of Cowardice

June 26, 2011

I don’t despise Liberals for their positions. Not on Choice, immigration, taxes, unions, or religion. I am not overly affected by their need to protest, preach, mandate and enforce their determined magnanimity. I’m not very bothered by an obvious lack of Family values or even a moral compass with no magnet.
What absolutely drives me nuts, jacks my jaws, has me seethe and froth at the mouth, want to do them violence, is that they cannot say the same. The hypocrisy. To a man, the intellectual cowardice.
Such as…
I know that many Conservatives disagree but I would happily stay out of your uterus if you would leave my foreskin be. You can’t though, can you? My foreskin represents sooo much more than just choice, to you. My foreskin is not just a matter of convenience or the result of “choice”. My foreskin, to you, suggests religion.
The intellectual cowardice is your suggesting otherwise. That it is, instead, your concern for all those poor children of misguided parents that would have them mutilated in some antediluvian ritual soaked in ignorance.
Of course your “choice” is yours to make. Your body, your uterus…your fetus? No ritualistic mutilation there. No exploitation of those in your care or choosing for those who cannot. No way, not you.
No sweat. Your base will stand by. The Latin community is firmly in your camp. Why wouldn’t they be? You have their back. They get it…alot of it. Hooked and dependent. Perhaps they won’t even notice or care when you get around to disallowing ear piercing on their beautiful three week old baby girls, huh?
You won’t though. Anymore than you would demand other culturally defined rituals cease and desist, especially those of the disenfranchised…as long as they aren’t steeped in religion, of course.
Will you continue to decry globalization, all the while singing  Bob Marley’s “One World? Will you, still recoil in horror at the premise of natural selection, but insist only evolution be taught in your schools? Will you, demand the evil rich be taxed at a much higher rate so to keep the Latin community in your camp, while you move your remonstrating Irish band to the Netherlands because royalties are tax free?
Of course you will.
A hypocrite and coward, you.

6 Responses to “of Cowardice”

  1. Chaf said

    I support the ban because it is the only mechanism currently available that protects United States citizens from non-consensual plastic surgery performed for religious and aesthetic reasons by an increasingly unskilled physician pool largely untrained in the technique.

    This is actually a conservative stance because it upholds the freedom of an individual to decide their own Johnson’s fate, it takes medical decisions away from doctors and it sticks it to the Jews.

    . The stereotypical liberal stance would be to protect circumcision because it is a minoritie’s cultural heritage.

    There is simply no reason to chop foreskin off (except to keep young men from scaring Christian women with their pagan anatomy). It is a silly practice and to carry on with it is absurd. Arguments about cleanliness have been disproven except in the cases of the ignorant who don’t understand how to clean the fleshy member.

    If someone comes from people too dumb to wash a dick, then their dying of a shmegma based infection is just keeping the gene pool tidy.

    The ban is anti-semetic in nature. There’s even an educational comic book out where an Aryan super hero defeats evil Hasids bent on the continued chopifying of dicks.

    The ban directly interferes with the religious freedom of people that think god wants to cut off a piece of an infant’s penis. Good. The only thing circumcision provably does is desensitize the penis. If it takes a dumb law to stop a tradition likely initiated to make sex less fun, bring it.

    My other positions: legalize weed, free birth control pills for everyone, decriminalize well deserved ass kickings and mandatory sterilization for citizens on government aid for more than three years.

    Where’s my medal?

    • ofreh said

      Wellllll…if we are being honest, and I’m always grateful for your brand of it, most of us could use a lil desensitizing of our blue helmets. Ask the next Woman in your path, you selfish bastard!
      That said, you disregard the rights of parenting. That would also be a conservative platform.
      While you may have been capable of informed decision as an infant, the rest of us need rely our our Parents, for better, and often, worse.
      As you know, my point wasn’t to debate the attributes of the ban, but the Left’s penchant for cloaking the issues in socially acceptable terms.
      As you say, it’s a anti-semetic maneuver bent on restricting religious indoctrination.
      Were it simply a cultural minority issue, I’d likely agree it might be a textbook liberal position, but that it infringes on parenting, religion and is a direct assault on it’s freedoms, makes it handbook instead.
      Not to mention, as you have previously, often a deal breaker for many Women.
      To your other stated positions, I’ve got news for you Chad Lott…you are much farther to the Right, than Left. I’m especially fond of the sterilization for parasites. Make a T-shirt and I’ll be the first in line to buy and model it.

  2. K8 said

    “recoil in horror at the premise of natural selection, but insist only evolution be taught in your schools?” love the point. well done. I think two ideas are being somewhat mixed up here, though. Natural selection may be horrible sometimes, so is disease, and just as real (and perhaps one occurs within the framework of the other). That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try to keep each other alive and content. Teaching anything other than evolution is silly, and just as we can’t wish away disease, we can’t wish science class into being more God friendly. Would that it were so.

    • ofreh said

      A very fair point. One might be relied upon to champion evolution, yet still be dismayed at it’s unavoidable consequences. To acknowledge it is not necessarily to practice it or even enable it. I get that.
      I don’t get that science class is understood or even required to be not God friendly though.
      I’ve not advised my confessor, as yet, but I’m not conflicted by the two.
      My Faith, does not discourage my trust, in evolution.
      For me, they are easily reconciled.
      I don’t suggest science teachers begin insisting or even suggesting that God IS the Big Bang, but I don’t think they need dismiss it out of hand either.
      To natural selection, I might also wonder if we might be tilting the natural order in denying it it’s quarry. If it IS the natural order, surely there will be as dire consequences for having staid it’s march, no?
      Essentially, I think you and I may have different ideas on the significance or value of the human foot print.
      My Faith insists we are esteemed in God’s eyes, the World our buffet.
      Science tells me we are a parasitical nuance, hardly indistinguishable from any other and unworthy of such lofty notions as preservation.
      You tell me.

  3. K8 said

    As for foreskin. I’m conflicted. If I have a son I don’t know what I’ll do. Inflict my preference in bed in a violent way on a little baby? It seems very wrong. Yet…

    • ofreh said

      Conflicted but conflicted in choice.
      What the ban is supposing, is to rid you of the conflict.
      It seems that were you not partial to determining your own personal preference upon the babe, you could, as many do, commit him to an adult life of “oh…wow..uh, I think I may have left my diaphragm in the car..be right back, K?…don’t you move now!”
      ~car starts. Tires squeal into silence. Fade to black~
      A deal breaker for most, as my good friend Chad suggests below.
      That is not really the issue though. I submit it is the religious significance of the ritual that has those determined to ban the practice. Cloaked in concern for the unwitting and defenseless babe.
      I don’t know if adult circumcision is even an option but I can tell you if I’d not been so addressed as a baby, I’d have considered it as a grown Man.
      I don’t recall the procedure having been so unaccountably (I’m not a Jew, why else would they?) forced upon me but I think it would be easily recalled, and with some discomfort (you’ve seen the face, the look, when a man considers his poor dog having to get cut) if performed on me within the span of my adult life.
      Interestingly, Chad and I don’t agree on the proposed ban but I like how he introduces “tiding the gene pool” into the conversation. We like Chad.

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 )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: