|
A cynic may ask then what about creationism.
Isn’t this an absurd belief? Why would a secularist vote for a president
who is a creationist? The answer is: yes creationism is absurd. But that
is not the only absurd or illogical belief. Everyone is guilty of
believing in some absurdity. Is the belief in God logical? Or is the
belief in atheism logical? In fact, neither of these beliefs is logical.
In reality, the moment you believe you step into the realm of
illogicality. All beliefs are illogical, by definition. Beliefs do not
rest on logical proof or material evidence. That is why they are called
beliefs. If they did, they would be called facts.
The key here is tolerance. I do not have to agree
with your beliefs nor should you agree with mine, but we must tolerate
each other and even each other’s irrational beliefs. However, tolerance
should not be confused with submission. You should not, indeed must not
tolerate my belief if I believe it is my right to kill you or to impose my
beliefs on you.
The reason many secularists supported a religious
candidate is precisely because of this. We felt that the liberals have
lost the notion of right and wrong. That in their zest to "respect
opinions of mankind”, they are not only ignoring their human rights and
their needs but also endangering the peace of mankind.
Wills names
France
,
Britain
,
Germany
,
Italy
and
Spain
as paragons of enlightenment and laments that
America
is not like them. What is so great about these countries? The common
denominator of all of them is moral relativism. Wasn’t it high ranking
French politicians who received $1.7 billion dollars in bribes from Sadaam
out of
Iraq
’s oil-for-food fund to peddle on his behalf in the UN? Didn't several
members of the UN receive kickbacks from Saddam for the same reason and
from the same fund when the Iraqi children were dying by thousands every
day for the lack of food? With all that going on, the liberals had the
chutzpa to blame
America
for the sanctions. Aren’t these “enlightened” European countries
vying with each other to sign trade agreements with rogue regimes such as
the Iranian Mullahs, disregarding completely the fact that these are thugs
and not the legitimate rulers of the wretched people whom they have
subdued and suppressed?
“Respecting the opinion of mankind” is only a
pretext of these European neo-colonists to continue pillaging the wealth
of the poor nations and propping the dictators. Under this pretext they
turn the blind eye to all the atrocities and human right abuses going on
in the world and continue dealing with the most ruthless regimes.
The reason Bush received the vote of many
secularists is because we were fed up with the liberals' hypocrisy and
their moral relativism. We found Bush to be a man of principles. He does
what he believes to be right. We may disagree with him but we can trust
him because we can see through him. Kerry on the other hand claimed to be
a Catholic. He even quoted verses from the Bible. But his views were
contrary to his professed faith. He came across as a moral relativist at
best and a hypocrite at worst, who would say anything to get elected.
Unlike what
the liberals claim, it is not the strong stance of
America
that has enraged the Islamic terrorists. What fuels the Islamic fervor is
precisely the decadence and moral relativism of the liberalists. Osama
bin Laden expressed that very thing in his letter to
America
when he berated the Americans for tolerating
Clinton
’s acts of lewdness in the Oval Office. He again made slight of the
Americans for their sinfulness and profligacy in his latest video message.
Interestingly, it is the wealthy liberals and those who control the movie
industry in
America
that are the harbingers of this decadence and not the religious right.
This
election should not be considered as a triumph of religious
fundamentalism. It is rather a triumph of principles. It is a rebellion
against moral relativism. It is a rejection of political correctness. It
is a victory of justice and truth.
We, the secularists who supported Bush, did not
support him for his religious views. We supported him because we found him
to be a man of principles. Many of his views were not popular. But he
stuck to his guns and did not say things contrary to his beliefs just to
grab more votes. This is what we appreciated in him. We backed him for
what he is made of and not for what he believes. |
