Stop Oppressing Me With Your Freedom!

Force

Nobody brings the red meat quite like the great Matt Walsh, and his latest on religious liberty, where he addresses the oft-repeated liberal claim that Christians are “forcing their morality on others,” is a must-read.

No matter how you read the Bill of Rights, there’s no way to interpret it as granting the government permission to force a private citizen to take part in a gay wedding. You can flip the First Amendment upside down, turn it inside out, spin it in circles and get it drunk, and still it won’t give a homosexual couple the power to compel a Christian to make them a cake, no matter how inconvenient it may be to drive 18 and a half feet to the next bakery and get a cake from someone who isn’t a devout Christian.

In a free country, if we are to be a free country, you cannot compel someone to play any kind of role whatsoever in a private event that he objects to as a matter of conscience or religion. If you can, then I guess white supremacists can conscript Jewish caterers to serve them lunch at their next meeting. You may take exception to that analogy and point out that a white supremacist meeting is repugnant while a gay wedding is a wonderful celebration of love and happiness. That’s your opinion, yes. But it’s only your opinion. You cannot force me to agree with it or act upon it.

Addressing a liberal tweet that called him a “bigot” trying to “force his morality on others”, Walsh summed up the current state of affairs quite succinctly.

Christians are “free” to think whatever thoughts they want in their heads (a generous concession, to be sure), and they’re “free” to be as religious as they want while within the walls of designated religion buildings, but anything beyond that is oppressive. Meanwhile, Leftists can force you to make a cake, they can force you to share the bathroom with the opposite sex, they can force you to fund the abortion industry, they can force you to pay for their birth control, they can force all sorts of beliefs and doctrines on your kids in the school system, they can literally march down the street half naked in a celebration of sodomy and hedonism, and none of that can be construed as oppressive. In fact, you’re oppressing them by objecting to it.

It’s truly amazing that they’ve been able to frame the argument this way. Somehow, they succeeded in redefining “force” as “refusing to do what we tell you.” They were greedy in their lie, and it paid off. Rather than being satisfied with shoving their ideology down our throats and pretending they haven’t shoved it down our throats, they went for the home run and claimed that we’re shoving our beliefs down their throats by not swallowing whatever crap they feed us. And they got away with it.

It’s complete insanity that the Left has been able to twist logic so thoroughly in their favor, and mask their own cultural oppression as fighting against oppression. But that’s always how oppression works, isn’t it? The Nazis, the Bolsheviks, the KKK and other white power groups, the Hutu genocide in Rwanda – they all kick-started their movements by demonizing some group (Jews, blacks, bourgeois capitalists, Tutsis, etc.) and convincing others they were being oppressed and screwed over by that group. The easiest and most effective way to hate and oppress a group is to make everyone else believe that they’re the victims of that group. People won’t go along with oppression if they think it’s oppression, but they will enthusiastically go along with it if it feels like justice. Likewise, liberals and so-called libertarians are more than happy to strip Christians of their God-given constitutional rights, as punishment for their “wrongthink”. If we don’t start putting liberty first, I shudder to think of where this kind of logic will lead.

2 comments to Stop Oppressing Me With Your Freedom!

  • Rufus

    Well stated, JimmyC. It’s surprising to me, but I don’t recall ever making the connection you just stated about convincing folks one is being oppressed by a group to incite hatred. I’ve thought about it specifically, in relation to unique protests like those against the police or capitalism, etc. But I never made the connection with Hitler and the Nazis doing exactly that with the Jews in Germany. I’m aware of both things, but I never connected them. But you’re right. It is the same thing.

    Regarding Matt Walsh’s post:
    I agree he is right, but this is really tough ground to tread in America due to slavery existing at our nation’s founding and its continuation into the end of the 19th century.

    I think the founders intended the individual to be sovereign. Our country was founded on the principle that you could refuse to serve, hire or work for whomever you want for almost any reason. Let’s say the owner of a tavern hates Greeks. I think the founders would have been fine with him refusing to serve Greeks. Now, the idea is that word would get out this loon in town won’t serve Greeks, and most everyone would likely stop going to his tavern, and go to the one next door where the owner serves everyone, but the founders intended folks to be free to associate with whom they want for whatever reasons they choose; including misogyny, bigotry, racism and/or religious or anti-religious beliefs.

    Well, we know how this principle went awry. Cities, counties and states used this liberty to codify bigotry and racism. Separate but equal. We forget how many private institutions wouldn’t serve Irish or Italians or Jews, let alone blacks or hispanics. In time I think this would have eventually worked itself out. More and more people would have grown to despise these practices so that the free marketplace would have driven businesses and institutions practicing exclusion out of business.

    That’s all well and good in theory, but what if it takes longer than your entire lifetime for your neighbors to become enlightened? On that basis Abraham Lincoln, then the Courts and then Congress stepped in to stop the heinous practice of exclusion through legal means backed by martial force. Few things make this historical necessity more obvious to me than looking at photos of Arkansas National Guardsmen, armed and in uniform, staring down a group of black girls in dresses armed with books, hoping to attend school.

    So, here we are. Matt Walsh is correct. But we can’t ignore our nation’s past. We now have a mixed bag of laws that were written to undo injustices and are sometimes contradictory with the principles of liberty and freedom. Just as German legislatures and judges go to extremes to avoid anything that hints of bigotry due to the religious genocide they committed 80 years ago, our legislatures and judges go to extremes to avoid anything that hints of bigotry due to the injustices that took place in our nation and were codified into many of our states’ laws as recently as 50 years ago.

  • Raoul Ortega

    Let’s never forget that Jim Crow was Democrats using the powers of the states they controlled to force businesses and individuals to not do business with Blacks. There were also “unfunded mandates”, like forcing businesses like the railroads into building and maintaining “separate but equal” facilities.

    Things haven’t changed much, because today we have Democrats using the power of the state to force business into doing business with Gays, and trying to force infrastructure changes like “gender-free” toilet facilities.