Editor, the Record:
Here's some reasons to not vote Democratic this November.
If a Republican doesn't like guns, he doesn't buy one. If a Democrat doesn't like guns, he wants all guns outlawed.
If a Republican is a vegetarian, he doesn't eat meat. If a Democrat is a vegetarian, he wants meat banned for everyone.
If a Republican doesn't like a talk show host, he switches stations. If a Democrat doesn't like a talk show host, he demands he be taken off the air.
If a Republican is an atheist, he doesn't go to church. If a Democrat is an atheist, he wants any mention of God and religion silenced.
If a Republican decides he needs health care, he shops for it or may chose a job that provides it. If a Democrat decides he needs health care, he demands that the rest of us pay for it.
Get the picture?
CONSTANTINE J. MILLAS
OK, I know full well that it works the other way, too, with fundamentalists wanting this or that law passed against certain behaviors. But the Left defines itself as tolerant, inclusive, non-judgmental, etc. I do object to the Atheist Democrat characterization, though, at least for politicians: Atheo-Demo-politicos will always claim Christianity. That's a good consequentialist decision.
2 comments:
But the Left defines itself as tolerant, inclusive, non-judgmental, etc
And the Right defines itself as small-government, free market, etc etc and then consistently votes to allow Big Government to tell me what chemicals I can and can't put in my body in the privacy of my own home, to allow Big Government to dictate what partner (and how many) I can and can't choose to be married to, to allow Big Government to tell me that I can't pay someone privately for sex, to allow Big Government to tell me whether I can or can't bet my own money on games of chance, to allow Big Government to form a bloated military that thinks the USSR still exists, and to allow Big Government to invade any country it wants at any time for any reason no questions asked.
Wow, you do all those things?
Seriously, though, prohibition started under the Left as a progressive cause; Drug prohibition will ultimately fail but is supported by most of the left as well as most of the right; Marriage laws are state laws; Prostitution laws are state/local I think; gambling is state law and is here to stay, protected as income sources by right and left in state assemblies; bloated military - we just voted out the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, a 30+ year Pelosi Democrat (Ike Skelton) - and the leftist Administration is preparing to spend $500 billion on defense for no apparent reason; invasions for no reason - wikileaks just revealed the actual finds of WMDs in Iraq - I don't know why that was classified. I doubt most Iraquis would want to return to Saddam as their lord and master. However they are still blowing each other up.
That's not to say that even local government interference in private lives is OK. On the other hand where would you draw the line, in terms of unacceptable behavior? No lines at all? Either there are moral guidelines for that, or the lines are drawn arbitrarily (or a little bit of both).
Take marriage for example. Homosexuality has always and forever been recognized as a deviation from normal sexuality, until homosexuals took over the national psychological associations and overnight changed the clinical definitions: the inmates captured the asylum, and it has been thus ever since. Homosexuals want marriage for exactly the same reason, government certification of their behavior as normal. That is why governments, all of them, should allow all marriages, including multiple marriages of mixed groups to animals and farm equipment if they wish. But only after removing tax differentiation for married/singles. In terms of right/left, it appears to me that there is about as much opposition to gay marriage on the left as on the right. Same for drug wars, most invasions including Iraq and Afganistan, etc.
Post a Comment