Your Truth or My Truth: The Denial of Objective Reality

One of the quandaries I often find myself trying to figure out, and a question others often ask me to answer is:

“Why can’t the Left see the truth.”

Now, I understand the difficulty with this word “truth.” I’m sure the question goes back much further than the time Pontius Pilot once asked Christ: “What is truth.” And I doubt mankind will stop asking this question until Christ answers it for us all. But I have noticed that there is something to this question.

Many on the left seem to object to the claim that this nation was founded by religious men and on Biblical principles. They would have us believe that our founders were atheists, or, at best, a collection of deists, and that they intentionally designed a secular government. But these assertions stand in stark contradiction to the historic record. One need but look to find how religious these men were or how often they pointed directly to Biblical scripture in designing our system of government. I could fill this post with proof of this argument, but I’ll use the words of one supposed deist to make my point, Benjamin Franklin writing to a friend after the Constitution had been drafted:

“Probably, it might not have immediately occurred to him that the experiment had been tried, and the event was recorded in the most faithful of all histories, the Holy Bible, otherwise he might, as it seems to me, have supported his opinion by that unexceptional authority.”

Then there are the words of another man often argued to have been a deist, John Adams:

“As much as I love, esteem, and admire the Greeks, I believe the Hebrews have done more to enlighten and civilize the world. Moses did more than all their legislators and philosophers.”

I recognize that this is just one example of an objective reality that the Left often denies. There are many more, such as their denial that a nation cannot keep spending money it doesn’t have without paying a price. This propensity to deny reality goes so far that some on the Left have actually denied their own words, even when they are being played back for them on audio or in video tape. I do not understand how, when or where it happened, but – as a group – those on the Left somehow acquired what appears to be a highly developed ability to deny objective reality. There’s no other rational explanation for these observed phenomenon.

But the Left is not alone in their inability to see the truth; the right shares this problem. Take my posts about secession as an example. An RNL reader posted a comment informing me that Red State and The American Thinker attacked our position on secession on their blogs yesterday. I am told they called me some rather nasty names (I suppose it was me because I was the one carrying that torch yesterday). Well, how often do we hear the right telling us that anyone who resorts to calling someone a name instead of addressing the issues is signaling their defeat? I’ve heard Limbaugh say this, Hannity, Levin, O’Reilly and even Coulter. Now, do you suppose the bloggers on Red State and American The Thinker recognize that – by the Right’s own admission – they admitted the failure of their objections the moment they started using ad hominem attacks against me? I bet those folks from the Left would have noticed – because the Right is so often making that case against them. To me, this is a failure to recognize objective reality.

Maybe, if they were pressed, those on the Right would tell us that they just reacted that way because of how wrong I am in my position on secession. They would tell us that secession is illegal and impossible. Now, this would be an issue where objective reality and “truth” start to mix. The objective reality is that secession is not illegal – not if the Right wants to keep their claim to supporting the ideals and principles in the Declaration of Independence that is. It is also possible. If it weren’t, this nation wouldn’t exist to be saved. So, on both counts, the Right would seem to still be in denial of objective reality. And this is where I think “truth” comes into the picture. What they are actually admitting is that they are frightened of what secession would mean and/or unwilling to pay the price it would cost to actually secede. And by doing this, the Right opens itself up to legitimate attack from the Left for not really believing what they preach. The Right never seems to see this, either.

So, why is it that neither the Left nor the Right can seem to recognize objective reality – or “truth – when they see it? Heck, I don’t know. Maybe it’s connected to the same reason so many people deny the imperative for a Creator. Now, this is not an attack on those who do not believe in the Creator, or who may hold different beliefs from mine. It’s just a statement of scientific fact. OK, before that starts an argument, I’ll explain.

First, “Intelligent Design” is not a “fairy tale.” It is actually a very well respected and scientifically based theory; a theory that actually explains what we can actually observe and measure much better than Darwinism. Now, understand, Intelligent Design accepts the idea of evolution, it’s just that Darwinism is more than evolution: it’s the notion that something evolved from nothing. More and more, modern scientific discoveries are telling us that this simply cannot be the case. Take the case of what astrophysicists have discovered about the precise nature of the universe and the balance of the hundreds of physical constants that must all hold their exact value in order for life to exist at all.

The statistical chance of 0 is 1 in 10 to the 50th power. That is a 1 with 50 zeros after it:

1 in 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000

However, there are at least 322 known physical constants that all have to align a precise way for the universe to exist, let alone life (the number is actually about 700 now, but these numbers come from information that is now 10 years old). That is 1 chance in 10 to the 322nd power, or:

1 in 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000

Here is a little perspective for you. The number of SECONDS since the universe began is:


Or the chance that you will win the Powerball Lottery:

1 in 200,000,000

This is all mathematical reality based on what modern science has discovered, yet many people still cling to science and deny God. Now, tell me how one does that? How do you look at these numbers – based on hard scientific discovery – and conclude that this all “just happened?” Is it the multiverse theory that there has to be one universe like ours in a world of infinite alternate universes? Sorry, but that does not work. In an infinite number of universes, there are an infinite number just like ours – all defying mathematical reality. And that’s just one reason SCIENTISTS have rejected the multiverse theory. No, actually, modern astrophysicists and microbiologists are starting to come to the unavoidable conclusion that the universe was designed by an intelligent Creator.

So, you ask me how those on the Left or the Right can deny objective reality? I answer: How can those who claim to believe in science deny what science has proven to be reality? Mankind simply has an infinite ability for self-deception.

About these ads

8 thoughts on “Your Truth or My Truth: The Denial of Objective Reality

  1. “Maybe, if they were pressed, those on the Right would tell us that they just reacted that way because of how wrong I am in my position on secession. They would tell us that secession is illegal and impossible.”

    Well, Joe, you’re right, I have yet to see a really solid objection to secession. If anything, just talking about it is waking us up to just how far the nation has strayed onto an unsustainable path.

      • ===it appears they are abandoning reason and principle in favor of political pragmatism and demographics.===


        Sort of removes most the reason to be a “conservative,” doesn’t it? :-(

        • “Sort of removes most the reason to be a “conservative,” doesn’t it? ”

          Republicans will never beat Democrats at their game of divide and conquer. It goes against our principles.

          As the article says, Ted Cruz predicts Texas may be on its way to becoming a blue state due to the influx of Hispanic voters, who vote overwhelmingly Democrat. If Texas turns blue, the article claims we can look forward to solid, uncontested Democrat rule, and the GOP could become a relic.

          If this is the reality, then is it any wonder that secession is getting so much attention?

          • Justin,

            It may not matter if Texas “goes blue.” If Florida stays blue, no Republican will ever win the Presidency again — not as a “conservative,” that is. In which case, it is as I say: we enter into a 1,000 year period of darkness.

    • ===If anything, just talking about it is waking us up to just how far the nation has strayed onto an unsustainable path===

      In truth, this is my only goal with all my secession posts. I am well aware it will not happen: but not because it won’t, because we are not the people we need to be to make it happen.

  2. We do have a propensity for self-deception, I agree with you there. I’m not sure why anyone who claims to be conservative would ever call another person a name to make a point, but sometimes we let our passions get the better of us and lose control. We’re human I guess, but it doesn’t make it any more right when we do it than when Leftists do it. Side Note: I don’t think modern science IS rejecting the multiverse theory. Matter-of-fact, they are saying there are 11 dimensions and that the 11th dimension is out of phase with our reality leaving the door open, so to speak, for alternate realities and multiverses and also gels with the membrane theory of the Big Bang starter for this and other universes and none of which precludes a Creator having initiated the processes by which all these grand designs occur. I agree with your basic premise, but just think you might open your mind even further to the infinite possibilities, all of which include a Divine Creator who may or may not have used some type of evolution (probably not primoridal ooze evolution, due to everything being in a class, genus, species etc.) and some kind of big bang (such as membranes smashing together) to make life happen.

    • Inohuh,

      ON your side note:

      My rejection of the multiverse theory relates only to the assertion that there are infinite universes. And that rejection is based on several supporting objections posed by scientists and philosophers. It’s a long debate, but the notion of infinite universes can be dismissed by simply pointing out that — if this were the case — we shouldn’t be here.

      As for alternate dimensions, I am aware that there are at least 9. But that does not mean there are alternate universes. it merely means we cannot access all dimensions of THIS universe. See what I mean? :-)

      Finally, yes, I understand the Creator could use natural process for all that we see and know. I actually believe this is exactly what the Creator did. Are you familiar with Hugh Ross and Reason to Believe?

Talk Amongst Yourselves:

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

You are commenting using your 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