Four Labels the Left Will Give You

My previous blog entry covered many labels that fit me, when understood in the proper context (in other words, when not twisted by the left for their own purposes): liberal, pro-choice, etc. I'd like to add to that list with a few labels that do not fit me, but that the left will insist on applying to me-- and if you oppose them, they'll insist they apply to you too. 

First, I am not Racist. I think it's great that we finally have a black President even though I did not vote for him. I don't agree with most of what he does and I don't trust his motives, but that's not because he's black. I wouldn't agree with the policies he's advancing no matter what color he was. Frankly, the idea that white people cannot oppose a black President's policies without being racist is one of the most racist things I've heard in the past year.

Second, I am not Fascist. I have much less in common with Nazi ideology than socialists do. The word Nazi is an anglicized abbreviation of the German word Nationalsozialismus, meaning National Socialism. The Nazi Party's official name was the National Socialist German Worker's Party. Their actual policies involved increased government control over every aspect of the German citizen's life. They opposed capitalism on principle and they "approved" of individual property rights only when those rights were used to further the Nazi agenda. I could go on and on, but this issue has been widely covered in other blogs lately.

Third, I am not Sexist. I am a man who believes that abortion is morally and socially wrong, at least as wrong as killing any other human being. I'm all for equal rights for both sexes, but that means equal rights for both, not better rights for women. Violence by men against women is horrible, but is violence by women against men somehow more acceptible? Why do feminists work so hard to cover up statistics about violence by women against men? Considering that criminological studies estimate 40%-50% of rape accusations are false, why is it wrong to suggest that those accused of rape should be considered innocent until proven guilty? Why is it wrong to hold false accusers accountable for the lives, careers and relationships they ruin? I've been called a rape sympathizer and told I'm as bad as an actual rapist, just for asking this. Many other men have been called sexist and worse for asking questions like these. Rather than address potent issues that could benefit us all, men and women, the left would rather have you believe that anyone who questions their dogma is simply sexist and bigoted.

And then, finally, I am not Homophobic, as if opposing a thing somehow requires that you are irrationally afraid of that thing. I do not agree with homosexuality. Of course, it is your right in a free country to choose that lifestyle if you wish, but that does not mean I have to support it, and it does not mean my tax dollars have to subsidize it through legal recognition. If you want that for your tax dollars in your state, fine. I don't want it in mine, and that does not mean I'm homophobic. Homophobia implies an irrational psychological pathology where none exists. Curiously, pro-homosexual activists spent much of the 20th century campaigning to remove homosexuality itself from the list of irrational psychological pathologies, only to immediately add their opponents to that list instead. I am not afraid to take a principled stand on a contentious current issue-- I do oppose homosexuality, but that does not make me homophobic.

[To give credit where credit's due, I'd once again like to acknowledge Warner Todd Huston and his August 6th column "The Liberal Lexicon... Emphasis on the Con" on Right Wing News. Huston's column finally spurred me into writing my own list.]