Posted on 06/29/2023 10:23:09 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
One of the Achilles’ heels of the conservative movement is the sense that we are mean to people.
We think criminals should be punished more harshly than liberals do.
We oppose initiatives that are sold as “compassionate” to marginalized groups.
We criticize people like Dylan Mulvaney, who seems so happy-go-lucky.
We oppose policies sold as catering to kids who are different from their peers.
The list goes on. Even my family members think I support bullying transgender kids and don’t understand why I say mean things when they know I am not a mean person.
Some of this is how we argue points, and some have to do with the sleight of hand that the Left uses to weaponize compassion.
I thought about this when I ran across a tweet by the Connecticut Democrat Party. This is the Party that just changed its human rights law to eliminate the exclusion of “minor-attracted people” being recognized as a protected class. Even this horrendous change in the law was sold as an act of compassion to the LGB community.
Democrats will never let the bullies win.
In CT, we’ve done a lot to make sure we treat everyone equally. Any time anyone thinks they can attack Connecticut’s LGBTQ community, ban their stories, or deny them equal rights, they’re going to run into a blue wave of resistance 🌊
pic.twitter.com/kA6us6s0Sr— Connecticut Dems (@CTDems) June 28, 2023
This is a great argument on their part. It is very appealing, even though it is deeply deceptive.
Nobody likes bullies, and nobody should. If people were fighting against the alphabet ideology in order to harm gender-confused kids, it makes sense to chastise them.
But of course, the accusation is crap, a complete inversion of reality. The Left is fighting to sterilize and mutilate children in ever greater numbers, up to and including bullying children to “transition” and sexualize them in schools. They are hiding mental illnesses from parents, encouraging kids to use potentially harmful tools such as “binders” that can cause injuries such as broken ribs and breathing problems, and even legalizing kids getting puberty blockers and hormone treatments without either parental permission or even knowledge.
In short, we are fighting to protect kids and get them the treatments they actually need to become mentally healthier and prevent them from making medical decisions as minors that will potentially destroy their fertility or even, potentially, end their lives. The suicide rate of gender-confused people peaks after transition, not before. These kids need help, not to be experimented upon by ghouls.
There are doctors who literally advertise on TikTok to get kids to chop off body parts, which is, seriously, referred to as surgery to “Yeet the Teets.” These are not compassionate people, but modern Mengeles.
Wow this is truly sick Dr. Sidhbh Gallagher uses social media to advertise the double mastectomies and sex changes she does to kids on TikTok. She uses TikTok to reel them in while making irreversible sex change surgeries sound like no big deal. 🎥 compilation by: @LandonStarbuck pic.twitter.com/g5hy6kQWUC
— Robby Starbuck (@robbystarbuck) September 3, 2022
What they have over us, though, is a great PR campaign to present their experimental and dangerous “treatments” as “life-saving” care, and we only have facts on our side.
The emotion wins out every time.
The next big battle in the culture war will be normalizing pedophilia, and again compassion will be the bludgeon the Left uses on us to demonize our opposition.
The case for pedophilia is ramping up, and the groundwork is already laid. All the grooming that is done in schools is based upon the assertion that kids as young as infancy are already both gender-identity aware and set and that they are sexual beings in need of explicit, even pornographic sexual education.
This is about meeting kids’ needs, not the needs of those grooming them. It is an act of respect and even compassion, recognizing a “reality” that kids at very young ages are already interested in sexual fetishes, how to perform sex acts, and in need of explicit instructions on how to use sex apps to meet up with people.
That is already happening in schools, and the legitimizing argument is already accepted by most school boards and attempts to stop it are “book banning” and denying the identities of “Queer” children. It is now commonly accepted in Left-leaning and even centrist circles that kids need to see pornographic images in school to get educated, and that such books are legitimately educational and necessary for the mental health of children.
Remember the controversy over the falsely named “Don’t Say Gay” bill? All that criticism, including Disney’s, was about the limitation of age-inappropriate books for kids 8 years old and younger.
K-3. The opponents of DeSantis’ bill wanted explicit, sexual books with graphics depicting sex acts to be handed to kids 8 and under. Not doing so is oppressive, apparently.
So how do we get to pedophilia from here? First of all, it is not a big leap. And secondly, as I said the argument is already made.
If kids are sexual beings, capable of making life-changing decisions at ages as young as or younger than 8 (puberty blockers begin around 8 or so), then denying them the choice of making decisions about who they love and how they do so will be deemed oppressive.
Sure, some adult/child relationships may be exploitative, but only if the child objects. It should be the kids’ choice, and who are we to say no if they want it?
That will be the argument. It is, in fact, an argument that has been made a lot already. The London Police have just teamed up with an advocate of just such a position to do outreach to the LGBTQIA+ community. He has made no bones about his support for adult/child sexual relations, and the London government has chosen him as an advocate and outreach ambassador.
Rather than being ostracized, as he should be, he now has official backing.
The man is Peter Tatchell, and his record of advocacy for pedophiles goes back decades.
In 1986, Tatchell contributed to a chapter of a book compiled by Warren Middleton, former vice-chairman of the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE), entitled “Radical perspectives on Childhood Sexuality, Intergenerational Sex, and the Social Oppression of Children and Young People”. PIE, which for a decade advocated for adult-minor sexual relationships to be decriminalized and called for abolishing the age of consent, was disbanded in 1984, and several prominent members were arrested for child sexual abuse offenses.
In Tatchell’s chapter of the book, he argued that laws criminalizing adults for sexually abusing children do more harm than the abuse itself. Other chapters in the book covered child pornography and prostitution, incest and “how to make paedophilia more acceptable.” He later tried to distance himself from this book by claiming he was “conned” into contributing. However, at the time, Tatchell praised the book in a review he penned for The Communist Party of Great Britain.
In the review, Tatchell wrote, “Society would remove a lot of fear, anxiety and depression if, instead of repressing children’s sexuality, it acknowledged the fact that many children have sexual desires at an early age and accordingly educated children, so they are able to make free, informed and responsible decisions about when and with whom they have sex.”
This argument is right in line with recent guidance from the United Nations regarding child sexual education and age of consent laws. These are no longer outlier arguments, and the efforts to normalize pedophilia are continuing apace. It will not occur as an effort to enable pedophiles to be freer; it will be presented as an effort to free children from constraints on acting out their recognized legitimate sexual desires.
It will be an act of compassion for the children, and opposing it will be seen as bullying. A loving adult/child relationship should be embraced, not suppressed. Love is love.
Compassion is being weaponized, and efforts to defend children are being portrayed–successfully, so far–as efforts to bully children.
The result is the exploitation of children.
You can extend this same line of argumentation into lots of realms. As I just wrote, officials at a Connecticut school actually did fundraising to pay off coyotes who trafficked an unaccompanied child to the United States, and the people involved knew exactly what they were doing. They saw it as compassionate–the kid, who lived alone!–was in need and they wanted to pitch in. They didn’t think for a moment that leaving a kid to live alone and paying off the cartels was anything but a good deed, and in their eyes they were doing one.
It never occurred to them to actually protect a child in need–who was being extorted, was living alone and working overtime to work his way out of a $5000 debt to a cartel–by contacting law enforcement and child services. They had bought into the idea that trafficking people into the US is a positive good. As is the liberal position, after all. The Biden Administration does it every day, shipping unaccompanied kids across the country and dumping them uncared for. Many of these kids–tens of thousands are missing–are now working dangerous jobs to pay off cartels.
Yet the Left has successfully convinced people that opposing these policies is mean, and they do it through constant repetition of the most slanderous accusations.
When depravity becomes the norm, opposing depravity becomes repressive.
And here we are. Conservatives are mean.
Simple. - Because we expect people to deal with the consequences of their choices.
It’s called personal responsibility.
It’s good for the person who made the bad choice (he will learn from it), and good for the broader society.
Whenever I stand my ground, when talking to liberals, they will eventually get around to calling me selfish. Their essential reasoning is that forcing people to be good makes them good people. Any thing refuse to be good are bad people and, therefore, deserve to be subjugated into goodness.
Liberalism is the idea that forcing people to be good is as good as teaching them to be good out of goodwill.
It’s also the essential difference Satan and God. God wants people to be good out of goodwill motivations. Satan argues that goodwill is not not enough, so people need to be coerced.
We want everyone to be held to the same standards and personal responsibility.
Libs just want the people they don’t like to be punished, even when they do nothing wrong.
The basic difference.
A better question would be: “Why do I care?”
Simple- We deal in REALITY.
Because, compared to simply handing someone a fish, it’s mean to expect him to learn to fish. But, ultimately, liberal compassion is all about doing something to make yourself feel good regardless of whether it is good for the object of your “compassion.”
Another basic difference is that liberal “compassion” is the avenue towards their control over the individual.
Conservative compassion is the avenue towards independence of the individual.
Because libtards refuse to be responsible for bad behavior and conservatives refuse to ignore it
Nothing new here, ref the tagline
Conservatives follow true “hard” science.
Liberals follow the squishy “social sciences”.
Conservatives trust established facts.
Liberals gravitate toward emotive “stories” and “feelings.”
Conservatives are from Mars.
Liberals are from Venus.
…Because every teacher, priest, MSM article, TV show, movie, celebrity they see calls us mean, that’s why.
Why? I guess it all comes down to three simple words: “Thou Shalt Not”. These amoral punks don’t follow rules. Their motto is “if it feels good,do it”.
Because females tend to be gullible and we allow them to vote. Over 100 years many males have followed ...
The Left abhors those who hold a mirror up to them, whether held intentionally or not.
Yes! We are realists. We believe that actions have consequences, and words have meanings.
And for this we are called “mean spirited”.
The demonization of the Right by the Left.
We believe in judging people not by the color of their skin, but on the content of their character.
People don't -- the stooges and shills of the DNC do.
“Why do people think Conservatives are mean?”
Why do conservatives allow these people to control the narrative? I respond to liberals, by asking, “Why are you so hateful?” And then I give specific examples of liberals who pretend to be loving and all-inclusive — as long as everyone thinks exactly like they do — when in fact, their words and actions prove that liberals are the most intolerant people in what is supposed to be a free society.
We’re seen as mean and unfeeling because that’s the nature of the universe and we are, first and foremost, realists.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
