The war for "family values" is contrary to our cau

[Wiking]

http://www.faithfreedom.org/oped/ThomasGarlinghouse60419.htm


I was profoundly alarmed reading the article by dr. Thomas S. Garlinghouse on the front page, titled ” The Left’s War on the Family”.

First, let me state a few facts:
The purpose of this site is to refute Islam, to prove the Koran wrong and to convince the Muslims that are within reasons reach to turn away from this evil ideology of hatred and destruction and embrace humanity. Also, we want our knowledge and understanding of the subject to be spread to the media that, undeniably, controls the minds and opinions of the people. We want also to influence the politicians who “run the show”. This site is a repository of knowledge about Islam and Islam's relations to the world, both historically and in the present. Also, it is an open forum for all to express their opinions, went their angers and to debate those who disagree.

[Eopithecus]

The Lefts War on Family has nothing to do with Islam, the Koran and their practise. What is this article doing on this site?

[Frodo Baggins]

[umma_allergic]

While Frodo's argument can be made, it is a very indirect kind of link. I consider myself neither left or right in the contemporary political sense, but clearly both ideological traditions are part of our larger Western tradition. So while I understand Frodo's remark, I would refute it. Institutions and criticism of those institutions and the freedom to think heretical thoughts, even about the family are all part of the Western tapestry, as is this author's critique of that critique.

So Frodo, it's all part and parcel of who we are. It's all "traditional western values". There have been freethinkers in the West for centuries.

Also, the author himself did not emphasize any link with Islam. That had to be added by implication. It is not his focus. It is ours.

The thing is, I think this article is an exercise in pure wing-nuttery, setting up an enormous straw man to make a tired old ideological point. However, this is not a website about liberalism versus conservatism. If I get into the details of this person's windbagging, I will be trapped in a very different debate than the one I actually want to get into when I come to FFI.

So I agree, it's a strong diversion from our main thrust here. I don't mind it staying up from a principled point of view, but from a website-identity point of view it does not belong here.

I also think it is a total joke.
_________________
Learn how to argue/debate properly
http://changingminds.org/disciplines/argument/argument.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_fallacies
http://www.fallacyfiles.org/

[Kittymom]

Although I am no liberal, the opposite argument can be made that the left is not warring on the family but trying to make it possible for families of all types to exist. The family just doesn't come in a one-size-fits-all package anymore. I would call myself a centrist and can't stand the far left, but historically middle and lower income families have had more money under moderate Democrats than under big business Republicans. Taxes may have been slightly higher, but the economy was robust under Clinton and the cost of living was lower.

Besides, this issue is a minor, homegrown affair. It does not have global implications like the fight against Islam does.
_________________
The spread of evil is the symptom of a vacuum. Whenever evil wins, it is only by default: by the moral failure of those who evade the fact that there can be no compromise on basic principles ~Ayn Rand

[Ali Sina]

We are facing an enemy. We must not only know our enemy, his weaknesses and strengths but we must also know our own weaknesses. It is through our weaknesses that our enemy can win.

It is my firm conviction that the west has weaknesses that if not amended it would not be able to withstand the onslaught of Islam. Every person who had converted to Islam has stated that the reason was his or her disgust of the immorality of the western society. Whether you like it or not this is a flaw. It’s a major fault that could make the west succumb to Islam.

This subject is really very complex and I have talked about that extensively in my book. I can’t explain the whole thing here or I would have to publish the main argument of my book. Personally I don’t mind to do that but this would put off any prospective publisher.

Wiking: if you think Dr. Garlinghouse argument is biased, why don’t you point out to his errors? Don’t just say how much good the Left has done for the family. Please go over what Garlinghouse's article and refute his arguments one by one.

Have you read Engel’s Origins of the Family, Private Property, and the State? Don’t you think that book is an assault at family? It’s a bit long but it’s worth reading.

And what do you say about this article written by a Marxist? http://www.anu.edu.au/polsci/marx/gayleft/oppression.htm

Please read it. You’ll see that Garlinghouse is not too much off the mark.

I am very interested in this subject because this is basically the theme of my book. I would like to hear criticism against this idea so if I am wrong, I can correct myself.

I am not a right winger and in my book I reject their alternative and point out to their flaws too. However, I am concerned about the west’s loss of family values.

[Peace95]

[IHSoter]

Bravo Ali Sina!

I am so pleased & surprised to hear you taking this position. ~ You seem to be a profoundly clear sighted person. ~ Not many people today can understand a basic defense of the natural moral law (different from the laws of nature) of human society. ~ Such ideas could hardly be more alien to the modern sensiblity.

The basic foundations of human society is the family, not the Hegelian state. ~ ~ The family is not a construct or an ideology, it is a fact of nature. ~ It is a man & a woman coming together & having children. ~ Everything else is dependent & in some sense subordinate to that fact. ` The family as it perpetuates itself through generations is the source of custom, language, traditions that became the source for law & government. ~ The state was created as an adjunct to the family as a protection & a prop. ~ Not as an instrument to destroy the family by pretending to redefine it. ~ The modern state or corporations thinking they can easily redefine human nature is like the old science fiction canard of the man who goes back in time & kills his grandfather as a child. ~ Thus, the man could never have been born to go back in time to begin w/. ~ These modern institutions are destroying the source of their own being.

Until Western civilization wakes to this fact is is doomed.

Once again I thank you Ali Sina for your vision.
_________________
FIDES ET RATIO:
"We must rid ourselves once and for all of the Quaker-Papist babble about the sanctity of human life." --Leon Trotsky

[Ali Sina]

[The Cat]

I do not know how or what you'd propose, because the ancient archetype of ''family values'', based on a housy mother, can hardly be reconciled with most of women going to work and, nowadays, two incomes are necessary for an average wealthy family. It even provides jobs in kindergarden. I think we are slowly leaving the patriarcal model to get into a ''kibboutz'' social mentality, like found in the ''Social Contract'' and ''Emile'' of Jean-Jacques Rousseau. To reverse this, you'd have to outdo democracy itself and impose dictatorship upon ''morality''. Family strong taxations incitment could be the solution, but can that rally a majority of people?
_________________
Authority has the same etymological root as authenticity.

[Peace95]

[Ali Sina]

Peace95 Wrote:

[bihary]

"With all this in mind, it is time for conservatives and those who value American society to stand up and redouble their efforts to preserve and defend the traditional family. It is also time to peg leftists with their true label—enemies of American society. "

Hmm... Has it gotten that bad? I do not see this tendency in my environment. I believe this article is extreme in the sense that it does not reflect the typical, normal status quo, perceived and practiced by most people. I have nothing against the publishing of this writing (anything can be published, why not?) but FFI is doing a disservice to itself publishing this kind of material.

[Politicallyincorrectlib]

[The Cat]