 |
| It's as if your boss could tell you what to wear to work!!!! |
The rabid backlash against Monday's SCOTUS decision in
Burwell v Hobby Lobby is frightening and depressing me.
I am told that "morons" penned the first
amendment that grants me religious freedom, a religious freedom that I did not
have when I visited relatives in Soviet-era Czechoslovakia and Poland,
countries that tortured and murdered Catholic priests. Religious freedom I did
not enjoy when I worked in Nepal, where I was told in no uncertain terms that
voicing my Christian faith out loud could get people imprisoned.
I am repeatedly reminded that if I have a vagina – yes
it's all about words and attitudes like that – if I have a vagina, a twat, a
c---, a hole – speak these words proudly and often if you are a real
feminist!!! – if I have an innie rather than an outie, I must side with Ruth
Bader Ginsburg, and she must be my heroine, rather than the mean and
unattractive old lady she strikes me as being. (I am unattractive. I am old. I
am capable of being mean. Please be sure to call me a mean old lady if you
disagree with me. I can dish it out, and I can take it.)
I am a Catholic, member of a church whose leaders are
men. Yes, I wish we had women priests; no, I don't wish that because I think
that men and women think differently. Brains think, not gonads.
The insistence on sexing cognition is primitive and
backward. I frequently read Vatican documents, all I assume, written by men,
and I love them. I love their eagerness to follow Christ's commands. I don't
want people telling me that I'm a lesser being because I follow leaders who
happen to be male.
Why don't my sisters who insist on vaginas as granters of
wisdom and virtue get it that their argument can be turned around? It could
just as well be argued that penises are granters of wisdom and virtue. Neither
sex organ is. Feminists defy logic when they argue for equality of men and
women and the negligible importance of gonads to thought and ethics, and then,
when it is convenient, argue that being a biological female makes you superior
and that it is your vagina that performs that trick.
The first amendment to the Constitution states, "Congress
shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the
free exercise thereof."
There you have it. The first amendment grants the Green
family, founders of Hobby Lobby, a crafts store chain, the right to practice
their religion as they see fit. They believe that their religion prevents them
from paying for four birth control methods. They have no objection to sixteen
other forms, and they provide them to their employees, whom they pay generously
and treat very well, and they did so before Obamacare.
The same cannot be said about leftwing employers like
universities; please have a look at how adjunct professors are treated.
Similarly see organizers, fund-raisers, and other employees of leftwing
organizations. Benefits? Health insurance? Pay? Are you kidding?
And yes I do speak from experience. Experience I am
living right now as I work for a leftwing university and do so without health
care. No health care coverage from employer. No health care coverage from
Obamacare. No one protesting in the street in my name or in the name of
thousands of others like me, similarly screwed by leftwing employees. No
outraged op-ed pieces. No absurd analogies, either.
No one cares about employees being screwed over by
leftwing atheists.
Anti-Hobby-Lobby arguments tend to run into false
analogies: "The Hobby Lobby SCOTUS decision means that Hobby Lobby can
deny women birth control!!!"
No, it doesn't mean that at all. Birth control, including
abortion, remains available, and Hobby Lobby has done nothing to impede access
to birth control for anyone.
"The Hobby Lobby SCOTUS decision is just as if the
court ordered you to have an abortion!"
No. It's not like that at all. The Hobby Lobby decision
doesn't order anyone to do anything against his will. (There. I just used the
male pronoun to identify an unknown person. I must be going to Politically
Correct hell!!!)
"The Hobby Lobby SCOTUS decision is just like if the
court decided that your boss can make you wear a BURKA!!!!!"
Now, this last is very interesting for a couple of
reasons.
First, are those upset by this decision so blindly
elitist that they have never had a job where they had to wear something not of
their choosing? I had such a job when I was still in my teens: I worse a
nurse's aide's uniform because it was a requirement of the job. Similarly,
Hooters waitresses, letter carriers, MacDonald's burger flippers, and Disneyland
cartoon characters all wear uniforms, uniforms their boss requires them to
wear.
That leftists are unaware of this population of workers
says much about their cluelessness about everyday life.
But there's another feature of this analogy that tells us
much about the left.
Again and again, in Burwell v Hobby Lobby posts and
parodies, the "Hobby Lobby SCOTUS decision is just like ___insert Islamic
analogy here___ …" analogies spring up.
Why?
Why have the Politically Correct suddenly discovered Islam?
The Politically Correct have long maintained a cordon
sanitaire around any critique of any aspect of Islam. Anyone who, for example,
mentioned the word "jihad" in a discussion of the terror attacks of
September 11, or in relation to the rise of ISIS in Iraq, or in reference to
the kidnapping of schoolgirls in Nigeria, or as a factor that should be
considered in attempts to list possible causes for the disappearance of MH370 –
anyone who mentioned Islam or jihad in relation to any of these news stories is
immediately verbally crucified by the Politically Correct as an Islamophobic
monster, unworthy of admittance to public debate.
So, why have Politically Correct people, who have been
telling us for decades that there is nothing noticeable about Islam, suddenly
discovered Islam?
The Atlantic tells us that the Hobby Lobby SCOTUS decision
explains the rise of ISIS in Iraq. You can read that here.
The Daily News tells us that Hobby Lobby is the
equivalent of those who make women wear burqas and stone them to death here.
Daily Kos plays the racism card and demonizes "White
Christians," opposing them to "a Muslim" here
The Raw Story quoted George Takei scaring his readers
with equations of Christianity to Islam here.
There are hundreds if not thousands of similar
comparisons out there. Their general thrust is this: the SCOTUS Hobby Lobby
decision is a bad thing, and we know it is a bad thing because of this analogy:
It's just as if Muslims were allowed religious freedom, or religious power, in
America.
Now, this is a really, really interesting analogy for our
Politically Correct friends to make. Because, for decades, our Politically
Correct friends have not allowed anyone to breathe one word of criticism of
Islam; they have not allowed anyone to say that any aspect of Islam poses any
problem for anyone.
And all of a sudden, in the wake of the Hobby Lobby
decision, our Politically Correct friends let loose the floodgates they have
kept more tightly clamped than the legs of a woman who buys her own birth
control (No, I really couldn't resist, and I'm not sorry.)
But, suddenly, our Politically Correct friends have
decided that Islam / hijab / burqas / sharia are all bad things, and they are
bad things because you can use them in analogies to condemn Hobby Lobby.
"Truth is that which serves the party." When it
was convenient for American communists to say so, the Hitler-Stalin pact was a
very good thing and America should stay out of World War Two. When it served
American communists to say so, America really should have joined World War Two
much sooner.
Week before last, Islam was a religion of peace and hijab
was just another clothing choice of women choosing freely. This week Islam is
scary and hijab is scarier. So say our friends on the left. Because it is
convenient for them to say so.
I have always been open with the criticisms I have of
Islam. I have Muslim friends and I love them. They know exactly what I think
about Islam because I tell them.
One of the things I repeat to my Muslim friends over and
over is this: do not trust the "love" you get from American leftists.
They will befriend you for as long as it is convenient for them to befriend
you. When you no longer serve their needs, they will drop you suddenly and
thoroughly and they won't even acknowledge you in public.
What have we learned from the disgraceful hysteria on the
left regarding the SCOTUS Hobby Lobby decision?
That employers who pay their employees twice what comparable
employers pay, and who offered their employees healthcare before it was mandated,
are to be demonized and ruined, thus driving their working class employees out
of work.
That no one deserves the protections of the first
amendment. Huffy leftists get to decide what religious beliefs you may espouse
or not.
That women who think with their brains are doing it all
wrong. Women, remember. You are nothing but your gonads. Any aspirations to
rise above your reproductive anatomy will not be allowed by the Party.
That Islam is suddenly scary. Actually, the Left always
found Islam scary; they're just letting their fear out now, and they are doing
so because it is helping them to bash Christianity.
That men and women aren't really equal. Except that they
are equal. Except when it serves a leftist's argument to say that they aren't
equal.
That spiteful ruination of a company owned and operated
by Christians who treat their workers well is a really good thing, even if the
workers are driven out of their jobs.
That leftist, atheist employers are excused from all
demands to provide any health care for anyone and are free from protest.
It's an ugly, cognitive train wreck.
Yes, these are some of the reasons why I left the left.
 |
| Source |
No comments:
Post a Comment