature. Animals don’t commit crimes.
These laws are not written on our DNA, and even if they were, who or what says that they are crimes?
Here’s part of the exchange he had with Megyn Kelly on Fox News:
These laws are not written on our DNA, and even if they were, who or what says that they are crimes?
Here’s part of the exchange he had with Megyn Kelly on Fox News:
Megyn
Kelly: What I’m
saying is that when you ask — for example, I had an interview with Tony Perkins
of the Family Research Council. What is it about calling a marriage — calling a
gay union a marriage that offends you. How does it hurt a traditional, or a
heterosexual marriage? And I didn’t hear anything articulated that was
particularly persuasive. What people go back to —
Bill O’Reilly:
… I agree with you a 100-percent. . . . The compelling argument is on the side
of homosexuals. That’s where the compelling argument is. “We’re Americans. We
just want to be treated like everybody else. That’s a compelling argument. And
to deny that, you’ve got to have a very strong argument on the other side. And
the other side hasn’t been able to do anything but thump the Bible.
It’s unfortunate that a lot of anti-homosexual marriage advocates don’t know how to argue their case. The first question I would ask is: “Do you believe in moral absolutes?” If a person says no, I would then ask, “Then why are you supporting homosexual marriage as a moral issue if there are no moral absolutes? If a person says yes, I would then ask, “What is the basis of morality?”
The standard answers are social consensus, common sense, and more recently, shifting attitudes of public opinion. None of these are what could be called absolutist positions.
Homosexuals have hitched their wagon to the civil rights engine. Many Blacks resent it since civil rights is not a sex act.
It’s unfortunate that a lot of anti-homosexual marriage advocates don’t know how to argue their case. The first question I would ask is: “Do you believe in moral absolutes?” If a person says no, I would then ask, “Then why are you supporting homosexual marriage as a moral issue if there are no moral absolutes? If a person says yes, I would then ask, “What is the basis of morality?”
The standard answers are social consensus, common sense, and more recently, shifting attitudes of public opinion. None of these are what could be called absolutist positions.
Homosexuals have hitched their wagon to the civil rights engine. Many Blacks resent it since civil rights is not a sex act.
Thomas
Sowell writes that analogies that compare a ban on homosexual marriage to
“interracial marriage are bogus. Race is not part of the definition of
marriage. A ban on interracial marriage is a ban on the same actions otherwise
permitted, because of the race of the particular people involved. It is a
discrimination against people, not actions.”
Almost nobody asks the moral question. They’re afraid to,
and yet there is no other way to argue for or against any behavior. People like
Bill O’Reilly live off moral capital that has been stored up by people who for
centuries have appealed to the Bible.
The Bible built America. This is not to say that everybody who sent to the Bible to make a moral argument was right. The same can be said for any appeal to authority. It’s true that slavery was supported by the Bible. And it’s also true that slavery was denounced by the Bible. Who was right? A study of the Bible will show that biblical slavery deals with payments of debt. The type of slavery practiced in England and the United States is specifically condemned. It carries the death penalty. Kidnapping is a crime punishable by death: “He who kidnaps a man, whether he sells him or he is found in his possession, shall surely be put to death” (Ex. 21:16).
People disagree on what the Constitution says and means. Does this mean that the Constitution should no longer be appealed to as our nation’s civil authority?
Darwinism killed any possibility that there can be a fixed moral worldview. Even Natural Law has been logically decimated. How can there be a fixed Natural Law derived from nature when nature is evolving?
O’Reilly has one foot in his Roman Catholic upbringing and one foot firmly planted in the pragmatic worldview of secularism.
Where is the moral line now going to be drawn and why? Who says there is even a moral line to be drawn? Pre-Socratic Greek philosopher Heraclitus (c. 535 – c. 475 BC) said it this way: “Everything changes and nothing remains still . . . and . . . you cannot step twice into the same stream.”
It seems that no one is talking morality except the homosexuals and their supporters about how it’s immoral not to support people of the same sex who engage in a sexual relationship and call it marriage. Why marriage? Why not rule that marriage is a social construct rooted in religion and has a moral component to it that excluded homosexuality.
It makes no sense unless the goal is to reduce the Christian worldview to rubble. If that ever happens, moral anarchy will reign, and not even Bill O’Reilly will be able to hide from its consequences.
The Bible built America. This is not to say that everybody who sent to the Bible to make a moral argument was right. The same can be said for any appeal to authority. It’s true that slavery was supported by the Bible. And it’s also true that slavery was denounced by the Bible. Who was right? A study of the Bible will show that biblical slavery deals with payments of debt. The type of slavery practiced in England and the United States is specifically condemned. It carries the death penalty. Kidnapping is a crime punishable by death: “He who kidnaps a man, whether he sells him or he is found in his possession, shall surely be put to death” (Ex. 21:16).
People disagree on what the Constitution says and means. Does this mean that the Constitution should no longer be appealed to as our nation’s civil authority?
Darwinism killed any possibility that there can be a fixed moral worldview. Even Natural Law has been logically decimated. How can there be a fixed Natural Law derived from nature when nature is evolving?
O’Reilly has one foot in his Roman Catholic upbringing and one foot firmly planted in the pragmatic worldview of secularism.
Where is the moral line now going to be drawn and why? Who says there is even a moral line to be drawn? Pre-Socratic Greek philosopher Heraclitus (c. 535 – c. 475 BC) said it this way: “Everything changes and nothing remains still . . . and . . . you cannot step twice into the same stream.”
It seems that no one is talking morality except the homosexuals and their supporters about how it’s immoral not to support people of the same sex who engage in a sexual relationship and call it marriage. Why marriage? Why not rule that marriage is a social construct rooted in religion and has a moral component to it that excluded homosexuality.
It makes no sense unless the goal is to reduce the Christian worldview to rubble. If that ever happens, moral anarchy will reign, and not even Bill O’Reilly will be able to hide from its consequences.
Read more: http://godfatherpolitics.com/10115/bill-oreilly-bloviates-against-bible-thumpers/#ixzz2OxghlarT
4 comments:
We do have the moral codes in our DNA that's a biological spiritual fact. So if you need a man made partially fictional story book (bible) in order to tell you how to live or be burned to death go ahead but don't preach that judgeamental critical crap that allows one group of people to feel superior.
I have NEVER belonged to a religious sect from childhood but my God given DNA enhanced soul told me murder rape and all the other vile things was unacceptable. It also consumed me with every living being is a part of God/Source and we are all connected not one single being better or worse than the other regardless of the packaging.
That damn bible has caused the most intolerable suffering around the world since it was written. It rendered us seperate isolated and arrogant to any being that did not fit the script.
We are brothers and sisters ALL beautiful magnificent divine beings in our own right not seperate from God but PART of each of us with individual unique characteristics given to create in love.
We need to stop telling each other how to live to best suit someone else's hang ups and fix this world with love compassion and respect. One simple rule DO NO HARM
The bible people are going to have the worst time with the coming of the new world because they will not be able to hide behind the bible. You cannot act responsible for your choices and behavior when someone or something else tells you how to live and no change is needed cause due to reading the bible and demanding everyone also live by it if it goes sideways there's your ace in the hole Jesus will ride in on his white horse and save you regardless of how you've treated other beings. WAKE UP
God does not condemn. But they draw the line at free will. If it's against somebody's free will, then it's a no-no.
Your absolutely right that's why the universal law DO NO HARM is simplistic and amazingly attainable by any being even young children get it.
(The following paper was inspired by Bill O'Reilly whose TV show favors God Dumpers and not "Bible Thumpers." Quotes are from "Vital Quotations" by Emerson West.)
DANGEROUS BIBLE THUMPERS OF AMERICA
ROBERT E. LEE: "In all my perplexities and distresses, the Bible has never failed to give me light and strength." (p. 21)
DANIEL WEBSTER: "If we abide by the principles taught in the Bible, our country will go on prospering and to prosper." (p. 21)
JOHN QUINCY ADAMS: "I have made it a practice for several years to read the Bible through in the course of every year." (p. 22)
ABRAHAM LINCOLN: "I believe the Bible is the best gift God has ever given to man. All the good from the Saviour of the world is communicated to us through this book." (p. 22)
GEORGE WASHINGTON: "It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible." (p. 22)
HORACE GREELEY: "It is impossible to mentally or socially enslave a Bible-reading people." (p. 23)
THOMAS JEFFERSON: "I hold the precepts of Jesus as delivered by himself to be the most pure, benevolent, and sublime which have ever been preached to man. I adhere to the principles of the first age; and consider all subsequent innovations as corruptions of this religion, having no foundation in what came from him." (p. 45)
THOMAS JEFFERSON: "Had the doctrines of Jesus been preached always as pure as they came from his lips, the whole civilized world would by now have become Christian." (p. 47)
BENJAMIN FRANKLIN: "As to Jesus of Nazareth, my opinion of whom you particularly desire, I think the system of morals and his religion, as he left them to us, is the best the world ever saw, or is likely to see." (p.49)
WOODROW WILSON: "The sum of the whole matter is this----that our civilization cannot survive materially unless it be redeemed spiritually. It can only be saved by becoming permeated with the spirit of Christ and being made free and happy by practices which spring out of that spirit." (p. 143)
PATRICK HENRY: "There is a just God who presides over the destiny of nations." (p. 145)
THOMAS JEFFERSON: "Material abundance without character is the surest way to destruction." (p. 225)
THOMAS JEFFERSON: "Of all the systems of morality, ancient or modern, which have come under my observation, none appear to me so pure as that of Jesus." (p. 237)
GEORGE WASHINGTON: "The foolish and wicked practice of profane cursing and swearing is a vice so mean and low, that every person of sense and character detests and despises it." (p. 283)
BENJAMIN FRANKLIN: "Here is my creed. I believe in one God, the Creator of the universe. That he governs it by his Providence. That he ought to be worshiped." (p. 301)
CALVIN COOLIDGE: "The strength of a country is the strength of its religious convictions." (p. 305)
GEORGE WASHINGTON: "The perpetuity of this nation depends upon the religious education of the young." (p. 306)
Prior to our increasingly "Hell-Bound and Happy" era, America's greatest leaders were part of the (gulp) Religious Right! Today we've forgotten God's threat (to abort America) in Psa. 50:22----"Now consider this, ye that forget God, lest I tear you in pieces, and there be none to deliver." Memo to God Dumpers: In light of Rev. 16:19, can you be sure you won't be in a city that God has already reserved for destruction?
/ What's above? An amazing little piece that I bumped into on the web. Enjoy. /
Post a Comment