A lawyer friend of mine told me yesterday that there's been an ethics ruling in California forbidding state judges from interacting with the Boy Scouts because of their stance on gays. I saw a news piece about it as well, but I'm in a hurry and don't have time to find it now.
I'm not up to speed on gender theory, but it seems to me that the Boy Scouts are an organization for boys who identify as boys. Is there a problem with that? If we had the Tran Scouts for boys who identify as girls, would there be a ruling forbidding judges from dealing with them?
Is it that no one can choose their friends any more? I suppose that as long as we didn't organize officially and wear uniforms, I could host friends and their sons who want to do manly things without fear of reprisal. If I did so and a gay fellow objected, would he be able to sue me in court because I won't let him play with us?
For theological reasons, the Catholic Church does not distribute the Body of Christ to non-Catholics. Can we be sued for that?
The Land of the Free has gotten really complicated.
3 comments:
The questions you ask assume that there may be some underlying, non-hypocritical, consistently applied principle to these things.
Well, there is, but leftists generally prefer to not let the rubes (that's you and me and that fellow over there) know what the principle is.
But, in asnwer to your questions: "Trans Scouts" is GOOD, whereas Boy Scouts is BAD (unless the Scout is a "gay" boy who is being used by Big Gay to demonize scouting); Girl Scouts is GOOD, and even more so since the organizatoin is openly run by feminiats and lesbians, but I repeat myself. An all-girl school is GOOD; an all-boy school is VERY BAD. An all-male military, or police force, of fire department -- you know, an organization organized-and-manned in such a way as to actually be able to do its job -- is ULTRA BAD; a feminized and homosexualixed (is there a difference?) military or police department or fire department, which can't do its job, is WAY TOO COOL FOR WORDS.
And so on.
There is a pattern, if one looks. Thus, one can discern the underlying principle, even when the leftists play coy about what it is.
I'm still looking for that pattern. It seems really hard to see.
;-)
Ah, well. Patterns can be hard to see -- even for the pattern-making animal (i.e. that's what humans are).
Post a Comment