Many Americans are outraged by liberal hostility to traditional religion. But as Ann Coulter reveals in this, her most explosive book yet, to focus solely on the Left's attacks on our Judeo-Christian tradition is to miss a larger point: liberalism is a religion—a godless one.
And it is now entrenched as the state religion of this county.
Though liberalism rejects the idea of God and reviles people of faith, it bears all the attributes of a religion. In Godless, Coulter throws open the doors of the Church of Liberalism, showing us its sacraments (abortion), its holy writ (Roe v. Wade), its martyrs (from Soviet spy Alger Hiss to cop-killer Mumia Abu-Jamal), its clergy (public school teachers), its churches (government schools, where prayer is prohibited but condoms are free), its doctrine of infallibility (as manifest in the "absolute moral authority" of spokesmen from Cindy Sheehan to Max Cleland), and its cosmology (in which mankind is an inconsequential accident).
Then, of course, there's the liberal creation myth: Charles Darwin's theory of evolution.
For liberals, evolution is the touchstone that separates the enlightened from the benighted. But Coulter neatly reverses the pretense that liberals are rationalists guided by the ideals of free inquiry and the scientific method. She exposes the essential truth about Darwinian evolution that liberals refuse to confront: it is bogus science.
Ayden Watson
polytheism keeps me comfy
Evan Gonzalez
you're shilling for anne coulter? That's a woman nasty enough bill maher had to stop slipping her the dick.
Parker Ortiz
APOLOGIZE
Justin Anderson
No...
Adrian King
>Then, of course, there's the liberal creation myth: Charles Darwin's theory of evolution.
Love Ann Coulter but this is beyond embarrassing
Jayden Baker
I've never understood when people call an ideology like that "a religion" when it's just not.
Sure you can make all those connections, but they apply just as well to pretty much every other philosophy or worldview at all.
Owen King
Marduk is where Jews get the name Morty.
Benjamin Baker
has anyone told Rick?
Leo Phillips
>Judeo-Christian Goddamnit.
Angel Lewis
>ann coulter
Please don't associate us with this bitch. I get that her job is to be a polemicist, but I promise you that 90% of people in this country agree that this is one crazy cunt.
Parker King
I've heard this idea before and it makes a lot of sense, even if religion where to disapear tomorrow the personality type of the true believers would still remain, they are the ones that can't separate reason from emotion.
Their dogmas circle around equality, everyone is equally capable even if statistics prove otherwise. You are a heathen if you disagree, worthy of exile and/or (career)death.
Its really sad because these type of people could be the nicest of them all if they were to follow a benign religion, they would be the most pious and pure, yet ready to fight for their faith. But the new toxic liberal religion leads them to life of hedonism and moral decay instead.
William Moore
>Judeo-Christian
The pilgrim fathers and founding fathers were not Jewish, they were Christian. America is not a 'Judeo' nation, it is Christian. The 'Judeo' nation is the place they call Israel. Jews have inserted the 'Judeo' part over the years to legitimise their parasitic takeover of America. Vox Day covers this in his interview with Molyneux.
William Nelson
You know that all abrahamic faiths originate from the same canon right?
Zachary Lee
you might find it funny but think of how the people that hold evolution as undeniable truth never take it to its logical next step. If different races evolved in different environments then it comes to reason that they should have many different attributes to each other, including but not limiting to mental capabilities.
The "church of liberalism' would see that conclusion as horribly racist. even if they openly mock anyone that believes in creationism they only believe in evolution in an equally superficial way.
Dominic Robinson
Medicine doesn't deny the physiological difference between groups of people. We can still however regard human races to be very similar due to the fact that humanity had a single source and not multiple sources. The global distribution of the species can be attributed to migration.
Aaron Williams
yes, but alongside the evidence of physiological differences there are the mental ones, IQ tests have been refined for about a century to accurately show them, but somehow this is not even considered in today's world were equality is held up as the true goal.
Gavin Jones
>Medicine doesn't deny the physiological difference between groups of people.
But many people do.
Many people will claim to be progressive and hence only concerned with empirical facts, and will continue on to claim that there is /literally/ no biological distinction between people of different races., like Bill Nye the liberal demagogue claiming that "race doesn't exist"
Cameron Torres
You might as well say that we are all African, because humanity originates from Africa, right?
William Carter
>You might as well say that we are all African, because humanity originates from Africa, right?
We're not all African, but we all originated from Africa yes.
Just as the various sects of christianity, Judaism and to a lesser extent Islam are all different, but all grew out of ancient Zoroastrian and later Semitic tribal belief.
Noah Hall
>Humanity had a single source
But that isn't proven at all and since the discovery of the denisovans a good body of literature has coem out in favour of mixed groups of hominins interbreeding during various stages and across stadials and interstadials. Aurignacian early modern humans are similar to African early modern humans but have some clear differences in the skull etc. It is likely a lot of this interbreeding happened in north Africa and the middle east.
William Barnes
Not trying to be a dick but actually interested in the topic. You have any sources?
