You are currently browsing the American Clarity weblog archives for March, 2010.
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| « Feb | Apr » | |||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
| 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 |
| 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 |
| 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 |
| 29 | 30 | 31 | ||||
- cultural/racial (16)
- economy (9)
- philosophy (46)
- politics (49)
- Theology (28)
- Uncategorized (2)
- 5. September 2010: Us vs. Them: liberal positions on belonging
- 30. August 2010: Sex and cruelty
- 29. August 2010: The case against "tolerance"
- 28. August 2010: What should the law forbid? (VIDEO)
- 15. August 2010: The eight dumbest arguments for gay advocacy
- 8. August 2010: Reexamining the philosophy of territory
- 2. August 2010: The difference between thievery and taxation: John Locke and Moses speak
- 1. August 2010: Making sense of God's anger, judgment, and forgiveness
- 29. July 2010: Citizens' rights vs global humanitarianism: rights, responsibility, and amnesty
- 25. July 2010: The giving nature of God: proof of His existence in Jesus Christ
Archive for March 2010
Rethinking education: McLeroy, Texas, and historical perspective
29. March 2010 by admin.
Editor’s note: the end of this article contains implied use of vulgarities from other liberal writers who oppose American Clarity’s position. Tread carefully!
A short while ago, Don McLeroy and other Texas conservatives decided they’d had enough: liberal indoctrination of their children had been crossing boundaries for too many decades, teaching values which opposed the very foundations of conservatism. And so one day, he and a band of other Texas school board members decided that Texas would be different. They decided that Texas would spend class time talking about different aspects of American history than what had been considered adequate for decades. Predictably, the backlash was vicious: the anger expressed by liberals has been predictably foul (by historical standards), and at times even terrifying.
So what exactly did McLeroy and his board do to cause all the rage?
In a short list from the liberal Huffinton Post, the Texan conservatives wanted to:
1) Teach about the values of the free market, and how America was intended to achieve economic success with less government intervention (see: The Wealth of Nations, written by an incredibly important historical figure whom liberals tend to forget, Adam Smith).
2) They didn’t want to spend as much time on one of our most humanistic (read: liberal) founding fathers, Thomas Jefferson, and instead decided to discuss the speeches of Jefferson Davis–The President of the Confederacy, an important person in American history–alongside those of Abraham Lincoln. Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in cultural/racial | Print | 1 Comment »
Evolution, racism, and the validity of intelligent design: a discussion
28. March 2010 by admin.
Editor’s note: this Facebook discussion with a very intelligent evolutionist resulted after I created my sarcastic Facebook group (”Evolution affects my worldview on everything except racism and human rights”). I felt that the conversation was too important to disregard, especially since it highlights critical arguments and topics regarding both evolution, intelligent design, and how racism is impacted by either philosophy. I hope you enjoy this, and if you decide to be persuaded by my side of the argument, feel free to join my group :)
Me: Just started my new group: “Evolution affects my worldview on everything except racism and human rights.” Obviously I’m a Jesus guy, so don’t take this page seriously. Join it if you realize that evolution and human rights/racial equality are completely incompatible, and you’d like to make fun. [Quote from group] “We also do not believe in social Darwinism, because every evolved monkey deserves a chance to feel good about themselves and have an education before they die a meaningless death on a rock which is flying in outer space. As such, we enjoy demonizing the rich for not sharing the wealth they accrued through superior adaption.”
Brad: I guess for an evangelical Christian such as yourself, it would make a lot of sense to derive your worldview from your understanding of nature. Now, I’m not saying this approach is wrong, but without a good epistemic reason for doing so, it is not necessary. Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in philosophy, Theology | Print | 1 Comment »
Why libertarians are not conservatives
21. March 2010 by admin.
One of the Seattle’s silly quirks is that if you’re a conservative, people will often think you’re a libertarian, and libertarians oftentimes consider themselves to be conservatives. From what I can tell, this confusion comes from Seattle’s (and the Left’s) strong record of vicious fighting against social conservatism, which makes conservatives terrified about taking social stances in public, which leads to something similar to libertarianism (as libertarianism is a combination between liberalism’s severely limited control upon sexual/substance morality and conservatism’s supposedly lax business standards). But even beside differences in social liberalism, it’s easy to see that libertarianism and conservatism are irreconcilably different in too many ways to even consider them similar.
Because of these differences and the fact that libertarianism seems to be gaining serious ground in the Republican party, our knowledge about the two governmental philosophies is absolutely essential: we must be clear about what we want, and what we mean when we use words like “conservative.” So for my many wonderful libertarian friends who think they’re conservative, and my other friends who think I’m a libertarian, here is a quick primer on the philosophical differences between the two. Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in philosophy, politics | Print | 2 Comments »