By now I think the evidence is overwhelming. If there were a political beauty pageant Republicans would win hands down, which is just something else that grinds the gears of the liberals. Today a story creating some buzz is about a recently elected Republican lawmaker in Tennessee, Julia Hurley, that was *gasp*, a former Hooters employee, who unseated an incumbent Democrat. Worse still, she was a single mother at the tender age of 15.
Hurley now works as a consultant and entrepreneur. She is a Southern Baptist and a member of the National Rifle Association and the Gun Owners of America.Damn those rednecks clinging to their guns and bibles.
Actually, she is a case study in how you approach life. If you wish to wallow in self pity and be a victim, then you are prime material to be a liberal and a Democrat. If, on the other hand, you choose to deal with the issues and obstacles that occur in your life, take some responsibility for your actions, and work hard, you can still realize your dreams in this country. That is why I get so infuriated every time somebody trots out that tired old horse argument of fairness. Life isn't fair. Sometimes bad things happen due to our decisions and actions. Sometimes we get blindsided by events beyond our control. What matters is how we handle them and make the best of these challenging times.
Congratulations to Ms. Hurley, although I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for any sort of endorsement from any of those women's rights folks. Just like most of the conservative women in politics, she continues to shred the stereotypes perpetuated by liberals who claim to possess so much expertise and knowledge of the conservative mind. We know this because they are constantly telling conservatives how they should act and when they don't fit those stereotypes they just get flummoxed and wind up pouting in the corner until they can find the next target of their righteous outrage. Like ChickFilA for daring to provide food to people attending a meeting.
5 comments:
Anti-Christian liberals already hate Chick-Fil-A for daring to close their stories on Sundays. Damn fundies denying the pagans their weekend poultry fix...
ScottBrown vs HarryReid, BarneyFrank vs JohnBoehner.
The Repub guys have it goin' on, too.
You know, as a gay man I don't give a hoot who Chik-Fil-A gives their food or money to. But I do reserve the right to not eat their stuff --and not just because it's unappetizing glop, but precisely because of whom they give their money to. And tell everyone I can reach to do the same. On the other hand, it is the right of other corporations to give their food and money to whom they want. And if some corporations want to give gay employees all the benefits of straight employees why is this then a concern? Don't like it? Don't buy those company's products, as I don't buy Chik-Fil-A. If some corporation wants to sponsor a gay pride parade, whose business is it? I'm not offended that some Christians don't like gay folks, I probably don't know those sort of people. They don't know me. And I don't care what they do, yet they greatly care what I do. Indeed, they seem quite "offended" by my mere presence in the nation and even more offended when I say I'm just as fine a person as they are.
I'm not really even offended when the No-like-gays movement demands that the corporations and Christians who do like us to stop liking us. Free speech -- you try to convince people to not like gays -- we gays try to convince people to like us. Oh well, it almost seems like we are winning. Though what business of theirs it is who likes gay folks or not I don't know. Whom are these fellow citizens to say who is allowed to like gay folks? And why are the We-Like-Gays people condemned by the No-Like-Gays movement? Again, gay folks don't condemn Christians, but plead for understanding and tolerance, as best it can be mustered within your belief system, and we've convinced a fair portion of the nation that we just fine folks. But far too many Christians still condemn gay folks and even other Christians who like gay folks. It's their right to do so, but gay folks sure have a right to say it's a little nuts. Again, free speech right? Or is even my self defense suspect -- sure it is, why, it's called a "radical agenda" or "promoting homosexuality" right?
Not to belabor this point, however:
<p>I'm not particularly thrilled, that as a tax paying citizen that the No-Like-Gays movement is heavily involved in making laws and public policy to prohibit the We-Like-Gays movement from acting on their beliefs. Which is what this whole gay thing is about -- do we enshrine into law the religious beliefs of some against gay people, or do we allow gay folks equality in the civil realm and let each religious denomination deal with it as they will? Why is my Christian denomination prohibited from giving me a "marriage" by any name recognized by the state, a power supposedly vested in the church by the state to whom I pay taxes like every other American merely because some other Christian denomination disapproves? That does sound like a First Amendment freedom of religion and establishment clause issue. And that's what all these court cases about this issue are facing. And that's what this nation has got to decide -- are some Christians more right than other Christians on the whether gay folks are equal citizens or not?
</p><p>
</p>
Living well is the best revenge. Anyone who can fill out a Hooters uniform *and* get themselves elected to Congress has nothing but respect from me.
<span>
http://libertyatstake.blogspot.com/
"Because the Only Good Progressive is a Failed Progressive"
</span>
Post a Comment