Freedom of Speech is Non-Negotiable!


The Divide between Progressives and Conservatives is Total.

Left Wants Children Exposed To Deviant Sex Pratitioners
The Split Between Left And Right Is Really The Difference Between The Sane And Insane
The fate of mankind hangs in the balance, with no happy medium to be found. Either the rational and sensible dominate, or the unreasonable and disorderly will cause our failure, threatening our really existence.

How can we reconcile the contrasting views on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, where some perceive Israel as the oppressor and Hamas as the victim, while others see Israel as the victim and Hamas, with its declared intent to get rid of Israel and its Jewish population, as ethically comparable to the Nazi program?

How can we reconcile the disparate views on exposing young children to drag queen performances, with some considering it proper and others believing it is morally objectionable?

How are we to bridge the divide between those who think reducing the number of police will decrease violent crime and those who believe reducing the number of police will increase violent criminal activity?

How can we reconcile the divergent views on free speech, where some people believe in limiting it when they consider it hateful or misinformative, while others advocate for its unconfined workout?

Each of these positions opposes one another, and this list is only incomplete.

Ironically, even those who hold these equally inconsistent positions concur that these positions are unbridgeable. Just the ignorant (typically suggesting non-left liberals) believe otherwise.

I suggest that Americans who believe in bridging the left-right divide must browse the remarks section of New York Times short articles and columns that resolve left or ideal perspectives. These comments provide valuable insights into the beliefs of those on the left, including liberals (I make a difference in between liberalism and leftism). To leave a remark, one must be a New York Times subscriber, which means that the majority of commenters are left-leaning, college-educated, and have the financial ways to afford a subscription.

This pertained to my attention once again this previous week when reading all the most popular remarks responding to a column on “Christian nationalism” written by Ross Douthat, the one New York Times writer who safeguards Christian conservatives.

The term “Christian nationalist” is being utilized by the left as a method to criticize conservatives. This label is contributed to other terms such as “sexist,” “racist,” “homophobic,” “Islamophobic,” “transphobic,” “xenophobic,” “fascist,” and “hazard to our democracy.” Instead of participating in significant discussions or disputes, the left often uses these labels to challenge those who hold different views.

In a thoughtful and informative piece, Douthat defined 4 distinct conservative Christian perspectives and the respective factions they represent.

The remarks ranked highest on the list of “Reader Picks” are not just left-wing; they are illogical. A couple of, if any, actually specify “Christian nationalism.” They state conservative Christians as “Christian nationalists,” just as they state “transphobic” anyone who opposes hormone blockers for minors or opposes guys who state they are females completing in females’s sports.

These comments likewise reveal an absence of self-awareness I think is a specifying quality of leftism. Nearly every commenter composes that any American who seeks to advance policies rooted in Judeo-Christian values is a Christian nationalist and therefore a “danger to democracy.” However if you look for to advance policies or laws rooted in a secular value system, that is completely in accord with American democracy.

Progressives can push forward their beliefs and objectives by adhering to their values. Nevertheless, there is concern that democracy is at danger when challengers promote their worth with a spiritual structure, particularly conservative Christians and Orthodox Jews.

The Left does not acknowledge that it imposes its beliefs and worth on others. They strongly pushed for widespread COVID-19 vaccination, even amongst low-risk groups like young people, and kept kids out of schools for a prolonged duration. Nevertheless, fans of the New York Times do not see their actions as imposing values on the general public. They argue that the genuine danger to democracy originates from conservative Christians promoting for open churches and schools. They stop working to attend to the fact that in a democratic system, choices are made based upon the bulk vote, even if it aligns with conservative values. This raises a question – if most of people support a conservative candidate or policy, how does that threaten democracy when democracy is basically about the bulk option?

The existing divide between the left and right in America is viewed as overwhelming, similar to the historic North-South divide throughout the Civil War. The Democratic Party, which opposed flexibility in the past, continues to be considered as opposing flexibility in present times.

This writer takes the position that the differences between right and left in America are similar to the differences between the sane and logical and the insane and illogical. Those on the left are simply insane and need to be treated as insane people have always been treated with care and institutionalization. They cannot be allowed anywhere near the levers of government. They must be isolated and treated and hopefully, some can be restored as good, productive citizens.