This question has been bothering me, and lately it has flared up to burn a hole into my thoughts.
Is it somehow evil to be fearful? If so, then is it also evil to be hateful or angry? Then, is one wrong where the other is right?
let me present a word picture to illustrate what I mean, and to see if its better or worse to be either a person of fear, or a person of hate.
Imagine there is a kid on the playground. for the sake of identifying him, let’s call him Joe. He has an irrational fear of the sliding board. When it comes to the slide,, there’s nothing inherently unsafe, or wrong with it. If you were to ask the kid, all he knows is that to him it’s scary and wrong.
Enter another kid. This one takes right to the slide. let’s refer to this guy as Sam. He enjoys it , his participation it proves how sound it is. there’s nothing to fear. But for all the demonstrations of safety, and harmlessness,, Joe remains fearful.
by now, Sam has noticed the fear Joe has in the slide. Rather than just leaving Joe alone, he begins calling him names. Sam tries to drag Joe onto the slide , claiming his fear is horrible and wrong, and that Joe hates him for playing on the slide. It’s all Joe’s fault that he’s afraid. Just get over it, evolve your unfounded ideology. I’m not going to stop shaming and hating you, and calling you names until, you at least agree with me that there’s nothing wrong with the slide. we can’t be friends until you change, and accept me.
Now, I ask you. Which kid is acting wrongly?
doesn’t it seem like bullying to have Sam impose on Joe, forcing him to change, though it clearly bothers him? the brutal tactics seem only doomed to drive the fear deeper. but wait. is it really fear?
Do you see a parallel in my playground scene to one that has been unfolding in our current social climate?
Let me pick apart the elements for those lagging behind.
The fearful kid really isn’t fearful. But if he were, doesn’t it make more sense to get him professional help or overcoming his perceived mental deficiency? Shouldn’t we feel sorry for him? He can’t help it if he has an irrational fear. But remember, he isn’t really fearful. If we’re bent on shaming him, and bullying him, we may never find out why he only appears to be afraid.
The slide isn’t really a slide. I could just as easily made it a dog, or a bike, or anything. It represents a particular extremist group that is terrorizing constitutional rights in this country. There are really only a small minority in this group, but because they control, and flavor nearly all media including the news, their numbers are grossly inflated. Because the average person gets their worldview through the media, they are easily influenced to think this is the right worldview, and it’s the majority way to think.
Sam, the hateful, angry kid represents the individuals, and tactics of the ones in this currently offended group. For some reason, the group who wants to terrorize the rest of us out of our constitutional rights feel that if we don’t see the world their way, we are second class citizens, worthy of berating, name calling, shaming, destroying businesses, homes, threatening lives, anything it takes to claim a victory on their side.
The real world situation that caused me to write these thoughts has to do with the pending bill in California. At first I thought it was a joke. I heard about it first on a web site known for its satire. Then it began making the buzz in other places around the Inter-webs. This is real.
Imagine a bill that proposed to remove all offensive material to the way of life that you prefer. Sounds great, as long as it’s it’s your life preference, and the group it represents who gets to decide what’s offensive, and what’s not. Passing such a law will put an end to all sales of products or services that you deem offensive. But all that really does is trash the First Amendment, the right of freedom of speech, the right to a free press. For the first time in our nation’s history, people will be legally silenced in expressing their opinion on a topic. And who got to decide to rip this long standing, and highly prized right? An extremist, minority group.
It’s all because the claim is that our national ethic is evolving. It’s high time the fearful holdouts get with the program, and move with it. The problem I have is this, what happens when the national ethic evolves again, in a new direction, and this law backfires on its makers? It won’t take long for some other militant activist group to hit the scene, claim they’re offended, and force materials to be banned. Maybe even books and services that support the faction who is now feeling offended. Where will it stop? Who is the next offended group who will tear down the rights of the majority for the sake of a fringe, extremist group?
I dearly hope the political powers that be, there in California, will be smart enough to protect this unhappy terrorist group from doing harm. I’m not as much worried over the guns being drawn on my side of the political viewpoint. I just think these people are shooting themselves in the foot, thinking the short term victory seems to be what they want. When they’re loading the gun to tear down their own rights in the future.