Comments on: The Drama Of Our Time

By: Roy

Roy — Sat, 17 Apr 2010 03:44:44 +0000

I also believe this is a good article and perhaps a way to convert people to conservatism. However, it is a fundamental difference. I think that God had a hand in helping found our country. We did, after all, have a revolution which was a war. As I study how they arrived at our Constitution I have discovered that many of the same arguments we have today they had then. They resolved the issue to form a limited government. That limited government worked well. In fact, many of the warnings about human nature and government our founding fathers gave us then have been either ignored or called false. Which brings me back to that fundamental difference of opinion. Can one be slightly pregnant? Can a country be slightly socialistic with a mixed economy for long? I wonder!
rcf100

By: Kylie BattName

Kylie BattName — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 12:41:08 +0000

Как специалист, могу оказать помощь. Вместе мы сможем найти решение.... By: R.J. Moeller "Impartiality is a pompous name for indifference, which is an elegant name for ignorance." –G.K.....

By: PatriotUSA

PatriotUSA — Sun, 11 Apr 2010 07:40:06 +0000

RJ,
Will be cross posting to PC with credit and link
back to here. Really a fine job and you are one
of the best writers out here that many of us
have been reading. It is in the ‘details’ and fine
print where you excel and that sets you apart
from so many others who do this.

By: Father Brown

Father Brown — Sat, 10 Apr 2010 07:22:59 +0000

Bravo!!

By: Phil Shirley

Phil Shirley — Fri, 09 Apr 2010 21:43:45 +0000

As usual, you and I agree on even the most minute of details. Such salience is or rare order these days. If you write a book, and presumably tour, Son Tours would be honored to accommodate.

-Phil

By: Bill G

Bill G — Fri, 09 Apr 2010 04:28:57 +0000

Another tremendous commentary, RJ!

You have a talent. Keep developing it. Keep inspiring and informing your readers.

God bless.

By: Justine

Justine — Fri, 09 Apr 2010 03:48:14 +0000

Have you read “The Ball and the Cross”? Its interesting premise is that a devout Catholic and an ardent atheist who vow to duel over their beliefs have more in common in their passionate adherence to a worldview than the world in general can stand. The world can take anything except people who take ideas seriously. And so, the world tries to stop their fight. They flee. The world — usually in the form of the police — gives chase. Over most of the rest of the picaresque novel, the two duel with words, rather than swords, and come to love each other, though neither convinces the other. It is a fascinating character and philosophical study, and I wonder if Chesterton had his give and take with McCabe in mind when writing it — though, I think he curiously gives the atheist the more Chestertonian personality, while the Catholic is far more grave.

Worldview matters — and the willingness to fight (with words and civil actions — that is, a symbolic rather than literal duel) for that worldview is something that our “soft, worldly, timid” lifestyles have clouded. It’s stand up now or lose it for a generation (at least). G.K. also said, “Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions.” Got convictions America?

Good article!