The Sin of Pride?
At a Pride celebration on the White House lawn, a "transgender influencer" (When did "influencer" become a thing? And doesn't it warn us of what social media is aiming at?) removed his/her top. He goes by Rose Montoya. Montoya defended the action on Instagram and TikTok and then apologized because of the backlash. I think the most amusing part of this particular story was when they reported "she was within her legal rights to bear her breasts." Yes, those with breasts should be able to bear them in public ... just not bare them.
And We All Know It
Every outlet I looked at had the same story. A pregnant woman was shot and killed by two gunmen in Washington D.C. "and her baby is in critical condition." It is a tragedy, but why does everyone acknowledge that this unborn child is a baby while denying it elsewhere? Why does "public sentiment" get to define "human being"?
Missing the Point
The story in Business Insider recognizes that Trump allowed a transgender to compete in the 2012 Miss Universe pageant but is now "campaigning to ban trans women from competing in women's sports." Obvious contradiction, right? Only if you completely miss the point. Biological males have an inborn advantage in sports that makes it unfair for them to compete with biological women, so many are calling on bans on biological males from competing (unfairly) with women. Biological women have an inborn advantage over biological males in beauty contests, so comparing sports vs beauty contests is apples and oranges. Mind you, the amount of surgery and literally unnatural -- against nature -- work that has to be done to make a biological male able to compete with a biological female in a female beauty contest seems a bit unfair to me, but my point is that this sports ban isn't an "anti-transgender ban" -- it's an biological-male-competing-against-biological-female ban. Not the same thing ... as demonstrated by the fact that it says nothing about "transgender men" competing with biological men.
Those Crazy Californians
California is at it again. They're advancing a bill that would require parents to "affirm a child's gender identity." It could cost custody and/or visitation amd classify parents that refuse as abusive. "Never mind the science or the permanent damage done to a prepubescent child. We will push this anti-science, irrational agenda in California." Whatever it takes to remove the rational populace from the state.
Bring Down the Constitution
12-year-old subversive, Liam Morrison, was sent home from school in March for wearing a T-shirt that violated the dress code, making students feel unsafe. The malevolent child's shirt boldly declared "There are only two genders." A district court judge ruled against Liam's 1st Amendment right to free speech in favor of other students' nonexistent right to not feel uncomfortable. We have our priorities straight now.
Dangerous Liberty
The Southern Poverty Law Center touts itself as "fighting hate" and "seeking justice," so they like to track "hate groups." You know, hate groups like "Moms for Liberty," a group "dedicated to fighting for the survival of America by unifying, educating and empowering parents to defend their parental rights at all levels of government." Yeah ... parents with rights ... what could be more dangerous? Got it. Moms and liberty are right out. No, of course not. It's just most any conservative group that they classify as "hate."
Assault Weapon Ban
In New Zealand, an attacker with an axe visited 3 Chinese restaurants sending 3 people to the hospital. Government is calling for better assault weapon control, such as axe registration, background checks, and possibly a total ban on axes. No? If not, why not?
Democratic Religion?
Roman Catholics want the church to promote women into decision-making roles and have a "radical inclusion" of the LGBTQ community (like offering them "fraternal space"). Because, as we all know, churches are defined by their people and not, say, by the God they seek to follow. So Scripture's idea about women in authority over men is no longer to be considered. And while I think that homosexuals, etc., need what the Church has to offer, I want to be careful not to give them "fraternal space" as if people in direct, intentional, bold contradiction to God's commands can actually be "brothers in Christ." What people really want is their own club where they can lay down the rules and God has to follow them because they voted it in.
Eliminate the Opposition
A gay, tenured history professor in California was suspended after bringing chocolate bars to a campus open house. The bars were "he/him" bars containing nuts and "she/her" bars without nuts from Jeremy's Chocolate. The professor was suspended for "creating a hostile environment" in opposition to diversity and inclusion ... which, apparently, is remedied by eliminating his diverse opinion and excluding him. Got it. (I'm wondering. Has anyone ever been disciplined for creating a hostile environment for, say, conservatives or Christians?)
A Lesson in Logical Fallacy
The Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) has been defending religious freedom since it was formed in 1994. Now that the Southern Poverty Law Center has deemed it a "hate group," the media is jumping on the bandwagon and warning everyone -- "There be Christians here!" The ACLU regularly attacks 1st and 2nd Amendment rights, but that's good these days. If it's Christian, it's bad. This is, by the way, a classic logical fallacy. "Whatever you do, don't consider the argument. You need to consider the source!" (The genetic fallacy.)
__________
Just a note here. I'm skipping the Bee's inputs this week because of the unusual length of the news items this week. I hope what I put here was humorous enough for this week.
Side note: It offended some recently when I failed to spend enough time on Trump's indictments because I'm apparently supposed to be writing about what others want me to write about. If that's the case, I hope others won't be outraged that I am not spending enough time on Hunter Biden's guilty plea. I'm sorry. You can check it out for yourself.
3 comments:
Sadly, only people in your generation would miss that typo. Mine and younger probably don't even know the difference between bear and bare.
I've often thought of the dichotomy of the charge of a double murder for killing a pregnant woman. I have a scenario in my head asking if a pregnant woman is stabbed and the baby is killed, should that be murder? And if yes, what if that woman was on her way to get an abortion?
They can't see the point because they've bought the insane lie that men and women are the same in every way.
I heard about a boy that died on the operating table getting his bits inverted, because he'd been on puberty blockers which stunted the growth so he didn't have enough material to do the procedure "properly". Too bad "trust the Science" only matters when they want it to.
I feel for that kid, but if course he lost his rights. The LGBT group's "rights" trump all other's.
Since almost nobody believes the Bible really is the Word of God, of course they can change it by vote. They simply fail to understand that if we have the right and necessity to change the meaning of Scripture and rites presented in it to fit our current culture, it makes Christianity just as valid as all other religions because it was simply made by men, and you simply need to decide which men you want to listen to.
I wonder how much longer this country has left before it rips itself apart just like all other civilizations have that have embraced sexual "freedom".
David, as I was reading Stan’s post, I was thinking similarly. Given our influence in, and God’s mercy for His world, how much time can America have left before He intervenes given our exponential increase in embracing detestable falsehood as truth and/or attacking the fabrics of a morality?
In the free world, have we become the great exporters of evil to the nations? Jesus help us!
Post a Comment