Progressive … the new liberal buzz word
Who doesn’t like real progress? But what if regress is the wolf and progress is the sheep’s clothing? That’s what we have with liberals now.
I mean is abortion progress? No, because it is murder and ANTI-nature. Is rap music progress? No, because it is an expression of an unhealthy spiritual and emotional state. Can the fact that 2,700 teens attempt suicide every day be considered to be an expression of a progressive society? Obviously not, but that’s what we have. Can worsening statistics in marriage, addiction and crime be considered progress? I could go on and on.
Also disproven here is “evolution” … another liberal religious tenant. Things that are worsening aren’t evolving. We have been in a state for decades now (like the band DEVO named themselves after) of De-evolution. (And for those like me who like to play with words: devilution). That means that only the devil and those who follow him (whether knowingly or not) see the changes as evolution and progress.
So then how did we come to such a bad state? Yes, we can see that liberals were aggressive in bringing about social degradation, but how did a generally conservative nation, whose laws and culture even were geared to protect that conservative state, come to allow the degradation to happen? I mean, despite how San Francisco has been for the last several decades, it must be remembered that the Republican convention that in 1964 nominated such a staunch conservative as Barry Goldwater was held at the Cow Palace in San Francisco (which I enthusiastically attended … just to show you where I was at in those days).
So then how did this conservative (especially by today’s standards) city become the primary breeding ground for all of the emerging liberal cultures (beatnik, hippie, feminist, gay)? How did the authorities and civic hierarchy come to allow this?
The liberal factory that spawned the liberal movements in the last half of the 20th century went something like this: San Francisco would create the evil, and Los Angeles (and its control over the entertainment industries) would promote it. Even though I was a part of this degradation (I’m speaking about the hedonistic side of the hippie movement, not the organic side, which had a number of positive aspects to it), when I finally became religious after moving to Los Angeles in the 1980’s, I would go back and visit my family in San Francisco and feel an anger as I watched the city slowly decline. I very much felt the phrase, “If God doesn’t destroy San Francisco and Los Angeles, he owes Soddom And Gommorah an apology.” But then the very strong earthquakes that happened in both cities and the prediction of the inevitable “big one” told me that it was time for me and my family to leave, because I knew that it wasn’t a matter of if God was going to bring a big earthquake to both cities, but a matter of when. (By the way, right after I left, on my birthday in the town I had lived in and went to college, Northridge, was a major earthquake in which buildings and freeways collapsed. But still, that was only a hint of the one of biblical proportions that is yet to come that the Bible predicts.)
So, back to why San Francisco allowed the liberal movements to spawn there. It has been said that “Pride goes before a fall”. And such was the case before the moral fall of this nation. It started with a pride problem in San Francisco.
(I’m going to start with a biblical context here). It was ‘pride’ that led to the downfall of satan (the original rebel), which he then passed on to humanity through his tempting of Adam and Eve. Well here’s another example of how ‘pride’ can lead to a downfall.
I spent the first 32 years of my life in San Francisco. The San Francisco I grew up in was an all-American city … in tune with the rest of the U.S. in that it was basically no different: nice, normal, religious, family-oriented.
But it did possess a unique physical charm … its rolling hills with great views, cable cars, ethnic neighborhoods, smogless, moderate climate, and Victorian houses and apartments. And it took pride in this charm. But then it started boasting about this charm and its elevated stature compared to other cities. And in its rivalry with eastern cities (who themselves were vocal about their pride in being more cultured than the west), San Francisco, not wanting to be outdone, added ‘being progressively cultured’ to its pride portfolio. Therefore in seeking unique ways to be progressive, it had to go with new things, even if natural standards of decency and good function had to be compromised.
“The arts” have traditionally been breeding grounds for lowering the standards of nature. Theatre, literature, dance, poetry, sculpture, music, photography, cinema and art have been the main places where the boundaries restraining evil are tested, broken and commercialized. The new, more evil boundaries then become the accepted norms in society (e.g. profanity, immodesty, nudity, violence, rebellion, sexual perversion, insults and liberal thought).
Now if San Francisco was going to be able to maintain its ‘progressive’ status, it had to be the FIRST city for any new progressive movement. And its media and people even started promoting the dysfunctions as being good (along with promoting its pride for being the leading progressive city). So, San Francisco became the first mecca for: beatniks, hippies, gays, sexual perversion, and liberals. Now San Francisco has become the most dysfunctional city in the nation. It has become the leading experimental center for evil and dysfunction. As I said earlier, it manufactures the evil, and then Los Angeles markets it. The beautiful city that I grew up in doesn’t exist anymore.
(By the way, I’m not down on people who fall into the gay lifestyle. I’ve had many gay friends, some of whom have died from AIDS, which is some of the reason for my inspiration to try to do something about the evil and dysfunction in this world … to prevent further troubled victims from experimenting with dangerous lifestyles. I see people who fall into the gay lifestyle as being somewhat victims of falling into permissive spiritual traps either to seek relief from their inner turmoil or to seek new sensations … the kind that San Francisco takes pride in allowing to happen. And because these traps have a certain intoxicating liberating energy about them, they lure people in. But I know that within the Bible is a good life for anyone, no matter what their circumstances. And there are many ex gays to prove this, including ex gay activist leaders. In defense of people who are in the gay lifestyle, many of them have a high degree of ‘sweetness’, which is an admirable and endearing quality. [I’m mainly speaking about the men. The women more so like to see themselves as tough]. And, they often are interested in personal growth. They just need to take that next step in growth by surrendering to God and following the holy standards in His Bible. That is what can liberate them from all internal problems).
So in conclusion, I’ve lived on both sides of the “progressive” lifestyle as a conservative and as a liberal and also went through the transition. And I suffered greatly as a result because of the transition. So I write now to warn, and also to remind of why the ‘40s and ‘50s were socially better than today (and therefore we haven’t progressed, we’ve regressed). I personally experienced the greater pleasure and security with what was “in the air” in the ‘50s: love, unity, peace, order, patriotic love, civility, romance, reverence for God, and much better social statistics. And these are all closer to God’s way and plan than “cool” rebellion (which is closer to satan’s way and plan).
Dennis Marcellino is the author of THE PROOF that God exists and the Bible is true (which can be seen at www.ConclusiveProofOfGod.com) as well as the political books The Plague Of Liberalism (which can be seen at www.ThePlagueOfLiberalism.com) and THE Solutions (which can be seen at www.TheOptimumPoliticalSolutions.com). He is also available to speak: www.ChristianProofs.com