This past summer was an eventful one in more ways than one, both positive and negative. On the negative side, the summer got off to a lousy start with the passing of our Boston Terrier, Buster, and then got worse with some philosophical and practical changes in the company I work for which caused me no small amount of inconvenience and irritation. On the positive side, in August we picked up our new Boston Terrier puppy, Cage, which helped more than I can describe to fill the void left in my heart by Buster's passing; I also got to spend some quality time with my parents and my wife, and get in some riding on top of that. All in all it was a good summer, but quite an eventful and educational one at that.
The one lesson I learned this past summer that has stuck with me the most was taught to me by the Liberals in our nation, and I wish I could say it was a good one but I'd be lying if I said that. The Liberals taught me all about tolerance - or, rather, their lopsided and self-serving version of it.
Let's start out by looking at what the Webster's definition of "tolerance" is:
Definition of TOLERANCE
1: capacity to endure pain or hardship : endurance, fortitude, stamina
2a: sympathy or indulgence for beliefs or practices differing from or conflicting with one's own
b: the act of allowing something : toleration
It goes on to give a couple more definitions of the word, all of which are correct but none of which have anything to do with what I'm talking about here. (Like the amount of variance allowed when constructing machinery, etc. See what I mean?)
No, the part I'm specifically referring to is #2, the "sympathy or indulgence for beliefs or practices differing from or conflicting with one's own." But after the events of this past summer, it is apparent to me that the Liberals in our country have an entirely different definition of the word, one that is warped beyond all reasoning.
In a nutshell, the Liberals believe that their way is the only way, that anything they choose to do or believe is right and above reproach, and everyone must accept their beliefs in their entirety without debate or recourse, while at the same time the Liberals have the right to totally and completely dismiss any other belief held by any other group no matter what, and may ridicule and deride those beliefs without fear of retribution or retaliation. Anyone who dares dispute their beliefs or voice objections to them or their ridiculing of conflicting beliefs is immediately branded either a "hater," a "racist," or a "bigot."
In short, to fully and completely accept their beliefs is being "tolerant." They, of course, are not required to be "tolerant" of your beliefs since theirs are right and yours are automatically wrong.
The proof of this is the big flap over the Chick-fil-A president's comments concerning his religious beliefs. All of the liberals out there automatically took issue with his beliefs because they were drastically different than their own, and immediately began flooding his corporate and personal telephones and mail boxes with death threats. That's right, death threats.
That's a really good way to show how "tolerant" you are, huh? God forbid that a Liberal should receive a death threat for voicing their opinion...should that happen, the next thing you know MSNBC or CNN will be doing a feature story on it!
The Liberals have also taught me the true meaning of the words "hypocrite" and "hypocrisy." Case in point: after the tragic shootings at Sandy Hook, Wayne LaPierre of the National Rifle Association suggested that a good way to keep our children safe at school was to post either police officers or armed guards at the schools. The Liberals, of course, took issue with this, saying that it was "silly" and "ridiculous" to post armed guards at schools. During the invevitable gun control debate that followed, one New York newspaper, "The Journal," even went so far as to publish the names and addresses of concealed weapon permit holders in their county in the newspaper.
So how is this hypocritical? Those actions alone are not; however, when the President of the United States refuses to entertain the idea of posting armed guards at public schools while his children attend a private school with armed guards, THAT is hypocritical. The various liberal congressmen who cry about needing more gun control laws while doing so from behind the protection of their own armed guards is also hypocritical, as is the number of those very congressmen who themselves are in possession of a concealed weapons permit - like Chuck Schumer of New York. And last but not least, when the newspaper that published the list of permit holders began to get hate mail, they posted armed guards at the entrances to their buildings.
So what they're all trying to tell us is that it's okay for them to use guns to protect themselves, but it's not okay for us to do it.
That, friends and neighbors, is the absolute height of hypocrisy - and I despise a hypocrite.
I firmly believe that everyone is entitled to their own opinions, and I also believe that those opinions are neither "right" nor "wrong," they're just different. I've always believed that, and I always will. And I truly don't have an issue with differing opinions - my issue starts when the intolerance and hypocrisy starts, and unfortunately we've seen a plethora of both in the past seven months or so.
And with the looming inauguration of the Buffoon In Chief to his second Reign of Terror, I have a feeling it's only going to get worse.
IHC
Saturday, January 19, 2013
Friday, January 18, 2013
My Reply to Allison's Daughter
Yesterday I received a very interesting comment and a request for help from one of my readers, Allison Hardt. Here's the comment as posted:
"Allison Hardt said...
I have been reading your blog for quite some time now and for the most part I have agreed with you .I was wondering if you could help me with your input on something ? My Daughter came home from school yesterday and told me that the talk at school is now they are going to let teachers carry a gun in school. My daughter is 12 yrs old and is very upset .. This is what she said “ Mom , why is it alright for a teacher to carry a gun at school when guns are prohibited on school property . I would feel safer with the police being here then I would with a teacher having a gun . The police are trained to use a gun and are prepared to use it if they have to. If the teacher has one in her desk all that will do is make it easier for the insane student or other insane person at the school to get it . They have taken God out of my school and replaced it with a gun ,and further more the only American Flag is the one out front on the flag pole. “ My daughter did not want to go to school today , she did go but now she is more afraid on how many guns are there . What do you tell your child ? School is hard enough as it is . I would really like to know what you think about this if its not to much trouble . Thank You."
As I told Allison in my initial reply, I'm very flattered that she's been such a loyal reader, and instead of answering her in the "Comment" section I said I'd answer her here instead. Having said that, let me also say that I'm honored that she would ask for my opinion and assistance, and am more than glad to help out in any way I can. Since Allison is going to be relaying this to a 12 year old child, I'm going to try and keep my answers simple and non-political.
So here we go!
People at all different levels of government thought that prohibiting guns from being taken onto school property would keep everyone safe; unfortunately, events in real life have proven this idea to be wrong. The rule was made with the best of intentions, but the fact is that people break rules every day, and this rule is no exception.
Having the police station an officer on school grounds is a good idea, one of which I'm in favor of, but the reality is that the police don't have either the money or the officers to be able to do this. One alternative is to hire an armed guard agency to protect the schools, but the schools don't have the money either. The only other alternative is to let the teachers be armed themselves. If this takes place, I'm 100% sure that the school would train the teachers on the use of firearms first, very much like the police are trained on firearms safety and use, and would make sure that the teachers either carried the firearm on their person at all times or had it locked up in a gun safe where no one could get hold of it except them. We did this as a nation with our airline pilots after 9/11 and the program has worked, so there's no reason to think that it won't work in schools either.
I agree that "they" have taken God out of schools, which I disagree with, but I don't think "they" have replaced Him with a gun. The Supreme Court says that religion can't be taught in schools, and while I disagree with this I will follow the law because that's what good, honest citizens do. I also think that if parents were to teach their children about God, integrity, and respect for others that we wouldn't have most of the violence we have today. The schools used to do that, but now they can't so it's up to the parents to do it. I'm sorry to say that there are a lot of parents who have not done this, and the results are obvious.
I think that every classroom in every school in every state of the United States of America should have an American flag in it, and each day should be started out with the reciting of The Pledge of Allegiance. This is how I was raised, and this is how I think all future generations of American children should be raised. I'm sorry to say that for a lot of reasons, all of which I don't understand, the schools have gotten away from this and don't do this anymore. There were some confused and misguided people who said that the mention of God in the Pledge was teaching religion to children, so the schools had to stop. I think this has done much more harm than good, and until we get a President and a Congress who agrees we're just going to have to do the best we can with it.
Lastly, guns are nothing more than a tool, much in the same way as a hammer or a saw is a tool. If you put a hammer or a saw on a table and leave it there, it won't do anything but lay there until someone picks it up and uses it. If they use that hammer or saw to hurt someone, then it's not the hammer's fault or the saw's fault, it's the person's fault. The person should be punished and not the tool.
It's the exact same way with guns. A gun is a tool that will hurt no one on its own; it takes a person to pick it up and use it for this to happen. People will say that guns are designed for only one thing and that thing is to kill, and to a point they are right. But they choose to ignore the fact that a gun is nothing but a tool, and will only be used to kill if someone - the person who picks it up - uses it for that reason.
But guns can be, and are often, used for good and to save lives as well. The police use them for this purpose every day, and I myself have used a gun to save my own life. Two young men tried to rob me using a knife one night a long time ago, and I was carrying a pistol at the time for which I had a license. I drew my pistol and pointed it at the young men, who dropped the knife and ran away. I thank God that I didn't have to shoot anyone that night, but the point is that a gun saved my life that night. So guns are used for good as well as bad, every single day.
You don't need to be afraid of guns, because guns can't hurt you. Be afraid of the people who use the guns to hurt people, because people are the cause - not guns.
And there you have it, Allison. I hope this helps, and I hope that you'll let me know how things turn out with you and your daughter.
Again, thank you for being a reader and for asking my help on this.
IHC
"Allison Hardt said...
I have been reading your blog for quite some time now and for the most part I have agreed with you .I was wondering if you could help me with your input on something ? My Daughter came home from school yesterday and told me that the talk at school is now they are going to let teachers carry a gun in school. My daughter is 12 yrs old and is very upset .. This is what she said “ Mom , why is it alright for a teacher to carry a gun at school when guns are prohibited on school property . I would feel safer with the police being here then I would with a teacher having a gun . The police are trained to use a gun and are prepared to use it if they have to. If the teacher has one in her desk all that will do is make it easier for the insane student or other insane person at the school to get it . They have taken God out of my school and replaced it with a gun ,and further more the only American Flag is the one out front on the flag pole. “ My daughter did not want to go to school today , she did go but now she is more afraid on how many guns are there . What do you tell your child ? School is hard enough as it is . I would really like to know what you think about this if its not to much trouble . Thank You."
As I told Allison in my initial reply, I'm very flattered that she's been such a loyal reader, and instead of answering her in the "Comment" section I said I'd answer her here instead. Having said that, let me also say that I'm honored that she would ask for my opinion and assistance, and am more than glad to help out in any way I can. Since Allison is going to be relaying this to a 12 year old child, I'm going to try and keep my answers simple and non-political.
So here we go!
People at all different levels of government thought that prohibiting guns from being taken onto school property would keep everyone safe; unfortunately, events in real life have proven this idea to be wrong. The rule was made with the best of intentions, but the fact is that people break rules every day, and this rule is no exception.
Having the police station an officer on school grounds is a good idea, one of which I'm in favor of, but the reality is that the police don't have either the money or the officers to be able to do this. One alternative is to hire an armed guard agency to protect the schools, but the schools don't have the money either. The only other alternative is to let the teachers be armed themselves. If this takes place, I'm 100% sure that the school would train the teachers on the use of firearms first, very much like the police are trained on firearms safety and use, and would make sure that the teachers either carried the firearm on their person at all times or had it locked up in a gun safe where no one could get hold of it except them. We did this as a nation with our airline pilots after 9/11 and the program has worked, so there's no reason to think that it won't work in schools either.
I agree that "they" have taken God out of schools, which I disagree with, but I don't think "they" have replaced Him with a gun. The Supreme Court says that religion can't be taught in schools, and while I disagree with this I will follow the law because that's what good, honest citizens do. I also think that if parents were to teach their children about God, integrity, and respect for others that we wouldn't have most of the violence we have today. The schools used to do that, but now they can't so it's up to the parents to do it. I'm sorry to say that there are a lot of parents who have not done this, and the results are obvious.
I think that every classroom in every school in every state of the United States of America should have an American flag in it, and each day should be started out with the reciting of The Pledge of Allegiance. This is how I was raised, and this is how I think all future generations of American children should be raised. I'm sorry to say that for a lot of reasons, all of which I don't understand, the schools have gotten away from this and don't do this anymore. There were some confused and misguided people who said that the mention of God in the Pledge was teaching religion to children, so the schools had to stop. I think this has done much more harm than good, and until we get a President and a Congress who agrees we're just going to have to do the best we can with it.
Lastly, guns are nothing more than a tool, much in the same way as a hammer or a saw is a tool. If you put a hammer or a saw on a table and leave it there, it won't do anything but lay there until someone picks it up and uses it. If they use that hammer or saw to hurt someone, then it's not the hammer's fault or the saw's fault, it's the person's fault. The person should be punished and not the tool.
It's the exact same way with guns. A gun is a tool that will hurt no one on its own; it takes a person to pick it up and use it for this to happen. People will say that guns are designed for only one thing and that thing is to kill, and to a point they are right. But they choose to ignore the fact that a gun is nothing but a tool, and will only be used to kill if someone - the person who picks it up - uses it for that reason.
But guns can be, and are often, used for good and to save lives as well. The police use them for this purpose every day, and I myself have used a gun to save my own life. Two young men tried to rob me using a knife one night a long time ago, and I was carrying a pistol at the time for which I had a license. I drew my pistol and pointed it at the young men, who dropped the knife and ran away. I thank God that I didn't have to shoot anyone that night, but the point is that a gun saved my life that night. So guns are used for good as well as bad, every single day.
You don't need to be afraid of guns, because guns can't hurt you. Be afraid of the people who use the guns to hurt people, because people are the cause - not guns.
And there you have it, Allison. I hope this helps, and I hope that you'll let me know how things turn out with you and your daughter.
Again, thank you for being a reader and for asking my help on this.
IHC
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)