I may have finally come upon a topic for my first book. When I was a youth learning the rule of composition, my teacher always impressed upon us that the key to writing a great composition was to write about something you knew about. Author Malcolm Gladwell tells us that to become proficient in anything you have to devote at least 10,000 hours to it. I believe I am approaching that level of expertise when debating liberals. So I'm struggling with the title...
101 Crazy Things Liberals Say
1000 Foolish Things Liberals Say
10,000 Silly Statements From The Liberal View
1,000,000,000 Stupid Things Liberals Say
Maybe that last one was a little strong, but I'm sure the title will work itself out. One thing I've come to realize in my interaction with debating liberals, is they have a very linear thought process. They simply don't understand cause and effect. Which led me to another observation, (which is by no means complete yet, still in the stages of confirming). I also get to spend a great deal of time in the company of engineers. And believe it or not there is a common denominator with every engineer I've come in contact with. They all seem to be conservative Christians. Why is that? I have a theory....
Engineers are trained in systematic thinking. Everything they do has a cause and effect. They research everything to expose every possible scenario when a system is put into place. Engineers also have to deal with principles on a daily basis. For instance if they were designing an aircraft, a thorough understanding of the principle of gravity is an absolute must. Christianity is a defined set of principles, which a engineer can easily relate to. Liberals on the other hand, not so much. Engineers almost always have a high degree of the melancholy personality, so as a part of that personality, they have to be correct. A conservative Christian belief system satisfies all those needs and simply makes sense to an engineer. Using their systematic thinking process it fulfills their need to be right. Now there are exceptions to every rule, but it has been my experience that individuals who understand systematic thinking cannot justify the liberal stance as it just lacks the ability to pass the verification process and common sense. The last point is being conservative is important when designing something. A radical attempt to alter a set of principles that systematically bring you consistent results is rarely the path to success in engineering.
Liberals on the other hand when their thinking is challenged simply point the conversation toward another direction. A modern day example is when you catch a liberal regurgitating some talking point that is easily proven untrue, the simple say, "What about what George Bush did?" Actually the response of a liberal is almost completely predictable, it's as if they have a handbook with answers a liberal can respond with. Not unlike the liberal bible ,"Rules For Radicals"- by Saul Alinsky, where they are taught to divert the discussion to something completely unrelated.
A short quip from one of my discussions that'll undoubtedly make it into this book went something like this.....
Liberal-"You Christians are always trying to force your religion down our throats!"
Response- So what part gets you? Is it the "honor your father and mother" part, or perhaps the "thou shalt not kill" that throws you? Maybe you take exception to the commandment that demands we not be adulterous, or is it the fact Christians are taught it's a sin to steal that falls outside your value system? So really, tell us, where do you take exception to the teaching of faith? Remember even Christians are free to ignore these mandates from God, and they do, but the consequences aren't worth it. Your freedom isn't in jeopardy because of religion, your salvation will be due of lack of it.