Do Republicans Support The Troops Because the of Jesus and the Apostles?


Just a musing, follow my thoughts if you will…

Take the US occupation of Iraq. It is costing many American lives and much American resources.

Put aside all potential benefits to America, such as destruction of terrorists and a potential source of oil.

Taken like this, the US involvement in Iraq is basically exacting a huge cost on America, in an attempt to bring peace and stability to a people who may show no gratitude whatsoever. America instead becomes even more vilified across the world.

Now consider the general opposition to continued troop presence in Iraq by Democrats, and general support for continued troop presence in Iraq by Republicans.

Could it be that all other factors aside, more Republicans support a continued American involvement in Iraq simply because more Republicans are Christians?

After all, by staying on in Iraq to stabilize the nation, Americans are sacrificing for the sake of Iraqis – with no benefit to Americans themselves.

Could it be that Republicans are influenced by the Christian example of self-sacrificial love and charity – the example set by Jesus Himself dying on the cross for our sins?

Or of the Apostles and Paul who suffered hardship and died to proclaim the Gospel for the sake of the lost?

Or of the early believers who sold their possessions and gave the proceeds to the church?

Or even of the missionaries who give up their time, money, health and even lives to help strangers who may be intent on killing them?

Could it be that Republicans are more supportive of the notion of gainless American self-sacrifice for the Iraqis, simply because more Republicans identify themselves as Christians?

It makes sense to conservative Republicans to give up their (America’s) own benefits for the sake of strangers – even hostile strangers, at least from a heavenly prespective. After all, to them this life and this world are but a fleeting shadow – eternity awaits afterwards!

Whereas fewer Democrats identify themselves as Christians, or at least not strongly religious Christians. And I believe more of them identify themselves as agnostics or atheists.

It would make no sense at all to liberal Democrats to give up their (America’s) own benefits for the sake of strangers (except for continually letting CAIR and like-minded groups subvert, conquer and dhimmify America’s own culture). After all, to them this life and this world is all there is – live it to the selfish full, for only oblivion awaits!

The Republicans have an example, a precedent, an inspiration which encourages them to say “Yes! We will help the Iraqis, even if it gains us nothing and costs us everything!” Why? Because Jesus tells them so.

The Democrats have no such example. Why not? Because Darwin’s survival of the fittest precludes such a suicidal genetic-propagation strategy.

And those are my thoughts.

DemRepMoralStandard

From Mike Shelton (not exactly what is discused above, but related)

PS. Go to Pro General Petraeus, Anti Betray Us Editorial Cartoons to see support for the selfless American efforts to aid the Iraqis!

PPS. Yes, I am politically biased. Go and read Daily Kos if you need to feel better about being a yourself-first Liberal.


7 Responses to “Do Republicans Support The Troops Because the of Jesus and the Apostles?”

  1. George Miller Says:

    “Whereas fewer Democrats identify themselves as Christians, or at least not strongly religious Christians. And I believe more of them identify themselves as agnostics or atheists.”

    Well then, you better update your belief system because there is only 1 openly atheist democrat in all of the US! I like the insinuation though – Christians are selfless givers and atheists are immoral scum who would never help a stranger. Ignoring that the father of neo-conservatism, Leo Strauss, was a non-believer himself.

  2. Scott Thong Says:

    Religious Intensity Predicts Support for McCain – Americans who say religion is an important part of their daily lives support John McCain over Barack Obama for president, 50% to 40%, while their less religious counterparts support Obama over McCain, 55% to 36%.

  3. George Miller Says:

    But you said they identify as atheist and agnostic, and I though you were referring to politicians, not the electorate (which is only about 9% atheist/agnostic anyway). All I was saying is that, as I understand it, there is only one openly atheistic speaker in the house/senate in all the US. I honestly don’t see a positive correlation between being Christian/atheist and being pro/anti-war. Maybe I’m wrong of course; maybe I’m missing something.

    And people who are stubbornly atheistic like me or Christopher Hitchens are often motivated to support the Iraq war due to passionate hatred of Islamic savages and the harm they are doing to what could potentially be the most prosperous and developed region of the world. People who are openly atheistic but a bit too passive like Dawkins don’t recognize the evil of Islam like more stubborn atheists do.

  4. Scott Thong Says:

    Well then, Mr. Miller, I apologize for my generalization and propose a truce and a partnership: We (i.e. Christians and Atheists) shall keep away from each other’s throats until the more pressing concern of jihadofascism has been eliminated.

    The religious and the irreligious in America and Russia once worked together to stop cult-mentality fascism. I suggest we do so again.

    After that, we can get back to tearing each other’s philosophy apart.

  5. George Miller Says:

    I don’t want to tear Christian philosophy apart; I prefer peaceful coexistence with people I don’t agree with. If Islam was a death cult that kept to itself; a Heaven’s Gate with large membership if you will, I wouldn’t care about it or criticize it.

    I would indeed like a permanent truce between Christians and atheists so that atheists only focus on Islamic atrocities in the year 2008 and forget about Christian atrocities in the year 1008 and Christians would stop telling atheists that they are to blame for Nazism, communism and that every atrocity of the 20th century was committed by an atheist. In all fairness most atheist bashing in England comes from leftists standing up for Muslims, not from Christians, or at least not because of their Christianity.

    It is confusing that a typical Guardian article concerning atheism will paint Richard Dawkins as an “aspiring totalitarian” and a Muslim schoolgirl in France who is told she has to abide by the same rules as non-Muslim students as an oppressed victim of the “secular fundamentalists”.

    Typical Guardian articles concerning atheism (search Google):
    1: Secular fundamentalists are the new totalitarians
    2: The anti-God squad
    3: Atheism is pretentious and cowardly
    4: The atheist delusion

    Call me paranoid, but those articles (please read them) seem like egregious anti-atheist scapegoating designed to divert people’s attention away from the scourge of Islam. Similar anti-Semitic articles are very common in leftist rags (Guardian, New Statesman – Don’t you dare ask me why I read them!) although they use the euphemism “Zionist” instead of just openly bashing Jews.

    I would love to know why the left is doing this; do they just view Muslims as a victim they can stand up for? I can’t think of any other explanation for widespread support of Islamic terror amongst leftist intellectuals.

  6. Scott Thong Says:

    The past can remain in the past (but only so long as the future does not repeat it). But all too often people totally ignore the past, to the point that they use their unhinged grasp of the facts to justify modern atrocities.

    Case in point: Jihadists and rabid clerics blaming all conflicts on the ‘Imperialist Crusaders’, notwithstanding the fact that the First Crusade only began after 460 years of constant Muslim invasion.

    The European leftist media is at least partially balanced by the Telegraph, which is vocal in its criticism of the ever-accelerating colonization and dhimmifying of Britain.

    However, if atheist bashing happens a lot, the same happens with Christian bashing. Honestly, who really does the beheadings on a weekly basis – Christians or those other guys?

    And the US entertainment media is renown for its demonizing of Christians, while painting halos of light around the other guys.

    So I guess you could say that everyone is smearing everyone else, all in the name of appeasing the frightening fatwas of militant Islam and the frivolous lawsuits of CAIR and the ACLU.

    There is a simple way to describe the Left – Moonbats. Everything they do is out of spite, selfishness, suicidal tendencies, arrogance, insanity, and just plain idiocy.

    Well, that’s what wingnuts like me think, anyway.

  7. George Miller Says:

    Here’s a time saver: non-Muslim bashing. It is indeed an attempt to appease the Jihadists. That’s why suicide murderess in Palestine are victims of evil Zionist bullies and a university nerd in a fluffy jumper is a militant.

    Every non-Muslim has been used as a scapegoat at some point (Christians, atheists and especially Jews and “Zionists”) I guess I noticed those nauseating articles since I’m an atheist myself. What really bothers me is we have a dangerous enemy that we’re not even allowed to criticize. Cowardice and appeasement in response to immediate threats are the status quo in Europe but masochism and actively supporting the death cultists is relatively new.

    “They are nihilistic, anti-Semitic racial supremacists whose ultimate goal is to control the world and kill all those they consider inferior”. Say that in Leeds in 2008 and you’re (or I’m) called an “Islamaphobe” would anyone have called me a “Naziphobe” for saying that in 1938? I was a “racist” in school (I think I was about 12) because I was foolish enough to call someone who had assaulted me a Paki within earshot of a teacher.

    The “crusader” rhetoric is indeed particularly ironic since those crusades were a defense against Muslim aggression!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: