Anti-me?
This was the entire "About Me" description on the Facebook page of someone I know:
i care about a lot of things... pro-choice, reproductive rights of women and men, feminism, human rights, gender equality, environmentalism, anti-discrimination/racism, amnesty international, anti- death penalty, gay/lesbian/bisexual/transgender rights, atheism, healthcare, democracy, anti-homophobia, anti-hate, pacifism, publicly funded elections, autonomy, freedom of speech, separation of church and state, right to privacy....and much more..I don't know her well - just who she is. Save but 2 or 3 things, is this the perfect anti-me description?
posted by Chris Hill @ 1/13/2007 08:42:00 PM
13 comments
13 Comments:
I know from Navy ROTC too, by the way, which is kind of a strange place for someone like this to be.
Chris - At the risk of being labled a sexist, it sounds like another woman who makes sense!
Jed
Chris,
As a physicist, I am warning you to never touch this person. It is very clear that if you do that you two will instantly annihilate, like matter and anti-matter, releasing incredible amounts of energy as gamma rays. You would both surely die in the process, and probably take out thousands of others with you.
Please, think of the children and stay clear.
With love and concern,
Jordan
Jordan,
I appreciate the warning. The energy could certainly be harnessed for good purposes. However, I'd rather not die in the process. Thank you.
Wow, it must have been a long weekend; when I first read what you wrote, Chris, I actually thought you were serious. Funny stuff.
You know me... pretty much a modern day hippie!
Ok, so I thought I'd actually say what I may technically agree with on her list:
1. Human Rights - I'm a big fan of them, but probably not in the sense she means them. I'm sure she means things such as "universal health care" and "abortion rights" and "welfare rights" etc. I do not believe in these. The Left likes to define these as part of our "rights." However, the Left denies the foundation of Human Rights, that being their origin: God. Without this, you get people declaring that rights come from the government (if you don't believe me, ask a Left-wing liberal where our rights come from). When we recognize that our rights come from God, we find that there are only a few things we can actually say are "rights," namely those written in the Dec. of Independence: life, liberty, pursuit of happiness.
2. Anti-racism - however, by this I'm sure she means other things such as pro-affirmative action, as if opposing it makes me a racist. I am not. I'm sure she'd call me one, though.
3. Environmentalism - I like animals and trees and pretty things and stuff. Of course, she means "environmentalism" in the sense of "anti-corporation," which is a non sequitur, but often one used by the Left.
4. Gay... Rights - but by this, I mean rights that treat people as people, not as gay/straight/etc. A gay man has the exact same right as I do to marry a woman. How this is discriminatory or wrong or somehow treats us unequally is beyond me.
5. Healthcare - I like healthcare too, but I don't want the government paying for it (well, actually I do because I'm in the military, but the military is one of the few Constitutionally approved uses of the Federal government's money).
6. Democracy - This is a good general form of government, although too much is bad. We don't all vote on every law, do we? By this, however, I believe she means "Democraticicy," or the system of government the Democrats would like.
7. Anti-hate - Hate can be a bad thing, although sometimes it's good (hatred of evil, for instance). Actually, I'm not anti-hate, because all emotions have their use and place. Why did I even talk about this?
8. Pacifism - yeah, but not at the cost of freedom or goodness.
9. Freedom of Speech - big fan, big fan. Although, I wonder her position on "hate speech" laws. I'm so crazy that I actually believe in freedom of speech even when I find it "hateful"! But then again, I'm not anti-anti-hate.
10. Separation of church and state - But by this I mean what the 1st amendment says, that Congress cannot establish a religion or regulate its practice. This has very little to do with Nativity Scenes on public property, or prayer in public schools. Actually, the 1st amendment prohibits Congress from doing ANYTHING about either of those things. The courts should back off too...
11. Right to Privacy - well, it's not in the Constitution, but I do think there are grounds to this issue. It can go too far, though.
Well, there. I guess we really don't disagree that much.
"4. Gay... Rights - but by this, I mean rights that treat people as people, not as gay/straight/etc. A gay man has the exact same right as I do to marry a woman. How this is discriminatory or wrong or somehow treats us unequally is beyond me."
To be honest, Christopher, I find that argument to be very lacking. While I am absolutely opposed to recognizing any sort of gay marriage, saying that they have the same right to marry a woman as you do is a red herring argument.
If you wanted to argue against gay marriage, you need to be able to combat this statament: "Gays aren't allowed to marry the person they love, yet you are".
Anyways, I hope life's going well for you. Sorry about getting into that argument with you at Mike's house. Are you and Katie going to be able to make it to Clamshell this summer?
No, you are treating the issue the same way the homosexual agenda treats it, that being that it is wrong for the law to discriminate on preference, and that this is somehow unjust. You can make that argument and even say that the law should not discriminate on preference, fine. However, that means we have to change a whole lot of other laws.
I can't legally drive the speed I want to drive. I like driving 85 on the highways, and I can do it quite safely. Just because others can't, doesn't mean I should be discriminated against. Of course, I'm being facetious. My point is that the law treats everyone equally when it says: "Speed Limit 65" and "You can only marry one person of the opposite sex". To say this is discriminatory (as the homosexual agenda does) is intellectually dishonest, and confuses issues of past civil right abuses, which actually DID treat people differently (blacks can only use this bathroom, etc.). There are no such laws against homosexuals, so to confuse it as a civil rights issue is insulting to true civil rights.
Regarding Clamshell, we'd really like to make it. Unfortunately, we won't know until a few weeks before, most likely.
Thanks for the apology. Sorry for getting so upset, too.
Sorry, something else to add that confuses the entire issue (and I fell into it): Gays ARE allowed to marry! It's just not recognized by law. No one is prohibiting it, which makes the whole homosexual agenda even more irrational.
"Environmentalism - I like animals and trees and pretty things and stuff. Of course, she means "environmentalism" in the sense of "anti-corporation," which is a non sequitur, but often one used by the Left."
I didn't read her original post so I can't truly say I know, but it sounds a bit like you're assuming she means "anti-corporation" when she states she is pro-environmentalism (way too many syllables...). Then again, I happen to be pro-environment AND pro-industry, because it is my feeling that we need to protect both (though our natural environment usually gets the short end of the stick in that fight, I'll leave that one alone) so it is possible I am projecting my own views onto this defense of hers. In any event, your explanation of your views was even funnier than the original post, so Cheers! Now I'm going to bed (just thought I'd share that)
Abe,
We're probably in agreement there. My comments were, I hope obviously, meant to be succinct and not a full explanation of why the left-wing-environmentalism movement is a socialist/communist movement in disguise. My assumptions were not based on her saying "environmentalism," but the combination of that with everything else she said.
Post a Comment
<< Home