“Equality” has been rallying cry in just about every modern
revolution. We find “marriage equality” on LGBTQ banners. Socialists and
communists are quick to invoke “equality” as their goal. The Founding Fathers
also invoked “equality.” But do we believe in equality? Our banners claim that
we do, but banners might not reflect what we really believe.
We claim that everyone should have an equal vote, but yet
voter fraud has become acceptable, even openly promoted. In a now-deleted
tweet, actor Peter Fonda called on Democrats with voting-age children to commit
the illegal act of filling out their ballots — and turning them in.
For another example, an outspoken racist, Sarah Jeong, has
recently been hired as a member of The
New York Times editorial board. Townhall
reports that:
·
Jeong is a raging racist who has tweeted
hundreds of times about her extreme hatred toward white people. In one tweet,
she boasted that “it’s kind of sick how much joy I get out of being cruel to
old white men.” She also asked on Twitter whether white people are “genetically
predisposed to burn faster in the sun, thus logically being only fit to live
underground like groveling goblins.”
How did The Times
respond to the push-back? It claimed that Jeong was “the subject of frequent
online harassment” because she is a “young Asian woman,” as if that entitled
her to make racist remarks.
Where is the equality if some are entitled to make racist
remarks while others are not? How does Jeong defend her many racist remarks?
She had once tweeted, “Theoretically you can’t be racist against white
people."
Why not? Townhall.com
explained:
·
This theory is predicated on the belief that
white people in America benefit from an unequal power structure. Government
discrimination against minorities exists to keep this inequality of the races
present. Ergo, in order to be racist, you have to have power they argue. The
left believes white people have all the power in American society. So if a
minority attacks an entire group of white people, they are doing so honorably
in order to dismantle the white patriarchy according to the left. (August 4,
2018)
Hence, certain forms of racism are defended. But if we believe
in equality, the question of who has the power, the money, the bigger house, or
the better job is irrelevant. Shouldn’t we all have equal protection under the
law against racism and libel? Should some people be protected while others are vilified
because of their income, education, or any other criterion that might be translated
as “privilege?” If Jeong is entitled to libel and vilify others, why would she
not also be entitled to steal from them or even stab them? After all, aren’t
they “oppressors” who deserve such treatment?
When we reject equality, we also reject justice. Justice
insists that, individually, we be held accountable according to our criminal
actions and not according to or color or some other measure of “privilege” or “entitlement.”
If Jeong believes that someone has criminally acted in a racist manner, then
she should expose him to prosecution. If she believes that he has committed a
crime against which there are no present statutes, then advocate for the
passage of such.
We are a nation of laws intended to protect everyone. What
happens when we start choosing favorites and labeling others as “deplorable?”
Trust is replaced by bitterness and defensiveness. Years ago, a highway
patrolman had ticketed me for speeding. I had been speeding, but everyone else
was driving faster than me. Why did he choose me to be ticketed? I had
out-of-state plates! This experience had filled me with bitterness, even rage
and contempt for the law and the system that manipulated it for its own
purpose. Instead of wanting to be law-abiding, I now wanted to do the very
opposite thing. It’s called “pay-back.”
This was a little matter. However, what happens when we
perceive that the entire system is flagrantly abusing our rights because of our
color or “privilege,” and even justifying this abuse? Let me try to answer this
question with another question – How do we respond when a judge or a policeman
shows genuine compassion for us, going out of his way to protect our welfare?
Most of the time, we will want to reciprocate, at least by showing respect for
their office.
Now multiply this a million times, and we will better
understand what is happening to our nation. Our Founding Fathers evidently
understood this principle. Our second president, John Adams, had stated:
·
“The general principles upon which the Fathers
achieved independence were the general principals of Christianity… I will avow
that I believed and now believe that those general principles of Christianity
are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God.”
·
"We have no government armed with power
capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion.
Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of
our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only
for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of
any other." --October 11, 1798
Love – other centeredness – is our only hope. It doesn’t
come naturally. I always pray that I might put others needs above my own, but
how do we do this when we are feeling persecuted and threatened? I think that
there is only one way. We have to know that our Savior is looking out for our
needs.
·
"Without Religion this World would be
Something not fit to be mentioned in polite Company, I mean Hell." [John
Adams to Thomas Jefferson, April 19, 1817]
No comments:
Post a Comment