|
One of the most illustrative differences between liberal and conservative thought can be found in the Nature-vs.-Nurture argument.
Nurture:
The conservative position is that nurture shapes the human being. Conservatives will tell you that gays can become straight simply by means of a strong will (and therefore that all gays have become gay through some sort of trauma!). Children behave badly when they haven’t been raised correctly, argues the conservative. “The human being defines himself through his actions; one should strive to righteously carry himself through life, and define his existence through his moral will.”
Now, in order to answer whence all this will comes from – i.e., from anywhere but nature – conservatives top off their pyramid of life with the granddaddy of all nurturing – the Judeo-Christian God. “God” is a nurturing, proactive, supernatural being. Super-natural. Beyond the limits of quaint little nature herself.
Nature: The liberal view of life is that nature plays the dominant role in shaping the human being. Humans play a proactive role in their lives, of course, but through eons of evolution some of us are simply better suited to cope with certain circumstances than others. Genes mold behavior as much as, if not more than, environmental factors.
Although many liberals are atheists, I'd guess more are agnostic in their beliefs. As far as “God” is concerned, the liberal mindset is much more accepting of a Deist (or even Eastern) philosophy. God isn’t some giant, elderly white man sitting in the sky and meddling in our every day affairs. If indeed there is some phenomenon we – from our particularly narrow perspective – might want to label “God,” it most assuredly isn’t the petty character who parts seas so that one people can escape from another, floods the Earth because he’s angry at the world’s “sinners,” or sends people to "hell" because they question the nature of his/her/its existence.
Indeed, to liberals who accept that there is, or might be, a higher form of universal intelligence, “god” is often likened to nature itself. I doubt very seriously you’ll find many pantheists, panentheists, or Buddhists at a GOP rally.
-----------------
In light of this distinction between the conservative and liberal mindset, consider the ongoing battle between people who claim that America was founded upon “Christian principles” (or as political correctness would have it, “Judeo-Christian” values), and those who know better. Despite the recent events in Montgomery, Alabama, the issue isn't as simple as a giant slab whereupon a mythology's Ten Commendments are written.
The issue is the nature-vs.-nurture argument.
Conservatism, at its very core, must believe that Nurture is the bedrock of all phenomena. Sure, there are some splinter groups of respectable nurture-over-nature proponents, (ID, or Intelligent Design theorists, for example), but the dominant proponents in today's pro-nurture America are fundamentalist Chritians, a group whose beliefs are further discredited with each passing day - by science and everything else synonymous with progress itself.
We should all be concerned about this issue now, not because some ignorant judge in Alabama is acting like a horse's ass, but because many in the current administration are doing their best to set the stage for some pending Biblical event. Call me alarmist, but considering the dubious role religious differences have played in the rise and fall pf history's greatest nations, I believe this is a very scary reality.
If we get serious about the election in 2004, we'll all play a role in assuring fundamental Christianity will eventually become a sort of neo-mythology. The alternative is the continuance of administrations peppered with completely brainwashed Xtian fundies, who - through sheer stupidity - may destroy our country in a very short time.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(208 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
