A sample (with some editing for language):
Another goon steps in to say…
Actually, this is not a good thing. It is a statement that some of those familly values that Sarah [Palin] is advancing could not even be passed along to her own kid.
I still like Palin, but, if true, this is not good.
It’s this punitive and unrealistic worldview that gives conservatives, and especially conservative Christians, a bad name.
Listen up, Stupid: You can do “all the right things” and live your life according to Christ and teach your kids values and all that stuff, but guess what? You’re still going to sin.
Your religion, in fact, explicitly states that no one is without sin, except Christ, so implying otherwise is a direct heresy against Christ’s teachings.
And furthermore so will your kids sin. And their grandkids.
The worldview is utterly naive and unrealistic, which would simply be chuckleworthy, if not for the other part of it: Because there is among some this heretical belief that accepting Christ is a perfect defense against all sins, these j***offs become nasty and gleefully judgmental about others falling short. It’s not really morality; it’s just a pretext for self-celebration and exulting in the travails of others.
Christ didn’t ask you to be smug nasty p****, did He? No, I don’t think that’s among his teachings.
[…]
No one wants to be preached at. Or rather, some like being preached at, but for a couple of hours on Saturday or Sunday, thank you, and by a representative off the church we’ve selected, and not 24/7 by an endless parade of Concern Scolds who have appointed themselves Conscience Ministers Without Portfolio and General Universal Missionaries for Caring.
But the same effect happens when strict moral conservatives just won’t give it a f***ing rest about sex and older forms of conventional morality. There is not a much bigger audience for that, either. It’s not as if people are looking to be bullied without pause by self-appointed Morality Inspectors all godd*** day long, and it’s just that we dislike the particular service offered by the liberal moral scolds.
Call this Morality Fatigue. Yes, I kind of agree with most of what you say about morality, at least to some extent. But you know what? I didn’t f***ing ask you to serve as my substitute conscience, nor to be my proxy in moral scolding anyone who errs, and if I were seeking someone to fill such a position, I’d want to see a resume and references first. I’d want to know that you actually are qualified for the position.
And, quite frankly, your enthusiasm for this job does not count in your favor, nor does your presumptuousness in performing the job’s fuctions before I’ve made you a formal offer of employment.
A bit of reluctance to accept the title, even if offered, might just increase your odds of landing the job.
I really don’t see how this buffoonish, cartoonish view of human morality (and immorality) serves the purposes of moral teaching at all. It makes mockery of the whole idea of morality and thereby drives people towards nihilism. People confuse message and messenger all the time. And if the messenger seems like he’s full of s***, it’s easy to conclude that so must the message be, too.
OUTSTANDING!