Hostile Environment
Democratic candidate Pete Buttigieg faced angry protesters over a shooting in his city. They told him that if he didn't fire his police officers, he didn't care about black lives and wouldn't get black votes. Now, mind you, I'm not a Buttigieg fan, so this isn't about him. However, the fact is that the incident is under investigation and the officer involved is on administrative leave and South Bend, Indiana, as far as I know, is still in America, so the police officer in question is still innocent until proven guilty. The demand for immediate firing (and whatever further punishments they deem fit) indicates that our country is now a hostile environment ... for American jurisprudence.
License to Kill
Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers vetoed four abortion bills passed by the Republican-controlled legislature last week. Oh, it wasn't a surprise. He ran as a pro-abortion candidate and promised to veto them. "'Everyone should have access to quality, affordable healthcare, and that includes a mother's right to kill,' Evers said in a statement." Okay, so I changed the exact words. He obviously said "reproductive healthcare," but if they can change the language to mean something completely different ("reproductive healthcare" means "not reproducing" and "killing human beings"?), then I can, too. Especially if my language is closer to the truth.
One Small Step?
For the longest time the courts have held that property owners cannot go to federal court to find protection of the use of their private property when local courts don't give it. The Supreme Court took a monumental step last week and ruled to override that precedent. Now, this is property rights and not something that is that big, but the question still hangs in the air. If they're willing to override precedent there, where else might they do it? Like, say, Roe v Wade? (Note: I would suggest that without a move of God on the hearts of Americans, this isn't likely. Abortion isn't a legal problem; it's a "heart of man" problem.)
Indoctrination
GLAAD conducted its annual "Accelerating Acceptance" survey and found that people ages 18-34 are decreasingly comfortable with LGBTQ people. In that age group, the most recent level of those who would feel uncomfortable with an LGBTQ family member was at 36%, up from 24% in 2016. Their solution? Bring LGBTQ characters and stories to a world where male audiences are consuming content. So, is that propaganda or brain-washing? I'm not clear.
Exclusive Inclusivity
Remember Israel Folau? He is the Australian Rugby player that got his contract rescinded by Rugby Australia because he expressed a biblical view of homosexual sin. Folau (right or wrong) started a GoFundMe page to get contributions to recover his lost wages. He had collected more than $750,000 when GoFundMe Australia simply pulled the plug. They removed his page saying, among other things, that they were committed to "fostering an environment of inclusivity." Do not anticipate reason to prevail here. You cannot be inclusive by being exclusive.
Who's the Sensible One Now?
And why is self-proclaimed "unrepentant atheist" Peter Singer making more sense than Rugby Australia, the mainstream media, and even a lot of Christians? Why does he see that "the post no more expresses hatred toward homosexuals than cigarette warnings express hatred toward smokers"?
Democracy in Action
This is a weird story. Apparently 11 Republican lawmakers in Oregon are on the run. They're in hiding. Some have even left the state. "I'm not going to be a political prisoner in the state of Oregon," one senator told a Portland TV station. What's going on?
Well, the Democratic-dominated state senate is trying to vote on a climate bill, but with the absence of the 11, they don't have a quorum to take a vote. Unfortunately, there are "more than 100 other bills" waiting for funding and could possibly be scrapped. The runaways claim that the bill will hurt jobs and raise gas prices, but they don't have the slightest chance of voting it down. So they're on the run and the governor has authorized the state police to track them down. "It is absolutely outrageous," Gov. Brown said, adding "In Oregon, this is not how we solve problems." No, the way they solve problems is to arrest the opposition and force them to participate in a cause they fiercely disagree with. That is democracy in action. (For the sake of clarification, I'm not supporting the runaways here. It looks to me like neither side is in the right here. Besides, what in the world are Republicans doing in the leftist state of Oregon?)
An Un-American Utopia
The leadership of St. Louis Park, MN, voted unanimously to refuse to pledge allegiance to the United States. The goal is "to accommodate the city’s increasingly diverse population." That's the way to do it. Eliminate allegiance to the country that made it possible to make such a foolish thing to be done.
It's not new. The NBA is working at eliminating the term "owner" because a lot of players are black -- sorry, African-American -- and calling someone the "owner" of a franchise feels racist. You know, even if he is, like, the owner. As if the owner of a team or a business or a corporation actually owns his employees?
Or the story that Illinois is becoming the 11th state to legalize recreational marijuana. Why? Well, it provides revenue for the state and clears the records of nearly 800,000 people convicted of possession. The sad truth is that offenders are "forced to live in permanent second-class citizenship." So sad. So the remedy is to make it legal. Now, tell me again what was the purpose of passing laws?
Following this line of thinking, we should eliminate anything "American" to avoid offending non-Americans, change any and all terms that are deemed offensive to someone somewhere (which would, in essence, eliminate most terms), and legalize anything that causes a negative impact on people should they violate the law against it. A better way forward, I'm sure.
No comments:
Post a Comment