2015-12-07
Lefty Progressives Making Things Simple - Guns, Terrorists, and Victims
The recent tragic terror attack in San Bernardino has sparked intense conversation on the internet. Leave it to our lefty, progressive pals to lecture us on the dangers of "assault weapons" (it's rather agonizing they still don't realize ALL guns are assault weapons), and how if only we could make more laws, shootings would no longer occur. They seem to base this belief on magic.
Take this recent exchange on Facebook, where one man informs us of such an easy, simple way to stop all gun violence:
Perhaps it's their insecurity in the world that makes these sort of people lash out at things like facts and reason.
In a horrific example of journalism, Linda Stasi for the New York Daily News decided to give the terrorists a pass on killing one of their victims, Nicholas Thalasinos, whom she describes as an equal bigot deserving his death. She makes this point very clear when she states at the beginning of the article there were "13 innocent victims," as opposed to the actual number of 14.
She compares the men, leaving the reader to believe there is almost no difference between them, except for the fact that one is dead due to the other's actions.
Yes, apparently Stasi views bigotry as being equivalent to that of being a terrorist. Still, she only makes this conclusion based on some posts this man made on Facebook. Even worse, she doesn't provide any screencaps showing these supposed rants filled with bigotry so, I guess we are just supposed to take her word for it. She continues:
So dedicated to ad hominem attacks, Stasi actually worded this in such a way that would lead the reader to believe it was Thalasinos who called Ann Coulter "hateful." Exactly who is this Stasi to determine who is hateful and who is not? Did she join some moral-brigade I am unaware of? How exactly does claiming Coulter to be hateful not make her a bigot? Last I checked, being a bigot simply means being intolerant of another person's views.
The entire article is merely just a confirmation that in the minds of extreme lefties, some people are more equal than others. If you chose to kill someone, just make sure it's one of those right-wingers because they sort of deserve it, right? Don't blame the radical and his fanatical religion that drives him to commit a terrorist act, just blame the victim.
The simplistic and irrational thinking is never in short supply on the far-left.
Though California has strict gun-laws, this terrorist attack still managed to occur. Even IF one of the victims was indeed a bigot, he most certainly was not the one who carried out this murderous deed, and there is no comparing a rant on Facebook with the work of a murdering terrorist. Thalasinos was an innocent victim who did not commit any crime, despite what Stasi would like to believe. Having a different opinion that isn't "politically correct" is not reflective of someone worthy of death. Perhaps Stasi should worry about her own bigotry, or at least have a better command of the English language.
The truth is in the US, there is no clear pattern of gun laws automatically leading to less gun crimes. This also means that less gun laws do not mean more or even less crime either. The numbers can actually be skewed in such a way that either side can make arguments depending on where they fall on the ideological spectrum. Many of these statistics involve suicide, which is technically a crime but only the person pulling the trigger is the victim.
I wish I could tell you it's more clear-cut but, our country is quite unique since we cover not only a large amount of land but as you travel across this country you will find many different types of mindsets. A small town in the South will be vastly different from a major metropolitan city in the North. There are many anomalies that both sides will hold up as an example. For example, DC has many strong gun control laws, yet it also has one of the highest markings for gun violence. On the other hand, places like NY and NJ also have many gun laws and their gun crime rates have indeed fallen. Yet, no one can claim that gun laws actually equal lower crime rates.
I say it's immoral to tell a citizen they are not allowed to protect themselves. As uncomfortable as it may be, the police are not magicians who float through the air or pop into existence the way Endora did on an episode of Bewitched. Calling the police takes time and waiting for them takes even more time and sometimes those precious minutes are not enough. A person must have the ability to protect themselves in these horrifying experiences. What is needed is education about firearms - how they work, how to use them, and when not to use them. Fear is always combated through knowledge.
Switzerland is a country where gun ownership is high and shootings are quite low. The reason is due to their education. They demand that citizens are educated in how to handle a gun.
Training should be mandatory. Our government will never realistically succeed in taking away guns from our citizens but it can succeed in implementing courses that keep our citizens aware of firearms and how to accurately use them. Rather than stirring the pot by talking about the evils of guns and blaming the victims, we need to get behind more rational ideas that can ultimately unite people on both sides of the aisle.
Take this recent exchange on Facebook, where one man informs us of such an easy, simple way to stop all gun violence:
Perhaps it's their insecurity in the world that makes these sort of people lash out at things like facts and reason.
In a horrific example of journalism, Linda Stasi for the New York Daily News decided to give the terrorists a pass on killing one of their victims, Nicholas Thalasinos, whom she describes as an equal bigot deserving his death. She makes this point very clear when she states at the beginning of the article there were "13 innocent victims," as opposed to the actual number of 14.
She compares the men, leaving the reader to believe there is almost no difference between them, except for the fact that one is dead due to the other's actions.
What they didn’t realize is that except for their different religions they were in many ways similar men who even had the same job.
Yes, apparently Stasi views bigotry as being equivalent to that of being a terrorist. Still, she only makes this conclusion based on some posts this man made on Facebook. Even worse, she doesn't provide any screencaps showing these supposed rants filled with bigotry so, I guess we are just supposed to take her word for it. She continues:
Thalasinos was an anti-government, anti-Islam, pro-NRA, rabidly anti-Planned Parenthood kinda guy, who posted that it would be “Freaking Awesome” if hateful Ann Coulter was named head of Homeland Security. He asked, “IS 1. EVERY POLITICIAN IS BOUGHT AND PAID FOR? 2. EVERY POLITICIAN IS A MORON? 3. EVERY POLITICIAN IS RACIST AGAINST JEWS?” He also posted screeds like, “You can stick your Muslim Million Man march up your asses,” and how “Hashem” should blow up Iran.
So dedicated to ad hominem attacks, Stasi actually worded this in such a way that would lead the reader to believe it was Thalasinos who called Ann Coulter "hateful." Exactly who is this Stasi to determine who is hateful and who is not? Did she join some moral-brigade I am unaware of? How exactly does claiming Coulter to be hateful not make her a bigot? Last I checked, being a bigot simply means being intolerant of another person's views.
big·otˈbiɡət/
noun
a person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions.
The entire article is merely just a confirmation that in the minds of extreme lefties, some people are more equal than others. If you chose to kill someone, just make sure it's one of those right-wingers because they sort of deserve it, right? Don't blame the radical and his fanatical religion that drives him to commit a terrorist act, just blame the victim.
The simplistic and irrational thinking is never in short supply on the far-left.
Though California has strict gun-laws, this terrorist attack still managed to occur. Even IF one of the victims was indeed a bigot, he most certainly was not the one who carried out this murderous deed, and there is no comparing a rant on Facebook with the work of a murdering terrorist. Thalasinos was an innocent victim who did not commit any crime, despite what Stasi would like to believe. Having a different opinion that isn't "politically correct" is not reflective of someone worthy of death. Perhaps Stasi should worry about her own bigotry, or at least have a better command of the English language.
The truth is in the US, there is no clear pattern of gun laws automatically leading to less gun crimes. This also means that less gun laws do not mean more or even less crime either. The numbers can actually be skewed in such a way that either side can make arguments depending on where they fall on the ideological spectrum. Many of these statistics involve suicide, which is technically a crime but only the person pulling the trigger is the victim.
I wish I could tell you it's more clear-cut but, our country is quite unique since we cover not only a large amount of land but as you travel across this country you will find many different types of mindsets. A small town in the South will be vastly different from a major metropolitan city in the North. There are many anomalies that both sides will hold up as an example. For example, DC has many strong gun control laws, yet it also has one of the highest markings for gun violence. On the other hand, places like NY and NJ also have many gun laws and their gun crime rates have indeed fallen. Yet, no one can claim that gun laws actually equal lower crime rates.
I say it's immoral to tell a citizen they are not allowed to protect themselves. As uncomfortable as it may be, the police are not magicians who float through the air or pop into existence the way Endora did on an episode of Bewitched. Calling the police takes time and waiting for them takes even more time and sometimes those precious minutes are not enough. A person must have the ability to protect themselves in these horrifying experiences. What is needed is education about firearms - how they work, how to use them, and when not to use them. Fear is always combated through knowledge.
Switzerland is a country where gun ownership is high and shootings are quite low. The reason is due to their education. They demand that citizens are educated in how to handle a gun.
Training should be mandatory. Our government will never realistically succeed in taking away guns from our citizens but it can succeed in implementing courses that keep our citizens aware of firearms and how to accurately use them. Rather than stirring the pot by talking about the evils of guns and blaming the victims, we need to get behind more rational ideas that can ultimately unite people on both sides of the aisle.
2015-12-03
2015-11-21
Bill Maher on How Muslim Values and American Values are Different
Is Bill Maher finally finding his way back to the center? Back in the day when Bill was just a host on Politically Incorrect, his views started off fairly libertarian and later on he drifted to the left - far left in many cases. He found himself on HBO after his program was cancelled due to a "too politically incorrect" statement and while conservatives were the ones who disagreed with his statement, they were also the only ones pointing out the injustice of his firing.
Bill once again finds himself in an "unholy" alliance with conservatives who rightly recognize that Islam carries with it values that are not compatible with Western culture.
A certain trend is taking place in America now. The political landscape is changing and rather than liberals vs. conservatives, it seems we are being divided by authoritarian vs. libertarian. No matter what the mainstream liberals will tell us, most liberals in this country are in the center and they still very much value general freedoms. They want nothing to do with a culture that treats women as second-class or stones people for adultery and homosexuality. This is one area where we need to stand together.
2015-11-18
Beliefs About Sharia
Beliefs About Sharia
Why are Americans concerned about refugees? Is it because we are a bunch of bigots? Well, speaking for myself - no. I would like to believe that most people are generally the same in understanding most people, including Muslims are generally good, non-violent, decent people. However, many Muslims support Sharia law, a set of laws that are in direct contrast to so many of our native laws that cherish the freedom of speech, religion, and civil rights.
Sharia law dictates the removal of hands for committing a crime of theft. It demands stoning for sins like adultery and for simply being a homosexual. My question for many liberals demanding we accept these people with open arms and hearts is simple - why are you so willing to accept people that strongly support laws that are outright hostile to current Western values?
I get it. You hate the right because we want things like family and G-d. We aren't keen on aborting babies because they are innocent. We like law and order. We enjoy living in a society that values justice and freedom. We also like clinging to our guns. These particular things you might not enjoy or appreciate. For many of you, it's more of a label game. You see the things we appreciate and value and infer things that are simply not true - calling us names like homophobes, Nazis, racists, etc. Maybe you interpret us too arbitrarily. We do have our extremists, no doubt but most of us are fairly reasonable, contrary to what the media tells you. Maybe you don't like Christianity. It is an old religion and many of you have expressed your disapproval of old ideas from the Bible. I might not agree but, I can understand. I can. I assure you being conservative doesn't mean you have an inability to view things through a different lens.
I still have to ask, if you hate the right and what we stand for, how on earth can you tolerate those who support Sharia law? Yes, I know some of you enjoy cherry-picking Bible versus in an attempt to either shame us or make us feel like hypocrites. However, setting the Bible aside because in the end arguing about it is indeed a futile experience, should we not take other circumstances into consideration?
I understand wanting to help people but how far should we go? The fact is, most of these particular people have ideas and values that are just not compatible with our Constitution. There may indeed be wonderful people who are willing to work and become contributing US citizens but there is also a strong likelihood that many of them have no interest in doing those things.
Yes, many are coming out and saying these attacks are not in their name. No, most Muslims do not practice extreme Islam, nor are they violent. Yes, there are documented cases of extreme Christians who have killed. All of these points are correct yet, no matter how much you may despise Christianity, there is nothing in their doctrine that demands women wear a burka. There is also nothing that demands people to stone homosexuals or those who commit adultery. I also see no laws in the Christian world that support the removal of hands as being a form of punishment for those who steal.
In Russia, 26% of Muslims said they support a person being stoned to death for adultery. Now you may say to me, "26% is not the majority." Yes, but it's still 1 in 4! Shouldn't it be 0 in 4? Stoning someone to death for anything is something we as Americans should not ever support. I don't know one American that supports a punishment like that - not one, liberal or conservative. It is simply NOT an American value. Can you really not see why so many of us are concerned about these refugees?
You are free to judge me however you please but, please don't lecture me or the right in this country about being tolerant when you, as supposed liberals, cannot muster up enough tolerance to tolerate your own fellow citizens. No, you'd rather pat yourselves on the back and give your support to people you don't even really know, people who really support nothing you value. At least the right in this country allow you disagree with them and even respect you. I cannot say the same for the people you are advocating to come here.
Beliefs About Sharia
Why are Americans concerned about refugees? Is it because we are a bunch of bigots? Well, speaking for myself - no. I would like to believe that most people are generally the same in understanding most people, including Muslims are generally good, non-violent, decent people. However, many Muslims support Sharia law, a set of laws that are in direct contrast to so many of our native laws that cherish the freedom of speech, religion, and civil rights.
Sharia law dictates the removal of hands for committing a crime of theft. It demands stoning for sins like adultery and for simply being a homosexual. My question for many liberals demanding we accept these people with open arms and hearts is simple - why are you so willing to accept people that strongly support laws that are outright hostile to current Western values?
I get it. You hate the right because we want things like family and G-d. We aren't keen on aborting babies because they are innocent. We like law and order. We enjoy living in a society that values justice and freedom. We also like clinging to our guns. These particular things you might not enjoy or appreciate. For many of you, it's more of a label game. You see the things we appreciate and value and infer things that are simply not true - calling us names like homophobes, Nazis, racists, etc. Maybe you interpret us too arbitrarily. We do have our extremists, no doubt but most of us are fairly reasonable, contrary to what the media tells you. Maybe you don't like Christianity. It is an old religion and many of you have expressed your disapproval of old ideas from the Bible. I might not agree but, I can understand. I can. I assure you being conservative doesn't mean you have an inability to view things through a different lens.
I still have to ask, if you hate the right and what we stand for, how on earth can you tolerate those who support Sharia law? Yes, I know some of you enjoy cherry-picking Bible versus in an attempt to either shame us or make us feel like hypocrites. However, setting the Bible aside because in the end arguing about it is indeed a futile experience, should we not take other circumstances into consideration?
I understand wanting to help people but how far should we go? The fact is, most of these particular people have ideas and values that are just not compatible with our Constitution. There may indeed be wonderful people who are willing to work and become contributing US citizens but there is also a strong likelihood that many of them have no interest in doing those things.
Yes, many are coming out and saying these attacks are not in their name. No, most Muslims do not practice extreme Islam, nor are they violent. Yes, there are documented cases of extreme Christians who have killed. All of these points are correct yet, no matter how much you may despise Christianity, there is nothing in their doctrine that demands women wear a burka. There is also nothing that demands people to stone homosexuals or those who commit adultery. I also see no laws in the Christian world that support the removal of hands as being a form of punishment for those who steal.
In Russia, 26% of Muslims said they support a person being stoned to death for adultery. Now you may say to me, "26% is not the majority." Yes, but it's still 1 in 4! Shouldn't it be 0 in 4? Stoning someone to death for anything is something we as Americans should not ever support. I don't know one American that supports a punishment like that - not one, liberal or conservative. It is simply NOT an American value. Can you really not see why so many of us are concerned about these refugees?
You are free to judge me however you please but, please don't lecture me or the right in this country about being tolerant when you, as supposed liberals, cannot muster up enough tolerance to tolerate your own fellow citizens. No, you'd rather pat yourselves on the back and give your support to people you don't even really know, people who really support nothing you value. At least the right in this country allow you disagree with them and even respect you. I cannot say the same for the people you are advocating to come here.
Beliefs About Sharia
2015-10-16
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)