Monday, May 18, 2009
Kudos To Sullivan
Recognizing that anyone can be a stand-up guy even if I normally oppose him, I offer this interesting piece about Andrew Sullivan. I always focussed on the stupidity of the law proposal itself and its very likely ramifications for our nation. Didn't think of the motivations in quite this manner. I applaud Sullivan for being so straightforward about it. But it shouldn't surprise anyone the lengths to which the activists will go, what with deceit being a common weapon of theirs.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
I just thought it was a way of conferring special rights upon homosexuals, but this makes sense, too.
I'm shocked, just shocked.
Mr. Sullivan's law degree is from the same place Mark's and Marshall's is.
I read Sullivan every day. He is a conservative I respect. I don't disagree with what he is saying. Don't say I completely buy it either.
But this quote: "He has admitted publicly now" - is false. Unless he wrote the bill, promoted it, or legislated it in some way, he has nothing to admit. He can suggest all he wants, but not admit.
Jim,
Really. Kinda insignificant in the face of the larger point, don't you think?
Maybe, but the larger point is not necessarily true. It is Sullivan's conjecture. And I respect his opinion, but don't necessarily agree with it.
Jim said:
”…It is Sullivan's conjecture. And I respect his opinion, but don't necessarily agree with it.”.
Well of course you don’t agree with it. Probably your reason for supporting the law has nothing to do with what Sullivan has put forth; I’ve never doubted your motivation for certain misguided beliefs, just your rationale.
But, the man makes a valid point; you should never discount the striving for power or money. And because you seem to be driven by what you perceive as a noble and legitimate cause, apparently without questioning or believing what should be obvious, you’ve merely become a handy tool for those whose motivations aren’t up to your standards.
Blamin' said, "your reason for supporting the law"
Don't recall expressing a strong opinion one way or another on this subject. And my answers on this post do not offer support for the bill either. I have only expressed opinions on the rationale given by folks here who oppose it along with my doubts about Sullivan's theory.
So "And because you seem to be driven by what you perceive as a noble and legitimate cause, apparently without questioning or believing what should be obvious, you’ve merely become a handy tool for those whose motivations aren’t up to your standards." sees to be completely pulled out of your butt.
Jim,
My apologies. I assumed since you took the “pro” (or at least the anti-con) side in the hate crimes debate you were for the legislation. As you pointed out, that may not be true.
I guess you’re arguing the point just for the sake of hearing (impressing) yourself with your perceived debating skills. Which just so happens to make you an even bigger tool. The libweenie extremist care not for your reasoning, only your actions.
Let me make something clear; I'm only suggesting, not admitting.
Sure, whatever.
Marshall,
Have you visited Dan's lately? Check it outu.
Post a Comment