Saturday, November 06, 2004
A man's gotta know his limitations ...
I notice that the cluelessness continues among our intellectual "betters" regarding the effect of the "values voters" in the election. The losing side continues to chatter about "not getting our message out" as the reason they could not overcome the "ignorance" that MUST exist here in Flyover Country ... and how President Bush must "reach out" to his opponents, with the implication that the willingness of those opponents to question their own viewpoints is irrelevant to the process.
They don't understand ... that those of us in Flyover Country DO understand, and got their message, loud and clear. That's why we voted the way we did.
They still refuse to question the substance behind that message -- and their own smug, self-assured trust in their ability to completely understand the world around them.
They decry the speck of "fundamentalism" in the eyes of those between the coasts who denied them their Utopia ... while totally ignoring the Sequoia trunk of secular fundamentalism in their own. They don't see that the secular world view is itself faith-based -- based not on a faith in God, but on faith in the human species to "get it right" on EVERYTHING ... IMO, a foundation for faith that is far less sound. Yet, the losing side continues to express reasoning that is starkly black-and-white when it comes to their intellectual and moral superiority over the unwashed masses between the coasts.
They don't see what we in Flyover Country see ...
... that bureaucrats, just like theocrats, don't have all the answers.
... that while we can and should question what we see around us, there are many choices -- important choices -- that are black-and-white ... right-and-wrong ... good-and-evil -- that must be acted upon, for we ignore them at our peril.... that faith, and wealth, are not inherent threats to the social order, but are quite often forces for good -- even when pursued stridently.
... that we do not need anywhere near the "help" from government the Left thinks we do -- and in fact, that "help" often ends up perpetuating misery instead of alleviating it.
... that "tolerance" is not defined as unequivocal acceptance -- or societal/governmental endorsement ... of another's worldview, but instead is the mutual respect for the rights of both to express their viewpoints (while not forcing them down each other's throats).
... that we percieve the pursuit of government endorsement for same-sex marriage as an attempt (executed as an end-run around the will of the people) to end the debate over the moral and societal implications of the homosexual lifestyle, in favor of its advocates (more on this, a little later).
... that we perceive the secularist pursuit of "separation of church and state" as an attempt (unconsciously or consciously) to make the public square the EXCLUSIVE province of only one faith -- a faith that does not invoke a Diety, but includes principles that are as "faith-based" as anything coming out of a church.
... that, OTOH, even the fundamentalists among people of faith do question (on an ongoing basis) how they and their fellow believers apply the principles of their faith ... and are even open to questioning the principles of that faith (albeit with respect to the God they serve).
... that we do recognize our own limitations when it comes to perfectly discerning right and wrong,
... and that we wish that those whose faith does not invoke a Diety would do the same.