Okay, I have the time now.
They come together for political action which is aimed at foisting their religious agenda, and their
crusade for Christian values, on everyone.
Their values, yes. Just as almost every organized group (labor, environmental, atheist, you name it) seeks to impose their values on everyone. That's the nature of any cruasde. But the press doesn't use most of those terms perjoratively. Why should the fact that a person's values arise from their religious thinking rather than their ethical thinking as might be the case with, say, animal rights crusaders, make it wrong for them to seek to have society accept their values? IMO, the anti-smoking people are far more virulent in pursuing their agenda than any religious group I know. And they have, indeed, been successful in denying people the right to smoke in many locations. (For which, as a lifetime smoker, I am not ungrateful, but as a libertarian have serious concerns about.)
My basic feeling is that people should use their right to ignore other people and behaviors. If you are offended by a Noel sign on a ferry terminal, don't watch it. Watch the seagulls, which offend other people. No sign can hurt you unless you choose to let it do so. It's an element, IMO, of peoples' unwillingness to accept responsibility for their own behavior. If the sign offends you, blame somebody else for putting it up, don't blame yourself for letting yourself be offended.
I'm being asked to turn the computer over to others, so I'll leave it here for the moment, but I'll be back later this weekend, I hope! |
