The second of two pieces on the Morals and Values vote: Moral Values without the bullshit------Let's get real here. Muslims have moral values. Wahabi Muslims have them too. The Nazis had them, as did the Communists. Obviously Christians and Jews who follow their faiths have moral values set down on paper. Hindus and Buddhists have so many of them that nobody can figure them all out. So the true believers have moral values, but the depth of these values always depend upon how closely they follow their code. Moral values for a political movement or deity have their "rules" and reasons written down in bibles, Korans, manifestos (Das Kapital) and so on; generally we know what they think and how they might behave in certain situations. Catholics oppose abortion (in most cases), other Christian sects refuse to accept all things modern or mechanical, some will refuse to go to war under any circumstance and so on. We know more than we want to about the Muslim religion which is governed by the Koran and fatwas issued by local imams.

People with no faith or code are unpredictable. The increasingly atheist or secular Europe cheats , lies, conspires, and it is obvious that they lack centrally published codes of conduct.

Similarly, the "immorality" we see in our own country has to do with people of no faith who adhere to no codes at all. Show movies of people being killed is no biggie. Show rapes, write titillating stories about incest and sadism, call political opponents Hitler or Stalin, lying about whatever suits the moment is just part of the game. Sometimes murder is OK and you let the killer go, sometimes rape is excusable, but verbally insulting a woman is a crime against humanity. Today. Tomorrow the ideas may change. Morality on a sliding scale with no ruler or mathematical equation.

It is obvious that people who live by defined codes are a threat to people without them. Conversely, the people with no codes are a threat to the people who live by them. That is because secularists try to stamp out all references to codes in any public place because the codes will make them appear to be criminal or dishonest. The people who are Muslim or Christian are always proselytizing for their religion, or code of conduct, to become paramount. This is an ongoing and unchanging culture "war."

The secularist wants no code at all other than to be "tolerant" of everything. "You mean I can't have sex with an 8 year old boy?", laments Man Boy Love Association. "I've decided to use heroin, fuck you." "I'm having sex with my mother and we both like it so mind your own business." People with codes make things occurring outside their codes their business. Things like hunger, medical care, freedom, lying and so on are things codes try to deal with. If you will check around I think you will see that 90% of the food banks in America are church sponsored and use money voluntarily contributed by members. These members also volunteer to distribute food and help, all with no agenda other than to do good. They do it every day, not just when the TV cameras are rolling on some special day.

The "secularists" want professionals paid by money squeezed from taxpayers to do all the charitable jobs. It is easy to see "big government vs small government" as a moral issue when looked at this way. When a secular association of lawyers tramps the Red States stamping out all public displays of codes like The Ten Commandments, crosses anywhere, or prayers anywhere you have a moral or values issue. People with a Christian or Jewish code want to fight terror everywhere. People with no code want to do a France while keeping the ACLU around to be sure nobody gets punished.

Are atheist (secularists) immoral? Amoral? Of course they are when viewed through a magnifying glass of a specific code. Are people of faith immoral or amoral? Yes, because secularists feel that people allied with a fictional God have no business telling them what to do, how to behave, or what they are allowed to think about. Secularists, feel they are being "judged" through a judgmental magnifying glass. The guy having sex with his sister doesn't want to be "judged," the woman who murders her abusive husband---without going to the cops or lawyers--- has the "right" to kill. Killing a baby as it comes out of the womb by sucking its brains out is "a woman's right to choose" to the secular atheist crowd; murder to the religious.

The values of the secularist are entirely situational. Sometimes things are OK, sometimes not OK. It all depends. When Moral Values become part of the voting considerations, the people with codes will marginally outnumber the people without any. This election was partly that conflict being played out. The Democrats were seen as morally "hazy" because they are secular and have no constant code to live by.

The atheist, or as it is as it is characterized in politically correct language today, secularist, will always fear the person of faith, the people who follow a set of rules to govern their lives. Secularists don't like people of faith because when a person of faith has something bad happen to them that person turns to a Higher Power for solace and finds it. When Mormons rush to the aid of other Mormons and rebuild flood damaged homes for free, the secularists see evil; they think the Mormons should fix every home. Secularists on the other hand, want to turn to paid professional home builders for help. Help paid for by the taxpayer. When in emotional difficulty caused by catastrophe atheists will turn to a psych person paid by the state to somehow teach them to deal with it. The person who follows a set of rules set forth by a Higher Power (Secret Police, God, Communism) will turn to God, the state, or a written document of rules to solve problems with no cost to the general population.

The people who voted in this election and claimed that Moral Values were important meant that they wanted to vote for someone they recognized as being guided by something higher than current elite cocktail party conversation, rich Hollywood whores who use heroin and speed, or the hate filled intellectual class that seems to babble endlessly about nothing and everything.

Personally, I refuse to be told what is morally right by a bunch of aimless "secularists" whose morals shift from day to day, who don't know what "is" is, and think a blow job isn't sex.

I know Bush has a code, one that I can recognize, and I trust him. Period. Others want no code at all. Kerry could not explain who he is because he is everything at all times. Values vs nothing.