We are all bigots about something I guess. Barack Obama's longtime pastor and mentor seems to be bigoted against white people. Barack himself is more open-minded, saving his for the attitudes of "typical white person(s)"- such as his grandmother. He also does not seem to think much of the attitudes and aspirations of white working-class Pennsylvanians who are suffering from the evaporation of jobs from that state. When asked about his lack of poll support among that group, he described them as people who have ``gotten bitter and cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them
The evidence is quite strong that Barack Hussein Obama is bigoted against people like me. I am not from Pennsylvania, but I am a white working-class person who (like most of the Founding Fathers) is an orthodox Christian and strong supporter of the right to bear arms. Fortunately for his political aspirations, the dominant media largely share Obama's bigotries, so that to them it appears as if he has none. To them this sort of attitude is not bigotry, but simply "the way it obviously is". Most bigots are blinded to their own bigotry, even those who are quick to attack the presumed bigotries of others.
Now I could just stop here and say that I have as much right to mine as they do to theirs, but I am not. My position is that I have more
right to mine than they do to theirs because what they might see as my "bigotries" are grounded in realty and truth while theirs are grounded in absurd delusions
about the nature of human beings and the governments which they create.
I take his three "clingings" one at a time. Each should be measured against its statist secular liberal alternative....
- The right of self-defense is a natural right which predates the Government of the United States and therefore is not a grant of the government nor does the government have any legitimate authority to take it away. That is why the Second Amendment does not
say "the people shall have the right to bear arms", rather it says "the right of the people to keep and bear arms". The right is assumed, not granted.
The preferred alternative of statist secular liberals to free citizens keeping arms to defend against crime, and as a last resort government tyranny, is to trust the government for all security. This is an irrational position when one considers both local events and world history for the past 100 years. For local crime, most police forces are better at catching a criminal after they have perpetrated some awful crime than they are at preventing the awful crime in the first place. World-wide, despite the brutal wars we have experienced, more people have been murdered by the government of their own country than have died as soldiers in combat with the soldiers of other countries.
Because of these facts and the overwhelming strength of the objective evidence, it is more rational to "cling" to your own gun as a last resort for security than it is to relinquish all of your personal means of defense and entrust it completely to government officials.
: I don't defend all "religion" here, because some religions are irrational and destructive. Still, the majority of the people that Obama was talking about are orthodox Christians. They believe in the God of the Bible. They want to live their lives the way He says that they should. The universe contains plenty of evidence that it was created by a Supreme Power. As one looks through human history, if ever that Supreme Power has come among men it surely was in the form of Jesus Christ, who changed human history.
Christianity has changed countless lives for the better, shaped the Western civilization that brought so much progress to humanity, and is the most dominant faith on the planet. The only other religion that is even close to "global" is Islam, which relies on forced conversions and violence to intimidate subjects from leaving of their own free will. No, clinging to the Christian religion is not irrational at all. It is the most rational choice one can make when considering both the broad scope of historical evidence and the effect that the teachings of Jesus Christ have on the soul of the honest seeker who hears them.
Clinging to God is not irrational, but rather it is the secular liberal alternative of clinging to a god-like nanny state that is irrational. Men like Obama want people to look to government for every need of life. Ultimately, government cannot fulfill man's needs- not even in this life, much less in whatever eternity lies beyond the grave. It is far more rational to cling to God than to government.
3) antipathy to people who aren't like them
: Whether or not this is as irrational as the liberal alternative depends on the sense in which it is meant. If the "difference" is merely race, then it is irrational and is a violation of point two, since it conflicts with orthodox Christian teaching about the brotherhood of all men. If the "difference" is between legal citizens and those who barged into this country illegally, then that is another matter. It is perfectly rational for those who obey the law to have antipathy for those who disregard it. In fact, it is impossible for the rule of law to be sustained unless the law abiding are permitted to have disdain for those who break it.
The problem on illegal immigration is that Mr. Obama (like McCain and most of the others) really represents large corporations who want a free flow of labor to depress wages below the level that an honest free-market would permit. While they demand you respect all of the stupid laws which they make to favor their contributors, they themselves feel free to flout the laws on illegal immigration- and imply you are a bigot if you dare to utter a word in protest.
If by "different from themselves" it is meant a difference between those who share and respect our culture, morals, and traditions and those who disregard or disrespect them, then once again the thinking of the Pennsylvanians is more rational than that of the statists like Obama. Despite all the happy-feel-good talk about multiculturalism, the actual record of multi-cultural societies is one of division, friction, and bloodshed. American worked as a melting pot, but if cold ore is added in faster than the fires of community can melt them down, then the melting pot is broken. Other fires can then take hold, and they bode ill for our country. I am not only talking about illegal immigrants here. The debauched Hollyweird crowd, militant homosexuals, and Nation of Islam race warriors are in this group as well.
Antipathy for the Godless left who have coarsened our culture, undermined our values, and made it exponentially more difficult for families to raise well-adjusted children is completely justified and eminently rational. A continued prozac-response, where we lack the energy or moral fiber to protest the cultural polluters among us, is a far less moral response than antipathy. I only wish enough of us would raise the level of antipathy toward these people until they respond to it and quit "pushing the envelope" of deviancy any further. The only thing to the credit of some of them is that they are honest about being anti-god. I have the greatest antipathy for those of the Godless left who are dishonest enough to conceal their unbelief in the teachings of Christ and His Apostles with vague "God talk".