Old And Busted: Donald Trump Wins On First Ballot. New Hotness: A Scorched Earth Convention
There is no reason why the GOP should allow Donald Trump to have the nomination no matter how many delegates he shows up with.Read More »
Amanda Marcotte is a feminist blogger and “journalist” best known for her feminist/Leftist views. She was a very vocal voice during the Duke lacrosse team controversy and allegations of rape. Even though the charges were dropped and the prosecutor eventually disbarred, in the mind of Marcotte the lacrosse players were still guilty. Illustrative of the hypocritical and bizarre mind of the Leftist, while decrying this non-crime, she became “blogmaster” for the ill-fated 2008 presidential run for sleaze bag extraordinaire John Edwards- the guy who was having love children while his wife lay dying of cancer. Some of her comments in that bizarre capacity for Edwards got her in hot trouble, particularly the hypothetical example of Mary taking Plan B after the Holy Spirit got get Her pregnant.
But despite this absolutely disgusting diatribe, alas Ms. Marcotte landed on her blogger feet and now writes for a who’s who of Lefty blogs- not that they get many hits. But the one that gets the most is her articles for Salon, best described as a “Left-leaning, progressive online magazine.” It is short on news but very long on commentary.
Like all Leftist feminists, Marcotte remains upset over the Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby decision. But, her love of womanhood is matched only by her hatred of religion. Her latest article is titled, “The Growing Trend That’s Got the Right Totally Rattled.” The gist of the article is that the Right, in particular religion, is on the decline and that the United States is becoming increasingly secular. That in turn has rattled evangelical and conservative Christians so much that they are now lashing out and have an advantage on the Supreme Court to do their dirty work.
Marcotte, in an attempt to appear “scientific,” cites certain polls. For example, in 2014 the number of people who cite “none” as their religion has increased to 20% from 15% in 2007. She notes that this poll also indicates that nearly 33% of Americans under the age of 30 cite no religion. Then she makes the incredible analysis that since 67% of the “nones” cite a belief in God, this is a cultural drift toward secularism. Left out of these statistics is the fact that Americans tend to become more “religious” with age.
She notes some poll that indicates that those who answer in the affirmative regarding regular church attendance are, in essence, liars. For this, she makes reference to an “in depth” study showing that such poll respondents are “lying.” Following the link to this study, we find that it is a reference to a Slate article by some researcher whose main thesis was that the wording of poll questions often leads respondents to certain answers. A writer for Salon citing another article on Slate as proof of their point is like Barack Obama seeking constitutional advice from Lois Lerner and Eric Holder. Regardless, linking church attendance with one’s level of religious beliefs is a little disingenuous. One can be an avid Christian without going to church every Sunday, a notion totally alien to the Left.
Regarding organized religions, she makes this bizarre observation as proof that America is not as religious as it reports itself to be:
Take, for instance, the ways that weddings have quietly changed in this country. It used to be that you only had a wedding in a church, and only people who were eloping got married by someone other than a minister. Now, outside of very religious circles, it is more common to see weddings on beaches or at country clubs, and very often officiated by friends of the couple rather than the clergy.
If nothing else, this quote illustrates the closed world in which Marcotte operates. Because she sees only weddings on the beach and in country clubs, therefore church weddings are a thing of the past and a dying breed. To add to her point, she says that several states are now allowing weddings to be performed by non-clergy (besides the other allowed individuals). Indeed they are and she references her own article on Slate about a ruling by an Indiana judge who decided that non-clergy should be allowed to officiate at weddings. Besides having the chutzpah to cite your own previous article to prove your current article, the Indiana case is a court decision. New Jersey and Washington DC have passed legislation allowing non-clergy to officiate at weddings, but they have not become law. And there is a similar effort in Minnesota. That makes three states that passed or are considering changes to their law and one that is having it forced upon it by the courts. That is hardly a growing trend.
But then we get to the real problem Marcotte has with religion:
While public opinion on reproductive rights has stayed roughly the same, conservative Christians who make up the anti-choice movement have grown more extremist in recent years, not only dramatically surging in the attempts to wipe abortion out of the red states, but also expanding the war on women’s rights to include attacks on contraception access… Anti-gay sentiment is quietly becoming more extremist as well. While most of the country is coming around on gay rights, conservatives have expanded beyond just opposing same sex marriage to backing laws that would allow restaurants and hotels to refuse gay people service.
WOW!! There is so much in that partial paragraph that it boggles the mind. First, public opinion on reproductive rights- and let’s call a spade a spade; she means abortion on demand- has wavered over the years and today stands on the pro-life side. Granted, the percentages have never exceeded 60% either way, but to assert that as of 1973 everyone fell in line with the Supreme Court denies reality. If they did, Marcotte would not even have a voice. Second, notice of the use of the phrase “anti-choice.” To Marcotte and her ilk, it is “me, me, me,” never the unborn child. There is no attempt to wipe abortion out of red states, but to make them safer and the decision more informed. There is more informed consent required to have a cyst removed than there is to terminate a human life. One would assume she is talking about the Texas law. While some abortion clinics have closed in that state, that was at the option of the clinic. There are still a number of abortion clinics in Texas, just not the one every 25 miles the anti-life crowd would prefer. Then there is the implication that access to contraception is a right. Perhaps by stretching the “penumbras” of the Constitution, but she is wrong on so many levels that it need not be discussed in detail.
Contrary to popular belief, not all conservatives and not all religious conservatives oppose gay marriage. We do oppose having it shoved down our throats as if condoning gay sex should be the preferred mode of thinking. We do oppose courts creating rights nowhere to be found in the Constitution. We do oppose gay rights legislation by judicial fiat. Most conservatives I know, some of them quite religious, may even vote for gay marriage if they were given the chance. Unfortunately, the gay rights movement has allied itself with the feminist movement and transferred the subject to the courts. If the country was coming around to the idea of gay rights in general and gay marriage in particular, why are they afraid of putting it to a vote? Why run to the courts? And most conservatives I know do not condone allowing hotels or restaurants to disallow gay patronage. But again, we do oppose having judges force us to make cakes for someone and the like.
Near the end of her article, she states:
They (the Christian Right) really do believe that everyone else owes them, that we are obligated to tithe to their churches and pray to their God and if we don’t want to do that, we should somehow be treated as less than fully American… And if the rest of us heathens aren’t cooperating, they are going to force it on the rest of us through government means…
Well, again I can’t speak for every conservative or every Christian, but Ms. Marcotte would likely be more welcome in my church than I would be in her closed secular circle. And I do not care what God she or anyone else prays to or if they don’t have a God at all. That is something they will have to reconcile at the end of their miserable lives. But, if Ms. Marcotte really wants to see how religion can be “forced” on anyone, perhaps she should go live for a few years among the “emancipated” females of Sudan or any other Muslim country. My guess is she would be more thankful for religion in America.
In conclusion, Amanda Marcotte proves that the Lord truly does work in mysterious ways. How He can endow one person with so much stupidity boggles the secular mind. But, unfortunately, she is indicative of the close-mindedness of those on the Left.