What ever happened to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness"?

[olde_fashioned]

I feel compelled, by recent replies to my other posts of a political nature, to warn anyone of Democratic, liberal, or otherwise left-leaning politics that I'm posting this because at the moment I feel like expressing myself on my own blog, (even though I'm sure some comments will make me regret it later), not to offend anyone intentionally but to voice my own feelings on a subject which is surely foremost in the majority of minds in this country, if not the world. So this is a warning that few populi will like what I'm about to say, so don't both clicking the cut line if you're not able to read opposing viewpoints and comment like a sensible adult. Everyone is welcome to comment, only refrain from giving me the broadside, please.



Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. What does that even mean any more? It means "a woman's right to choose, tolerance of all things immoral, and the separation of church and state." Perhaps we should just strike out the "life" part and replace it with "choice," remove the "liberty," trade it for "tolerance," eliminate the "happiness," swapping it for "all about me" and have done with it.

What happened to a human being's "inalienable rights"? It seems they go out the window when that being becomes an unwanted burden, or a "threat" to a woman's life. We can have liberty, and freedom of speech, so long as we don't exercise that freedom proclaiming our beliefs if they happen to be in opposition to what is politically correct. We can't have any Christianity in our government, but the government wants to tell us what we can and can't preach in those religions. The likes of Rosie O'Donnell can talk about how horrible Christians are, and Evolutionists can curse those who believe in Creation, but heaven forbid a Christian should speak out against homosexuality or the idea that we evolved from apes.

What is wrong with this picture?

Thomas Jefferson wrote in 1809, "The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government."

Oh, how much can change in two hundred years. In 2009, the object of our government (and a saddeningly large portion of American citizens) seems to be to deny helpless human beings their right to life and happiness, by destroying them under the blessing of the very lawmakers that are supposed to protect them.

This is the same Thomas Jefferson, by the way, that ended his oft-quoted "separation of church and state" letter with, I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection and blessing of the common Father and creator of man." So very interesting, isn't it? That the man whose words have been used for decades as an excuse to rid this country of it's godly foundations was also a fervent Christian himself.

I often wonder, how different would our Founding Fathers have designed our Declaration of Independence, how differently would they have worded our Constitution, and how much would they lament the turn this country has taken, if they could see us now?

I am very glad, that they cannot see us now, for I think we would break their hearts.

I think it would break their hearts, as it breaks mine, that we are on the verge of electing the most liberal senator who has a record worse than the likes of Hillary Clinton and Ted Kennedy (!!) into the highest office in the land. That we might very well have a Muslim as our next president, who is not even man enough or faithful enough to admit that he was born and raised in that religion, who is ashamed of America, has promised to sign into law the Freedom of Choice Act which will once again make partial-birth abortions legal, who wants to deny babies who have already been born basic human rights, and who wants to have tea parties with our international enemies who would probably take very great pleasure out of nuking us off the face of the planet.

I wish the liberals that had vowed to flee the country when Bush was elected had left, then perhaps we would not have to worry about the fate of our country.

I hope God saves this country from herself.

Comments

[ceallaighgirl.livejournal.com]

remove the "liberty," trade it for "tolerance,"

This reminds me of a book that recently came out called "Tyranny of Nice". I haven't read it yet (I plan on it though!), but I read one of the co-authors' blog every day, and I think you might find that to be a really good book.

I'd be careful about calling Obama a Muslim though, I think it kind of hurts our cause a bit. I'm not convinced that he is (though I'm not convinced that he's a Christian either), I don't think there's really any practical evidence that he's a Muslim anyway (my suspicion is that he had to be listed as "Muslim" to be placed in the school in which he was placed since that country is so heavily Muslim) . . . and really, the fact that he's a Marxist and essentially pro-abortion is argument against him enough.

[victoria-tonks.livejournal.com]

he fact that he's a Marxist and essentially pro-abortion is argument against him enough.

I knew about his pro-abortion views (which are scaring the living daylights out of me, thruth be told) but a Marxist?? Oh my word. I come from a post-communist country where we had the bad luck to test the Marxist/Leninist theories on our backs, so to say, for 44 years (and 19 years after 1989, we're still struggling with the remnants of socialism) so the mere thought that someone - a prominent politician! - can still stick to this system, is beyond scary. Gah, I can't believe it. :(((

[ceallaighgirl.livejournal.com]

I think that 20 years ago the fact that he's a marxist would have mattered to most people, but we've passed so far away from that era now that people either don't know what marxism is, or they don't care and view it as a good thing. They don't really understand the full implications of it.

Where are you from (if you don't mind me asking)?

[victoria-tonks.livejournal.com]

I do apologize for such a late reply. I've been on a break from my online activity lately, so to say - RL takes over sometimes. ;)

I'm from Poland and, as I'm in my very late thirties, I do remember socialism here. Praxis, not theory - but I think we have quite a good grasp of what it means in reality.

Personally, I'm amazed at how many people in the US seem to long for this model of economy. My experience is that the redistribution of goods never, ever works properly; other than that it feeds the whole army of clerks who have the real power of decision. Money rarely goes to those in need, really.

But then, my perspective is that of the awful European (both post-socialistic and EU) bureaucracy - and yours is this of possibly the freest economy in the world. I suppose there's a happy medium somewhere in between. It's all very difficult, though. No perfect solutions anyway, I suppose. *sigh*

[olde-fashioned.livejournal.com]

Looks interesting! I don't know a whole lot about Canada, but I expect you to remedy that for me and all the rest of your f-listers when you go to live there, eh? ;-P lol.

How does it hurt our cause? People call McCain another Bush when he's obviously not.

http://obamawtf.blogspot.com/2008/07/new-torker-cover-portrays-obama-as.html

[ceallaighgirl.livejournal.com]

It hurts our cause because it's intellectually dishonest and it makes us look pretty bad in the eyes of the people who are middle of the road. Just because the other side isn't being honest, that doesn't mean that we should do the same.

[olde-fashioned.livejournal.com]

Intellectually dishonest! Deborah, I'm not just saying whatever I want like a Democrat. Do you think I'm lying?

Didn't you read the link I gave you?

[ceallaighgirl.livejournal.com]

I read the link that you gave me. It didn't give any convincing evidence that Obama is still a Muslim. In fact, it's not even convincing that he truly was ages 6-10. Especially if you consider in our country, hundreds of people went to Catholic school when they were elementary-aged and are most definitely not Catholic today.

I'm more inclined to believe that if he worships anyone, it's simply himself. (*gag*)

[olde-fashioned.livejournal.com]

Well it raises enough questions, let's put it that way. And his idea of a "Christian" church is pretty scary, you must admit.

I'm just a little taken aback that you implied that I was playing the political game and lying about something to serve my own ends, that's all.

I'm more inclined to believe that if he worships anyone, it's simply himself.

UGH!

[ceallaighgirl.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I don't really have a problem with questioning his (former) church. 20 years and not knowing how extreme the pastor is? That's not very discerning . . .

No no no I don't mean at all that you're playing the political game or lying or anything. I think I must have come across the wrong way (internets is like that). What I think is that it's an argument that we shouldn't use since we don't have any hard evidence of him currently being a Muslim, to the middle-of-the-roaders it it discredits us a bit, especially when there are so many other good arguments that we can use against him anyway that it's unnecessary.

UGH!

Well, he IS the Messiah . . . :-P

[olde-fashioned.livejournal.com]

Yeah, so much for being a good decision maker!!

Okay. :-) And I know it's hard to come off the "right" way online, which is why I use smilies a lot to show what my face normally would in real life conversation. ;-)

I see what you mean now.

Well, he IS the Messiah . . . :-P

Oh gawsh... *facepalm*