Dear Liberals, Moderates, and Non-Religious: Remain Strong

Image result for image of donald trump

I have almost stopped watching the national news.  It is so depressing.  Every day it seems our new president, Donald J. Trump,  does something stupid or something destructive to our environment, our nation, or our world.

Many of Trump’s supporters are even scarier than he is.  I cannot believe that neo-Nazis would be allowed to conduct a torch-light march on an American university campus in 2017.  I cannot believe the level of hate in this country towards people who are viewed as “different”.  I thought we had progressed as a country.  I thought that the wealth of knowledge and science now available to all on the internet would advance progressive, democratic values.

How did we get here???  Is this the new normal, or just a freak aberration?  Will sanity prevail in the next election?  It is hard to say at this point in time.  The uncertainty is unsettling.

So should we progressives despair and give up?  No.  Absolutely not.  Too many people before us in history have paid with their lives for the advances we have made; advances which have created at least some separation between government and the superstitions and unquestioned dogmas of religion.

We owe it to these forbearers of reason and science to persevere.  We owe it to our children and grandchildren to persevere.  We cannot quit just because the going has gotten tough.  Truth matters.  Illuminating the truth with knowledge, reason, and science, for all to see, is worth our continued struggle against the fear of invisible boogeymen, instilled into generation after generation of the world’s little children by pious churchmen and other practitioners of religion.

Don’t despair.

Don’t give up.

Keep up the struggle, my friends.

It is worth it.


36 thoughts on “Dear Liberals, Moderates, and Non-Religious: Remain Strong

  1. It’s not good. A dangerous, mentally sick man.

    This is Chris Uhlmann, ABC (Australia), on Trump at the G20 in July. He rips into him (interesting, I think, to see an outsiders take on this lunatic), but it’s his message at the end that is most telling.

    “Some will cheer the decline of America, but I think we’ll miss it when it’s gone.”


  2. Do you think that Trump is a “conservative?” Nonsense. He is/was an extremely wealthy adulterous playboy just like Bill Clinton. In fact the Clintons were at Trump’s wedding to his third wife so they are friends and the animosity between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump in the run-up to the 2016 election was surely manufactured. Mr.Trump also attended a fundraiser for an IRA-front organisation some years ago, which is something liberals do frequently. Mr.Trump is pro-LGBT. He waved a rainbow flag at one of his election rallies. In what way is Trump a conservative? Why the animosity towards Trump whose liberal views on morality permit him to run strip clubs and casinos and engage in serial monogamy? I would not have voted for Trump or Clinton if I lived in America as they are both evil and it is disgraceful that so many Evangelical Christians voted for him. I suppose that you, the blog owner are liberal on abortion and homosexuality now despite the fact that you probably opposed those evils when you were an Evangelical.What has changed? Do you no longer think that abortion is murder? Do you no longer think that sodomy is abnormal and physically damaging and destructive to the body? What about murder? If abandoning Christianity has caused you to become liberal and left wing in your views and to believe that there is no absolute standard of morality then on what do you base your opposition to murder? The Bible informs me that murder is wicked and deserving of the death penalty but you reject the Bible so how do you know that murder is wrong?


    1. tRumpsky will be and do whatever benefits him personally. Period. He has no ties to anyone but himself (and possibly his immediate famlly). Certainly none to the America he wants to “make great again.”


    2. It makes no difference to me if Trump is a real conservative or a fake conservative. The fact is that he is championing and imposing the conservative agenda on the people of the United States.

      -My view on the morality of abortion has not changed, neither has my position on maintaining it’s legality.
      -My position on the morality of persons of the same sex having physical and emotional relationships HAS changed. There is no societal reason why I (or you) should have the right to tell other people who they can or cannot love or have sex with (as long as it is a consenting adult).

      As for the basis of my morality, see the link in my previous comment.


      1. The “conservative” political parties (called Republicans in the US and Tories in the UK) are not conservatives at all. They have all moved to the Left, just not as far to the Left as the Democrats and British Labour Party and their ilk.) So how can you say that Trump is imposing the conservative agenda on the US? The only truly conservative Christian Party that I know of is in the Netherlands and is called the SGP. I wish there was such a Party in Northern Ireland. I glanced at the ethics of secular humanism post which you linked to and I noticed this statement, “They (common moral decencies) need not be divinely ordained to have moral force, for they are tested in the last analysis by their consequences in practice.” end of quote. What consequences do we see when a given society embraces sexual anarchy and hedonism? A casting off of all restraint, a wallowing in decadence resulting in a sex-obsessed, drug-addicted, brutal and sadistic populace. When one ceases to believe that there are absolute standards of morality, and behaviour in general, anything goes, so your humanistic ethics are a one-way ticket to disaster. Your comment about abortion is unclear so may I ask if you considered abortion to be murder when you were an Evangelical Christian? If you did, then why do you now want to legalise murder? I have every right to oppose homosexual relationships because they are abnormal and physically destructive. Think of the oxymoron known as sodomite “marriage.” What is normal about two men or two women walking down the aisle, bride and bride and groom and groom, Mrs and Mrs and Mr and Mr? A nonsensical and ridiculous pretence. Homosexuals are killing each other behind closed doors with their vile practices and no Christian (or non-Christian who sees things as they really are,) can condone such a lifestyle.


        1. You wrote, “I have every right to oppose … “

          Yes, you do. You have the right to oppose anything and everything you do not agree with. But you do NOT have the right to force your beliefs (religious or otherwise) on anyone else.

          Personally, I oppose Christianity and some of its “vile practices,” but I would never force you or any other believer to reject your religion.

          Something to consider … how would you feel if you were forced to obey Muslim laws? What would your reaction be to wearing clothing that covered everything but your eyes? How would you feel about never being able to express your views as you just did on this blog?

          Liked by 1 person

          1. Islam is a totalitarian and terrifying religio-political system and the thought of being under its domination chills the blood. If I faced a choice of submitting to Islam or death, I hope I would have the courage to choose death. The Muslim clothing for women which hides everything but their eyes is an extreme form of modesty, but I am all for modesty and I make sure that my daughter and I always dress modestly and never provocatively. Our standard for clothing can be summed up with these words, long, loose and layered or, long, loose and lots of it. We do not need to wear a Muslim burqa to cover up. Provocative clothing is very dangerous. I heard of a US detective who said that in his 17 years of experience, immodest, provocative clothing was a factor in many of the assaults on women. By the way, we have our own blog and have been expressing our views therein for 5 years (we’re having a break from it at present) and we have always allowed those opposed to us to air their views. We are not dictators.


            1. You have changed the subject.

              Nan wanted you to consider how it would feel to be forced to follow Muslim beliefs in how one dresses to demonstrate how unfair it is for one person to impose his religious beliefs on another. Muslims have no right to force you to wear a Burqa and Christians have no right to force gay people to live in the shadows. Gay sex does not affect you in the slightest. What someone else does in his or her bedroom is none of your business.

              Liked by 1 person

        2. “I have every right to oppose homosexual relationships because they are abnormal and physically destructive.”

          Abnormal says “who”? Your superstition-based ancient holy book??? And how is gay sex physically destructive? If you infer that gay sex causes AIDS you are poorly informed. The AIDS virus can be transmitted between heterosexuals as well as homosexuals, so sexual orientation is not a cause of AIDS. In Africa, AIDS is primarily a heterosexual disease.

          The truth is that your beliefs are based on ancient superstitions that have no scientific basis whatsoever. Homosexuality has been part of human behavior for as long as historians and scientists can detect.

          Liked by 1 person

            1. There is no such thing as an ex-homosexual.

              I don’t care what one or two (probably fundamentalist Christian) doctors say. The consensus among all medical societies is that there is nothing abnormal or dangerous about a homosexual orientation/lifestyle…other than the dangers of discrimination, verbal abuse, and often, physical violence, from fundamentalist religionists such as yourself.


  3. Nan, I don’t know why you can’t see the dangers of provocative, revealing dress. Women who dress in such clothing invite the lustful stares and attention of unprincipled men. Such women communicate the message that they are sexually available and morally loose (deliberately or in ignorance.) They are playing with fire!


  4. You Sir are wilfully blind and deluded. It is difficult to believe that you were once a fundamentalist Christian. You show such hatred for Christian principles that you make me shudder. Even agnostic/atheist (and former Christian) Bart Ehrman does not display such hostility and hatred towards Christians that you do. By the way Sir, you have come very close to slandering me in your comment i.e implying I could/would be violent towards homosexuals. If you lived in Northern Ireland, you might just find yourself in court!


    1. I hate bigotry and discrimination, from whatever source. I hate the bigotry of Islam just as much as I hate the bigotry of Christianity. I did not infer that YOU personally physically attack gays, just that people of your mind set are usually the perpetrators of such acts.


    2. While you are on your moral high-horse, here is a question for you:

      Is it or is it not ALWAYS immoral/evil/wicked to target a child, born or unborn, for killing?


      1. Yes it is immoral and evil and wicked to target a child for killing. It is significant that you describe the unborn as a child, which of course he or she is, but that being a fact, how can you approve of abortion?


        1. I’m glad we agree. Now, would you agree with me that someone who targets children, born or unborn, for killing or someone who orders others to target children, born or unborn, for killing is immoral, evil, and worthy of our condemnation?


          1. I think I know where you’re going with your line of questioning i.e the wars in the Old Testament. Am I correct? If so, I will preempt your condemnation of the orders given on occasion to the armies of Israel to wipe out men, women and children. I will readily admit that such orders seem extremely cruel and merciless. However I am not God and cannot see the future and I therefore conclude that God foresaw that the unborn babies and children of the heathen nations would grow up to be as pagan as their parents and would engage in human sacrifices and sexual deviancy.Therefore, at times, He ordered Israel to kill everyone and everything that breathed. God is an awesome, frightening deity at times and there is the “goodness and severity” of God as the Bible says and sometimes He shows His “frowning providence” on a people and the consequences are deeply unsettling to mere mortals. I’ll end with a paraphrase of part of a Spurgeon message. “Defend the Bible? I’d sooner defend a lion! Turn it loose, and it will defend itself.”


            1. So you believe that it is sometimes moral to target children for killing. Therefore, your morality on this issue is no different than persons who support abortion.

              Yes, you have your fervently-held justifications for why the targeted killing of children is sometimes moral, but so do the abortionists. I see no moral difference. I, on the other hand, assert that the targeted killing of children is ALWAYS immoral. My position on whether abortion should be legal or illegal (I support allowing early abortions and only allowing late abortions if the life of the mother is in danger) does not change my position that the targeted killing of any child, born or unborn, is immoral.

              What you should think about is this: You and the abortionists agree that targeting unborn children for killing is sometimes moral; I can say that you support this position because you are unwilling to condemn your god for (allegedly) ordering the killing of all the Amalekite and Midianite women, including any who were pregnant. However, you go beyond the abortionists. You condone the targeted killing of newborns, infants, toddlers and older children. Your approval of the targeted killing of children, in some situations, is not restricted to just a small sub-group of children. You condone killing them all!

              I therefore see your morality as more immoral than that of an abortionist.


    3. Is it right for a virgin, woman who is not engaged, to be forced to marry her rapist and be compelled to live with him for the rest of her life?


        1. Your response refers to a man seducing a virgin who is not engaged to be married. Seducing is not necessarily the same thing as rape.

          The passage that I was referring to is Deut. 22: 28-29. In this case. the man “seizes” the woman and has sex with her. The word ” seizes” is from the NRSV and suggests coercion so very probably rape. If the man pays her father 50 shekels of silver to the girl’s father, she is forced to marry him and forced to live with him for the rest of his life. He is not permitted to divorce her. So she is obliged by god’s law to live with her rapist as long as he remains alive.


        2. Don’t immoral passages said to be commanded by God show that the bible is not plenarily inspired and that those passages that are barbaric (and designed to justify the power elites immoral commands by attributing them to God), show that these parts of the bible were written by savages?


  5. I was invited to take part in a debate on abortion on a TV programme in Northern Ireland last Wednesday. The link is below. I make the point that the demand for abortion can be traced back to feminism and the sexual revolution. This fact is ignored by most pro-life groups. I also called abortion murder and confronted a panellist who seemed proud of the fact that she had two abortions. I also exposed the fact that most abortions are carried out for social reasons and I quoted a document called the Dublin Declaration which was drawn up by Obstetricians/Gynaecologists who stated that “Direct abortion… not medically necessary to save the life of a woman.” end of quote. Sir, I find your comment(above) deeply offensive and downright wicked. I am 100% pro-life. No exception, no compromises.I suggest that you take your concerns about Old Testament wars to Almighty God.


      1. How dare you hold me responsible for “acts of God” in the Old Testament. Who do you think you are? Don’t you dare to put words in my mouth. Address your questions to the likes of Al Mohler, James White and John MacArthur and other Christian “celebrities” just like them. I’d like to see you tell them they “support the targeted murder of children of all ages under certain circumstances.” Again I have to warn you Sir, that you are slandering me. Don’t assume that I will always “turn the other cheek” to your slander. I will not.


        1. If you can dish it out, you need to be able to take it. And stop the threats. This is my blog. If you don’t like the conversation, go somewhere else!

          Liked by 2 people

    1. Just curious — since you say you are 100% pro-life. No exception, no compromises

      1. If a woman were to reject abortion but put the child up for adoption, would you be willing to add this child to your family and raise it as your own?

      2. How do you feel about “Christian” parents who believe “God will heal” and allow their child(ren) to die when they could have received medical treatment?

      3. What would you say about a women who rejected abortion for religious reasons but then murdered the child(ren) after they were born because she didn’t want them. (Incidents like this have been documented.)

      Rejecting abortion is not the only way to be pro-life.


      1. In answer to question 1, Yes, we would happily raise the child of a woman who rejected abortion and chose life for her child, but at the ages of 58 (me) and 69 (my husband) we are considered too old to adopt. In answer to question 2, in general, it is wrong for parents to refuse to allow their children to receive life-saving treatment e.g Jehovah’s Witnesses refusing blood transfusions (although one has to consider that people have died because they were given contaminated blood via transfusion.) Doctors are not infallible. They can, and do, and have made mistakes in their diagnoses and in the treatment they recommend for various medical conditions. In general, parents should accept medical advice and/or seek a second or third opinion. God does sometimes heal miraculously today, but ordinarily, He expects us to seek medical advice and treatment. In answer to question 3, please provide details of a specific case or cases where anti-abortion women have murdered their children.


        1. Mrs. White, I feel as Christians we should do our best to adopt a consistent life ethic. I would oppose elective abortion except in the most extreme circumstances such as jeopardy to the life of the mother, or in the case of a baby who would be born with the most extreme birth defects incompatible with life. I also oppose capital punishment, and feel that we should do everything possible to pursue peace, and avoid armed conflict.

          However, I honestly feel that the Scripture is not addressing sexual orientation as we understand this today, or the matter of gay and lesbian people involved in life long, committed, loving monogamous relationships. Is it fair to take examples of some gay folks who have been involved in harmful practices to the body such as fisting, promiscuity, anonymous sex, perhaps linked with the abuse of drugs and alcohol, and then assume this is representative of the entire gay and lesbian community? I just can’t agree.

          I want to add that I visited your beautiful country some years ago, and hope to return again. Pax.



  6. Another point to you, blog owner. Just as capital punishment is not murder, the Old Testament wars which sometimes included the killing of children and the unborn, cannot be compared to abortion.


Leave a Reply

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

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s