Free Speech Is Good, Blaming the Victim Is Not

I continue to be dismayed by the attempts of some people to blame the Charlie Hebdo staff for the terrorist attack that killed several members of the staff and a number of other people besides. If you go over to reason.com, you can check out Anthony Fisher’s article highlighting some of these comments. Most of them seem to be along the lines of, “Well, the murders should not have happened, but they wouldn’t have if those awful people at Charlie Hebdo had not been so mean and hateful.” It makes me wonder if these people are really thinking about the things they are saying.

Yes, Free Speech Means Offensive Speech Too

Some people seem to believe that if someone finds the expression of another offensive, that expression should not and cannot be considered free speech. Which is an emotional argument, not a rational one. By which I mean, it is an intellectually shallow, illogical and immature argument. It is an argument that cannot be defended by reason. If you doubt me on this, try to find such an argument that is supported by reason and not by emotional language. I am quite certain you cannot.

Birth Control, Hobby Lobby, and Common Sense

Recently the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Hobby Lobby does not have to pay for providing birth control to its employees. Some people have claimed this is next door to fascism. Others have claimed this is an open door to anarchy. And many have claimed this closes the door for access to birth control for the employees of Hobby Lobby. None of those claims are even remotely close to the truth.

Why I Am Proud to Be A U.S. Citizen

I have talked here many times about the foolishness of politicians and some of the ways I think the U.S. government is doing things that keep making things worse here in the United States. But despite all of that, I do love this country, these United States of America. Since Independence Day is nigh, and before I go back to all of that criticism, I would like to talk about part of why I am proud to be a citizen of the United States.

The Latest Anti-libertarian Argument

Someone has finally found the true weakness of libertarianism. Libertarianism cannot possibly work because it is “strange.” [insert eye roll indicating sarcasm here] Yes, boys and girls, prepare yourselves. It is time for another post about why an anti-libertarian argument is wrong. Hey, this is my blog, and I write about what I want to write about.

Why Gradually Encroaching Authoritarianism Is a Bad Thing

Some of you readers may wonder why I talk about the ever encroaching government authoritarianism with disdain. Because the politicians who are pushing it believe we are all stupid fools who need them to tell us what to do. If you object to a patronizing patriarchy depicting women as weak and stupid, then you should worry about patronizing politicians who are forming policy on the belief that we citizens are all weak and stupid. If you object to racial discrimination that depicts people of dark skins as lesser humans, then you should object to politicians acting and talking as if we citizens are all stupid morons who need the masters in government to tell us how to behave. What has me talking about this? Glad you asked.

Project August: Day 22 – Just What Is This Libertarianism Anyway?

Yes, I am going to talk about libertarianism again. Why do I talk about it when I could be making sexier posts about Dominance/submission? Talking about D/s and talking about libertarianism really stem from the same place for me. This blog is about expressing support for the liberty of the individual. D/s is part of my understanding of that, as is libertarianism. D/s and libertarianism may seem separate things in your mind, O reader, but they are intertwined in mine.

Libertarians and the Law

In a previous post I mentioned the oft used “if you think X should not be illegal then I guess you’re okay with murder” argument. There is a notion out there in the political ether that libertarians who oppose certain laws are just foolish anarchists who want all laws abolished. While some libertarians are anarchists, most, if not the vast majority of them, are not. “You don’t get to pick and choose which laws are obeyed/enforced,” is the general reply to that. “For if everyone only followed/enforced the laws they liked, that would make the law ineffectual and impotent.” Perhaps, but insisting we have an obligation to obey any and all man-made laws makes the law a tyrannic oppressor rather than a protector of rights. Protecting rights is the true purpose of just laws.

Concerning Libertarianism: On the “Cynicism” of Libertarian Philosophy (Updated Version)

You may be thinking I just posted this the other day. But that post was not as well made as it should have been. So I made some changes. This is the updated and (hopefully) improved version.

One of the popular criticisms (and by criticism in this instance I mean denigration) of libertarianism these days seems to be that libertarianism is little more than cynicism. The implied idea being that libertarianism has no ideological footing or moral standing and therefore is just something snarky kooks use to pick on the poor ol’ government that is just trying to help people. Which is, of course, a fully erroneous idea. Libertarianism is, in fact, both moral and optimistic.

Wherein I Use a Tragic Story as Metaphor

The other day I was listening to a man speak, and he told a story I think has a relevant lesson for us in this age of constantly demanding government do something. Some moron uses a firearm at a school to kill people, and we insist something must be done. So now we have people trying to say government has to pass laws and do whatever it takes to protect our children. But those demands, in my opinion, are ignoring what those laws and somethings might cause.