Monday, March 21, 2005
If this does not scare you, you need a lesson in history.
This was a letter to the editor of the Bremerton Sun Newspaper on March 21.
Politics
The Right is wrong about our freedoms
To the Editor:
When the Christian Right-wing claims they want to get government out of people's lives,
they're not telling the truth.
There are three issues about which the Christian Right wants to restrict our rights and freedoms
as citizens by forcing their moral code on the rest of us. First, a woman's right to choose whether
or not to have an abortion. Second, gay and lesbian people's right to get married.
Third, the fundamental right to die.
They don't understand that if the Liberal Left had its way, then people would have the choice
and thus the freedom to decide these issues for themselves. No liberal would ever force a
Right-wing Christian woman to have an abortion, or to marry a lesbian, or to die only when
her God wants to take her regardless of her pain and indignity. Under a liberal agenda,
everyone will have the freedom and the responsibility to make those choices.
Right now, though, the Right-wingers are violating the most fundamental principles of American
citizenship because they are restricting the choices of ALL according to THEIR moral code.
They curtail the freedom of all citizens through their perceived divine right to rule — and that
is NOT what America stands for! The Right is Wrong!
John C. Cxxxxxx
Bremerton
Now, first of all, I can not disagree with this person more and here is why:
Liberals believe "the woman" is the only one with the right to choose, not the fetus or the
sperm donor (as liberals call them).
When single sex human couples can have children without outside intervention, then you can
call it "marriage". It is not religion, it is biology and history.
If you sign any of the current "living wills" or "DNR's" then you can be denied medical attention.
If you are "capable" of requesting to be allowed to die, your request is normally honored.
But this is not the governments role to choose. Liberals want the government to choose.
Claiming to have a lack of moral code is in reality a moral code. Just one that lets you do what
others would not.
And finally, under the liberal agenda, the money you make at work was not earned. Thus is not
yours to keep. Especially, if you are making as much or more than a liberal congressmen;
unless you are a liberal Actor or Rock Star.
The Left is right? Don't bet on it.
- posted by Mike @ 7:51 PM
Comments:
<< Home
Mr. Straw-Men-R-Us is on steroids today, I guess. Looking past my general objection to anybody who uses more than one exclamation point per paragraph, this might look like a fun letter to Fisk.
“When the Christian Right-wing claims they want to get government out of people's lives, they're not telling the truth.”
That’s Straw Man #1: It depends on the part of “people’s lives” we’re talking about. If the government wants to intervene against me abusing my family in the privacy of my own home, well, I don’t think many would object to that. If the government wanted to stop me from injecting black tar smack into my veins, most wouldn’t object to that, either. And despite the vast commercial success it would bring me, I cannot (as yet) legally prostitute myself to the Dallas Cowboy Cheerleaders (damn!).
“There are three issues about which the Christian Right wants to restrict our rights and freedoms as citizens by forcing their moral code on the rest of us.”
Straw Man #2: All law is a moral code. Why is it illegal to speed? Because you might hurt yourself or (more importantly) somebody else. Why is it illegal to steal? Because you’re damaging the interests of another. Murder?
More entertainingly, why is it the Law that the government can confiscate a chunk of my money so it can be given to people who did not earn it? Because it’s the “right thing to do,” according to our Left/Lib friends. Why is it right for Doctor Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr. to instruct us about, “back men and white men, Jews and gentiles, protestants and Catholics...”? Who were the primary leaders of the Civil Rights Movement? We’re only supposed to take, and accept, moral instruction from men of religion when those men are Democrats. Uh huh. Got it. Whatever.
“First, a woman's right to choose whether or not to have an abortion. “
Inaccuracy #1: Please point to the right to have an abortion somewhere in the US Constitution. What? Oh! It’s party of the Living, Breathing™ Constitution! Of course! Well, then what if it happens to “live and breathe” in a more right-leaning direction? (Kind of kicks the legs out from your augment, doesn’t it?) Maybe the Right wants to play the “living and breathing” game for a while. Sit back and watch us. You might have fun.
“Second, gay and lesbian people's right to get married.”
Inaccuracy #2: Again – point to this “right” somewhere in the Law. Just asking. Never mind, let’s move on.
“Third, the fundamental right to die.”
Inaccuracy #3: Oh! Not just a “right” but a “fundamental right”! Is that kind of like “strenuously objecting”? Again, see Inaccuracy #1 for the generally-applicable slapdown, er, I mean argument.
“They don't understand that if the Liberal Left had its way, then people would have the choice and thus the freedom to decide these issues for themselves.”
Comment: See “school choice” (I’ve got no more use for this guy)
“No liberal would ever force a Right-wing Christian woman to ... die only when her God wants to take her regardless of her pain and indignity.”
Good Point #1: Yes. The Liberals would only force a Right-wing Christian woman to die when her husband demands it because he wants her money. Natch.
“Under a liberal agenda, everyone will have the freedom and the responsibility to make those choices.”
Inanity #1: All except Terri Schiavo, anybody who wants to keep more of their own money, have some local say in their local laws (i.e. “gay marriage”), or the freedom to speak without being ostracized (check your local college campus speech codes).
“Right now, though, the Right-wingers are violating the most fundamental principles of American citizenship because they are restricting the choices of ALL according to THEIR moral code.”
Empty Rhetoric #1 (alternate listing: Laugh Line #1): Every tax hike, every gun restriction, every land-use regulation, every auto-emissions rule, every mandate that bused, racially-sifted, dumbed-down children cannot go to the school of their parent’s CHOICE, is a limit of freedom brought about by Liberals imposing their own “moral code.”
“They curtail the freedom of all citizens through their perceived divine right to rule”
Red Herring #1: What? Next time, break the pill in half. Nobody is asserting a divine right to rule. We get the high ground of claiming a right to rule because we win elections. What’s your excuse?
(the crowd cheers!)
Next?
“When the Christian Right-wing claims they want to get government out of people's lives, they're not telling the truth.”
That’s Straw Man #1: It depends on the part of “people’s lives” we’re talking about. If the government wants to intervene against me abusing my family in the privacy of my own home, well, I don’t think many would object to that. If the government wanted to stop me from injecting black tar smack into my veins, most wouldn’t object to that, either. And despite the vast commercial success it would bring me, I cannot (as yet) legally prostitute myself to the Dallas Cowboy Cheerleaders (damn!).
“There are three issues about which the Christian Right wants to restrict our rights and freedoms as citizens by forcing their moral code on the rest of us.”
Straw Man #2: All law is a moral code. Why is it illegal to speed? Because you might hurt yourself or (more importantly) somebody else. Why is it illegal to steal? Because you’re damaging the interests of another. Murder?
More entertainingly, why is it the Law that the government can confiscate a chunk of my money so it can be given to people who did not earn it? Because it’s the “right thing to do,” according to our Left/Lib friends. Why is it right for Doctor Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr. to instruct us about, “back men and white men, Jews and gentiles, protestants and Catholics...”? Who were the primary leaders of the Civil Rights Movement? We’re only supposed to take, and accept, moral instruction from men of religion when those men are Democrats. Uh huh. Got it. Whatever.
“First, a woman's right to choose whether or not to have an abortion. “
Inaccuracy #1: Please point to the right to have an abortion somewhere in the US Constitution. What? Oh! It’s party of the Living, Breathing™ Constitution! Of course! Well, then what if it happens to “live and breathe” in a more right-leaning direction? (Kind of kicks the legs out from your augment, doesn’t it?) Maybe the Right wants to play the “living and breathing” game for a while. Sit back and watch us. You might have fun.
“Second, gay and lesbian people's right to get married.”
Inaccuracy #2: Again – point to this “right” somewhere in the Law. Just asking. Never mind, let’s move on.
“Third, the fundamental right to die.”
Inaccuracy #3: Oh! Not just a “right” but a “fundamental right”! Is that kind of like “strenuously objecting”? Again, see Inaccuracy #1 for the generally-applicable slapdown, er, I mean argument.
“They don't understand that if the Liberal Left had its way, then people would have the choice and thus the freedom to decide these issues for themselves.”
Comment: See “school choice” (I’ve got no more use for this guy)
“No liberal would ever force a Right-wing Christian woman to ... die only when her God wants to take her regardless of her pain and indignity.”
Good Point #1: Yes. The Liberals would only force a Right-wing Christian woman to die when her husband demands it because he wants her money. Natch.
“Under a liberal agenda, everyone will have the freedom and the responsibility to make those choices.”
Inanity #1: All except Terri Schiavo, anybody who wants to keep more of their own money, have some local say in their local laws (i.e. “gay marriage”), or the freedom to speak without being ostracized (check your local college campus speech codes).
“Right now, though, the Right-wingers are violating the most fundamental principles of American citizenship because they are restricting the choices of ALL according to THEIR moral code.”
Empty Rhetoric #1 (alternate listing: Laugh Line #1): Every tax hike, every gun restriction, every land-use regulation, every auto-emissions rule, every mandate that bused, racially-sifted, dumbed-down children cannot go to the school of their parent’s CHOICE, is a limit of freedom brought about by Liberals imposing their own “moral code.”
“They curtail the freedom of all citizens through their perceived divine right to rule”
Red Herring #1: What? Next time, break the pill in half. Nobody is asserting a divine right to rule. We get the high ground of claiming a right to rule because we win elections. What’s your excuse?
(the crowd cheers!)
Next?
This is a total aside....I don't do this for a living.... I just needed somewhere to ask Mike why he archived the global warming thing right after I commented without answering. (JB)
Post a Comment
# posted by 
: 10:05 PM
: 10:05 PM<< Home
