Monday, April 4, 2011

So when is someone really at fault

Lindsey Graham is a pansy-ass.  Anytime a Senator comes out and says "Freedom of speech is a good idea but..." and then tries to compare WWII era secrecy to modern day speech, he is making an erroneous and dangerous analogy.  Wanting to curtail free speech because it might cause rioting halfway around the world is kowtowing to the threat of violence and is a far cry from prohibitions about giving out the locations of military bases and troop movements (and even then the Office of the Censor was highly controversial).

Do I think that the guy burning a Koran should be shunned by his community?  Hell, yeah--stores and such can choose not to serve him and he could suffer from the consequences of his actions at home.  It was a dumb move.  Do I think that there should be a bunch of laws condemning his actions?  No I do not.  Do I think that there should be curtails put on free speech because of it?  Definitely not.

Putting the blame on the Florida pastor (who, by my reading didn't have the balls to do the deed himself, but had some drone do it at his request) for a bunch of barbarians killing people completely unrelated to the situation totally ludicrous. If some moron cuts a guy off in traffic and then the guy goes home and beats his wife because he got cut off, is it the moron's fault that the wife got beaten?  No it is not.  If it wasn't the moron cutting him off, he would come up with some other reason to beat his wife.  Same with the barbarians.  If it wasn't this (which I didn't even hear about until riots started overseas), they would have found some other reason to do violence.  Even the winning of a basketball title is found to be riot-worthy in some parts of the United States.  Do we then ban the playing of sports?

The point is that they are putting the blame on the wrong place.  Freedom of speech is not to blame for riots and killing.  The pastor (and his drones) exercising that freedom are not to blame for riots and killing.  The blame should be placed at the door of those who use any excuse to riot and kill.  Anyone whose first reaction to something they don't like (or something they do) is destruction and killing cannot be considered to be civilized and any appeasement will just make it worse.

Mob mentality should not drive public policy anymore than the threat of a tantrum from a small child should drive a parent to buy that child a cookie.


North said...

"If some moron cuts a guy off in traffic and then the guy goes home and beats his wife because he got cut off, is it the moron's fault that the wife got beaten?"

If you are a person, group, or sadly a LOT of people of several generations then if you have no idea how RESPONSIBILITY works, no surprise you can't understand the simple concept of blame.

Old Grouch said...

The more sinister side of Mr. Graham's argument is that it reduces to: "You showed bad judgment because you 'made' them do something wrong. Therefore I should get to control your conduct in the future."

Thus combining blame-the-victim (hey, wearing short skirts causes rapes, y'know!) with an attempt to steal our hard-won liberties.

Midwest Chick said...

North--but this is our 'ruling elite' who are putting blame in the wrong place. But you're right, they are probably more sheltered from the consequences of one's actions as well as the notion of personal responsibility more than the rest of us.

Old Grouch--spot on target.

Guffaw in AZ said...

What everyone said, in spades!
Maroons, All!