not of this world

Thursday, November 13, 2008

tolerance and ‘civil rights’ notables

Filed under: shmolitics — Not of this World @

more intolerance from the tolerant left, this time among the ranks of school kids - learn ‘em young!

similar tolerance exhibited in the art world , no surprise there. a gay acquaintance argued that free speech doesn’t prevent consequences, and while i agree there, i pointed out that if the information of ‘no on 8′ donors was publicized and persecution and firings resulted, it is more than doubtful that gay activists would similarly defend such workplace reprisals.

the intimidation factor has been concentrated at protests by ‘no on 8′ activists held outside of California churches, including this one where a woman carrying a cross has it ripped out of her hand and trampled, while surrounded by an angry mob who reportedly spit on her.

and finally what does 70% of black Californians voting to keep marriage between a man and a woman say to the ubiquitous claim that this is a civil rights issue?

Monday, October 27, 2008

SNL does Biden and Murtha

Filed under: shmolitics — Not of this World @

Monday, October 20, 2008

against the tide

Filed under: shmolitics — Not of this World @

Many people at the time of the American founding would have preferred a world without slavery but nonetheless opposed abolition. Such people - Thomas Jefferson was one - reasoned that, given the world as it was, with slavery woven into the fabric of society just as it had often been throughout history, the economic consequences of abolition for society as a whole and for owners of plantations and other businesses that relied on slave labor would be dire. Many people who argued in this way were not monsters but honest and sincere, albeit profoundly mistaken. Some (though not Jefferson) showed their personal opposition to slavery by declining to own slaves themselves or freeing slaves whom they had purchased or inherited. They certainly didn’t think anyone should be forced to own slaves. Still, they maintained that slavery should remain a legally permitted option and be given constitutional protection.

Would we describe such people, not as pro-slavery, but as “pro-choice”? Of course we would not. It wouldn’t matter to us that they were “personally opposed” to slavery, or that they wished that slavery were “unnecessary,” or that they wouldn’t dream of forcing anyone to own slaves. We would hoot at the faux sophistication of a placard that said “Against slavery? Don’t own one.” We would observe that the fundamental divide is between people who believe that law and public power should permit slavery, and those who think that owning slaves is an unjust choice that should be prohibited.

keep reading Obama’s Abortion Extremism

Tuesday, September 23, 2008

present market realities may bite, but at least there’s an image such as this to console.

Filed under: , shmolitics — Not of this World @

Powered by WordPress