A Quote by Ann Coulter

Liberals hate religion because politics is a religion substitute for liberals and they can't stand the competition. — © Ann Coulter
Liberals hate religion because politics is a religion substitute for liberals and they can't stand the competition.
For liberals, religion and politics mix as long as the results support their cause.
Instead of 'counterrevolutionaries,' liberals' opponents are called 'haters,' 'those who seek to divide us,' 'tea baggers,' and 'right-wing hate groups.' Meanwhile, conservatives call liberals 'liberals'-and that makes them testy.
Liberals hate America, they hate "flag-wavers", they hate abortion opponents, they hate all religions except Islam (post 9/11). Even Islamic terrorists don't hate America like liberals do. They don't have the energy. If they had that much energy, they'd have indoor plumbing by now.
Why is it that Christian activists are regularly pilloried for basing social standards on biblical texts while liberals are actually praised for mixing religion and politics?
Firstly, I think the values that underpin all liberals, frankly - classical liberals, all liberals - of respect for the individual and freedom are worth fighting for.
I expected a lot of flak over my new book, '50 Things Liberals Love to Hate' from, well, liberals. It's not a big shock that the kind of liberals I skewer in the book - the radical, Che Guevara-loving type - have posted scathing reviews at Amazon and written nasty e-mails and voiced opposition to a book they haven't actually read.
I don't hate religion, I try not to hate religion. I hate the terrible things that religion makes people do, and I hate the greed that comes from it.
I don't care if they're Republican liberals or Democrat liberals, they're still liberals. They're not 'moderates.' Don't hit me with that. There's no such thing as a moderate. A moderate is just a liberal disguise.
For a while in the twenties and thirties, art was talked about as a substitute for religion; now B movies are a substitute for religion.
Politics and morality are inseparable. And as morality's foundation is religion, religion and politics are necessarily related. We need religion as a guide. We need it because we are imperfect, and our government needs the church, because only those humble enough to admit they're sinners can bring to democracy the tolerance it requires in order to survive.
I'd pretty much debate anybody. I prefer to debate smart liberals. I'm not saying this about Stephen Colbert but, unfortunately, the most famous liberals generally aren't the smartest ones. I have a list of the smarter liberals I recommend.
Liberals spend a whole lot of time trying to convince us they love teachers, but dig even skin deep into the matter, and it becomes evident that liberals hate teachers.
Liberals want the family destroyed, they want religion destroned, because then you have loyalty directly to the state.
Art is not a substitute religion: it is a religion (in the true sense of the word: 'binding back', 'binding' to the unknowable, transcending reason, transcendent being). But the church is no longer adequate as a means of affording experience of the transcendental, and of making religion real - and so art has been transformed from a means into the sole provider of religion: which means religion itself.
Political debate with liberals is basically impossible in America today because liberals are calling names while conservatives are trying to make arguments.
The reason any conservative's failing is always major news is that it allows liberals to engage in their very favorite taunt: Hypocrisy! Hypocrisy is the only sin that really inflames them. Inasmuch as liberals have no morals, they can sit back and criticize other people for failing to meet the standards that liberals simply renounce. It's an intriguing strategy. By openly admitting to being philanderers, draft dodgers, liars, weasels and cowards, liberals avoid ever being hypocrites.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!