Leveling the “Hater” or “Bigot” Charge: The Ultimate Conversation Stopper

by walterm on December 10, 2016

In the wake of Donald Trump’s victory as the next President of the United States, liberals are up in arms about losing the social “gains” they made under eight years of liberal progressive Obama rule. They will no longer have the imprimatur of the Obama administration to force all manner of social engineering on the American populous. And that’s a good thing, because as liberals are wont, whatever they want can’t be a local or state matter, but must be foisted on all Americans through the force of courts or government regulations. That all ends on January 20, 2017 with the new administration. These people are never content with others having views counter to their own, and one devastatingly effective tool they have used over the past eight years was to say that anyone who opposed their social views was full of “hate” or was some kind of bigot. They made up all sorts of pejorative terms to stop all debate on a social subject dear to them by attaching the term “-phobe” to the end of some “aggrieved” group they made up.

For example, if you were against same-sex marriage, you were a homophobe because in their view, it is not possible to love a homosexual person while not condoning their lifestyle. If you were against Islamic terrorism or wanted to more carefully vet Muslims immigrating to the United States, you were an Islamophobe because to them it’s simply not possible to be against the strain of jihad endemic to Islam while at the same time loving or having no animus towards peaceful Muslims who mean no one any harm. If you didn’t agree that a transgender person should be able to select whatever public bathroom, shower, or locker room they wish based on their perceived gender as opposed to their biological gender, then you were a transgenderphobe which means you necessarily hate transgender people. It didn’t matter that your position was to protect women and young girls from sharing facilities with men or boys which would be an invasion of their privacy, or worse, an opportunity for a pervert to simply declare himself as transgender and be able to gain full access to vulnerable women or girls.

Capriciously using the word “hater,” or calling others “phobic” only demonstrates how vacuous is liberal progressive philosophy. Since they haven’t done the hard work to persuasively argue why their views and policy prescriptions should be accepted by others, they take the intellectually lazy route and just call others names for the purpose of shaming them into not expressing their views. If someone has a religious view for opposing their policies, then they won’t hesitate to say that religious views are “discriminatory” which automatically disqualifies them to have any voice in polite society. This is just another intellectually lazy tactic so they don’t have to make an argument as to why their view doesn’t violate the First Amendment that, last I checked, applies to Christians and other religious groups as well. Just as liberal progressives have the right to argue their views in the public square, so do Christians who are on equal footing which liberal progressives deny. They speak of Christians “imposing” their views on others, but it never dawns on them that they are imposing their views on others as well. If someone is trying to advance a view, then they are imposing that view, no matter what philosophy or ideology it comes from. So it is idiotic to say to someone else, “don’t impose your views on me,” because you have done the same even in making that statement.

What liberal progressives need to understand is that while they always argue that Christians have “no lock on the truth,” they don’t have a lock on the truth either. So they need to accept that there are other views out there, and those other views have as much right to be heard as theirs without them leveling the usual, tired pejoratives whose sole attempt is to shut down or disqualify other views out of hand. They talk so much about the horrors of the Catholic church during the Medieval Ages, but don’t realize there is little difference between ex cathedra denunciations from the pope centuries ago and the denunciations they take part in today to shut down reasoned debate. Liberal progressives are not a ruling class, their views are not sacrosanct, and Americans are getting woefully tired of their petty whining whenever they don’t get what they want. Liberal progressives need to simply grow up, and stop violating both First Amendment rights as well as rights to freedom of conscience and association. Thankfully, this childish, boorish behavior will soon no longer be condoned or supported by the White House.


Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: