The April edition of The Chronicle of Higher Education reports that Professor Steven Landsburg of the University of Rochester recently posed a “hypothetical” question to his students through his personal blog which went viral and immediately drew mass condemnation. (University of Rochester Professor of the Year Says, “Rape Might Be OK,” University Officials Plan No Disciplinary Action, Joe Calandra Jr., April 30, 2013, patriotaction.net)
He asked the question:
“Should rape be illegal if the victim is unconscious and if no physical harm results?”
Daniel Nelson, the doctoral candidate at the University of Rochester, immediately began organizing students to petition campus leaders to discipline Landsburg. He said:
“We feel like this is just too much. A line has been crossed. The professor’s comments are offensive…But more troubling…is that they could be harmful; We’re worried that a professor who teaches hundreds of students, who was voted professor of the year, and is in a position of great power and influence, is telling the community at large that rape might be OK.”
University leaders however, side with Landsburg, saying he was within his rights to be academically free to spark discussion among his students as he sees fit and plan to take no action against him. (ibid)
hile Lansburg embraces rape, anti-Christian leftist Mike Weinstein, Obama's choice as consultant to the Pentagon in charge of developing new policies on religious tolerance, decries what he calls the “virulent religious oppression” perpetrated by conservative Christians, whom he refers to as “monstrosities” and “pitiable unconstitutional carpetbaggers." Weinstein adds:
"If these fundamentalist Christian monsters of human degradation … and tyranny cannot broker or barter your acceptance of their putrid theology, then they crave for your universal silence in the face of their rapacious reign of theocratic terror. Indeed, they ceaselessly lust, ache, and pine for you to do absolutely nothing to thwart their oppression. Comply, my friends, and you become as monstrously savage as are they. I beg you, do not feed these hideous monsters with your stoic lethargy, callousness and neutrality. Do not lubricate the path of their racism, bigotry, and prejudice. Doing so directly threatens the national security of our beautiful nation." (Pentagon Taps Anti-Christian Extremist for Religious Tolerance Policy, Ken Klukowski, Breitbart.com, 28 Apr 2013)
God help us now when someone with such visceral hatred of conservative Christians—literally tens of millions of Americans—who says sharing this gospel is “spiritual rape” is helping develop policies for how to deal with Christians in the military, said Klukowski:
"Weinstein says those guilty of this “treason” must be “punished.” Under federal law, the penalty for treason is death. And the Obama administration is sitting down to talk with this man to craft new policies for “religious tolerance” in our military." (ibid)
Ideologically, Weinstein, Landsburg and his university defenders are usually described as either Liberals or Leftists. Ideology aside, some of them are moral imbeciles, others are dangerous psychopaths who, like vast numbers of American adolescents in adult-size bodies, are ruled by some or all of the following: narcissism, malignant narcissism, boredom, restless seeking, felt needs for diversions, self-indulgent compulsions, itching appetites, gnawing envy, dark fantasies, paranoia, death-wishing and even thoughts of murder that cloud, unbalance, and darken the mind resulting in deceptive, disjointed, self-contradictory, hypocritical, paranoid reasoning.
Liberalism is the default position ofself-centered children notes Reb Bradley, author of "Born Liberal Raised Right." No child needs to be taught how to be self-centered, to lie, covet, disrespect, resent, hit, spit, kick and otherwise rebel against discipline, order, rules and authority because in greater and lesser degrees, negation and rebellion are natural to all children.
Today increasing numbers of Americans at every level of society, on both left and right, Christian and secular, are controlled by their passions. Adding to the problem is the 'seeker-sensitive' church model attended by thousands of Americans that caters to felt-needs and self-indulgent emotional feel-goodism. Thus America itself is "a nation ruled by its passions," said Bradley. This is why heinous acts,
"...of casual disregard for life, unheard of fifty years ago, have become a familiar item on the evening news; students killing classmates, children murdering their playmates....these gruesome crimes are merely symptomatic of a breakdown of moral fiber..." (ibid, pp. 2-3)
Sanity is the ability to recognize right from wrongindependently ofpassions which when massaged can easily inflate into uncontrollable narcissism, sexual lusts, fits of rage, seething hatred, covetousness, dark obsessions, diabolicism and paranoia.
Rational thinking is reasoning disciplined to resist the corrupting influence of personal feelings or passions, thus allowing for the acceptance of higher truths, order, and authority that contradicts feelings, desires, and fancies. In short, rational thinking is morally-informed reasoning. It is dispassionate, rightly-orderedand logical, and is the fruit of self-control and unswerving commitment to enduring higher truths, moral law, and principle.
Moral imbecility is the inability to recognize right from wrong independent offeelings, impulses, and compulsions. By the degree to which the moral sense is corrupt, so too is reason. The greater the degree of corruption, the more depraved is reason, meaning that moral imbecility can shade into diabolicism, or psychopathy.
In his paper, "Leftism as Psychopathy," John Ray (M.A.;Ph.D.) provides a clinical description of psychopathy:
"The characteristics of the clinical psychopath can be summed up as follows: He is not obviously "mad"; he is often highly intelligent; he is unmoved by brutality (except to enjoy perpetrating it); he has no moral or ethical anchors or standards; he is deeply (but discreetly) in love with himself (narcissism) so secretly despises others and thinks they are fit only to be dominated and exploited by him and those like him; he is a great manipulator who loves getting others to do his bidding by deception or otherwise; he is the master of the lie and the false pretense but sees no reason to be consistent from occasion to occasion; he will say anything to gain momentary praise or admiration; his only really strongly felt emotions seem to be hate and contempt and he is particularly enraged by those who have what he wants and will be totally unscrupulous in trying to seize what others have for himself. But above all, the psychopath does not seem to be able totell right from wrong and, as a result, does sometimescommit or connive at murders and other heinous crimes with what seems to be a clear conscience. "
Although leftists form only a small fraction of the total population said Ray,
" ....their influence and their grasp on the levers of power in the media, in the bureaucracy, in the universities and, at times, in politics, make what they think, say and do very important indeed. And it is my contention that this type is eerily reminiscent of a well-known psychiatric category: The psychopath. So the ULTIMATE explanation for all the core characteristics of Leftism that have been described so far lies in many Leftists being sub-clinical psychopaths. "
The most frightening aspect of America's descent into moral imbecility and diabolical psychopathy is that through the White House, legislatures, media, Hollywood, courts, academia, pentagon and seminaries such people have the power to lead our country farther down the path toward disintegration, breakdown and implosion and from there to totalitarianism, concentration camps and mass murder.
In observation of this eventuality an astute commentator to the Prager Zeitung said:
"The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president." "The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince...The Republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool" "It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their president." (Prager Zeitung, Freerepublic)