Pollute Them While They're Young
At least in one community in Canada the requirement will be that all public elementary schools fly the rainbow flag for at least one week during Pride Month in June. Elementary schools. You know, the one age where you believe whatever your teacher tells you, even if it is in opposition to what your parents tell you. That age where they tell their parents helping them with math homework, "That's not how the teacher did it, Dad. You're doing it wrong." Lest you think that public schools are (or, at least, should be) ideologically neutral. They're not. They will block religion, then substitute their own humanistic materialism with all its worship and works of the flesh. That's how it works; get them while they're vulnerable.
R.E.S.P.E.C.T.
Meet Brendan Johnston. He is a high school student in Colorado who came in fourth place in the state wrestling championships. He could have taken third place, but chose to forfeit a match rather than wrestle a girl. "I don’t want to treat a young lady like that on the mat. Or off the mat." It wasn't a lack of respect. "Wrestling is something we do, it's not who we are," he said. "I'm willing to have those priorities." Johnston has won 37 of his 43 matches his senior year. Five of those six losses were forfeits to girls -- four of them to the same girl to whom he surrendered third place. His choice ended his high school wrestling career. I would hope there is no commentary necessary, but in today's world where respecting women and where chivalry are considered sexist and hateful, comment will likely be necessary.
Lady Justice Without a Blindfold
Lady Justice is displayed with a balance, a sword, and a blindfold. We get the balance (make things even) and the sword (power to make it so), but what about the blindfold? The blindfold represents impartiality. Justice, the idea goes, can only occur if it is impartial. In some cases it is not. The House Judiciary Committee, emboldened by its majority and unified in its hatred for President Trump, has begun a sweeping probe ... because special counsel Robert Mueller hasn't found anything. They will examine his businesses, his campaign, the transition committee, Russian interference, a list of 81 names to start. The investigation is predicated on the position that "Trump has evaded accountability for his near-daily attacks on our basic legal, ethical, and constitutional rules and norms" and the plan is to hold him accountable. This is not "innocent until proven guilty." It is "Mueller hasn't found him guilty, so we will" -- guilty even though he's been found innocent. I'm not a Trump fan, but surely the American people can see this has nothing to do with impartial justice. But, I don't think they will. The hate for all things "Trump" goes deep with this one -- the opposite of impartiality.
Responsibility Without Authority
Last week the Supreme Court of British Columbia ordered that a 14-year-old girl receive testosterone injections without parental consent. Further, if either of her parents tried to persuade her to abandon the treatments, addressed her by her birth name, or referred to her with female pronouns, they would be guilty of family violence. Her father was concerned that other mental health issues were driving this gender dysphoria and he was troubled by the permanent ramifications of the hormone treatments, so he wanted her to wait until she was older. The court told him to start her treatments. The father has no say, but bears the responsibility to obtain the treatments he fears will harm his daughter. Parents, you should be prepared to surrender your parental rights to the governmental poison of the day ... in the name of "progress."
Intolerance Illustrated
Cynthia Nixon has declared an end to civility towards anyone who holds to biblical convictions about sexuality. While Joe Biden refers to Mike Pence as a "decent man," Nixon is outraged that anyone would argue that her particular sexual activities are a sin. It is ... her words ... "vile, hateful," "insidious and dangerous." She makes no pretense of actual tolerance -- "He's entitled to his opinion even though I disagree with him wholeheartedly." She believes she is being attacked and all should do the same to those who hold to the view that sexuality acceptable to God is limited to the traditional marriage bed. The double standard -- "You have to be tolerant but we will not!" -- is painful to watch. Christians, are you ready? We aren't edging away from persecution.
Actions Speak Louder
The New York Post did an exposé on Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) ("Miss Green New Deal") regarding her "giant carbon footprint." While she pushes to save the planet in 12 years by demanding the elimination of combustion-engine vehicles and the use of public transit, she spent nearly $30,000 on Uber, Lyft, Juno, and other car services in combustion-engine vehicles even though her campaign office was less than 150 feet from a subway station. While she pushes to decrease or eliminate air travel, she spent $25,000 on airline transactions during her campaign. Her response is she was just "living in the world." The Green New Deal is about systematic change, she said, and not about personal practices. "Practice what you preach" is not a tagline for AOC ... or a lot of other people in that group.
We Have Consensus
The consensus on human-caused global climate change has long been touted as a strong reason to agree with the crisis and get a move on. Forbes is reporting that "only 36 percent of geoscientists and engineers believe that humans are creating a global warming crisis" and a strong majority believe that it will not be a very serious problem.
Now, mind you, I've never been a fan of "consensus" as a means of determining scientific fact. I'd prefer ... you know ... scientific fact to determine scientific fact. So I'm not really excited about this report. I'm just wondering how many rabid "the sky is falling and it's called anthropogenic global climate change" types will rein themselves in and admit, "Well, if we believed the consensus that it was a problem, then we'll believe the consensus that it's not a problem." I don't think that the "consensus" they threw at doubters will be allowed now that it is against them.
4 comments:
Pollute Them While They're Young
If they could at least provide evidence their position even might be correct (there is no such evidence), then it wouldn't be complete and utter indoctrination into what they demand must be true...or else.
R.E.S.P.E.C.T.
This is what "honorable" looks like. This is what denying falsehood looks like.
Lady Justice Without a Blindfold
Oh, c'mon! What made you think justice is of any concern to those whose whole life revolves around removing a duly elected president from office.
This is more evidence voting for Trump was the right play. It exposes more fully the Democratic Party for who and what they are.
Responsibility Without Authority
What an outrageous abuse of power by that government. And yes, we are headed in that direction and will get there much sooner if we continue to have so many who don't pay attention and have so many who sit out elections.
Intolerance Illustrated
There is no doubt this issue is the result of the same problems my previous comment more than implies. It is also related to the first dealing with people like Nixon having some evidence to back her beliefs about her disorder.
Actions Speak Louder
I have to say that to some extent she is limited by available options. However, if some of those options require her to put herself out a bit in order to prove she's not a total hypocrite, so be it.
We Have Consensus
I don't think this is meant to establish a "new" consensus as much as to show what was considered a consensus actually wasn't.
Alyssa Milano (who hasn't gotten around to moving out of the US even though we are well past the 2016 presidential election) is now transgender, a person of color, an immigrant and disabled. Just ask her.
No, Marshal, you're right. It didn't establish consensus, but the lack of consensus ought to be noted and it will not be.
Anon, strange stuff. She says she identifies with and not as. Makes sense to me ... not. But it points out our currently undefinable standards of identity; only that which is approved is acceptable. (I also note that "person of color" is acceptable but "colored person" is an offense. It's hard to keep up.)
I get a chuckle out of who the liberal media chooses to interview about their DNA test results. Invariably it is someone who is devastated to find she has some Caucasian in her family tree, or else someone delighted to find she has virtually none of that taint.
Post a Comment