When it comes to which amendments in the Bill of Rights modern liberals support, they’re highly selective. All rights are equal, but some are more equal than others. Especially when they involve scary guns, those inhuman baby murdering machines. Rachel Maddow froths at the mouth and claims the Constitution to be a living document when someone starts talking about gun rights, but as soon as the AP’s phone records get a peek from the FBI, she provides a full throated defense of the first amendment as-written, as if it were a commandment from God above. So naturally, now that a series of posters started springing up in Washington state comparing gun rights to some other personal liberties, the local hippy population is up in arms about the affront to their sensibilities. Salon.com picks up the party line . . .
A new campaign cropping up around Washington state is intended to strike a chord with gay and lesbian gun owners by comparing gun control to anti-LGBT discrimination.
The illustrated posters feature slogans like, “We won our right to marry, now it’s time to defend our right! And we sure as hell aren’t going to take shit from homophobes in the process!” and, “Some people dislike gays. Others dislike guns. We should not base our laws on personal dislikes.” […] The campaign’s origins remain something of a mystery.
I can’t remember where I read it, but there’s a brilliant breakdown of the classic modern lefty response to any argument. It starts with the liberal in question evaluating the status of the speaker; do they have the right background to make the claims they do? It doesn’t matter if what they’re saying is true, or factual, or effective, it only matters if they have the necessary bona fides. A dumb argument by the correct kind of person trumps a logical argument by the wrong type of person. Which is why Salon is so intent on looking at the origin of the poster campaign in question rather than its content.
As for the response to the new ads, I think this comment responding to the article sums up the beliefs of the readers pretty well:
Somebody posted a story on Facebook this morning about an old lady that was shot in the stomach by some guy on a golf course, shooting at squirrels. It really doesn’t matter what that old lady thought about gun control. The bullets don’t ask you whether you want to be part of the national massacre.
What gay people do doesn’t hurt me. It CAN’T hurt me. Even if I morally objected to it, it’s still not hurting me – maybe hurting my sensibilities, but that would be a choice I made, having my sensibilities hurt by something that has nothing to do with me.
Bullets do hurt me. I have a right to have a say so. I have a right not to be around nuts (or, as in so many cases, law abiding citizens) who are going to shoot me.
No, it’s not the same at all.
All gun owners are crazies who only want to shoot recklessly and kill everyone. That’s what they honestly believe. That law abiding citizens are going to shoot them. There’s no probability involved — it will happen. Gay people are nice and peaceful folks, but all gun owners are whack-job nutcases who are bound to go on murdering rampages. Therefore they don’t deserve the benefit of civil rights. Got it?