Skip to main content

One more supporter of marriage redefinition who 'gets' tolerance and civility. They do exist!

My opposition to marriage redefinition and the ongoing attempt to coerce America into recognizing sodomy as the moral equivalent of the reproductive act has resulted in a predictable response from those who disagree. I am libeled. I have my motives attacked. I am called names. But I am never rebutted by reasoned argument. And the truly fascinating thing is that such attacks are most common on posts simply observing that in specific instances the other side argues by libel and name-calling rather than by rational debate!

I thank those who have posted on my Google+ account (they're apparently too smart to do it here) and so promptly and vividly reinforced my argument by doing exactly what I deplored in the posts for which they attacked me!

There is a reason for this. The cultural Left aims to win out not by winning a debate, but by preventing one. It has largely succeeded. After all, if you can start the discussion by defining those who take a position even Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton took a couple of years ago as bigots, you don't have to listen to what they have to say. In fact, you can silence them entirely, equating them with the Ku Klux Klan and implying that to suggest that it's OK to have religious or moral problems with homosexual behavior- or to suggest that affirming a false equivalency between same-sex relationships and traditional marriage might be worth discussing before we as a society cross that line- is to be one with Westburo Baptist Church and the late (and not missed) Fred Phelps. Why bother even having a debate when you can intimidate, discredit, and silence the opposition without having to even engage their arguments?

The thing is, of course, that not all gays and lesbians (or straight supporters of marriage redefinition) are totalitarians at heart. Here is an example of someone who believes in extending our definition of marriage to same-sex couples who nevertheless deplores the Gestapo tactics those who agree with them have made their customary response to those of us who do not.

HT: Real Clear Politics


Popular posts from this blog

Jan Chamberlain's rhetoric is too strong. But the stand she has taken is right.

I do not share the religion of Jan Chamberlain. I don't even pray to the same god. But I can't help but admire the integrity of the woman who quit the Mormon Tabernacle Choir rather than sing at Donald Trump's inauguration.

Ms. Chamberlain, like me, voted for Evan McMullin in November. Like me, she holds no brief for Hillary Clinton or her agenda. But she cannot, as she put it, "throw roses at Hitler."

As I've said before, comparing Trump to Hitler strikes me as harsh. I believe that Trump is a power-hungry narcissist who exhibits disturbing signs of psychopathy, like Hitler. Like Hitler, he has stigmatized  defenseless minorities- Muslims and undocumented aliens, rather than Jews- and made them scapegoats for the nation's troubles. Like Hitler, he has ridden a wave of irrational hatred and emotion to power. Like Hitler's, his agenda foreshadows disaster for the nation he has been chosen to lead.

But he's not going to set up death camps for Musli…

Neither Evan McMullin nor his movement are going away

Evan McMullin has devoted most of his post-college life- even to the point of foregoing marriage and a family- to fighting ISIS and al Qaeda and our nation's deadliest enemies as a clandestine officer for the CIA. He has done so at the risk of his life.

He has seen authoritarianism in action close-up. One of his main jobs overseas was to locate and facilitate the elimination of jihadist warlords. Evan McMullin knows authoritarians.

And when he looks at Donald Trump, what he sees is an authoritarian like the ones he fought overseas. He knows Donald Trump. After leaving the CIA he served as policy director for the Republican majority in the United States House of Representatives. He tells about his first encounter with The Donald in that role in this opinion piece he wrote for today's New York Times.

In fact, when Mitt Romney and Tom Coburn and all the others who were recruited to run as a conservative third-party candidate against Trump and Hillary Clinton backed out,  McMulli…

Huzzah! Once again, 45 does something majorly right!

First. he appointed Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court, and now 45 has- at long last- initiated a sensible space policy, with a plan to promote a "rapid and affordable" return to the moon carried out by private enterprise by 2020.  Afterward, it will be onward to Mars and beyond.

This is a great idea for three reasons. First, private enterprise is the future of space exploration, and as far as I know we will be the first spacefaring nation to put most of its eggs in that basket. Second, it's nice to have eggs! Since the Obama administration canceled the Constellation program to develop the Ares booster and the Orion crew vehicle (though it subsequently reinstated the Orion part of the program), the United States has been twiddling its thumbs while China has taken great leaps toward the moon and other countries- including Russia, India, and Japan- have to various degrees intensified their own space programs. It would be both tragic and foolhardy for the nation which first…