Any person who voted for Barack Obama for the express purpose of having him utilize the US tax and regulatory apparatus to take money away from the rich and give it to them personally, is the moral equivalent of a bank robber. Neither I, nor any other person alive, is entitled to two red cents out of another person’s stash just because we don’t have as much.
- Repair Man Jack, contributor at Redstate (emphasis mine)
Mike Murphy complains that we Republicans have to get with the program – and get more secular. Well, this is what happens when morality goes unmoored from absolute values (in the case of the US, Judeo-Christian values) – exactly what Murphy is advocating. You see, we are bombarded from High Priests of Republican Political Operatives that Republicans are losing because of standing firm on Principles; yet, one of those Principles is “don’t steal”.
Democrats and Progressives have, for decades, pushed to remove religion from the public square under the rubric of “separation of Church and State”. They have done so at such a pace that it has become a societal meme. Speak up and you’re labeled as ‘shoving religion down my throat” or “oh, you want a theocracy” or even crazier: “who are you to be judgmental” (as if stealing, murder, adultery, <name your sin> is only a personal choice? And how dare you challenge my morality?
Thus, anything goes. What used to be verboten is welcomed. Some is goodness (black civil rights, for instance); some are definitely not (who ever thought that Govt could force you to buy a good or service simply for being able to breathe).
And more and more, with the moral guidance and internal governance of religious teachings successfully removed, we are now reaping the effects of what they sowed – to our detriment and their success. What has been warned before has come about: if less emphasis is placed on self-restraint, then external governance must increase but with unintended (but expected?) results. What one probably would not do in person, stealing from someone else, becomes perfectly acceptable via legislation (sure, tax the rich – they have too much and they don’t need it).
The Left has changed the culture from underneath – what used to be virtuous, admired and held as a standard to be held high is now a bug, not a feature. But a Republic, OUR Republic was built on the premise that only a virtuous people could keep it. When most of the electorate now believes that it is perfectly OK to overtax the rich “just because”, Mr. Murphy, what does that say about Republican philosophy of limited government, a singular pillar of Republicanism? Or that of self-responsibility, which is a requirement and pre-cursor for limited government? What happens to the Republican Party when the moral underpinnings have to be removed in order to just be elected? We’ve seen, over and over, that running as Democrat-Lite is a losing proposition
Socialism is on the acceptance – and the major premise of socialism is that it IS ok / perfectly fine to take what others have earned to simply give to others at a whim (after first screaming “Equality!”). Obama is now honing this into both a scalpel and a club – what will our Republic be once I only have to outrun you to make you dinner for the bear?
Dan Itse’s email signature says it all:
There is no difference between tyranny at the point of a gun or a knife and tyranny at the point of a pen; especially when that pen is backed by the power of the sword
So, Mr. Murphy, what remains when you eliminate morality? Because a “moving window morality” is doing so dang well for Society? Or Conservative governance?
So, Mr. Murphy, how’s that gonna work out fer ya?