Tuesday, October 07, 2008

A Sad Exchange

Here's a perfect example of how a disagreement can go quickly off the rails. A friend of mine from college put up a rather disturbing statement on one of the online networking sites. I sent him the message below. Identifying information has been removed, but otherwise, the text is unedited.

My first message:

Hey, man. I just noticed your status line: "I love Sarah Palin, she is a woman worth protecting, while liberal females are not."

Just thought I'd point out some implications of that line.

That means that Aradia's not worth protecting. Nor is her sister . You remember her, right? 4'11". Stomps everywhere she walks. Diabetic. As close to me as my own sister. Sure you do.

For that matter, it means at least half the women in this country aren't worth protecting.

You've shocked the living daylights out of me, man. I thought you were chivalrous. Now I realize that you're just political.

Women are worth protecting because they're women. No, better yet, they're worth protecting because they're human beings, liberal, conservative or moderate. I thought you of all people would be able to see that. But if Sarah Palin's pixie looks have turned your head so much that you'd lose sight of such a basic principle that I know, for a FACT, that you used to believe in, then she's a hell of lot more evil than I ever gave her credit for.

I don't believe you've ever disappointed me more in our entire friendship than when I saw that status line.

His response:

Really an evolutionist talking about evil!?! That is sort of hypocritical don't you think!?! Since, by definition Good and Evil are the domain of religion and morality based on something other than survival of the fittest. Let me see it was Nietzsche that made the argument that anything natural is therefore not evil (ignoring the point that good and evil are concepts that develop out of religion and not evolution). That means when a father sleeps with his daughter, or mother with her son, or sister and brother, who is of breeding age it is not evil nor wrong because it is natural for creatures to do so. Every primate except man, matter of fact every species of animal will do so with the exception of man. Since it is perfectly normal for that to occur in nature (the root word for natural) what keeps man from doing so. Is it a belief in evolution or is it a belief in something different? Yet we don’t allow that to happen. So the perception of meaning of the term “Evil,” depends on what way the person wants to define the situation. Maybe I consider those who have had or supports abortion to be Evil.

So let us look at this logically. Liberal females are for abortion and they make the argument that it is a woman's right and that it is their bodies and no man can tell a woman what to do with their body. That they have been liberated and no longer have the old shackles to hinder them. Ok, fine let us take that stand for sake of argument. However when a male does it is not fine? A male is not to control his body and not required to take damage when he does not want to nor when he thinks the person deserves the sacrifice!?! “Women are worth protecting because they're women. No, better yet, they're worth protecting because they're human beings, liberal, conservative or moderate.” The statement turns males into chattel slaves by not giving them a choice in the matter; but allowing females choice in the same style of situation when dealing with the unborn child within them. It is also a violation of the fourteenth amendment of the constitution and violation of basic fairness. It essentially says that you are male you must die to protect a female regardless of the situation, but Liberal Females do not have the same duty.

It is the lack of holding American females to account that explains why Scott Peterson is in Jail but Casey what is her name is not. Why adult females do not go to jail for fucking children. Why it is ok for a female to hit a male, and not the other way around (when neither is correct). How it is the poor Duke Lacrosse players lives were devastated because a woman without proof screamed rape. Those are just a few cases of the lack of honor with the system and Liberal Females. Until liberals truly want the same standards and fight for those standards to apply across the board that is just the sad logical truth.

Now the true aspect of chivalry is defending those even when they are not worth defending. I never said I would not protect liberal females, (however they are few in number {and those that I would gladly defend are even fewer [Lena is one]} and consisting of those you listed and on my friends list). I just said they are not worth defending. Look at John Adams defending the British Troops after the so called Boston Massacre, or the Nazi Defense Lawyers in the Nuremburg War Trials. They where chivalrous and defended people who are not worth it. Relax and don’t get too emotional about things with me

I responded, then he did. Etc. etc. etc. End result: he has completely cut off contact with me. This man was in my wedding. I always considered him my friend. But his religious stance has pushed him into this kind of thinking. This makes me sad. I've never actually been called an amoral baby-killing fascist, before.

Labels: , , ,


"Loyalty to petrified opinion never broke a chain or freed a human soul..." -- Mark Twain


Fire does not wait for the sun to be hot,

Nor the wind for the moon, to be cool.

-- the Zenrin Kushu