Victims of Political Correctness
By Michael Bresciani (03/27/07)
I opened up my e-mail and clicked on a published article that ended with a
line that said "I don’t believe that homosexuality is immoral..." It was
proudly signed by the author and accompanied with contact information to
the authors e-mail.
In the United States it is both legal and perfectly acceptable to say that
homosexuality is not immoral before anyone with an ear to listen. It is
also perfectly acceptable to the hearer or reader of such a statement to
agree or completely disagree with the statement. Or is it?
In fact it is not. While it has not become the law of the land to hold to
hold an opposing opinion it can be stifled, refused and rejected depending
what platform or what place the assertion is made.
The writer of the aforementioned statement was complaining about the
military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy in regards to homosexuality. He
thought it was wrong to force the homosexual soldier to have to live a
lie.
It is impossible to miss yet another double standard here that has emerged
with the ongoing concept of political correctness.
I have written two books and I have hundreds of articles read throughout
the world. I have columns online as well as national syndicated
periodicals and I have only had three articles rejected. The reasons “not
politically correct.” The incorrectness sited was saying that
homosexuality was immoral. No, I wasn’t asked my opinion but I was told I
couldn’t “tell” it. Maybe I need help here but it sounds just like “six of
one and a half dozen of the other” to me.
Being a Christian I cannot espouse or even suggest that homosexuals should
be hated or harmed in any way whatsoever. To harm them would be clearly
unlawful and immoral. It is an opinion not a battleaxe. If it is perceived
as one then the kind of slander and character assassination that passes by
political correctness proponents of the hour might be considered something
akin to a nuclear weapon.
Few Americans have not heard the rantings of Charlie Sheen, Bill Maher,
and Rosie O’Donnell regarding everyone from Jerry Falwell to President
Bush.
The President has been called a murderer, a liar and some names I don’t
care to mention here. None of the chiefs or architects of political
correctness had anything negative to say about these remarks. They are
acceptable under PCs one sided definition. No one was censured for making
these remarks and we can assume no ones written statement was excluded or
deleted. Where then is the balance, where is the fairness, suffice it to
say it is conspicuously missing.
Am I on a soap box? As long as my feet are planted here in America, you
bet I am. I’m not mad at homosexuals I am rather quite displeased with the
one sided and unreasonable double standards of political correctness. If
that seems hard to understand remember that even as I write I have in mind
previous experiments with political correctness that miserably failed. To
be fair they did much more than fail because at the peak of its acceptance
it cost the lives of millions of people.
Throughout history there have been despots, rulers and regimes that have
decided what people could say or not say. In modern times that is often
referred to as “the party line.”
Nazi Germany had one, Communism had one and China’s Mao had one. Has the
“party line” shown up in America incognito, perhaps even clandestinely
under a different name?
Do we need to be reminded that when taken seriously forcing people to
mouth only “the party line” can and does cost millions of lives? Joseph
Stalin alone is credited with the death of thirty million of his own
countrymen for refusing to talk the right talk. In many cases their deaths
were predicated only on a perceived truth and not based in proof that they
ever spoke a single word against Stalin’s policies.
The writer of the article previously mentioned in this article has a
perfect right under the constitution to state his opinion and to put it
forth with all argument and reason as he sees fit. Why is it that those
with opposing views are getting censured more and more?
More people then ever are questioning both the meaning and the legality or
constitutionality of the concept of “political correctness”, among them of
late has been highly respected Pastor John Hagee. He too is warning of the
dangers of leaving this threat to freedom unchecked. Others are joining
the ranks against this precursor to thought policing and I stand with
them.
Rev Bresciani
http://www.americanprophet.org/
(Printer friendly version) Email: Michael Bresciani
