Social Justice at What Price?

Yesterday, charges were brought against six officers in the death of Freddie Gray following days of riots, looting, and burning.  Chants of “No Justice, No Peace” were also heard amid the chaos.

In other news, a police officer was shot apparently in retaliation for Gray’s death.  Apparently the assailant, who is in custody, didn’t get the memo that the officers had been charged.

In my opinion, charges were brought against the officers to pacify the rioters, and some of those will not stick when all the facts are brought to light.  Regardless, the aftermath of this entire process is horrifying in the scope and the implications of what the future holds.  And thus another sad chapter has been written in which the insane round-robin series of events where someone gets killed (a person of color with a criminal record) & people riot before all the facts are in. 

Stop and think of the impact of these events have on the community.  Businesses are looted and burned, many of them are owned by the same race as the community that they are located in.  They had absolutely nothing to do with the events that triggered the riot.  But they were the focus of the mob’s wrath, and the destruction & looting began.

But I have never been able to figure out how robbing, burning, and otherwise destroying the very businesses of the community that you live in will make things better.  Sure, the people involved may be charged and even convicted, but exactly how does does that equate to justice?  If anyone knows, please leave a comment.

Baltimore-riots-cartoon

Baltimore 2

Additionally, the community now has a bad reputation.  If things were bad before, hold on because things will get worse as businesses, owned by real people, will be reluctant to reopen damaged or destroyed stores in the area.  Property prices will go down, insurance rates will go up, and the prices in any reopened stores will be higher than before in order to pay for the higher insurance rates, increased risk of opening a store in a volatile area, & loss of revenue from the destruction & unrest.

Yes, there is a cost to all of this mayhem, and someone will pay for it.  And it will be the people living in the neighborhood that was just reduced to ashes.

Again, in my opinion, protest in front of the mayor’s office, the police department, or anywhere else for that matter to get your point across.  But do not rob or burn down other people’s property, because that will make you the true criminal in these cases, and will not bring about the true social justice that is needed.


Due to work and personal commitments, I will not be posting until sometime June.  Until then, visit my counterpart’s blog at Wise Conservatism.

Discrimination or What?

I have been and continue to be discriminated against as well as been harassed, called names, and otherwise maligned.  For instance:

  • I have been denied entrance to various places of business.
  • I cannot enter various government buildings unhindered & without scrutiny.
  • I cannot step onto the property of the Post Office without committing a Federal crime.
  • I do not have a criminal record, but am often portrayed by the media as a criminal.
  • Various public figures have indirectly called for my incarceration or worse.
  • I have been called “a nut” and other names by the media.

Can you guess why?

It is because I hold a Michigan CPL (Concealed Pistol License), and believe in our Second Amendment.

As to the first three items in the list:  Yes, I can go to these places, but only if I disarm myself & leave the safety of my family and myself to others (why would I want to do that?).  For the next three, various media outlets and celebrities call for my forcible disarmament and/or incarceration and/or bodily harm for simply exercising my Second Amendment rights.

Now my reaction to a lot of the above is to simply avoid these establishments except when absolutely necessary.  It’s not to run and scream to the media or hire attorneys to sue these various entities into compliance.  Quite unlike another group…

The reaction by the militant arm of the LGBT lobby to my home state of Indiana’s passage of their version Religious Freedom Restoration Act has, in my opinion, been way over the top.  Considering that there has been a Federal law signed by their hero Bill Clinton and 19 other states, my question would be:  Why now?

Their vocal objections to the law has nothing to do with a baker or pizzeria denying catering a homosexual wedding based on a religious point of view.  If it did, then why only target a Christian-based business?  Why not a Muslim-based business offering the same services?  Here’s my humble opinion why…

The LGBT lobby is wanting to force religious organizations to remove bans against homosexual behavior in not only their policies, but scriptures as well.   They want to do this by having judicial decisions and laws passed banning discrimination based upon any religious practices to the contrary, and to ban scriptures describing homosexual behavior as a sin as hate speech.  This way, their lifestyle is then legitimatized from both legal and religious standpoints. 

Since the dominant religion in the United States is Christian-based, then this will be the religion that will be targeted.  It also does not help that the Christian religion is tolerant (hate the sin, love the sinner), and several denominations have reversed their stances on homosexual practices within their church. 

Thus, this is more about forcing acceptance and tolerance over the rights of others rather than respecting those differing opinions and rights.  The militant LGBT would rather ignore the Constitution and the Bill of Rights to further their agenda.  Otherwise, those same people who were supposedly denied service by a baker on religious grounds would do exactly what I would have done – find another bakery to fill their requirements.  Surely, there must be LGBT friendly bakers somewhere in that city…

Dr. Brian Joondeph has the following to say about the Indiana law on AmericanThinker.com (excerpts from article):

What exactly is so controversial about this Indiana law? It “Provides that a state or local government action may not substantially burden a person’s right to the exercise of religion,” unless there is a “compelling governmental interest.”

Maybe this is why the left is in a lather, as their worldview is that most of what we do in our mundane daily lives is a “compelling interest” of the government. What light bulbs we buy, how warm or cool we keep our homes, what size soft drinks we order, whether we sprinkle salt on our food, and so on.

One man’s compelling government interest is another man’s liberty or pursuit of happiness. As I wrote last year, what is the compelling government interest in whether a Christian baker chooses to not bake a cake for a same sex wedding? Or whether a kosher Jewish deli refuses to serve a ham and cheese sandwich? Or whether a Muslim printer declines to print copies of a Mohammed cartoon?

These are the freedoms enshrined by the First Amendment. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” If a Muslim female wears a hijab to school, this is a constitutionally protected right. Why are bakers and photographers not afforded the same constitutional protections?

Indiana, along with 19 other states, enacted a law allowing its residents to practice their religion free from government scrutiny. It took the 20th such state law to garner the attention of the left.

Yes indeed…it took them this long to figure out that many people, including their beloved Democrats, actually believe that the right of People to follow their religious convictions rather than the demands of a few.

The First and Second Amendments of the Constitution reinforce the Rights of the People that no government or organization can legally or morally subvert.  These are the Rights of the People to be respected by all, not excepted by a few.

(In the interests of full disclosure, I have friends and a cousin who are homosexuals.  While they want legalization of their partnerships, they also respect the rights of others.)

Stuff

I haven’t written anything for a while – between work and a death in the wife’s family, there hasn’t been much time to write.  But just listening to the news is enough for me to do a slow burn.  For instance…


The Hildebeast’s response to a Congressional inquiry to in her private email server’s contents is to wipe the server’s hard drives.  Since the Hidlebeast was using this same server for government business when she was Secretary of State, the emails were not hers to delete, but needed to be reviewed by Congress as to their relevancy to her former position.  I don’t know how many Federal laws she has broken in her 1) using a private, potentially unsecure, server for government business, 2) deleting said records and emails, 3) failing to sign her exit papers, and 4) obstructing a Congressional inquiry/investigation.  For the Democrats to keep promoting the Hildebeast as a potential Presidential candidate is disgusting given this latest action and the history of this person.  However, if she does become the next President, expect more of the same actions as the current President, only worse.


The Bergdahl case has taken another turn for the worse for the Administration.  Bergdahl has been charged with desertion and “misbehaving before the enemy”, the last being almost equivalent to treason.  This entire case has shown that this Administration has gotten the entire Bergdahl case wrong, and not only wrong, but with potentially disastrous results.

While the talking heads at the White House (Earnest, Psaki, Harf, and Carney) have all spun trading five terrorists for one soldier narrative every possible way (including calling it a “good deal”), the facts remains that this person was a suspected deserter from day one, multiple soldiers were killed or injured looking for this person, and the President illegally released said terrorists from detention.  Not a good move, Mr. President…

mrz032715dAPR20150327124525


Negotiating with Iran concerning their nuclear program will not bear any lasting agreements.  Iran is hell-bent on developing nuclear capabilities for both weapons and power generation, although it is for the weapons that they really want.  Iran’s stated policy is to remove Israel from the map, and to promote (dictate) their version of Islam throughout the region.  With these goals in mind, can anyone realistically expect Iran to negotiate and agree upon anything in good faith?

mrz032615dAPR20150325064511

Last thought on this subject – The nuclear “deal” with Iran has a deadline of Tuesday, March 31.  Too bad it’s not due until the next day because it would have been very appropriate.

mrz032915dAPR20150327114513


Harry Reid is stepping down from the Senate.  Good riddance…  I now wonder who will replace this most insidiously corrupt politician – Schumer, Durbin, or some other power-hungry elitist politician that is just as corrupt as Reid is…


I saw in the news that a person (who is black and has a criminal history) has been shot and killed by police.  The Boston faction of Black Lives Matter is making a big stink about this.  This shouldn’t fly too far – this person was shot after he shot a police officer in the face.  But then again, facts do not seem to matter in such cases…


One of the Left’s latest darlings is Lena Dunham, star of HBO’s “Girls”.  She has admitted in her book to committing some disgusting acts with her sister, and lied about being raped by a “Republican” student – all yawned at by the Liberal establishment.  Now she has written an article in “The New Yorker” in which she poses a quiz about who she is asking the question about – a dog or her Jewish boyfriend.

Now this is stirring up some discussion, but not by the hard-core Liberals.  Apparently, for these people, the more shocking and depraved the action is or the conversation, the better it is.  Comparing the actions of dogs and Jews is never acceptable, even in jest.

If a conservative person had written such an article, the Left would have been first in line howling for blood.  But since it is one of their own, it’s OK and she deserves a pass.  Unbelievable…or maybe not…


My home state of Indiana has passed their version of a Religious Freedom law, and the Liberals are losing their minds.  I thought Lawrence Meyers for Townhall.com states it best (excerpts from the article follow – please read to get the full effect):

Indiana’s Religious Freedom Law is not anti-gay. It is not anti-Black. It is not anti-Semitic. It is, however, pro-religion and pro-freedom and that’s why Leftists hate it.

The law is explicit. The government cannot substantially burden anyone from exercising one’s religion. If it does so, it must “further a compelling government interest and be the least restrictive means of furthering that interest.”

This is no different than the laws in 19 other states, and the Federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act that passed in 1993 – by unanimous vote in the House, 97-3 in the Senate, and signed by the ultra-Right-wing-nutjob Bill Clinton.

Anything involving a public service isn’t going to be denied to a gay person. Furthermore, if a person or a company or religious organization engages in any kind of discrimination for “religious reasons”, the courts apply the test of “strict scrutiny” (the Sherbert Test) to the claim of religious infringement.

The Ugly Truth

It is the Leftists that are bigots. To them, it doesn’t matter if the rights of other people that get trampled on in the process. It only matters when the rights of people Leftists care about get trampled on.

The Left is so very strident against discrimination – oh, but only gays, blacks, Hispanics, illegal immigrants, and Radical Islamists need apply for the victocracy.

Yet they don’t care about discriminating against Christians, and will do anything they can to align themselves against the Jews and Israel, because Leftist philosophy is anti-freedom, anti-religion, and ultimately anti-human.

The great irony is that these laws were passed because a gay couple decided to sue a bakery that wouldn’t make them a cake for their gay wedding. Instead of the couple just taking their business elsewhere, and doing everything they could to shame the business that turned them down, to put up awful reviews on Yelp, to protest in front of the store, and promote the more open-minded bakery, they chose to be vindictive.

Which forced the very governmental action they are now decrying.

Yep – when the laws don’t go their way, the Leftists cry “foul” – shameful and pitiful, actually…

gv032715dAPR20150327124525


This is all I can stand to write about this time.. Hope everyone is well, and is keeping their blood pressure down in the face of the insanity that we are dealing with on a daily basis.