Posted by
That Darn Republican on Sunday, June 17, 2007 1:30:36 PM

The social divide these days seems to be growing ever increasingly simple -- you either understand what you do, and know there is a distinct difference between right and wrong, or you believe firmly in what is right or wrong for the moment. One clearly based on a set of rather binary principles that are input - output oriented; i.e. garbage in, garbage out. The other, based on an ideological and philosophical interpretation predicated entirely on desire and will regardless of moral correctness or valuation. The attacks we see on the Constitution from the left are based soley on their ability to use the language "interpretation" to validate their arguments socially, while more conservative voices act on what is already assigned constitutionally -- but there are still those voices that are far left and far right that cancel each other out because they are socially and ethically six and a half of one -- half a dozen of the other.. To this writer, there is no visible difference between a nutter on the left and a dollar-bill atheist on the right/left. One wants a iniquitously morally equalized and socialized existence; the other wants a guaranteed corporate subsidy and doesn't care what the social conditions are -- what the differences besides 5 degrees to the left or right at that point? Both are as dangerous as they are wrong.
The problem I see is that this rhetoric of "interpretation" is dangerous because it fundamentally throws off understanding in lieu of a contextualized moral equivocation of lifestyle based depravity morally equated to bear witness to the heart of the reprobate mind in a social position of "accept my life style" equally to the moral standard of the day. This is pure madness... Our laws are rather mathematic by nature in that they endow the constant over the variable -- because the variable is purely elective, and see the worst the human condition can be, the variable might become something under the lawful standard. This why the left fights so ardently to confuse by assimilating out education system to indoctrinate rather that instruct, which is why rouge judges who feel they are insulated in the court ranks make illicit judgements from the bench on what they prefer to see over what principle dictates for the overall health of the nation... and that folks is what this is all about, the health of the nation over the health of a movement.
The nutter crowd espouses some debased position that we are to give them equal lifestyle billing, and that is just simply no-go. When did we have to get into a position of selling our children's future short by listening to a voice that does not have to entertained? The constitution does not guarantee a voice for the morally defunct. We give them credence when we kowtow to political correctness, but in reality -- equal protection has meant only one thing ever: same law yesterday, same law today -- same law tomorrow. How can we have a constitutional "guarantee" if change we change what was guaranteed? that isn't' a principle, it is a policy.. and policies can be changed whenever, and that is what nuts want -- flexibility. That is why Al Gore had the stone gall to project nutter ideology in brazen form at University forum falsely claiming our constitution is somehow a :living breathing document" -- folks, Al Gore is a living, breathing fool, and I'll debate him face-to-face on it anytime, anywhere -- and if your logic ain't bolted, best clear on out the back! Our laws are guided by immutable principles not subject to ideological tampering. But these nuts are good... good at trying to attack the bedrock you stand on, so what the question comes up -- you have no ground[s] to stand on. However, they overestimate the value of their game plan. Our Constitution protects the what, not the who... as who you become may be something of a problem, and the government doesn't protect problems., it rights them.
We will not see any progress in this area until we begin to address holding court with nuts, their voice onel has value to them, but has no [net] benefit to the national spectrum in any way, shape or form. Johnny can't read at his age level, but he sure knows what sexual "choices" he can make -- wrong, dead wrong. There will be no grown or healing in this nation until we address this matter unvarnished.
