Take Control of the Debate.

Conservative author and commentator William F....

Conservative author and commentator William F. Buckley, Jr. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

As we move into July, with the dreadful baggage of June behind us, I find myself in a reflective mood. Three years ago this month, the Robert’s court, for the first but not last time, threw the law of the land under the bus to save Obamacare SCOTUScare. The day after that, I followed a comment on that, to Jessica’s blog All along the Watchtower, and there I found the exceptional young woman who would become my dearest friend, muse, mentor, guide, editor, and above all, teacher. Her love, for me, n particular, for mankind in general, and above all for God, has made a huge improvement in my life, the largest since the death of my father. For the many of you who remember her contributions here fondly, she continues to slowly recover from her cancer, mostly in seclusion at the convent in Walsingham.

In any case, I was reminded of one of her posts today, when I read on her website, Geoffrey Sales post, Too much about Sex, because one of Jess’ themes has always been that we focus much too much on the material, instead of the spiritual. As she wrapped up 2013 for us here, she made the point this way.

I sometimes wonder to what extent this concentration of material things is a function of our societies forgetting about God, or thinking He must be confined to the private sphere?  It is easy enough (which is why it gets done so often) to focus on the bad things which came from a time when society was more Christian: the intolerance of other views; the attempts to force belief on others; the narrow-mindedness of some believers, and the like; it is little use pointing out that these features were also to be found in non-Christian societies and seem to be art of mankind’s development (where it does develop); those who wish to blame Christianity for the world’s ills will do so regardless of the evidence. But there is another side to it all. The values which Christianity espouses are about personal responsibility but also altruism: you take responsibility for your own sins; but you are saved by God’s mercy; you are part of a Christian family, and you have responsibilities to others; you are not better than others, but others are no better than you: at your worst you are a sinner; at your best you are also made in God’s image. Redemption is always possible. No one is so bad God cannot save them; no one is so good that they do not need God’s forgiveness.

All of that gives a focus to life which takes us beyond narrow definitions of self-interest, and which helps put material wealth in a proper perspective. There’s nothing in Christianity which says money is wrong; there’s a great deal which says that loving money more than people is very wrong; it is bad for you and bad for the society of which you are a part. The moment you begin to regard another human being as somehow instrumental in a search for personal wealth, whatever you may gain, you are losing your soul.  Christianity has been responsible for education and social and health care long before civil society took an interest in such matters; it has inspired some great art and architecture. It is easy enough (and therefore often done) to think that a Church should simply sell off anything that can be sold to feed the poor, but that ignores so much about the motive for the art and architecture, and it betrays an attitude towards religion which comes from the purely material world.

Men and women have given of their gifts freely to God and His service, and some of these have been great artists and architects. They take us beyond the realm of the everyday to visions of what can be, they raise our eyes above the horizon of the possible towards what could be. It is good for the human spirit to have that, as it is good for it to repent of sin and to help others; all of these are part of what it is to be really human.  In losing these dimensions, our modern society threatens to shrink our world to the merely possible and the expedient. It was not thus that mankind advanced, nor will it be thus it advances further.

To me that says much about the intolerant, vituperative left, and why the have become vindictive, narrow-minded, lacking vision, without faith in man’s future, and all together not someone that your mother would allow you to hang around with. In fact, they have become hateful, racist bigots.

Rachel Alexander, writing for Townhall.com said this recently:

This is no longer the nostalgic era of the late William F. Buckley, Jr., where people only had a few political sources to choose from, such as reading National Review or watching Firing Line. Nowadays, there are thousands if not millions of news sources and people are overwhelmed with information. Have you seen how thin the print version of National Review is today? The right can no longer count on winning the debate with reasoned arguments alone. As we’re preaching to the choir at Tea Party meetings, the left has our children captive in school teaching them we’re haters.

The truth is, the far left does hate the right, so calling the left bigots is no longer a stretch. How many times have you been attacked on Twitter or Facebook with profane language or threats over your right-leaning viewpoints? I’m beginning to lose track of all the people I’ve had to block. The hate is increasing exponentially.

Sadly,  she is correct, and if we allow them to frame the debate, we will lose, and lose catastrophically. So it is time for us to resume control of the conversation. Easy? Nope, it’s going to be hard, very hard indeed, but since when did we believe in the easy way? We, who think for ourselves know, and have always known that we must do the harder right instead of the easier wrong.

About NEO
Lineman, Electrician, Industrial Control technician, Staking Engineer, Inspector, Quality Assurance Manager, Chief Operations Officer

11 Responses to Take Control of the Debate.

  1. Reblogged this on Boudica2015 and commented:

    Take Control of the Debate.


  2. the unit says:

    As Rachel says you have to block some sorts to portray the message. Once upon at time block the LIV, the ignorant, now the intolerant and the stupid.

    Liked by 1 person

    • NEO says:

      Yep, not optimal but it may be necessary.

      Liked by 1 person

      • the unit says:

        It’s not disregard to freedom of speech to block. Millions of sites to go to for speaking and writing codswallop. And do own blog as well. But talking/typing over any bloggers site is blunting his/her freedom of speech.
        I think just say…I disagree, here is my site if you’d like to read why. No attack and name calling, insulting insinuation or declarations. Just show how stupid you are on your own dime. 🙂

        Liked by 1 person

        • NEO says:

          You”re right, but I prefer usually to let people make fools of themselves, rather than simply shut them down. Once i figure them out, unless they’re abusive, I simply don’t feed the trolls!

          Liked by 1 person

        • the unit says:

          Yeah, and also sometimes get to in a non-violent sort of way…stick a finger in their eye. 🙂

          Liked by 1 person

        • NEO says:

          Jawohl, mein Herr! 🙂

          Liked by 1 person

  3. John Doe says:

    There was this interesting video making its way around the internet a while back about this martial arts master who used his mind/body energy/chi or whatever to fight. He would wave at people and they would get punched or fall down, or something similar. The video is here…

    He was challenged by an MMA fighter, which is the second half of the video. At about minute 3:53, the MMA fighter clocks him. The rest of the fight is a disaster, with the…the video says Kiai master getting his clock cleaned. Should we be shocked? There was video of the guy throwing around his energy and knocking students left and right. What happened? The answer is simple, but often common. He believed his own deception until confronted with someone who did not feel like puffing up his ego, and he was trounced.

    You’re not taking control of the debate. When you say…

    “To me that says much about the intolerant, vituperative left, and why the have become vindictive, narrow-minded, lacking vision, without faith in man’s future, and all together not someone that your mother would allow you to hang around with.”

    …I think you’re like the Kiai master. The author of the Townhall piece is partly correct. When he says “The right can no longer count on winning the debate with reasoned arguments alone.” he is making one glaring assumption, and that is that the right is making a reasoned argument. They’re not. The right is in total intellectual disarray. There certainly are ” thousands if not millions of news sources” but the vast majority are pure crap.

    When the report came out that Fox News viewers were less informed than people who consumed no news at all, it was not liberal bias, it was reality that Fox News is making people stupid. Blogs are making people stupid, and preaching to the choir is making people stupid.

    I asked this before, but if a liberal walked in your place of business and offered to discuss politics with you, do you think you could hold your own, or would you find that, like the Kiai master, you were completely unprepared for the real world of actual facts argumentation where you were forced to confront the realities of the situation, instead of hiding or running away?

    The sad fact is, the candidate that the Republicans should be running, as a solid Conservative, is not any Republican, but Democrat Jim Webb. But how many Republicans could even explain Conservative philosophy anymore without resorting to a Duck Dynasty source? How many Republicans or claimed Conservatives could explain Burke?

    Buckley could, which was why he was brilliant, but he also got into discussions and talked with people he disagreed with and did not preach to the choir. If a liberal came here asking tough questions, what would you do? Engage? Run away? Ban them? Hide the evidence?

    I’m guessing it is any answer but engage, and this is a problem.

    Source http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2011/11/21/fox-news-viewers-uninformed-npr-listeners-not-poll-suggests/


  4. John Doe says:

    Why was my comment deleted?


    • NEO says:

      Don’t know, the spam filter grabbed it, likely too many links.


  5. Pingback: My Article Read (7-4-2015) | My Daily Musing

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s