Indifference is not respect.
Consider, as just one example, a belief in a god. If you think such a belief is arbitrary nonsense, but you think that you “respect” a person’s belief in a god, you are failing or refusing to recognize the “ought” implied by every “is”: you are separating value from fact. If you say that you do not believe in god but that you “respect” a person’s belief in a god even though you think that the person’s belief is arbitrary, you not only are lying: you are also telling the world that facts have no value to you; that truth, falsehood, and arbitrary beliefs are, to you, equally meritorious. Moreover, you are telling the world that you think it is right to treat all claims – whether they relate to a god or not – as equally valid and praiseworthy.
Ask yourself who benefits from such a practice. Read more
Are you a redian? Want to find out about the most promising political movement on the planet and its promise of communities of freedom, harmony, and abundance? Read on. Read more
The pundits have spoken, and they are unanimous: Ontario NDP leader Andrea Horwath simply cannot take yes for an answer, and Ontario Progressive Conservative party leader Tim Hudak won’t make budget demands because he wants an election. Well, ladies and gentlemen, I think those conclusions are incorrect. Here’s why. Read more
If your neighbour came over to your house with a gun, and had a cage in his basement, and said “I’m not making any money right now so hand over your wallet or else I’m locking you in the cage in my basement; and, if you resist me putting you into the cage, I’ll shoot you dead”, would you not consider your neighbour to be a criminal?
If he said that he intended to win a lot of praise and admiration by giving your money to “the children”, or “the poor”, or “the needy”, would you not still consider your neighbour to be a criminal?
If everyone on your block elected him their representative, and he demanded money on all of their behalves, threatening to put you in his holding cell, would they not have voted for a criminal?
If he and the rest of your neighbours formed a private association that went door to door demanding wallets and threatening to put people in their basement cells, would they not be an organized criminal gang?
If they registered their association as a political party and 42% of voters elected them to assume the office of government, and if they then passed laws pursuant to which you must hand over your wallet or else be locked in a prison, would the fact that they were elected change the morality of what they did to people?
Would their having been elected change their identity, such that they were no longer mobsters?
Would their passing of laws that exempted them from criminal prosecution change the morality of what they were doing? Would it change their identity, such that they were no longer mobsters?
Voting for a party that makes laws to redistribute wealth is voting for The Mob. Those who vote for for such parties are morally culpable and, arguably should be legally culpable.
Such voters are pretending that, because they voted for someone else to do their dirty work, they are not personally guilty of theft, extortion, and the like.
Such people apparently have not considered the fact that they are no different, in principle, than a person who pays a hitman or a money launderer.