So ESPN sacked Curt Schilling because he shared a meme on Facebook that ran contrary to the current égalipée movement. I may not agree with what you say, but will defend to the death your right . . . actually, we don’t say that much anymore, do we?
But I need to go on record as saying that ESPN should have every right to sack conservative sports commentators, and to do so for the dumbest of reasons. Once we disallow folly in sports writers, what will the harvest be?
Nevertheless, still, if they are a private company, they should have the freedom to disassociate themselves from any views they find reprehensible. Knock yourself out, I would say. It’s a free cou . . . . Actually, we don’t say that very much any more either, do we?
If I believe that evangelical bakers ought not be fined for declining to do business with immorality, then ESPN ought not be penalized for employing those who have given way to HATE. If I don’t think my Jenny Geddes Band should be forced to open for a showgirls review in Vegas, then I also don’t think that Springsteen should be forced to go to North Carolina to play for normal people. I mean, fair’s fair.
We should, however, penalize ESPN for belonging to that enormous cohort of hypocrites who refuse to abide by the rules they say should govern us all. Progressives are the ones who say that every job that services the public must abide by the sacred pretense of neutrality. I am not asking them actually to live by this standard for — as we should all know by now — doing so is impossible because neutrality is impossible. What chafes us is that they have given up the pretense, and pretending to be virtuous was the only thing that made liberalism even halfway tolerable. C’mon, guys.
So if we should penalize them, though, what should the penalty be? First, consider what they have already paid. Already they are forced to be THEM, and it is a heavy burden. Anything more and I fear we will have gone beyond our 40 strokes.
The égalipée movement? How charming! I was hoping someone would invent a classy word for all this bovine poo in the world. I have many pet peeves of course, but I really don’t like this policing of people on facebook or anywhere really. It is thought control or pre-crime units or something terribly science fictiony and closely linked to totalitarianism. The idea that you could fire someone based on beliefs they appear to have due to the memes they may have liked on facebook, is really quite chilling to me. I’m somewhat grateful I don’t have a reputation or a… Read more »
“Egalipee?”
How about:
“Peegalitarians”?
????
????
Ha! I’m not sure the concept of complimentary versus peegalitarians is going to work in this context. I don’t want a complimentary relationship in the restroom, either. :)
Memi, the plumbing fixture normative set up used to be “complimentarian”, where males and females did their equal but differently performed business in complimentary but separate rooms!????
The current threat to that previous set up, is an apt metaphor for the problems with the egalitarian position, in the theological sense.
(Or lack of sense, as the case may be!)
Not complimentary, complementary, FWIW. :)
Thanks Lady Dunsworth!
Ideally, both terms have a symbiotic relationship !????????
(However the vowels work out!)
If I’m getting compliments in a public restroom, something is probably amiss.
Ha! I am not an egalitarian, I am a complimentarian. That’s where two people get married and spend all their time complimenting one another. It actually works out pretty well :)
I think a better way to be fair is to just quit firing people for stupid things like posts on facebook. Schilling, as a public face of ESPN, is admittedly in a bit of a gray area there (and this was apparently not his first annoyance), but joe in the mailroom should be free to post whatever he wants. We could all do with a little less culture war hysteria in general.
In cultural marxism, equanimity such as yours is forbidden.
I think that disapproval of any point of view should generally be expressed socially, not in taking away someone’s employment. There are exceptions, but I don’t know that this is one of them.
Very fair-minded jilly.
Just curious, Miss Calvinism 2016 – which restroom do you use?
One more time, for the cheap seats… It’s a little late to be complaining about people suffering severe sanctions for not holding the same opinions as the New York Times on certain subjects. People have been getting fired for racism for decades now. And for decades, Christians have been fine with that, because racists are haters and so they deserve whatever they get. And, hey, that’s cool. But don’t whine and moan now that you’ve been added to the list of haters for opposing gay marriage and trannies in the ladies room, and you’re at risk of losing your job… Read more »
Yes, wars end when both sides decide to stop shooting at each other.
The question is: Why should Christians tolerate liberals in their societies at all? Is there any evidence that can be trusted to live among us peacefully? To be sure, many have gone along with liberalism because it’s both respectable and powerful. But those who champion it — shouldn’t we be preparing for the day they can be permanently removed, preferably to their own egalitarian-paradise reservation?
Curious,which part of my fathers world would you set aside for them?
I hear there’s plenty of room in Greenland.
Now that is funny!
It’s been updated — “I may not agree with what you say, and I’ll beat you to death if you try to say it.”
Or, “If I don’t agree with what you say, I will type “EDUCATE YOURSELF!” in all caps until you stop being an intolerant bigot.”
If there’s a rock and roll heaven, you know:
1) They got a helluva band.
2) Trannies can use the women’s restroom.
3) Prince is tearing the joint up right now.
(Man, I sure hope he didn’t have to follow G. G. Allin.)
Of course, all this is moot, because there’s NOT a rock and roll heaven.
“3) Prince is tearing the joint up right now.”
Should we call him the former artist formerly known as prince?
I think it’s the Former Artist, formerly known as The Artist, formerly known as The Artist Formerly Known As Prince.
Now my head hurts.
Doug, any thoughts on us dumping the racist Andrew Jackson from the $20 bill and replacing him with Harriet Tubman? Who’s next? Ethel Rosenberg? How much longer do you think the slavers Washington and Jefferson will remain on the $1 and $2 bills? Five years? Ten? And how many years after that until the nation’s capital is no longer named after the slaver Washington? Five? Ten? Anyone who thinks Washington will still be the name of America’s capital in 2050 is on drugs. And best not even contemplate what’s going to become of the Jefferson Memorial. It will either be… Read more »
“Anyone who thinks Washington will still be the name of America’s capital in 2050 is on drugs.”
Assumeing America lasts that long….
Don’t get distracted. While the right hand is changing around the appearance of cash, the left hand is marginalising its use altogether. Of course they’re putting one of their mythical heroes on the $20. If you’re complaining about it, who’re you complaining to?
LOL
Wherever did you get the idea that I’m complaining?
LOL
I don’t hate God. Why in the world would I complain about Him punishing the people who do despise Him?
By giving them more and more of what they love – equality?
Very valid points, great thoughts expressed sir.
I did a little research on this whole bathroom thing because, well, because I thought some hard facts might be helpful or useful. (Yes, I know that’s kind of a fallacy in today’s world, but humor me a bit okay?) I found the best estimate of the number of transgender folks in the country was about 700,000 people. Meanwhile, the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children (NCMEC) reports that the number of registered sex offenders in the United States has increased by nearly a quarter in the last five years. The total in the most recent survey (2012) was… Read more »
A little perspective, though — a lot of “registered sex offenders” are guys fined for public urination and 18 year olds who slept with their 16 year old girlfriends. Neither of which I condone, but neither of which represents a threat to children in bathrooms.
And from what I understand, the vast majority of sex offenders who DO represent a threat to children are victimizing family members, students, congregants, and others under their authority who they groom over time – not random strangers in high-risk public episodes.
Good point, Dunsworth. I actually checked, and yes indeed, public urination can sometimes end up in sex offender registration–which I believe is an irony of epic proportions in the context of this particular topic.
Interesting how hateful and bigoted the IOC is. It’s requiring all female trans athletes to have undergone a year of Hormone Replacement Therapy (no such requirements for trans males, BTW). http://www.outsports.com/2016/1/21/10812404/transgender-ioc-policy-new-olympics Interestingly: The overriding sporting objective is and remains the guarantee of fair competition. Restrictions on participation are appropriate to the extent that they are necessary and proportionate to the achievement of that objective. So the IOC is saying that there are some things that are more important than allowing trans-by-self-identification women into women-only places. And in so doing, they are using body chemistry (not anatomy or self-identity) as the… Read more »
Let’s remember that the original version of the slogan was “Liberté, égalité, fraternité, ou la mort”.
What’s The Gospel Coalition promoting these days? This article by a PCA missionary in the Washington Post giving out that himself and his wife are some great ones because they’ve rejected God’s plan for family formation – a man marries a woman, they have sex, and she bears his children. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2016/04/21/my-wife-and-i-are-white-evangelicals-heres-why-we-chose-to-give-birth-to-black-triplets/ Instead, even though they’re not infertile, they’ve left the natural use of the woman and substituted an adoption agency. And, being devout Judeochristians, they told the adoption agency that under no circumstances would they adopt a white baby, but only non-white ones. Because they’re just so full of Christian… Read more »
A discussion of Hollywood and wife beating. It’s an excellent demonstration of how the Wilsonian view of marital relations works in real life.
Just when you need all the fainting couch and hysteria talk to not be cliché.
Excuse me? I assume you approve of men spanking their unwilling wives, as public punishment?
That’s a bit kinky for a Sunday afternoon, but I was just curious, Hollywood is a secular, far left institution. How come when Hollywood creates a cultural narrative people disapprove of…. they always attack the church and try to target right leaning pastors?
Because the right-leaning pastor specifically endorses that cultural narrative. Wilson endorses patriarchy. Therefore he endorses men punishing their wives, even though he’s too much of a filthy coward to say so.
It seems rather unreasonable to blame Wilson for secular Hollywood and than turn around and complain that he actually has never said any such thing, on account of the fact he is allegedly a coward. So someow he has managed to subliminally endorse a secular Hollywood narrative without ever actually saying it? If this was your pet peeve, wouldn’t it make more sense to go complain to MGM or fire off an email to John Wayne or something? Or you could even write a strongly worded letter to the Left informing them that you are displeased with the way they… Read more »
Wilson has never had the guts to states boldly that husbands have the right to punish their wives, although he’s tiptoed closed to that statement often. He does say that “men conquer” women; that men are always in charge; and that men have the right to demand obedience from their wives. He’s simply too afraid of the economic consequences of clearly stating his belief to state that men can punish disobedient wives.
“It seems rather …”??? You’re too polite, ME.
Just for the ones who let their general lack of reading comprehension lead them to hysterical shrieking and screeching about nonsense.
But those only break off and float up from the bottom of the internet and surface here at Mablog every now and then, so the scope is fairly limited.
There’s nothing more Progressive than fighting the battles of the past.
Liberte, egalite . . . Is It Still Legal to Say the Third One? Great point, Doug. Fraternite means brotherhood, and that’s definitely sexist. So liberals and Judeochristians are gonna need a new slogan. But we don’t want to toss the baby out with the bathwater. The other two elements are fine: Egalite This is definitely a keeper. It’s all about human fungibility, and if there’s one doctrine liberals and Judeochristians treasure above all others, it’s human fungibility. Hey, man, people are people, we’re all the same, we all bleed red, God is no respecter of persons, there’s neither Jew… Read more »
The Galatians 3:28 revolution marches on!
Here a little, there a little. Line upon line, precept upon precept.
California: Male prisoners who call themselves women will be sent to women’s prisons
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/california-male-prisoners-who-call-themselves-women-will-be-sent-to-womens
Be careful what you exegete – you just might get it!