Saturday, December 12, 2009
 |
Sallies did President Obama suggest that we have
to include the immoral, with what is moral, when
he said we need to broaden are moral
imaginations? As well, what did he mean we
need to spare the pregnant mother, that we
should accept abortion? These two hurdles
he has obviously jumped in his conscience are
principles which if accepted, as I think he was
suggesting, is to accept, what is immoral as
moral and to accept what is wrong as right.
Now if we are going to do that we just as well
believe what is hot is actually cold; what is up
is actually down; what is left is actually
right; what is wet is actually dry, and if we
are going to accept this broader imagination,
the aborting of life, then we would be accepting
a perversion of truth.
Arvin to me it is clear, he has aligned himself with patronage, rather than with practicality; rather than with what is just; and rather than with what is true. It is as if he has placed himself in a big box of patronage, of favor granting, and if he suggests that abortion is wrong, then his patronage will scream; if he suggests that the War on Terror in Iraq was not arbitrary, than his patronage will reach up and slap him; it's as if he is living in fear, of standing up, to his patronage. |
»Back«