The Illogical Conclusion Of The Matter
Victor David Hanson points out the obvious: Smart people can and will disagree. Danger lurks, however, when we start to label those who don’t agree with us as “shameful” or “lying”.
“The current sophistry of using catastrophic current events to rush legislative agendas or build political capital is as natural as it is also dangerous — and can rebound in unexpected ways. If those who are skeptical about the legality and utility of infringing on the Second Amendment through legislative action are reduced to being slandered as shameful liars, and (if we believe what is now being written) they are in part culpable for the sort of carnage at Sandy Hook, then almost any event in the news becomes political fodder.”
This is the end game for the ‘If you’re not outraged, you’re not paying attention” crowd. Knowledge is only knowledge if it provokes an emotional response, and only responses pre-approved by the gatekeepers of “diversity”. My first response to Sandy Hook (and Aurora and Tucson before was, in fact, emotional. I felt angry that humanity could do such things against humanity, which then morphed into fear for my family’s safety if confronted with similar situations.
Having emotions like fear is a good thing, but emotions will express themselves into actions in many different ways. My response to potential threats to my family is to pay attention to what’s out there and be prepared to deal with them as they may (or may not) appear, and that includes the option to meet lethal force with lethal force, an option that Obama, Biden, Pelosi and Reid would prefer I not have.
I have the same emotions that progressives do. I just prefer to put them into action in ways that Obama and his ilk would like to legislate out of existence.
Which of us, then, is truly tolerant and diverse?
(Photo courtesy of Oleg Volk)