As I have stated in the past, I believe government as a whole to be my enemy and will no longer participate in choosing who will sit in the seats of power of an entity which, with almost every act it takes, violates the charter which established it. That said, I will also admit that this election cycle has proven to be quite entertaining, and hopefully, for those whose eyes may be part way opened and their brains halfway functioning, enlightening.
The way that the two political parties, both Democrats and Republicans, have ganged up on the outsiders, Sanders and Trump, to keep them from obtaining the nomination, while often being the clear choice of a disenfranchised electorate, clearly shows that they do not care about the will of the people; only their firm grip on the reins of power.
Although I plan on voting for neither Trump nor Sanders, I find the things people are saying, and doing, in regards to both quite entertaining. Take for instance those who have publicly said that if Trump is elected they will leave America. Mostly these comments have come from left-leaning high profile, and has-been celebrities; as if their status in life gives what they say any more credence than what the average Tom, Dick and Harry says.
You know what I say? Well, if you’re reading this I suppose you do, so here goes. I say GOOD, leave. Who cares? I certainly don’t. But do me a favor if you have the courage to keep your word if Trump is elected; turn in your passport when you leave and surrender the right to comment on American politics as I believe that if you leave this country for the reasons you state you forfeit the right to do or say anything about what is going on internally in America. After all, you did not hear any right leaning people threaten to leave America when your champion of Hope and Change was running for office. No, we stuck around to two terms of that asshole and suffered under his incompetency and unconstitutional exercise of Executive Authority.
So if you leave; STAY GONE! Okay?
Then there are those who protest Trump rallies by infiltrating the crowds and yelling and screaming, or insult and harass those in line to attend his campaign rallies, and even those who block traffic in an effort to stop people from getting to the rally. Do these people, who cry the loudest about human rights, realize that by their actions they are violating the rights of others?
You may not like what Trump is saying; fine, that’s your prerogative. By making so much noise at a campaign rally that the people in attendance cannot hear the speaker, or by blocking traffic so people cannot get to the rally, you are violating their right to assemble and hear the things the person they support says. It’s funny that you resort to these tactics yet claim to be the self-righteous supporters of human rights…the word hypocrisy comes to mind when I think about your actions. Or is it simply, do as I say, not as I do?
Why is it that those screaming the loudest about tolerance are the ones who are the least tolerant of ideas they disagree with? If someone expects you to be open minded to their views then they must also be open minded to your views as well. That is called honest debate. But when one side forces their views upon others and shuts down all opposition that is not tolerance; that is coercion and strong arming others until they concede their own beliefs or sacrifice their rights.
Take for instance those who go around saying we must not judge all Muslims by the actions of a few radicals. Okay, I’m willing to play devil’s advocate and play along with this. Let’s say not all Muslims are bad; that not all of them want to slaughter all us infidels or impose Sharia Law upon America. Fine; now why don’t you apply your own logic to gun owners? According to your way of thinking, not all gun owners are crazed gun nuts, or wannabe spree shooters. So why are you pushing to make it harder for the majority of law abiding citizens to purchase guns, or buy ammo, or limit what type guns we might choose to own? Hmmm, I’m awaiting an answer. After all, you are violating a constitutionally protected right, no matter what the 9 black robed tyrants of the Supreme Court say.
Then there is the whole gay rights tolerance thing. Listen, I’m not here to judge anyone’s lifestyle, I believe that judgment belongs to God and that He will judge each of us according to our actions in due time. That does not mean my beliefs are to be silenced, or that I cannot quote from Scripture where it condemns homosexuality. That’s like making it a crime to warn a child who is about to cross a street in front of oncoming traffic. It is not a crime to warn someone that something they are doing may prove detrimental to their future. Now if I were to take it beyond warning and begin harassing or assaulting them; then I will have overstepped my bounds and violated their rights and I would be guilty of a crime.
You see, I believe government, all the way from the federal government down to the local communities, has no place in marriage; whether it be between a man and a woman, or two women or two men. Marriage licenses are just another means of control government exercise over us in regards to what should be a religious ceremony, a bonding to two people together in matrimony.
Government should not get involved by forcing churches to perform same sex marriages when those marriages go against their belief system. Nor should it prohibit it by making same sex marriages illegal. It should simply stay out of it. But the problem is that many in the gay community, not all, but many don’t want that. They want the legitimacy that government sanctified same sex marriage gives them by condoning, and forcing others to accept – (tolerate) it. They also want to be eligible for the benefits a government sanctioned union provides; death benefits, insurance, and all the other things. So often the cause is less about equal rights as it is about equality of benefits provided by a government sanctioned act. If government got out of marriage altogether then if a judge, a priest, or justice of the peace binds two people together in matrimony then it should be binding for all other intents and purposes as well.
I may not agree with it, others may not agree with it, but it is not our right to interfere or deny you the right to do as you please; AS LONG AS YOU DON’T FORCE YOUR BELIEFS UPON ME!
Then there is the problem of Islam in America. Our First Amendment gives us the freedom to worship as we please; or not worship at all. This right extends to the followers of Mohammed just as equally as it does to the followers of Christ, or Buddha for that matter. Yet how do we reconcile the fact that a small segment of the Muslim community is very staunchly anti-American and is willing to use violence to achieve their goals? How do we reconcile the fact that their religious text tells them to lie to, cheat, and slay those who do not believe as they do? It is a question that we have yet to answer sufficiently to suit me, but it is one we must come to terms with if we are to find a way to coexist with those peaceful Muslims living in America.
But then at the same time, and here’s where the hypocrisy is so thick you can cut it with a knife; we are told that we must be tolerant of Muslims, our children are being taught about Islam in school, and in many instances they are given special treatment to perform their daily prayers. Yet those Christians who wish to practice their faith are told they cannot, that it is a violation of the wall that separates Church and State, (as if anyone had a clue as to who originally said that and why).
I’m all for tolerance; I’m all for live and let live. But I believe that tolerance has just become a word used by people who wish to force their beliefs upon others. Anyone who speaks out in opposition to the current flavor of the day agenda is insulted and denigrated as being intolerant. It does not matter how many facts a person can provide which back up their views as facts are not allowed in the courtroom of political correctness.
Tolerate this; I may not agree with your lifestyle, I may not even like it; but I’ll let you live it as long as you show me the same respect; let me live my life the way that I choose without asking your government to step in and pass laws which overstep it’s constitutional authority, or which violate my God-given rights.
If you can do that we’ll get along just fine. If you can’t, well most likely you’re one of those who don’t believe in private gun ownership, and that means I own guns and you don’t. You really don’t want to piss someone off who owns lots of guns and lots of bullets when you don’t own any. Just some friendly advice…