- WND - http://www.wnd.com -

The Democrats' problem with God

Posted By Joseph Farah On 11/04/2012 @ 3:05 pm In Commentary,Opinion | No Comments

Rape has become a big issue in this year’s election.

To listen to some Democrats, you would think certain Republican candidates are “soft on rape.”

It’s all part of their imaginary “war on women.”

But these Democrats, and their paid ideological hacks in the media, don’t really have a problem with rape.

They have a problem with God.

It all started with Rep. Todd Akin’s deliberately misconstrued remarks about “legitimate rape.” The Missouri Senate candidate’s point was not to delegitimize rape. It was to save human life. Akin is a devout Christian whose faith is behind his strong opposition to killing innocent unborn babies. It’s worth noting that the 1973 Roe vs. Wade Supreme Court decision was over a case in which a woman admittedly claimed rape falsely to legitimize her decision to abort her child – a “choice” she and many other women who make such claims later deeply regret for the rest of their lives.

The despicable, amoral Democrats, like Akin’s unworthy opponent, incumbent Sen. Claire McCaskill, and their warped allies in the news media twist and distort the intent of such statements to obscure the real issues facing the nation and demonize God-fearing, righteous and imperfect men like Akin. The absurdity of the situation reached a crescendo when establishment Republicans, such as Karl “the architect” Rove, publicly joked about murdering Akin for his out-of-context quotation and, to this day, refuse to support Akin with money specifically raised from donors across the country under the false pretense of supporting all Republican candidates for the Senate and House.

Now, of course, Rove and his limp-wristed, bed-wetting friends in the Republican establishment are in the position of hoping Akin loses and a Barack-Obama-supporting Democrat retains her seat in the Senate for fear a victory without their support will undercut their power and prestige in the party for the future. By the way, that’s exactly what I hope and pray happens in Missouri. It would be a “two-fer” – with a good man defeating a bad woman and the permanent tarnishing of Rove’s pseudo-legendary reputation as a kingmaker.

But I digress.

The next phony “rape crisis” was one that got less attention because it involved a Wisconsin legislative race. For that reason, you may have completely missed it. Last month, first-term Republican Rep. Roger Rivard’s Democrat challenger dredged up a comment Rivard made 10 months earlier about a criminal sexual assault charge brought against a 17-year-old high school senior accused of having sex in school with a girl two years younger, which, ironically, is something the Democratic Party actively encourages – as long as condoms or other so-called “safe-sex” practices are used.

Rivard had relayed a sensible, folksy, common-sense story his father had told him to discourage premarital sex: “He also told me one thing, ‘If you do, just remember, consensual sex can turn into rape in an awful hurry, because all of a sudden a young lady gets pregnant and the parents are madder than a wet hen and she’s not going to say, ‘Oh, yeah, I was part of the program.’ All that she has to say or the parents have to say is it was rape because she’s underage. And he just said, ‘Remember, Roger, if you go down that road, some girls,’ he said, ‘they rape so easy.’”

Once again, the media and the Democrats had a field day about “easy rape.” With Akin’s poll numbers dropping back then because of the media furor over his remark, they thought they had another scalp to add to their belts. Their strategy in 2012 nationwide was to persuade Americans Republicans were at war with women and soft on rape, rather than pro-life, pro-abstinence, pro-family and pro-responsibility. And naturally, once again, the cowardly, unprincipled Republican establishment unceremoniously abandoned Rivard like a used condom.

Then there is the more recent case of Indiana state Treasurer Richard Mourdock, a candidate for the U.S. Senate.

The casual media consumer might believe the cacophonic media nonsense that Mourdock had foolishly claimed that rape is “something God intended to happen.” Again, in the context of the immorality of killing an unborn baby produced as a result of rape, Mourdock said: “I struggled with it myself for a long time, but I came to realize life is that gift from God. And I think even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something that God intended to happen.”

Mourdock clearly wasn’t justifying rape. He was defending the right to life of an innocent unborn baby!

But that’s the Democrat strategy. It’s right out of Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals” playbook:

  • Rule No. 4: “Make opponents live up to their own book of rules. ‘You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.’”
  • Rule No. 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.”
  • Rule No. 11: “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it.”

By this week, a pseudo-sophisticated New York Magazine columnist could reduce it all to this cartoonish lead: “What a year for Republicans saying awful things about rape, eh?”

Yeah, right.

This is not a year for Republicans saying awful things about rape. This is the year the Democrats have openly expressed their contempt for God and His laws.

They even did it at their convention before reluctantly pulling back for fear, not of God, but of political blowback from an American public still clinging to some semblance of Judeo-Christian ethics.

Let me end with some rhetorical questions:

  1. If Democrats truly believe rape is so horrible, and the accuser is always right, why did they dismiss so cavalierly Juanita Broaddrick’s credible rape allegation against Bill Clinton?
  2. If the Democratic Party is truly the party of women, why did it stand behind Ted Kennedy until the day he died, despite the fact that he left a young woman to drown in his car at Chappaquiddick?
  3. If the Democratic Party is truly the party of women, why does it take the extreme position of advocating for abortion if for the purpose of sex selection – which inevitably leads disproportionately to the death of baby girls?

No, this isn’t about women’s rights. It’s not about women’s “health.” It’s not about the seriousness of rape. It’s not about a phony “war on women.” It’s about their own war with God. It’s about wanting to do what’s right in their own eyes. And it’s about winning power at any cost and by any means necessary.

Think about that before going to the polls tomorrow.

Receive Joseph Farah's daily commentaries in your email

BONUS: By signing up for Joseph Farah’s alerts, you will also be signed up for news and special offers from WND via email.
  • Where we will email your daily updates
  • A valid zip code or postal code is required
  • Click the button below to sign up for Joseph Farah's daily commentaries by email, and keep up to date with special offers from WND. You may change your email preferences at any time.

 


Article printed from WND: http://www.wnd.com

URL to article: http://www.wnd.com/2012/11/the-democrats-problem-with-god/

© Copyright 1997-2013. All Rights Reserved. WND.com.