Morality of the Left

The left loves to pontificate on their moral superiority. They believe that our current society is the cause of so many ailments in the world and will do everything in their power to recklessly correct these ailments. In doing so, they do not only believe that there are problems to be fixed, but if you do not agree with their assessment, then they will use the power of government or authority to make you agree.

Nowhere is this more prevalent than in the debates about transgender bathrooms or religious freedom. If you live in a state that decides that it is not okay for men to decide to go into women’s bathroom just because they say they identify as female, then your state will be boycotted by other states or corporations that do business with Muslim countries where transgenderism and homosexualism are crimes. Similarly, if you are a baker who believes that it is a sin to serve homosexual weddings, then you will be corrected and forced by the liberal regime to comply and act against your religion.

Abortion is another issue where the left loves to claim moral superiority. Killing babies is okay to them because of the women’s right to choose. To disagree is to be misogynistic, a social-conservative nut, or both. Any restriction proposed on abortion will bring about a backlash from the left and will quickly be put down even if the majority of Americans support restrictions.

Take illegal immigration. The left believes that the United States should be open to all who want to come and that it would be immoral to deport people who have broken the law. If you disagree, either because you’re worried about the cultural impact of unfettered immigration or its economic effects on working class Americans, then you’re labeled as a xenophobe and are left un-helped and forgotten by the liberal regime. In addition, the regime will take your tax dollars to provide for their educational and medical benefits.

Add to this the Syrian refugee crisis, among other issues, and the left provides you with a full slate of morally superior policies. If you disagree, you will quickly be shut down and put in line because their morally superior policies and arguments cannot be won through debate alone. Only through force will the left be able to impose their new morality on America and achieve what they really wanted all along, the destruction of traditional Western culture’s morals and values.

-Trevor Louis


      • Haha! You’re providing a perfect example of the exact point I was making. You can’t win the moral debate, so you’ve decided to use government authority and oppression to force people to comply with your belief.

  1. It is true, one possesses the rights of freedom and belief, but when those freedoms and beliefs posses a threat to others( Like inflicting pain on someone because of who they are or what they believe in), it generates much internal conflict and disunity within the nation. Ironically, as a result, through all of this, you are demonstrating a threat to national security, a core conviction of true conservatism.

    Under the great nation of the USA, an individual is an AMERICAN before a religious fundamentalist, a minority, or a homosexual. As Americans, the aim should be for everyone to able to exercise the rights of liberty in a peaceful manner without encouraging dissent amount other Americans. That is why a government is a very vital piece in enforcing that to evade vulnerability.

    • Nowhere did I suggest inflicting pain on others due to their beliefs. I stated quite the opposite, that moral debates should be played out in the public eye and that nobody should use power to force people to comply with their belief, common of the left. I agree that a person has a right to do whatever he or she wants unless it infringes upon the right of another person. The problem with the left is that they make up a lot of rights to support this argument, like the right to buy something.

      You are suggesting that people have liberty only so far as their version of liberty isn’t different from anyone else’s version of liberty, which means there is no liberty after all. The government exists to protect the rights of all Americans, which includes the right of the minority to disagree. The government does not exist to force upon the minority the majority’s opinions.

      • No I believe that everyone has the liberty to think what they want to think, but in your example of the baker he is rejecting service to other Americans, because of what the people are. You might call that “freedom of belief” but there is a special word for that kind of thing and it is called discrimination, a highly immoral entity. I mean if we should allow support for these kind of situations, why don’t we just bring back the times of racial segregation where restaurant owners have the right to reject to serve someone because of the color of their own skin in the name of “liberty”.

        Do you see how liberty can be a major liability that can cause civil unrest?

      • You’re right. Discrimination is immoral. And if you disagree with a business’ policies, then don’t buy from that business. Go to the business down the road. That’s how morality is worked out in the free market of ideas.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.