Everywhere I go is some agenda.
Treating every single part of life as a fucking ad.
The MAGA hat.
(Image removed from quote.)
Went back to my apartment wearing my hat.
From AnnCoulter.com
As Stan Evans says, whatever liberals disapprove of, they want banned (smoking, guns, practicing Christianity, ROTC, the Pledge of Allegiance) and whatever they approve of, they make mandatory (abortion-on-demand, gay marriage, pornography, condom distribution in public schools, screenings of “An Inconvenient Truth”).
When liberals say, “nothing is sacrosanct,” they mean “nothing other Americans consider sacrosanct is sacrosanct.” They demonstrate their open-mindedness by ridiculing other people’s dogma, but will not brook the most trifling criticism of their own dogmas.
Surely you can see that this is, as they call it, false equivalency?
Just as you can - and
should - apply
cui bono to statements, you can also apply
cui malo to ask 'what is the harm'?
The liberalism you profess to despise recognises the rights of people
up to the point it infringes on someone elses rights.
Who is
harmed by, to use one of those examples, abortion being legal (and sidenote: it's not fucking
mandatory)?
How are they harmed?
People who
believe it is morally wrong cannot enforce that belief onto others who may not share that belief.
Who benefits? How do they benefit?
People unwilling or incapable of supporting a life they will be responsible for for the next 18+ years. They won't be risking their life in a backstreet abortion clinic. They won't be forced into a marriage of convenience, or give up their career, or add to the welfare debt, or add another unwanted child to the thousands already in care, or bring an unloved child into the world.
As a society, which of these
actually accrues harm? Someones fee-fees are hurt, versus the state picking up another mouth to feed?
Can you not see the difference?
Christian Scientists believe all medicine is immoral, because sickness comes from God and God alone should cure it.
Do you see the difference between;
Allowing Christian Scientists to refuse medical treatment, even where they may die as a result, because to impose that treatment upon them infringes on their right to believe what they want?
and
Enforcing Christian Scientists belief that medical treatment is immoral on
all citizens and making doctors and hospitals illegal, because allowing anyone to be treated goes against those beliefs?