Monday, March 12, 2012

Stupid Liberal Arguments #1: Corporations Aren't People

So I'm going to start a series to quickly and hopefully somewhat humorously and or pithily pick some of the dumber liberal arguments I happen to run across for the day.

Today's is the more recently popular liberal meme that corporations aren't people and therefore aren't deserving of the same rights and protections afforded to individuals. In a sense, they are correct. A corporation is a highly fluid and somewhat ambiguous abstract concept. Typically the label is applied to very large businesses that employ high numbers of individual (oh no) people. They're run by people, organized by people, started by people (NO! you stop it. This is an inconvenient truth!!), and developed by people. A corporation doesn't get in trouble, people within the corporation get in trouble (you hush!!! The FCC needs to ban your blog!!). A corporation doesn't get rich, people in the corporation get rich.

Wow. it almost seems inescapable here. Corporations are almost like large groups of individual people!!! GASP!! Could it be that what is protected by the law currently that affords corporations, per se, human rights is that they're nothing but individuals working toward a single goal? Corporations actually are the individual people that make them up. Without the people the corporation doesn't exist. Any rights individuals have would be extended to multiple individuals trying to reach a similar goal. That's all a corporation is.

For a reductio ad absurdum example, say a government decided that a specific corporation must sacrifice their newborns. Well, the corporation doesn't have rights because it's not human, says the low liberal. Well, it's the rights of individuals being infringed upon in that situation.

I heard someone today try to apply this to the Catholic church with regard to the recent debacle of the Obamuhh administration trying to force people with religious convictions to act against their convictions, clearly violating the 1st amendment. The thing is, individuals who hold to a certain religion would be forced to break the free exercise of their own religion. The Catholic church being an institution does not take away from the fact that it is simply a group of individuals who hold to a common creed. Forcing individuals to act against that creed is prohibiting the free exercise of religion.

Friday, March 2, 2012

Lunacy on Display for All to See

Folks, when you try to look at life through a lens of reason, logic, and Godly philosophy it is sometimes hard to have fun. That's been my week seeing and listening to the abject lunacy that is on display in "political" discourse in America. How on earth has the American political machine, the one that was built by great minds of people like Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, John Adams, etc, sunk to the level it has?

We've been inundated by a straw man from the media all week that somehow the evil Catholics are trying to take away the right to obtain contraception while the American government tried to force Catholic run medical providers to provide items that are against their religious convictions. So we have a bunch of people whining about everyone else not paying for something that is not guaranteed them according to any American document whatsoever. Then the very government that is supposed to enforce the base document our law is founded on (the constitution) tries to force religious people to not be able to exercise one of their religious tenets. Are you able to fathom this utter nonsense? Whiny immature unthinking people demand that we pay for and/or provide a commercial product FOR THEM even if it is against the exercise of our religion. Are you kidding me? What kind of brain defect or mental illness can lead to this kind of thinking?

Then we have a supposed progressive woman (a grown woman mind you) sit in front of one of our most important and historic governmental bodies and go on a spiel about how she and women at her college have so much sex that they can't afford the contraceptives and abortifacients that they have to use to avoid the natural end of this. So this "woman", who on one hand would have the highest degree of moral outrage if the government dare told her she couldn't kill a baby who happened to be living in her body, then appeals to this government to force others by law to provide and pay for her to have things that enable her to have sex without the natural end result. So an American talk-show host uses a word and applies it to this "progressive woman", since she fits the definition behind that word, and then this talk-show host is somehow an unreasonable meanie. The President of these United States of America, arguably the most powerful governmental official on the planet, CALLS this woman and tells her her parents should be PROUD of her. Are you freaking kidding me!?!? An unmarried woman who admits to having so much sex that she cannot afford the contraceptives associated with it, and claims that everyone else needs to buy it for her so she can have this sex, should have proud parents because of this....How is this kind of thinking possible in a human mind?

To summarize this insanity, we have people who say nobody has a right to interfere with what they do with their sex life or when they do it demand that other people provide for this sex life that they don't have any right to interfere with in the first place. What? Then they claim that it's a basic right that they're being denied that other people aren't already paying for these commercial products that they need to have sex without leading to the natural end of sex. Then these people who are so adamant about the "separation of church and state" claim that people who have a moral and religious reason to NOT provide these things to screw their free exercise of religion (no pun intended) and buy them their damn birth control.

Then, the lady who is in charge of the health department of our government comes out and says that this practice that leads to fewer taxpayers, fewer people paying into the system, will be good for the system and its monetary intake. Hahaha.

This is what is being talked about on the mainstream news and in mainstream political discourse in the United States of America. This is the nation that at one time founded the most successful political system in history. The rational man can only conclude that lunatics, psychopaths, imbeciles, nitwits, fools, etc are in the positions of the most power and the most influence.

There just aren't words to express this psychopathy. It is definitely hard to be a logical and rationally minded person in this world today.


I just noticed something in the transcript of Ms. Fluke.

Ms. Fluke says her friend who has polycystic ovarian syndrome couldn't get a contraceptive that would regulate her hormones under Georgetown's health insurance regulations. Due to this, she had to have surgery to have one of her ovaries removed.

According to a gynecologist, monthly name brand birth control pills for this kind of thing are ~ $100.00. At Wal-Mart or Target (I hear there's one just near Georgetown), you can get a monthly generic supply for $9! But Ms. Fluke would have us believe that while she couldn't afford this medicine, she could afford the Oophorectomy...which is like $7,000.00.................................

Logic right there