Crush Liberalism

11 Comments »

1. I can definatly see the problem with the narrative you’re painting, but what I don’t understand is, what is the link between these two articles? if they had been written by the same person, I’d be right there next to you louding it as BS, but they aren’t.

   Comment by andrew | May 29, 2008

2. The link is simple: the jerks on the left who are governed by political correctness and a broken moral compass are quick to tell us that they don’t like the idea of broken families (in support of gay adoption), but in the name of racial purity, they support the idea of broken families (in opposition to transracial adoptions).

   In short, these PC jerks are shameless, yet harmful, hypocrites.

   Comment by crushliberalism | May 29, 2008

3. Funny how the left is against the idea of merging races in adoption but forces them to be merged in everything else. I truly am surprised that they are not forcing everyone to adopt a black child before you can get a white one. Seeing daddy hump daddy is ok but God forbid the races are seen mixing in a true family setting

   Comment by WMD_Maker | May 29, 2008

4. Mr. Moderation suggests that topical correlations can only be made when authored by the same person. That open-minded suggestion aside, what I find sincerely telling in this article is this:

   “minority children adopted into white households face special challenges and that white parents need preparation and training for what might lie ahead”

   Wouldn’t the opposite apply as well? Don’t minority parents face special challenges when adopting a white child? Certainly Jon is correct in his notion that a child adopted by gay couples faces challenges unique to the lifestyle. Ultimately, by zooming in on this person’s heritage or that person’s sexual orientation, we are missing the big picture.

   The simple fact is that all parents, natural and adoptive, require preparation and training for what lies ahead. Demographics do not matter.

   Comment by TheBad | May 29, 2008

5. TheBad hit my point exactly. I could see how these articles would seem backwards if they were written by the same person. but to view “the left” as some monolithic entity that speaks with one voice is like saying that Pat Robinson speaks for all conservatives.

   oh and crush, the whole “broken moral compass” thing? I got to tell you, I say the same thing about conservatives. but the difference is, I REALIZE my oppinion of another person’s morality is subjective.

   Comment by andrew | May 29, 2008

6. Can’t… resist… urge… to… respond…
   Andrew, if your opinion of someone else’s morality is subjective, then how can you EVER say that someone else has a broken moral compass? The statement makes sense only if morality has an objective foundation.

   Comment by PabloD | May 31, 2008

7. because even though I might say bad things about conservatives (especially when i’m watching the news), I’ve realized that since objective morality has only one souce (that being god), and neither I nor anyone else has the evidence to prove which god (if any) are real, each person is left on there own to determine their own morality.

   my principle is simple: acting for your self interest at the expense of others is evil, acting for others (especially at the expense of yourself) is good, anything you do that dosn’t affect others is morally neutral.

   with the exeption of the part about moral neutrality, I think everyone basically follows this same code, only they add their own spins on it.

   Comment by andrew | May 31, 2008

8. So… a person who doesn’t follow your moral code has a broken moral compass. In other words, you’ve made yourself your own “god.”
   Liberalism in a nutshell…

   Comment by PabloD | May 31, 2008

9. wow, here’s the respect I had for you for previous COMPETENT posts, and there it goes, gone. let me repeat, how about you pull the corn out of your ear this time. EVERYBODY makes up there own morality. the fact that you think that yours is better than everyone else’s demonstrates your lack of understanding.

   and seriously, become my own god? it’s called freedom, ya know, that concept that conservatives pay lip service to but don’t really believe in?

   Comment by andrew | May 31, 2008

10. There is no god. Deal with it.

    Comment by Stevo | November 23, 2009

11. Oh. Well, heck, with such a compelling argument as that, I’m sure you’ve changed a bunch of minds here.

    Comment by crushliberalism | November 23, 2009

« Previous | Next »

Site info

Crush Liberalism
Theme: Andreas04 by Andreas Viklund. Blog at WordPress.com.