breaking bread

A lot of hay is being made in a lot of different places over whether or not to be polite to anti-rights advocates, precipitated, of course, by a post from our resident apologist.

My position is simple: at the very least, I will try to be civil to all people, be they a murderer or a minister. That is the way I was raised, and that is the way I now choose to behave. That does not mean I will be friendly, that does not mean I will be “nice”, that does not mean I will tolerate idiocy, that does not mean I will support/encourage/endorse anything I do not agree with, and that does not mean I will go out of my way to do anything for anyone. Likewise, it does mean I will be honest, it does mean I will call a spade a spade, it does mean I will be factual, and it does mean that I will speak my mind.

And if this debate were about nothing more troubling than a difference of opinions, that is where this post would end. But we all know this debate is about more than simply opinions.

Those working against us are actively, specifically, and intentionally trying to abridge Constitutionally-protected, naturally-granted human rights.

Those working against us are actively, specifically, and intentionally trying to leave us defenseless and unarmed in the face of a known, quantifiable, and obviously-still-active criminal element throughout society.

Those working against us are actively, specifically, and intentionally trying to create a world where the stronger, larger, and/or more capable people and entities can take what they want, regardless of what the weaker, smaller, and/or unskilled people and entities desire.

Those working against us are actively, specifically, and intentionally lying about the issues, lying about the details, lying about the facts, lying about the participants, lying about us, lying about pretty darned near everything.

In short, if you are still whinging about “not making it personal”, you completely missed the bullet stamped “PERSONAL” banging through your brainpan at various multiples of the speed of sound.

Now, I am certainly not going to tell someone not to go sit down and have lunch with the leaders, figureheads, and sock-puppets of every anti-rights organization on the face of the planet – if they want to, and you want to, then more power to the lot of you (I might suggest you find some way to get them to pay…). However, bombasticly (word?) trying to use an attitude like that to leverage your way into a self-appointed position of Grand Arbiter of What is Proper and What is Not for a very large group of very diverse and very individualistic people is bound to annoy no small number of people, myself included. And, really, alienating your actual allies for the sake of pow-wow-ing with your actual enemies strikes me as being a particularly dumb course of action. But that is just me.

The parallels between this and the seemingly-interminable open carry debate are somewhat interesting… and, predictably enough, I fall into the same position on this issue as I do on that one. If you want to play nice with people determined to turn you into a victim whether you want to be or not, then have at it. If you want to get upset at people intentionally trying to abridge your rights on a very personal level, I completely see where you are coming from, and as long as you do nothing illegal, I honestly do not care. But I will do my best to not direct, induce, or shame you into following one path or the other – one would think most pro-rights advocates would be of a similar mindset.