Apr
30
Welcome to the 3rd and penultimate installment of this series, in which I explain how self-deluded I have been about my own hatred and bigotry regarding, well, just about everyone but straight, white, white-collar males between 18 & 65 years of age (or thereabouts).
Where was I? Oh…
Pro-choice Activists
7) I hate women. And it’s not just because I’m single. (Or, should that be the other way around?) ;-> In particular, I think most of today’s “feminist” positions and causes reveal a certain level of narcissism and another excuse to play the blame game for ones woes, real and (largely) imagined. Ask any feminist these days, and whether she knows me or not, she will assume that I am a misogynist. As it happens, I think the original feminists that fought for voting rights for women, etc., were great. But, modern feminism is largely influenced by Marxist doctrine, is very anti-male and obsessed with the evils of the “patriarchy”, which is evident in their revisionist theories of history, sociology, biology, etc. I think it’s all a bunch of hooey! (Of course, as a typical male, I would say that!) By the way, those original feminists (e.g., Susan B. Anthony) were predominantly pro-family, pro-life, and did not, as a rule, hate men.
But, perhaps the strongest, most recent evidence that I am personally anti-women is my desire to remove federal funding from Planned Parenthood. (Also, state funding. Heck, I’d like PP to go totally defunct.) More, I am staunchly pro-life and want Roe v. Wade to be reversed. Gasp! My thinking has been as follows:
The unborn, as even many pro-choicers now admit, are fully human beings. Science proves that the blastocyst/embryo/fetus is a unique individual and not part of her/his mother, though s/he is totally dependent on the mother for sustenance and protection during her/his gestation. The unborn is also completely human from the time of conception, as proven by genetics. The unborn’s size, level of development, environment, and degree of dependency do not magically change her/his value or status as a human. Nor do the circumstances under which the child was conceived. And most people with a conscience admit that we do not otherwise kill human beings for the kinds of reasons used to justify most abortions (i.e., matters of inconvenience to the mother (and father, if he even gets a say)). It is immoral, and we know it. Therefore, the unborn are due the same human rights (and constitutional protections here in America) as any other human beings. Any individuals, institutions, or programs that encourage, fund, or perform abortions should therefore be stopped, defunded, and possibly subjected to criminal prosecution. (We’ll let the legal eagles figure out the details.)
Liberals, however, make it clear that these arguments are irrelevant, unrealistic, unfair, or just ignorant lies. People like me simply hate women. We don’t care about the financial and emotional pressures they are under. We want to take away their access to mammograms (which Planned Parenthood doesn’t actually perform) and other women’s health services. We don’t care if they die in unsafe, “back alley abortions,” nor do we care if unwanted babies are forcibly brought into this cold, cruel world. It doesn’t matter that we are taking a principled stand to save human lives. It doesn’t matter if conservatives provide all kinds of pre- and post-natal services via pregnancy centers or how many kids we adopt or adoptions we may facilitate. We are bad people. We still hate women and… (this leads to my next self-revelation)…
8) I even hate children, and not just the ones that cry on planes or scream & shout & pester their parents in stores and restaurants. I hate children in general. This is evident by my disagreement with most global warming-based initiatives (which I’ll get to later) and my disapproval of most social welfare programs (which I’ve already mentioned), not to mention that I do not believe simply throwing more funding at public schools will cause our schools — rather, our students — to perform better. All of these efforts, say liberals, are “for the children.” We have to make sure they are safe; properly fed, clothed, & educated; given adequate healthcare, etc. Few would disagree with that. But, who should do it, and how?
When it comes to food, clothing, shelter, and healthcare for children, most are taken care of just fine by their parents. But, sometimes, a little assistance is needed. According to Robert Rector, a leading authority on poverty & welfare in the U.S.,
“The remaining poverty in the U.S. can be reduced further, particularly poverty among children. There are two main reasons that American children are poor: Their parents don’t work much, and fathers are absent from the home.”
Thus, child poverty can be seriously reduced if a) the parent(s) can work 2000 hours/year (i.e., one full-time or two part-time jobs); and, b) the parents are married to each other and living in the same home. In particular, fathers need to take responsibility. As a socio-political conservative, I believe the former can best be accomplished by instituting government policies that support free markets and encourage businesses to grow, providing more jobs (PT & FT). The latter can be done by, for example, teaching strong moral values and responsibility among our youth (who then become young parents) and providing pre-marital and family counseling (including financial advice, not abortion). There are volunteer clinics, charities, churches & religious organizations, and generous individuals who provide money and services for children and families in need. This can and should be done with a minimum of government involvement…. Or, so I thought.
Liberals, however, tell me I am wrong. They teach that, to “promote the General Welfare”, the government must be involved in all aspects of American life, that marriage is outdated and not very important (unless one is pushing for same-sex marriage, of course), and that it is better to have “the People” dependent on the government than it is to foster economic prosperity via free-market capitalism. (Don’t want those evil corporations in Big Business to make too much money, after all.) Children are better off on welfare, apparently. To disagree is a clear indication that I hate children. (And that I am a greedy capitalist, of course.)
On the matter of education, I question the wisdom of the federal government having so much control of the “public” schools. Teachers’ unions — generally controlled by liberals, I might add — are a big impediment to improving schools, as well. They don’t like the idea of teachers and schools being graded or held accountable; they fight against school choice for parents; and they are more concerned with making sure even bad teachers keep their jobs and get great pensions than whether or not children are learning what they need to. (And, don’t get me started on the teaching of sex ed in elementary schools, revisionist history, environmentalist indoctrination, anti-Christian bias, anti-American bias, etc., in many classrooms.) There is a lot that needs to be done under the banner of true “education reform”.
But,… according to liberal wisdom, we “common folk” don’t know what’s good for us or our children. The entity known as “government” must make those decisions for us. (The government is so smart and efficient in everything else, right?) And, despite the growing number of public-school graduates who are functionally illiterate, can barely add, and don’t know a lick of (real) history, liberals are certain that (liberal) government control of our educational system is necessary to make sure America remains academically and technologically competitive with other nations. (Ironically, many liberals are also pushing for a world without borders.) And unions are needed to make sure teachers are treated fairly, I guess, even if they don’t have a big, bad corporation taking advantage of them. They must be right, ‘cuz they’re really smart.
The fact that liberals accuse conservatives of hating children might seem odd, ironic even, considering that liberals support the murder of over a million of the smallest, most vulnerable children — i.e., the unborn — every year in America. And conservatives are typically the ones trying to save those lives. Also ironic is that it is the liberal “progressives” that are saddling our children, grandchildren, etc., with mountains of government debt. But, liberal logic says I’m the villain here. What do I know?
More next time…
