Having Your Cake And Eating It: Hate And Tolerance

So now the Jussie Smollett story doesn’t fit with the NPC mainstream media narrative (OrangeManBad!), it is vanishing down the memory hole, but can I refer to it one last time before we forget it forever and Jussie writes a book and is acclaimed “A Hero Of Diversity And Inclusion” and awarded his little gold star?

Diminutive thespian Ellen Page is refusing to apologise to Mike Pence for blaming him for the fake race attack on Smollett.

“If you are in a position of power and you hate people, and you want to cause suffering to them, you go through the trouble, you spend your career trying to cause suffering, what do you think is going to happen?”

Hoax race attacks is apparently her answer, and they are the fault of the nasty Christians.

This is the standard refrain – that evangelical Christians like Pence hate gay people, and black people, and transgender people, and so on. And now Ellen suggests that hoax race attacks are the inevitable consequence.

But I’m not sure the logic of the Left is very sound.

If Mike Pence believes gays and blacks and transgenders are going to hell, why would he draw attention to the life choices that he believes are taking them there, if he hates them?

Surely he would stay quiet and let them go to hell, rather than endure their tolerance hatred by speaking up?

If he hates them, what is he trying to achieve? Why not just………..stay quiet?

It would surely be easier for him to do so, rather than have the Left baying after him all the time?

After all, “the safest road to Hell is the gradual one-the gentle slope, soft underfoot, without sudden turnings, without milestones, without signposts”,  (C.S. Lewis) – just a quiet descent into hell with no notice.

Mike Pence has been signposting all his life if we are to believe Ellen Page, and his opponents claim that doing so means he hates the people in these groups?

Have your cake, or eat it – he either cares about you and is trying to save you from hell (however deluded you might think he is), or he “wants to cause suffering to you” and would therefore not be trying to correct your behaviour, right?

Which is it?

2
Leave a Reply

avatar
1 Comment threads
1 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
2 Comment authors
Matt RyanDodgy Geezer Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Dodgy Geezer
Guest
Dodgy Geezer

“…Which is it?…”

Both, and neither.

This is not a sophisticated debate. It is a playground argument, where “You said Black, so you’re a racist!” is the height of rhetoric, and a perfectly valid response to the reply “No, I’m not…” is ” La, La, La – I can’t hear you…”.

And this is the level of politics in the early 21st century…

Matt Ryan
Guest
Matt Ryan

Used to be we couldn’t say people were Black so we used Coloured instead. Now it seems that this isn’t allowed. Of course, that’s only if you are a Gammon – the word Nigger being perfectly fine if you are of African extraction with dark skin.