Fathers and "Cons"


I visit a number of blogs on a daily basis.   One of my favorite stops is Pascal’s Fervor.    He has acquired a “resident troll”, whose singular ability to ignore direct questions, while spewing forth any number of inane comments, makes one wonder  if  there is more than one functioning reality on this earthly plane, at the same time.

A couple of days ago, (Would have written about this sooner, but some minor -but no less annoying- physical issues, kept me from posting.) said troll posited the following, in response to a post (and associated comments) at Pascal’s home on the web.

Regarding cons excessive zealousness with history and the bible, seems to me they have a father fixation. The Founding fathers, the father in heaven, and their own fatherhood dominates their thinking. … “

Source: “The resident troll over at Pascal’s

To be fair, the troll hit on something which could almost be considered a “kernel of truth”.   Of course, he took it to the absurd (and incorrect) extreme.    However, there was still the feeling of (on my part) this perhaps needs to be addressed in somewhere other than the comments section.     So, here goes.

First off, we live (despite feminist claims to the contrary) in a Patriarchal society.   This has, with few exceptions, been the rule throughout recorded history.   This does not mean (nor should it) women are not capable of leading, or shouldn’t lead, only for the most part, men have been the leaders of the majority of sectors within any given society or culture.

Having said that, it is not too surprising that throughout this country’s history, the predominate number of movers and shakers were male.    It is our happy circumstance, that our “Founding Fathers” were of a shared wisdom, directed toward a common goal, (which allowed for what might be considered divine intervention) ending in the ultimate production of our nation’s signature documents, the Declaration of Independence, and the Constitution.   Is it small wonder we venerate these men, their collected works, and the great nation which has been passed down to us?

Regarding Mr. Trolls take on religion, follows a similar progression.  Most religions (also)  tend to be patriarchal in nature.   Currently, the top three, are all of this stripe.   Of the three, only one goes from being purely patriarchal, to down right misogynistic in it’s across the board dealings with, and toward, women. (Three guesses as to which “religion of peace” that is, and the first two don’t count!)

A partial exception to this might be the strong (and more than proper) adoration of Christians, particularly Catholics, to the Blessed Virgin.   However, taking this in context, it could be said this is but the personification of how we should honor and respect our (own) mothers.  That the Son of God, made flesh, should place his above all others, should not be too terrifically surprising, and in and of itself does not take away from the Patriarchal nature of the Church, rather it enhances it.   A man confident in his own nature and being, would not feel the least bit lessened or “marginalized” (to use some common psychobabble) in properly acknowledging his mother and the part(s) she played in him becoming who he is.

Ironically enough, the third “religion” mentioned above, as it is in most of its “teachings and instructions”, is the antithesis of promoting self confidence and self reliance in men.   This being the case, it follows  they are far less likely to respect or honor women,  (be it their mother, or any woman) because they are not given to honor or respect anything (save the darker parts of their nature)  or themselves.

So is it any wonder, we honor “The Father”, who allowed for his only begotten Son,  to surrender himself to the cross, in order for mankind’s ransom to be paid?   Nor has this been exclusive to the Christan sects.  Even the Greeks, Romans, and Norse mythologies place a “father figure” as the leader of their respective polytheist faiths.

That Mr. Troll’s statement at least  implies <b>only “cons” place their faith in God, is  not only absurd, but slanders those of other political stripes, who happen to (sometimes extremely so) go down a divergent political path, but are to the best of their abilities, as strong and as demonstrative in expressing their faith as any conservative would.   To be sure, there are men of all political persuasions who are of a wicked and vile nature.  For me to say that all who vote or belong to the Democratic Party are godless heathens who care for nothing else but what’s in it for them, would be just as untrue and as inane, as Mr. Troll’s bit of glibness above.

Which brings me to this.

All men, at least at some point in their lives, try to gain a better understanding of their own father (or the man or men, who for whatever reason, were their “father figures”).  In so doing, one hopes not just to understand the man, but gain a greater understanding of himself.   This is enhanced by attempting to understand, or gain a greater knowledge of, ones God (and the roots/core values of ones religion).  Further in working toward understanding the foundations of our form of governance, we complete a triangle of sorts.

Think of each “point” of the triangle  as labeled with the following:

1 Religion – God the Father

2 Culture/Society/Governance – The Founding Fathers

3 Familial History – Father

Placing oneself in the center of the triangle,  we seek to develop into a fully functioning, rational thinking, and reasoning being.  To head along that path, I would propose you could do far worse than to delve into all three sections of the triangle  above, to develop ones own core.  This is not the limit to this path of self growth and development, only the beginning.  And a constant return to same to reassess and evaluate where you are now, and where you are going, is not a bad thing either.

So is it of any wonder the seemingly rudderless and directionaless Mr. Troll is want to mock those who traditionally strive to honor those things which if properly done, stand to strongly make one a better person in the end?    I suspect there may also be more than a bit of envy on the part of Mr. Troll as well.  But as I do not know him, this is only conjuncture on my part.

So, go ahead and call me fixated on Fathers.  Call me a mother’s boy.  Call me reverent toward God the Father (though I am more than a bit of a backslider from time to time) by openly acknowledging His station.  Call me an unbending constitutionalist in my open admiration toward that document in particular, and the Founding Fathers who gave birth to same.   As far as I am concerned, you could do far worse in trying to insult me  in the above manner.   But be my guest.

h/t to Pascal

Advertisements

7 Comments

Filed under Constitution, Faith, Random Thoughts

7 responses to “Fathers and "Cons"

  1. Well, I can’t really knock anyone for “trolling”, I do it all the time and get endless enjoyment from it. However, I will say this: Lib trolls are really, really predictable. Every one of their rants are so cookie cutter as to be nearly worthless:

    Blame bush
    your stupid*, (insert your own adjective)
    You lying
    Christians are fools
    your a racist
    your uneducated
    try to make a point, get shut down, rapidly jump to another point, get shut down, continue until it’s time to give mom a sponge bath.

    LOL there is almost ZERO inventiveness from lefty trolls. No imagination what so ever.

  2. Guy S

    I don’t know, if one just “stirring up the mud a bit” would necessarily be trolling. However, if this was either off topic, or done with the usual points you list above, than yes, it would qualify as trolling.

    And contrary opinions, especially those which are well thought out, are always entertained here. Assuming they are on topic.

    Though sooner or later, I expect there will be trolls here, with my luck it will be about the same time I finally have a “personal Jihad” announced against me and or this blog.

  3. RayGun

    Guy, is Jesus the only way to be saved?

  4. RayGun

    Hey Guy, you have “Intellectual Concservative” on the right as a link. Isn’t that an Oxymoron, and doesn’t your con word have an extra “c”? 🙂

  5. Deb S.

    hmm. I tend to think their religion was what brought them to their societal patriarchy. And, you know my feelings on all that uh, woman-hating stuff.

    Trolls are trolls. The best you can hope to do is avoid feeding them.

  6. RayGun

    But Deb, aren’t half the cons religious zealots, like Palin, Bachmann, w, etc? And you follow them?

  7. RayGun

    The little trolls scared the big bad tough cons, again?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s