Timeless Tolerance

Many critics have noted the–we’ll call it ambiguity–of the left’s previously strident commitment to free speech and anti-blacklist principles. This uncertainty about its core values has stemmed mostly from the left’s furious attempts to restrict speech and impose political blacklists. So you can see how some particularly perceptive observers have been able to discern a subtle disparity.

Though the commentary emerging from these perceptions have tended to pool on the vast visible surface of liberal hypocrisy. And while their hypocrisy is plain enough, this rote observation does little to illuminate its key operational dynamics.

Free speech, opposition to blacklists, desegregation, non-discrimination, and every other principled progressive banner had nothing whatsoever to do with establishing an ecumenical social foundation. It’s not about free speech, and it never was. It is instead exclusively about gaining and monopolizing the tools to attack and destroy their opposition. This being a feature of ancient conflict fundamentals. But conservatives diligently fail to understand this. That is because they think they are building a society with their enemies, while liberals work to build one against theirs. In the distinction is everything. Who wins, most notably.

No military commander says if we have multiple modern armor brigades, my enemy should too: I believe in free tanks. The US doesn’t believe in free nukes. Cortez didn’t believe in free horses or muskets. And the union didn’t believe in free repeating rifles as it constitutionally burned its countrymen’s cities to the ground.

These were and are implements to use against one’s enemies, not share with them. And speech is perhaps man’s most effective weapon of all. The left understands this–at least those who do its thinking. Thus it should be completely unremarkable to see their seamless pivot from demands for open debates and despair over Hollywood blacklists, to an iron-fisted smashing of dissent once the tools are in their hands. Again, they were never for free speech. Only for the freedom to use speech against you. Universal values were merely the predator’s camouflage.

Unfortunately, the conservative mind flies toward values like gnats to a bug light. The results aren’t altogether different.

This brings me to something called “gay marriage.” Prior to being instituted in America via the democratic process of Anthony Kennedy issuing an order to 320 million people, this was a hotly debated topic. By far the most common point made by its advocates was one of universal equity attached to a pledge of innocuous result. Essentially, it was: We just want marriage parity, and what harm could come to you if we have it? Right. If homosexuals get “married” what does that have to do with me? The answer is infinitely more than the myopic ever grasp.

I thought this poignant piece on the results of calling copulating homosexuals married in Great Britain shows just how much that novel institution has had to do with regular couples. I will borrow liberally, though it’s worth a full read to comprehend how quickly ostensibly benign moral standards metastasize into totalitarian leftist tumors.

Four years ago, amid much uncertainty, 400 British members of parliament voted to redefine marriage in the United Kingdom.

Then prime minister David Cameron announced that, despite having made no mention of the issue in his party’s pre-election manifesto, it would be MP’s who decided the fate of marriage.

Now, it’s Australia’s turn to choose. There’s one key difference. Unlike in Britain, it will be the people who decide.

Everyone agrees, whether they admit it or not. This is a decision of enormous significance.

Therefore, it seems sensible to analyse the consequences of the potential change, within nations in which redefinition has previously been carried out.

In the United Kingdom, it has become abundantly clear that redefinition has affected many people, across many spheres. At first glance, these spheres appeared distinct from marriage redefinition. However, subsequent changes, have proved that they are entirely intertwined.

What does their pretending to be married have to do with me? The author cites four significant areas. Each of which I’ll describe in capsule below.

Gender
Acknowledgement of sex distinctions is becoming as verboten as race. A current government proposal makes official gender designations simply a matter of form filling. A man is a woman if he says he is, which means sex has been shuttled from the ancient realm of objective to the subjective. As a result, terminology such as “ladies and gentlemen” has been scrapped as a permissible salutation in London transport. No external party may presume to know what is a lady or gentleman, since this is now strictly a function of one’s internal dialogue.

But as always with the left, refusal to state 2+2 =7 is accompanied by increasing penalties. At least one university is now marking down students who cling to gender-defined pronouns. It will, of course, get much worse.

Freedom of Religion
Despite initial promises of religious exemption to homosex mandates, the husk of the British church now finds itself moving promptly into the arid social soil of Hate. Both the “Equalities Minister,” a bureaucracy that promises sheer malevolence from its title alone, and the Speaker of the House of Commons have both stated that no one is free until Christians are not. Thus churches will either come to accept their desecration by “gay marriage” or eventually face the wrath of state prosecutors. If American clergy are any example, I doubt God will have much to say in the matter.

Additionally, the inadequacy of one’s enthusiasm for the homosex lifestyle is now cause for additional prohibitions.

This month, Britain’s High Court, ruled that a Pentecostal couple were ineligible (foster) parents. While the court recognised their successful and loving record of adoption, they decreed that above all else: ‘The equality provisions concerning sexual orientation should take precedence’.

Thus providing a nurturing home for children weighs less heavily on British law than assuring their future equanimity to anal sex.

Freedom of Speech
The article discusses the now-dreary Western regimen of death threats, doxxing, employment terminations, and shuttered bakeries that flow through every BLT movement like shit through a goose. So what’s gay marriage got to do with you?

The author reflects wistfully.

In retrospect, the silent majority in Britain remained silent for too long. Reflecting on redefinition, Ben Harris-Quinney, Chairman of the Bow Group think tank pondered that:‘Same-sex marriage was promoted in the UK, as an issue of supposed tolerance and equality. What we have seen, is the most unequal and intolerant outcomes of any political issue in recent history’.

‘Tolerance and equity’ always ends with the same principled appeal: Kill the counterrevolutionaries!

Children
The author cites examples from an increasingly draconian BLT narrative pressed into the youngest minds. ‘Gender fluidity’ dogma has been incorporated into primary school curricula while alleged educators reportedly teach children proper masturbation techniques among other old English fundamentals. Schools are sanctioned for “inadequate promotion of homosexuality and gender reassignment” and administrators have denied parents the liberty to shield their children from such learning opportunities.

Such injuries are the eternal predestined result when people who want you off the Earth say: Please give me a tank. I call this tank ‘tolerance.’ Oh look, I just ran over another Western traditionalist. Good thing I’ve got a tank.

Advertisements

15 thoughts on “Timeless Tolerance

  1. Pingback: Timeless Tolerance | Reaction Times

  2. You could probably add the “normalization” of pedophilia to that list of atrocities the homogays have committed against normal, sane, undamaged people. The homogays are cancer. The cancer tendrils spread when you don’t cut it out, duh!

  3. One thing thats always amazed me about this issue is that it often isn’t even the gays who are screaming the loudest about this issue. Same with the racial conflicts. It seems to me that its often heterosexual white millenials that cause the most problems. Granted, it is increasingly hard to tell man from woman, gay from straight, LGBLT from whatever when looking at todays college aged kids, but it always seems like the biggest troubles fall under the white and straight banner.

    It is getting increasingly bizarre, though. They demand an end to whiteness, straightness, normal marraige, etc, all while remaining blissfully unaware that the world they inhabit, and they things they enjoy, would not exist if it wasn’t for those things. Nor will that world, with its functional cities, economies, power grids, and food production exist in a post traditional western society. SA and Zimbabwe being prime examples. European countries like the UK will probably be next.

    • One thing thats always amazed me about this issue is that it often isn’t even the gays who are screaming the loudest about this issue. Same with the racial conflicts. It seems to me that its often heterosexual white millenials that cause the most problems.

      It’s the Jews.

  4. In the one notorious instance, finally SCOTUS decided the baker did not have to bake the cake after all. So, see? No harm done. Just years of ruinous legal expense, destruction of your family business, and death threats alongside round condemnation from the overculture. I’m sure there will be no chilling effects upon other people who aren’t interested in working for those who want to celebrate institutional pederasty. You may refuse to bake a three tier cake decorated with dildoes, but you will be ostracized as someone on the same moral plane as a pedophile.

    Which is ironic, as pedophilia is the next exciting and liberated deity in the progressive pantheon.

    • Pedophilia will be “approved” only until the pedophile’s head appears on a pike planted in a public park, put there by a father who really doesn’t care if Joe Biden wants to grope children. Pedophilia is already currently practiced as approved by Show Biz Moms pimping out their kids to Hollywood’s finest. It has been this way for probably 100 years. When kids get diddled and the perp gets away with it (which is most of the time), mommy is almost always guilty of pandering.

      The Left’s lunacy only marches in the dark, or in the abstract. There’s not one damn thing abstract about a dorky teenager being sucked off by some pathetic-lunatic controlling bitch or getting the makings of an anal fistula from a middle-aged man, or a girl just out of her Disney Princess phase losing her cherry to Joe Biden or his pal. If I were on the jury, not only would I vote to aquit forever, I’d give the dad a high-five when he walked a free man after going Full Medieval on the perpetrator.

      I say, go ahead Left. Put your names on the list of those who pushed this. No tree grows to the sky, and the reversal is one day closer with each sunrise.

      • I have noticed articles on places like salon attempting to slowly normalize that behavior. It’s disgusting. Pretty soon it will be considered verboten to even criticize that ‘lifestyle’, else you lose your job for being pedo-phobic. I don’t think this one will actually work, though. Speaking only for where I live in the south, it’s hard to imagine a jury convicting someone of killing the man who raped his child. I certainly wouldn’t.

        This is yet another slippery slope the elite are walking. When the dirt people see that there is no rule of law anymore, they will increasingly take matters into their own hands.

      • Why do you assume Pozd-America will continue to have a jury system, especially when juries reliably provide the “wrong” verdicts?

      • No tree grows to the sky. Who here believes that this Insane Train can continue forever? Just as socialism eventually runs out of other people’s money to redistribute, our monetary system’s attempt to “prove” that you can have consumption without production (via the endless issuance of debt) will eventually run out of stuff in the marketplace. If not before, I think people will begin to object when China’s managers begin to use all those IOU’s we sent them (so they’d ship us shiploads of Walmart fodder) to buy the very dirt on which Americans stand.

      • Could anyone ever look ahead and see what was really coming next? We’re always surprised, no matter how hard we try, no matter how many charlatans arise to sell us their crystal ball output. We’re still the same savages as our prehistoric ancestors, we just have central air.

  5. Pingback: This Week In Reaction (2017/09/17) - Social Matter

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s