15 votes

Well, my girl sure put me in my place

Last night, I was explaining to my girl the whole Duck Dynasty fiasco, since she doesn't follow politics or watch TV (God bless her). I then went on to explain to her how this was bringing out all these verbal attacks on gays and how I didn't like it.

"...and you know how 50 years ago, it was socially acceptable to say racist things about black people? And now it's not accepted by almost anyone. So I can't wait until the day when saying insulting things about gays is considered equally offensive in normal company. Then.."

"And fat people," she interrupts me.


"People say really mean things about fat people."

"Yeah, ok, but that's totally different. You see, fat people are that way because they continue to make unhealthy choices and..."

"Some of them can't help it."

"Sure, I guess, some of them have genetic predispositions, but the majority.."

"It doesn't matter."

I was stymied. She was right. Who am I to judge why someone is fat? And does it matter why? Didn't we all learn, when we were five years old, not to be mean to others? May be that's the whole point.

In all the arguing about free speech, religion freedom, property rights, and collectivist ramblings, we forget that the whole point is not to be mean to each other.

This is easy to do in person face to face (most of the time). Even the homophobes are most likely nice and cordial to gay people in person. But somehow that gets lost when talking about groups of people. But hey, we are all individuals, right? You can't hurt a group's feelings. Yes, we are all individuals, but we all also identify with various groups. For example, the Christian gets offended when someone attacks Christianity, even though no one said anything about him/her personally.

And it's easy to do online. We don't see the person on the other end. We can't see their reaction. So the social feedback that would restrain us is not present. There is no exchange of empathy. We revert to being five-year-olds. What does this say? Are we assholes deep down, without the social feedback? I don't know. I don't have a solution. But I know I don't want to be an asshole.

Robert LaFevre was opposed to violence against others not because of what it would do to them, but because of what it would do to him. May be the solution is to be more selfish. Don't say mean things to others, not because of what it will do to them, but because of what it will do to you. Do that, and you don't need to be restrained by social feedback. Do that, and you'll be nice online as well.

We've all heard it said that the only way to change the world is one person at a time. Perhaps the only way to change a person is one action at a time. Instead of trying to change myself, to be a better person, perhaps I will try to change one action. Just one human action at a time.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Fat people unfairly criticized...

I was a fat kid.
No worse fate can be had for a 3rd grader.
Was I fat because I sat on my ass all day, eating junk food? No.
I went to the same gov't schools, played the same sports, ate the same food, participated in the same events, etc...

I just want to slap people who say fat people are fat because they choose to be. No doubt SOME (not most) fat people are that way because they don't exercise and eat way too much.... the REALLY obese people...

But as for your average overweight person, your chubby kid, or "husky"... that is most likely that person's genetics... And when the food runs out, you'll be a skeleton and they'll be looking like Fabio...

Can folks whose genetics predispose them to being 'overweight' exercise enough and eat better until they look "better"? Yes... BUT GUARANTEED they have to work ALOT harder than YOU SKINNY BOYS, to get there...

Then again, why would the fat boy want to be skinny like the rest of the sheep? The fat boy can usually beat the other kids up, which is a good response to bullying over being fat... in the 3rd grade at least...

Are you a POT or a PET - Person Embracing Tyranny?

Can we call this a

Can we call this a 'progressive morality' equal to the term 'ethical relativism'? That theory holds that morality is relative to the norms of one's culture. That is, whether an action is right or wrong depends on the moral norms of the society in which it is practiced. Progressive do not care about actions being right or wrong, but are they 'correct'. And 'correct' is defined by them alone (he who proposed the question), not by that consensus which previously establish moral normalcy?

clash of age groups

i think this is part of this

young people , being exposed to bi-racial, gay,, more disease stuff, allergy, diabetes, obesity are naturally more accepting

where as many in there 50's and older are from a different era, with different views,,, which die hard

for instance,,, I take my grandma shopping to avoid her driving

when out,,,, she constantly points out morbidly obese and says "my god look at the size of that woman"
and I agree we are seeing more and more huge men and women,, but it really gets to her

last week she says, "Mexicans and blacks are taking all the jobs"
I challenged her,, first illegals can't be legally hired
second, blacks have higher unemployment than an racial group
and ask black people if they would agree with that
and I pointed out that many of these jobs are minimum wage
and asked--- are they not aloud to be hired?? should only whites get jobs?? she was dumbfounded and tongue tied,, and I could see it hit her how wrong her statement was

it seemed a preprogrammed thought,,, something she never thought deeply or critically about but somehow was engrained in her thinking
a belief from another generation

I was mad when ron paul didn't get elected-I thought it was time. But I realize we still have a huge education tour to complete before liberty can be voted in big time

Many haven't critically thought about their beliefs and standards of thinking
economic knowledge is zilch inflation, debt, credit etc
liberty is a superficial knowledge

many still have to be woken and made to go over theory
I never examined my beliefs, where they fell short,,, and have learned so much and changed
that was ron paul's biggest gift to me

“Do you want to know who you are? Don't ask. Act!

“Do you want to know who you are? Don't ask. Act! Action will delineate and define you.” ―Thomas Jefferson

"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, Brave, Hated, and Scorned. When his cause succeeds however,the timid join him, For then it costs nothing to be a Patriot.” ~Mark Twain

This Gay thing is turning Political

because it is going to Hilary's number one follow up. She is going to pull in all the gays. Gays want more Government. Gays are begging for Government to come save them. Maybe if Gays were independent and said they were going to get married no matter what, I'd respect them but nope! They are communists who follow the leader.

there you go again

ALL gays want more government? Ever heard of Justin Raimondo?

“Although it was the middle of winter, I finally realized that, within me, summer was inextinguishable.” — Albert Camus

Let me correct my self

Most gays want more Government. It is a fact.

Sorry, you are absolutely, undeniably... Correct.

This is not a secret. This is like saying most black voters vote democrat. Sure, not ALL. Not by any means should an individual be pre-judged. But as a demographic, the LGBT community is LEFT-WING!

My aunt is gay, just got same-sex-married actually. Used to be a producer for CNN, years ago, I kid you not. She's also a professor at a California university. She is a hardcore democrat.

Last time I saw her, we tried having an intelligent conversation on gun-control, which she brought up. After I utterly refuted every point she tried to make, and made points of my own she could not refute, she proceeded to call me 'nuts' and attack my character. She is supposed to be a "very intelligent" liberal.

So maybe I've just had too up-close and personal a look at the hardcore collectivist mindset of the long entrenched LGBT community in the democratic party.

Are you a POT or a PET - Person Embracing Tyranny?

Did it ever occur to you that

most gays would be liberty oriented if they encountered most people who speak about liberty being well disposed to their well being? Same thing about immigrants -- if you wish immigrants to favor collectivism, keep trash talking and bashing them. If, on the other hand, you wish immigrants and gays (and many other groups who liberal Democrats have appealed to) to support liberty, defend THEIR liberty with as much energy and vigor as you do for gun owners and natural food advocates.

No. Individuals either decide to support liberty or collectivism

I can maybe understand immigrants, as they probably don't understand our system, and how it works.

In what way does Ron or Rand Paul, libertarianism, and constitutional conservatism, NOT support EVERYONE's right?

What is "THEIR liberty"? How is it different than MY liberty? Isn't it all about INDIVIDUAL rights, not GAY rights, or Minority rights, etc...?

Marriage is a TERM, that for thousands of years has been DEFINED as "...between a man and a woman...".
If it is just about fairness under the LAW, then why not get rid of marriage benefits by the gov't altogether?
I support CIVIL-UNIONS! But Not the redefinition of the term Marriage... Civil Unions, despite the corrupt idiotic courts, are NOT denial of equal protection. Because there is NO LAW saying an LGBT person cannot get married!!! They just can't marry between two men, or two women... You can't marry your dog either, because that is NOT the definition of marriage!!! But just because you find the dog attractive, doesn't mean you can't get married to someone!!!

Ridiculous, collectivism designed to destroy the MORAL fabric and NATURAL FOUNDATION of our society!!!! NWO stuff... And GAYS buy into it because they pay as little attention to reality as everyone else, and are just emotionally reacting based on their FOOLISH PRIDE!!!

Are you a POT or a PET - Person Embracing Tyranny?

I don't personally support

"redefining marriage." I agree with Ron Paul's position that government should have no involvement with marriage whatsoever.

When I said "support their liberty" I meant that we should vigorously defend the rights of gays, and I meant true individual rights, there are none other than those. But I also meant, could we possibly quit trying to malign the character of gays, immigrants, and people in other groups which liberal Democrats have traditionally appealed to. I am not perfect, and I am in no place to judge how another person lives their life.

In particular about immigrants -- There are people on this site, MANY people, who attack the character of immigrants just because many of them vote Democratic. As I've tried to explain, the reason many of them vote Democratic is because there are many Republican politicians who believe in supporting the big government socialist position of harsh limits and quotas, even outright closed borders, just to score political points. The liberty movement should be out there on the front lines defending the right of people to travel freely across international borders, that is the free market position. Is it any surprise that immigrants are skeptical of liberty candidates who have made it a point to single their rights out for violation? This was one of the issues which made me leave the LP. For many years the LP had a consistently libertarian platform, supporting peace and liberty across the board. Then when they watered it down, becoming just another Republican lite warmongering xenophobic party, I called it quits.

I thought that was a very agreeable post.

I also agree with Ron Paul on that.
So we have found the solution.
Unfortunately the government has not.
The question is do you support "Gay Marriage laws" and the ruling that Civil Unions are "denial of equal protection"?
Civil Unions are another potential solution I would think, if people insisted on the government involving itself in marriage.
We agree on the solution, but do we agree that the democratic party's solution, the current same sex marriage laws in many states, is not a good thing?
Because that is the precedent the 'Left' needs to change if we are going to achieve the solution we agree on, in a real legal sense.
Right now, the LGBT community wants MORE government involvement in marriage, not less...

On the "their liberty" point, you give a good explanation. But I just was clarifying the point that of individualism vs. collectivism.

There are only one or two points I disagree with you on in the rest of the post. You said this...

"The liberty movement should be out there on the front lines defending the right of people to travel freely across international borders, that is the free market position."

While that may be the international free-market position, it is not the national-sovereignty position. It is also the globalist position.
I believe in the Land of the Free, and the Land of Opportunity.
(So, I think in AMERICA you should be able to just come here and live how you like BUT you aren't entitled to any taxpayer handouts EITHER!
Give up the FREEBIES, and welcome to FREEDOM!)
That said, I think we (the USA) have the right to customs stops at our border to check people in, so you know who they are, for all sorts of legitimate purposes. And I wont speak for other countries, I am not a globalist.

Only other point I have any issue with is this...

"Is it any surprise that immigrants are skeptical of liberty candidates who have made it a point to single their rights out for violation?"

Immigrants are skeptical of Liberty candidates? I'm guessing they don't know they are LIBERTY candidates at all. Either these candidates AREN'T for liberty, or the people voting DON'T WANT Liberty, or don't understand it...

Are you a POT or a PET - Person Embracing Tyranny?

I agree, this is 100%

I agree, this is 100% accurate analysis. Good job. Somehow even the all caps moments didn't bother me.

The ACLU and freinds shouldn't go around sueing everyone

The ACLU and friends shouldn't go around suing everyone who happens to be annoyed by particular cultures traditions.

Suing and general BS hissyfits are NOT helping out these various "minority's" public image... And without the force of law behind these cultures... these outliers would generally not be able to function in society unless it's a big enough group to form a niche market that caters to them.

In terms of a fat person... sorry but I'm not going to hire somebody who is morbidly obese. They have a statistically significant likely hood of health related issues for most jobs. I don't hate fat people, but I have certain physical standards my employees must meet. Same goes for smokers and obvious drug addicts.

I think I said it best on reddit.

I'm sick of the ACLU and friends trying to force THEIR moral position on EVERYTHING via litigious actions....

You don't like baggy pants and nappy looking dread locks... IT'S BECAUSE HES BLACK I'M SUING.

You don't like that flamboyant person who wears a slave collar and a fishnet tshirt... IT'S BECAUSE HES GAY I'M SUING.

You think you have a right to put up a Christmas tree in your place of business... I'M SUING.

I don't hate people becuase they are different then me, but sometimes certain culture's traditions annoy the crap out of me and I would rather not deal with them... but I DAMN SURE wouldn't go around suing everyone who doesn't like my culture, I'll just avoid them when I can.

Tools of war are not always obvious. The worst weapon is an idea planted in the mind of man. Prejudices can kill, suspicion can destroy, and a thoughtless, frightened search for a scapegoat has an everlasting fallout all of its own.


I think I've reached a point where I try not to say things just to offend people, and honestly, I think I'm trying to help them out. But they are still mostly offended at what I say it seems. I attribute that mostly to irrational fear and conditioning to lash out at that which threatens the perceived ability to get benefit at others expense.

For example, I'm attacked as being anti-gay by gays simply because I suggest it's not worth the battle to have their sexual preference subsidized by the state (through explicitly positive educational programs or tax breaks or whatever). I'm attacked as being anti-marriage by social conservatives simply because I suggest it's not worth the battle to have their sexual preference subsidized by the state. And of course, they're scared to death that some guy in Utah is going to have more than one wife. Of course, the damage they've done to the "institution of marriage" by getting divorced is not to be considered.

Actually, it's not so bad. I hope you can reach the point where you can say things to help people without feeling like you're just being an a**hole, even though there seems to be some kind of social price to pay for such efforts in the current environment. In any case, I can understand why you feel that way.

I like Ron Paul's phrase

It goes something like this: "Always speak the truth, for once it's is said it cannot be unheard."

There is nothing to be gained by deliberately setting out to hurt or shock people, just as there is no benefit to no speaking the truth in order to spare their feelings. The art of interpersonal communications takes a lifetime to master. Just look at Ron Paul on TV in 1988 attacking a young man (who attacked Ron first) for being fat. That is not the Ron Paul of 2013. He still makes his points, but he does so with concern for the feelings of other people. But he never backpeddles from speaking the truth.

I'm not so sure about Rand.

Michael Nystrom's picture

Very well done Ed

Thank you.

To be mean is never excusable, but there is some merit in knowing that one is; the most irreparable of vices is to do evil out of stupidity. - C.B.

I'm so glad, just like your daughter,

I have no idea who these people are or what they have said. I bet Fox and CNN are covering it well

When you get right down to it, there is only one label that...



This is good energy, thank YOU......

Humility rocks!!!

kind people rock

Morality And Tolerance Are One Thing

Having the government legislate that stuff is entirely another thing.

IMO your premise is wrong

Phil didn't 'attack' anyone. He was asked a question and answered according to his beliefs. You can say the GQ questioner was attacking Phil's religious beliefs by manipulating the interview in order to raise controversy knowing what Phil's religious beliefs are (they're already known and out there) and intentionally trying to provoke controversy by including Phil's answers in the magazine.
Who shot first?
Was Phil supposed to lie or obfuscate in order to appease a tiny segment of the population?
I prefer the truth over a lie. To me, this is entering Thought Police territory. Like a*holes, everyone has opinions whether they pronounce them or not.
For me, I tend to take the side of the underdog, in this case it's Phil because he lost his job over stating his beliefs that homosexuality, bestiality, promiscuity and drunkeness are sins. Why is that offensive? It's Phil's opinion. Knowing what you do now, you have the right to see it for what it is - one man's opinion - or join the outrage bandwagon.
I had the most wonderful neighbor. We shared a lot of the same interests and opinions. He was gay. That lifestyle came up a lot as he had some pretty funny stories about his escapades. I told him to his face I didn't agree with the lifestyle but if that's what he chose, so be it. He wasn't angry over that. He couldn't care less. The fact that I think it's against the laws of nature didn't diminish our friendship one bit. I never defined him by it. He was a funny and caring human being.
My cousin was gay. He was the most depressed person I ever met and he was promiscuous. I told him I didn't approve of his lifestyle and if he was going to continue with it he needed to be careful because it was dangerous out there. He didn't listen and got HIV and died of AIDS at the age of 20. When I learned he got HIV I didn't throw it in his face that I had warned him about it, he was my cousin and I loved him and supported him through that most horrid time.
Having an opinion that something is wrong doesn't automatically mean that the person who holds that opinion will treat those who commit the perceived wrong badly. Phil isn't violent towards those who commit the sins he listed, he says he loves everyone and treats everyone with respect, but he recognizes sin when he sees it.
Why is that offensive?

If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.
James Madison

Finally somebody gets it!

+1 for you and +1 for your girl.

"We are not human beings having a spiritual experience; we are spiritual beings having a human experience"—Pierre Teilhard de Chardin

The Golden Rule and good manners...

Thank you for posting this lovely message! Thank your girlfriend for pointing this out!

Courtesy and good will go a long way, whether people "choose to be" a certain way or not. A courteous and thoughtful demeanor toward our fellow human beings whenever possible-gay or straight, fat or thin, black or white...can only be helpful in improving the general tone of the world we all live in, as well as increasing the acceptance of liberty-and libertarians-among the general public.

"Courtesy is contagious...let's start an epidemic"!


"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is not to be attacked successfully, it is to be defended badly". F. Bastiat

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, finally they attack you, and then you win"! Mohandas Gandhi

Be excellent...


Silence isn't always golden....sometimes it's yellow.

"The liberties of a people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." - Patrick Henry

"Who am I to judge why someone is fat?"

You are a human being. Human beings constantly make judgements about EVERYTHING! To pretend otherwise is dishonest.

I don't like how the media is using this to further infighting, so I can see what you're saying. But, GQ asked Phil's opinion. If they didn't want to hear it, why did they ask him?

And yes, even though I believe homosexuality is sin, I am nice to homosexuals every time I go out. I also believe gluttony, living on stolen money (welfare), and adultery are sin, but I don't treat people hatefully. I love PEOPLE, even if I find their behavior despicable.

Christians should not be warmongers! http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance87.html

good points... but...

In a libertarian society, we'd all own guns. And the rule of law would be politeness. So, picking on gays, or blacks, or conspiracy theorists could result in getting your ass shot. So, polite is all well and good, but in todays society the only backlash people have is to segregate something as hate speech. However, what the duck guy said was not hate speech. That's the point.

When did common sense become a super power? –Patrick F. Holman

Congratulations Ed,

You have discovered the true definition of Liberty, Liberty is about what you give to others not what you have. Respecting the other person to live their life as they see fit…..only the State wants to interfere to enslave you.

My older sister is obese from the steroids for her arthritis, these are the glasses I view the world, but I also view every homeless person as a veteran that has served this country (these guys are disposable to the USG. My opinion is they should be paid the same as any Congressman with the exact benefits, they are worth it….Congress is worthless).

Isn’t it funny that your girl without any outside influence already knows this? You should marry that girl.

To Your G/F

Thank you my dear or sticking up for us fat people.
Im over weight...I wear a size 18 but normal would be a size 14
I cant help it..it is a medical problem..(that every lame ass so called doctor refuses to address because it means they would have to do an extra thyroid test and God forbid those bastard do it ya know)
Hope you have a MERRY CHRISTMAS

I believe in Hope & Change..I Hope the government will Change
Spindale-Rutherford County-North Carolina