Posted by
Mantic on Sunday, March 18, 2007 1:12:05 PM
Why is some deviancy OK and other deviancy not OK? What does the definition of deviancy have on our society?
Why is it OK to murder a nearly-full-term baby, but not OK to take an unwanted baby after birth and leave it on a mountain top to die? The same result occurs.
Why is it OK to "celebrate" Gay/Lesbian/Transgender/and whatever else sexual rights, yet trample on the rights of people who don't agree with sexual deviancy to use such terms as "faggot" while the GLT???? crowd can call everyone they disagree with "homophobes"?
Why must we see loud-mouthed women on TV defend terrorists and our efforts to interrogate and detain them, yet have to put up with reading about related terrorists attack innocent civilians with chlorine gas?
Why can college students burn the Stars and Stripes, yet college administrations can prosecute students who trample on Hamas and Palestinian flags for hate crimes?
Why can we be browbeaten into accepting the "fact" that global warming will wreck the planet by people who fly around in private jets and proclaim that the purchase of "green" credits obviate them of any responsible actions?
The answer is that with a participating liberal left media, hypocrisy can be swept under the table. With a participating liberal left media, there is only a narrow range of "acceptable" opinion and actions. For all of the crowing of the left, there is little in the way of civility, open-mindedness, perspective and grace.
In the pursuit of "civility", Harry Reid can spout off any kind of invective about the Bush administration, even thought his words are absolutely wrong and get away with it. He can call any program or action by the Administration as failed, the facts can easily prove him wrong, and the press gives him a pass.
Al Gore can produce a global warming documentary, full of lies, misstatements, faulty projections based on discredited data both mathematically and factually and the press gives him a pass.
Joe Wilson can lie about the facts of his trips to Africa, they can be proven to be false in government commissions and other obtainable sources, yet the Dems can still claim that Karl Rove is the devil for questioning Wilson's veracity.
Bush lied in his 2003 State of the Union address. It's a fact, it's actual, everything is satisfactual... except for the little fact that Bush didn't lie. The Dem's have never been intellectually open enough to realize it. The press supports the continuation of the misstatements without any journalistic investigation and challenge.
What irony that truth and perspective can be so trampled upon in our society. Perhaps the 60's crowd need to die off before we get real again. (And this coming from a baby boomer).