The current storm over what Rush Limbaugh said about Sandra Fluke, his subsequent apology, and several of his advertisers quitting him allow for a great teaching point. Let me say up front—and make absolutely no mistake about it—this matter has nothing to do with the specific words Limbaugh used to describe Fluke; I mean, what else would you call a woman who brazenly broadcasts her licentious lifestyle to the world, and wants to get paid for it? That’s not the issue, as much as the left and the media are trying to make it so. Even Rush himself fell into that trap because he doesn’t fully understand what is at stake here, either. Limbaugh’s acumen basically ends with politics.
This issue goes down to the very nature of man and his source and purpose on the earth. And, ultimately, here is where the left and right disagree, where the true division rests. Is man a creature from the mind of God, created in His image, with a purpose in this world of serving and glorifying the Almighty, or is man nothing more than matter in motion, an accident of nature, a “naked ape,” an animal, whose existence finally and completely ends when he breathes his last breath on earth? Christians, of course, believe the former; the secular left believes the latter. The slight obeisance some on the left make to “God” is purely for political purposes. In effect, the lifestyle they defend is atheistic, i.e., subjective, changing with the circumstances, and defined totally by themselves. And it is this philosophy which has led to the moral degeneration and decadence of so much of the United States. It is, ultimately, this philosophy that Limbaugh, the “Tea Party,” and “God-fearing, conservative hicks” are fighting against, though few of them truly understand it. The liberal education system surely isn’t going to teach them about it.
This issue goes down to the very nature of man and his source and purpose on the earth. And, ultimately, here is where the left and right disagree, where the true division rests. Is man a creature from the mind of God, created in His image, with a purpose in this world of serving and glorifying the Almighty, or is man nothing more than matter in motion, an accident of nature, a “naked ape,” an animal, whose existence finally and completely ends when he breathes his last breath on earth? Christians, of course, believe the former; the secular left believes the latter. The slight obeisance some on the left make to “God” is purely for political purposes. In effect, the lifestyle they defend is atheistic, i.e., subjective, changing with the circumstances, and defined totally by themselves. And it is this philosophy which has led to the moral degeneration and decadence of so much of the United States. It is, ultimately, this philosophy that Limbaugh, the “Tea Party,” and “God-fearing, conservative hicks” are fighting against, though few of them truly understand it. The liberal education system surely isn’t going to teach them about it.
The consequences of secular ideology are this: in the words of Fyodor Dostoevsky, “If there is no God, everything is permitted” (Jean-Paul Satre said the exact same thing, as have other philosophers down through history). If there is no God, there is no heaven to be gained, no hell to be avoided, no Judgment Day when man will stand before his Creator and give an account of how he lived the life on earth which God graciously gave him. In other words, when this life is over, that’s it—eternal nothingness. Given that—and remember, that is the basic world-view of the secular left—then let us eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we die. Live it up, get all the gusto you can in this life, because you only go around once, so you might as well enjoy whatever you want to enjoy, for as long as you want, and “responsibility” and “consequences” be damned. And if somebody else gets hurt, so what? What does Adolf Hitler care, right now, what we think of him? Now, of course, the left has a problem with that, because they have God-given consciences (how many animals do?). And so, to the left, there are some moral values, but again, those moral values are defined by themselves, are subjective, evolutionary, and determined only by current conditions and circumstances. Thus, if Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin think they can create a better world by killing countless millions of people, then logically, the left cannot truly condemn them. Stalin and Hitler were only doing the very thing that the American left is trying to do: since there exists no heavenly “utopia”, an earthly one must be built, based upon the vision of these secular “intellectuals,” a vision which they are trying to force upon the rest of us through government action (it’s what the American “progressives” have been doing for over 100 years now, and exactly what Hitler and Stalin attempted). And any politician (or preacher or radio broadcaster or anybody else) who opposes them must be destroyed. At the moment, in America, that destruction can only take place by character assassination. But it’s only a matter of degree between America’s left and Soviet Communism. As Stalin said, “all the peasants are going to die someday anyway.” America’s capital of Christianity—and maybe the NRA—are about the only things that stand between America’s left and the Soviet Union’s. There is no ultimate, absolute line the left can draw, for their morality is no higher than the human brain as it has currently evolved. Why should I believe Barack Obama rather than Joseph Stalin, since both of them are nothing more than purposeless, accidental blobs of unspiritual matter in motion? And "all the peasants are going to die someday anyway"?
So, again, eat, drink, and be merry, for this life is all we are ever going to have. Why should Sandra Fluke feel any shame at all for announcing her pleasure-seeking lifestyle? And the left certainly feels no shame at defending her. Sex with no consequences and responsibility is one of the major religious doctrines of the American left, and—don’t forget this next statement, it explains much, from Bill Clinton to Sandra Fluke: the greatest “sin” to the American left is any attempt to prevent someone from living as hedonistic a lifestyle as he/she wants. That is why they hate God and Christianity so bitterly. And they are so perverted that, to quote Dostoevsky again, “it is not possible to eat me without insisting that I sing the praises of my devourer.” We not only have to let the left destroy America, we must exalt and praise them as “moral” and “progressive” while they are doing it.
One reason why Rush Limbaugh’s advertisers caved is there is little, very little moral courage left in the United States. Plato said, “The greatest victory a man can have is to conquer himself.” And John Adams, speaking of why democracy is such an incompetent form of government, wrote, “Individuals have conquered themselves. Nations and large bodies, never.” When you give power to people like Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, et al, you can expect people like Sandra Fluke to appear. Democracy, by definition, cannot omit even the lowest common denominator among the people. But a system like that can only work when virtue and excellence are demanded of the whole populous. The people, so few of whom can indeed “conquer themselves,” must be guided and lifted by a vision of excellence, virtue, nobility, and moral beauty; it is the only hope of a “self-governing” nation. When subjective, atheistic morality takes over, when Hollywood and pop music set the ethical standards, and Bill Clinton becomes a respected “elder statesman” politician, the only possible result is moral and spiritual decadence. I.e., America, 2012.
But the lessons of history still stare us in the face. As the prophet Jeremiah wrote, not long before the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonians in the sixth century B. C., “Were they ashamed when they had committed abomination? nay, they were not at all ashamed, neither could they blush: therefore they shall fall among them that fall: at the time that I visit them they shall be cast down, saith the LORD” (Jer. 6:15).
**********
And, on a bit of a humorous note--but not irrelevant because the issue also illustrates the left's determination to create an earthly utopia, overseen by them, through government power--there is this recent headline from a French News Agency:
"Global Warming Is Making the World Colder"
**********
The latest on Sandra Puke, uh, Fluke. It has recently been discovered that she is a liberal activist who has written a paper for a Georgetown Law School journal arguing that employers also ought to also cover medical expenses for people to have "sex changes." A real virtuous woman we have here....the idea that she is just some poor, innocent random Georgetown co-ed is, to no intelligent person's surprise, liberal media mythology.
**********
It's also interesting that Bill Maher can call Sarah Palin a horrible name (the "c-word", they call it), and of course, the liberals all think it is hilarious. But let Rush call a woman a "slut"...well, as Maher explained, Rush has sponsors but Maher, on HBO, doesn't. As if that makes any difference. Or any sense. Limbaugh explained why he apologized to Fluke: "It was simply for using inappropriate words in a way I never do, and in so doing, I became like the people we oppose. I ended up descending to their level. It's important not to be like them, ever, particularly in fighting them. The old saw, you never descend to the level of your opponent or they win. That was my error last week. But the apology was heartfelt." Rush, they don't care what you called her, and they certainly don't care that you apologized.