On The Joys Of Discriminating And The Pantywaisting Of Pence
–What is so bad about discrimination?
We often praise those who have discriminating taste is this or that.
You own the Property, you get to decide who can go on it.
You provide a service, you get to decide who can obtain said service.
The above is Abnormal Thinking – Doupleplusungood – in 2015.
Perhaps Edmund Burke made the definitive case for Discrimination in Reflections On The Revolution In France [paragraphing mine]:
You see, Sir, that in this enlightened age I am bold enough to confess, that we are generally men of untaught feelings; that instead of casting away all our old prejudices, we cherish them to a very considerable degree, and, to take more shame to ourselves, we cherish them because they are prejudices; and the longer they have lasted, and the more generally they have prevailed, the more we cherish them.
We are afraid to put men to live and trade each on his own private stock of reason; because we suspect that this stock in each man is small, and that the individuals would do better to avail themselves of the general bank and capital of nations and of ages. Many of our men of speculation, instead of exploding general prejudices, employ their sagacity to discover the latent wisdom which prevails in them. If they find what they seek, and they seldom fail, they think it more wise to continue the prejudice, with the reason involved, than to cast away the coat of prejudice, and to leave nothing but the naked reason; because prejudice, with its reason, has a motive to give action to that reason, and an affection which will give it permanence.
Prejudice is of ready application in the emergency; it previously engages the mind in a steady course of wisdom and virtue, and does not leave the man hesitating in the moment of decision, sceptical, puzzled, and unresolved. Prejudice renders a man’s virtue his habit; and not a series of unconnected acts. Through just prejudice, his duty becomes a part of his nature. Your literary men, and your politicians, and so do the whole clan of the enlightened among us, essentially differ in these points. They have no respect for the wisdom of others; but they pay it off by a very full measure of confidence in their own. With them it is a sufficient motive to destroy an old scheme of things, because it is an old one.
As to the new, they are in no sort of fear with regard to the duration of a building run up in haste; because duration is no object to those who think little or nothing has been done before their time, and who place all their hopes in discovery. They conceive, very systematically, that all things which give perpetuity are mischievous, and therefore they are at inexpiable war with all establishments. They think that government may vary like modes of dress, and with as little ill effect: that there needs no principle of attachment, except a sense of present conveniency, to any constitution of the state.
They always speak as if they were of opinion that there is a singular species of compact between them and their magistrates, which binds the magistrate, but which has nothing reciprocal in it, but that the majesty of the people has a right to dissolve it without any reason, but its will. Their attachment to their country itself is only so far as it agrees with some of their fleeting projects; it begins and ends with that scheme of polity which falls in with their momentary opinion.
-‘Cowards die many times before their deaths / And loseth the conservative vote’ [-Billy Shakes, Julius Obamacus Caesar, Act DCLXVI, Scene XXIII].
Governor Michael ‘Mike’ Pence of Indiana was actually one of my top choices for the GOP Nomination back in 2011, when the race was gearing-up, but he declined to run.
I’m glad that he did, because he has shown himself to be another Quisling Conservative, so frightened of being labeled a ‘meanie’ by the Left that he betrays what he knows is the Moral belief to hold.
Let me say first and foremost, as I’ve said to each one of them, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) was about religious liberty, not about discrimination. As I said last week, had this law been about legalizing discrimination, I would have vetoed it. This law does not give anyone a license to discriminate. The Religious Freedom Restoration Act in Indiana does not give anyone the right to deny services to anyone in this state. It is simply a balancing test used by our federal courts and jurisdictions across the country for more than two decades.
Now let me say on the subject of the bill itself. I don’t believe for a minute that it was the intention of the General Assembly to create a license to discriminate or right to deny services to gays, lesbians or anyone else in this state. And it certainly wasn’t my intent. But I can appreciate that that’s become the perception. Not just here in Indiana, but all across this country and we need to confront that, and confront it boldly in a way that respects the interests of all involved.
Sorry Governor: it was about Discrimination. No government has the right to tell a business owner who he must provide his services to, just as none of them have the right to force consumers to do business with a business owner. Freedom Of Association is one of the most fundamental of those Rights granted to the Sovereign People by the Creator and no man or group of men can violate this right without descending into Despotism.
Mark Levin and his legal arguments aside, we are not truly Free if we are prevented from discriminating, from using our unshackled judgement to do what we believe in the right thing and in the best interests of our endeavours. Of course, we should do what it takes to make sure that we are guided by Right Reason in our efforts, but this is not required, except Morally. Take away the Freedom to Discriminate and you take away the Right to Life, Liberty, Property, and the Pursuit Of Happiness.
Governor Pence, in his simpering submission to the forces of Despotism, has struck another blow against Freedom – I don’t know how many more it can take before it goes down for the count.
I’m not being picky here. This is not a case of honest disagreement with a fellow conservative [I do not and have never agreed with all of the beliefs of, say, a Sarah Palin or Ted Cruz, who are not afraid of being denounced by the Left as 'nasty meanies'], rather, this backtracking exposes a fundamental flaw in Mr. Pence’s character. And this is sad because he can be a very moving speaker, articulating the passion and nobility behind conservative thought.
Another one bites the proverbial dust; another disappointment for we who are engaged in a desperate struggle to preserve Freedom and Ordered Liberty for ourselves and our Posterity.
Set ’em up Joe and give me three fingers worth, straight-up.