Second example: Political disagreements are often framed in psychiatric terminology.<\/p>\n
The second amendment right to own firearms was designed to allow the individual citizen to resist an intrusive government.\u00a0 Progressives want gun control because gun ownership increases the possibility of individual resistance to their sovereign religion.\u00a0 Their \u201cconcerns\u201d are precisely what the Founding Fathers intended.<\/p>\n
Consequently, Progressives have declared gun ownership to be \u201cpolitically incorrect\u201d.<\/p>\n
Progressives claim that their political opponents suffer from the \u201csymptoms\u201d of latent aggression because they unconsciously remain \u201cracists, sexists, polluters, homophobes, and the like\u201d (despite denials) and unwittingly desire to resume the oppressions of the past (read Ann Coulter\u2019s Mugged<\/em> in order to appreciate the irony).<\/p>\n Why else would they cling to their guns?<\/p>\n But that is not all.<\/p>\n Progressive thinkcorrect<\/sup> rejects thinkFoundingFathers<\/sup> for a variety of cryptotheological reasons.\u00a0 The Founding Fathers were \u201cpatriarchal\u201d and condoned \u201cracism\u201d.\u00a0 In making such claims, Progressives project a thinkincorrect<\/sup> onto the Founding Fathers that they did not hold.<\/p>\n Progressives also deduce that their political opponents exhibit conscienceincorrect<\/sup> – not because they want to protect themselves from an intrusive government \u2013 but because \u201cif you own a gun, you want to hurt someone\u201d.<\/p>\n Such Progressive claims are projections of their own latent aggression.\u00a0 After all, they are \u201cbetter people than racists, sexists, polluters, homophobes, and the like\u201d, desire to become the oppressors of the future and intend to exploit any tragic situation in order to further their political agenda.<\/p>\n Simply put, Progressives demonize their political opponents by attributing to them a thinkgroup<\/sup> and a consciencelacking<\/sup> that their opponents do not hold.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Second example: Political disagreements are often framed in psychiatric terminology. The second amendment right to own firearms was designed to allow the individual citizen to resist an intrusive government.\u00a0 Progressives want gun control because gun ownership increases the possibility of individual resistance to their sovereign religion.\u00a0 Their \u201cconcerns\u201d are precisely what the Founding Fathers intended. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-688","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-the-science-of-original-sin"],"yoast_head":"\n