Posted by
rycK on Tuesday, August 26, 2008 5:36:07 PM
The Liberal Quest for a Syncretic Theological Solution to Sin [and more votes]
Liberalism is based, primarily, on sloth, sodomy and drug addiction all financed by the wealth of others using tax policy and begging. They have nothing else and California is the proof.[1] Their social and political messages and whines do not, however, attract many of the true religions from the center and right. The leftists are usually 5-8 percentage points short of guaranteeing a given political contest conclusion that would wax forever in their favor. Syncretism[2]is a social and political and, considered by some, even an intellectual process where by old beliefs and customs although supported by reams of proof documents and screiptures can be modified and certain precpets reversed. This is a cheap way to get votes by pandering to sinners for votes and financial contributions.
The liberals, despite their celebration of sodomy, abortion, crime, abuse of the law, civil disobedience and more clearly need to attract more members. One way is to convince their potential new victims that certain religions laws customs are out of date. Thus, sin may be abrogated.
One the case of Christianity, the syncretic process has been in force for probably 25 centuries if you count the Jewish scriptures and other noncanonical works. Certainly St. Augustine merged Manichean Dualism with Christianity and Thomas Aquinas switched from one Greek philosophy to another by moving from Plato to Aristotle.
Syncretic movements in the literature must include a long list of activists:
Fascism
Libertarianism
Marxism
National Bolshevism
Islamism
Producerism
The Mujahedin of Iran
Libertarianism.[3]
In all cases, the intent is to modify existing religious laws and tenets in an attempt to attract new conversions from those who accept these changes. Each movement seems to begin with an attack or explanation or redaction of some precept that the syncretic view as extreme.
In practical political terms, we can view the two major political parties in the US has being divided, in part, by several precepts and teachings that are considered extreme by both parties. The game here, and it is merely a game, is to show that the other side is unreasonable and extreme in their views and that their laws, rule and edicts need to be reformed to accommodate these views into the modern society.
Homosexuality is an interesting case[4] of a social practice that is considered a sin by most main stream religions. Islam considers the practice a sin worthy of capital punishment[5] The Bible is also quite specific on this particular sin. In Leviticus 18:22 the compulsory death penalty applies to both [or probably more] participants. The Catholic Church appears to deem such conduct a forgivable sin when practiced by priests.
Abortion in contrast is not mentioned in the scriptures of either the Bible or the Koran (Quran) [6] but seems to have been practiced in the ancient world with certain restrictions including early termination and tolerated if there was some threat to the mother or her reputation.
The Death Penalty is well known in all societies and is specified in the Bible, Koran (Quran) and other writings and the American Constitution.
So, the question arises: What can political activists do or say to convince people to switch their religions views to their side.
The answer: anything they can!
Here is an example from Nancy Pelosi:[7]
This was soundly refuted by Catholic Bishops in a matter of days or hours.[8]
“In the course of a "Meet the Press" interview on abortion and other public issues on August 24, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi misrepresented the history and nature of the authentic teaching of the Catholic Church against abortion.”
The MTP question and answer was this:
MR. BROKAW: Senator Obama saying the question of when life begins is above his pay grade, whether you're looking at it scientifically or theologically. If he were to come to you and say, "Help me out here, Madame Speaker. When does life begin?" what would you tell him?
REP. PELOSI: I would say that as an ardent, practicing Catholic, this is an issue that I have studied for a long time. And what I know is, over the centuries, the doctors of the church have not been able to make that definition. And Senator--St. Augustine said at three months. We don't know. The point is, is that it shouldn't have an impact on the woman's right to choose. Roe v. Wade talks about very clear definitions of when the child--first trimester, certain considerations; second trimester; not so third trimester. There's very clear distinctions. This isn't about abortion on demand, it's about a careful, careful consideration of all factors and--to--that a woman has to make with her doctor and her god. And so I don't think anybody can tell you when life begins, human life begins."[9]
Here, the authority of the Church to make policy on sins and conduct is abrogated by some politician trolling for votes. She invokes civil law that stems from not legislation but form some liberal legal activism that overrides the tenets of the Catholic Church. This is heresy.
There is every reason to suspect that Nancy Pelosi is a liar, atheist, and worse given her disgusting conduct in the last few years and especially as Speaker.
In the cancerous quest for power, the Speaker with all the attributes and countenance of a Repulsive Reptile [10] will undermine any honorable precept, tell any lie, sell anybody into slavery, corrupt any religions position, condemn the souls of any person to the Hot Floors of Hell or peddle the sexual favors of any child on the Streets of San Francisco.
This is heresy of the worst sort. This fiend now instructs the Holy See on how to interpret their own history and teachings.
She needs to be excommunicated.
The dogs shall eat Jezebel …[11]
I will pay for the candles that need to be broken.
rycK [ Chairman, Democrats against Biden]
Comments to: ryckki@gmail.com
[2]Syncretism consists of the attempt to reconcile disparate or contradictory beliefs, often while melding practices of various schools of thought.
[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syncretic_politics
[4] http://www.religionfacts.com/homosexuality/index.htm
[5] “According to traditional interpretations of the Quran, homosexuality is strictly forbidden and officially carries the death penalty in some Muslim or Muslim dominant countries including Iran, Saudi-Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Mauritania, Sudan and Nigeria.”
http://gayspirituality.typepad.com/blog/islam/
[6] “The Koran does not mention abortion specifically, but Islamic thinkers in early times did not regard abortion before 120 days (or, for some theologians, 40 days) as a crime in itself. Talmudic scholars decided that the harm had to befall the woman, not the fetus, for an attempted abortion to be a crime. The rabbis also concluded that there was no crime unless the fetus had quickened, but abortion was still permitted if the pregnancy endangered the mother's life. Some Jewish jurists went so far as to allow abortion if the pregnancy hurt the mother's reputation.”
http://uncpress.unc.edu/browse/page/420
[7] Good Bye Third World. The Dictators (thru Nancy Pelosi)Won!!
Wednesday, November 08, 2006 1:02 PM
http://rycksrationalizations.t...e3-914c-4017-96d6-99928227c60f
We can assume Pelosi is patriotic??
Friday, February 23, 20079:38 AM
http://rycksrationalizations.townhall.com/g/305bb4d5-12e2-4a62-a1a0-8517a4e84067
Nancy Pelosi's Red Ring of Marxism Decays
Thursday, November 16, 200612:44 PM
Pelosi: The New Red Flag Rules of Spartacus.
Thursday, November 09, 200610:37 AM
Pelosi Forms Her Marxist Cabal for the Destruction of America
Friday, October 20, 200611:56 AM
http://rycksrationalizations.townhall.com/g/54828669-849a-497a-a5e0-01170a780647
[11] http://bible.cc/2_kings/9-10.htm