I have no idea why you are ignoring that point.
I'm not ignoring that point. I've said twice now that you need to distinguish between public costs and personal expenditures. You have a case for the former. When you start in on the latter, it starts to sound too controlling. I think your argument would be more effective if you back off on the personal choices, which I'm sure you must agree, individuals should be free to make.
Regarding personal expenditures, for example, you made a big point of saying that people who put life energy into intimidating socialites with fur coats are indulging a frivolous interest. Fine, as far as it goes. What you don't mention is that the socialite is enabling the torture of small mammals to get her fur coat, which is at least as frivolous given that there are many other ways for her to keep warm. As long as neither creates a public cost, they're both entitled to be as frivolous as they want. I think it's reasonable for you to disapprove of the animal welfare frivolity as long as you don't sound like you want to outlaw "liberal" frivolities and while you indulge other frivolities like fur coats. There's an overtone in your essay that frivolities that you like are OK and frivolities that you don't like need to be stifled.
We spend all kinds of resources with consultants and school boards and public meetings to create, publicize, and debate "Heather and Her Mommies" and other such things, and allow inner city classroom to be chaotic, overcrowded, and ineffectual.
I understand that and I agree with you. I just don't agree with you that the liberals are the only ones who need to get a life. If "Heather" just sat quietly on the shelf in the school library, the resources would be spared. I don't see how the party who put it there is the one who is frivolous while the party who wants to burn it is not. That's part of why I suggested that your conclusion about liberals wasn't supported.
The ACLU litigates on behalf of NAZIs marching through a suburb filled with Holocaust survivors, and ties up thousands of police to keep the peace.
If you want to do something about this, why not argue that the marchers should have to pay for the costs of the police rather than that liberals should stifle themselves?
Neo, you put your essay out there and invited feedback. I spent a big chunk of my life commenting on proposed publications so I just naturally get out my blue pencil and go at it with the aim of making the document more effective and credible. That's what my feedback to you was about. I didn't engage you on the substance of the matter in my comments, only on your effectiveness in getting your point across. Take my comments for what they're worth and do with them as you please.
Karen |
