The plea to Houston voters by Andrea Greer in her article "A Yes Vote on Proposition 1 in Houston is Your Patriotic Duty" from the Burnt Orange Report is an attempted use of nationalistic propaganda to promote her agenda. She states innocently in her opening, "... [This issue] is neither right nor left, conservative nor liberal, Republican nor Democrat... The Houston Equal Rights Ordinance is about doing what's right and what's fair."
She then goes on to tell the story of prior enlisted Air Force Senior Airman Noel Freeman, who was allegedly discriminated against by a hiring manager in Houston soon after separating from the military because the hiring manager was "against all military force." This story is set against a backdrop of star spangled banners and bolded phrases such as "how patriotic are you?" A vote against Proposition 1 is a vote against American values! Right?
Well, the author (who claims to hold a law degree), as well as Freeman, the victim, fail to acknowledge that veterans are already protected from such discrimination under Section 4212 of the Vietnam Era Veterans' Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974. Additionally, the portrayal of the desperation to find employment that Freeman faced as a direct result of such discrimination is skewed. Frankly, if I were Freeman, I would not want to work for some one dull enough to openly say they could not hire me because they are "against all military force." I would make a big stink with the company's Human Resources department and then merrily continue my search. Merrily, you say? Yes, because as a recently separated service member, I know that upon Honorable discharge all service members are eligible to collect unemployment for up to a year after separation.
Another glaring issue within the article is the way that the Houston Equal Rights Ordinance is phrased. It says that it "prohibits discrimination in city employment and city services, city contracts, public accommodations, private employment, and housing based on an individual's sex, race, color, ethnicity, national origin, age, familial status, marital status, military status, religion, disability, sexual orientation, genetic information, gender identity, or pregnancy."
From the information given, we don't even know what sort of discharge Freeman received. Does this Equal Rights Ordinance ensure that Freeman is protected even if he received a Dishonorable discharge? A dishonorable discharge is a failure to perform the duties for one's country which one swore an oath to. (Not exactly the kind of job material employers seek out.)
With all of the logical fallacies in this blog article, I almost believed it to be satire, except for the link to a paid advertisement featuring this Freeman fellow that we're all supposed to feel bad for. Upon further investigation, a discerning reader will sift through the rubbish, use their inference-making abilities based on current events, and realize that this entire article is a weak, propagandized attempt at concealing the actual subgroup the Houston Equal Rights Ordinance was messily thrown together for: gay and transgender people.
Even so, I can understand the attempt to appeal to the extreme right wing with a cover story in order to perpetuate the liberal agenda. I even applaud it. But for a city as diverse as Houston, it would likely be more beneficial to just call it what it is. Nice try, Andrea Greer.
Monday, October 19, 2015
Sunday, October 4, 2015
Campus Gun Rights
When I stumbled upon an Austin-American Statesman article titled "More guns on campus will not make us safer," I couldn't help but to sigh pityingly for the liberal end of the political spectrum (which I typically agree with). Something inside of my brain cannot compute with the Left's stance on this matter: Gay/transgender/transsexual rights- good. Abortion rights- good. Gun rights- terrible!
Wait... What? So all fundamental human rights are equal, but some are more equal than others? (Yes, that was a nod to George Orwell's Animal Farm.)
Not surprisingly, the anti-gun author of this article uses mass shooting and school shooting data as an argument against allowing the concealed carry of weapons on college campuses, then proceeds to use this irrelevant quote from President Barack Obama:
"[there is]... a gun for roughly every man, woman, and child in America. So how can you with a straight face make the argument that more guns will make us safer?"
The amount of guns is not the issue. Second Amendment rights is the issue.
Appealing further, the author points out that more college students now are clinically depressed than ever before (a phenomenon Rush Limbaugh calls "the Wussification of America") making them potentially dangerous and unpredictable in the possession of a weapon. Sure, but to legally apply for a Texas Concealed Handgun License, the applicant must be at least 21, or active duty military. This alone rules out the majority of the traditional college student population.
Guns will not suddenly be flowing like free condoms on campus. Government class will not transform into a saloon in the Old West, where students with opposing viewpoints topple tables and send bullets ricocheting across the room. Texas is already rife with concealed handgun carriers- normal citizens who go unnoticed carrying on with their daily lives while carrying a weapon. These people are responsible. These people know how to use their weapons properly. These people are legitimate enough to pass through all of the bureaucratic red tape involved in obtaining a CHL. (Have we forgotten how much pain, anguish, and documentation it takes just to get a driver's license?)
Frankly, I feel safer with a CHL license holder sitting in my classroom. The presence of campus law enforcement alone is insufficient in preventing mass shootings. If we are truly concerned about the epidemic of violent crime in America, then we need to review the seriousness with which we handle the warning signs of mental illness. Disarming our law abiding citizens only harms our law abiding citizens.
Footnote: Knowledge is cool! Check out a brief history about the Second Amendment and some FAQ's about the Texas Concealed Handgun License.
Wait... What? So all fundamental human rights are equal, but some are more equal than others? (Yes, that was a nod to George Orwell's Animal Farm.)
Not surprisingly, the anti-gun author of this article uses mass shooting and school shooting data as an argument against allowing the concealed carry of weapons on college campuses, then proceeds to use this irrelevant quote from President Barack Obama:
"[there is]... a gun for roughly every man, woman, and child in America. So how can you with a straight face make the argument that more guns will make us safer?"
The amount of guns is not the issue. Second Amendment rights is the issue.
Appealing further, the author points out that more college students now are clinically depressed than ever before (a phenomenon Rush Limbaugh calls "the Wussification of America") making them potentially dangerous and unpredictable in the possession of a weapon. Sure, but to legally apply for a Texas Concealed Handgun License, the applicant must be at least 21, or active duty military. This alone rules out the majority of the traditional college student population.
Guns will not suddenly be flowing like free condoms on campus. Government class will not transform into a saloon in the Old West, where students with opposing viewpoints topple tables and send bullets ricocheting across the room. Texas is already rife with concealed handgun carriers- normal citizens who go unnoticed carrying on with their daily lives while carrying a weapon. These people are responsible. These people know how to use their weapons properly. These people are legitimate enough to pass through all of the bureaucratic red tape involved in obtaining a CHL. (Have we forgotten how much pain, anguish, and documentation it takes just to get a driver's license?)
Frankly, I feel safer with a CHL license holder sitting in my classroom. The presence of campus law enforcement alone is insufficient in preventing mass shootings. If we are truly concerned about the epidemic of violent crime in America, then we need to review the seriousness with which we handle the warning signs of mental illness. Disarming our law abiding citizens only harms our law abiding citizens.
Footnote: Knowledge is cool! Check out a brief history about the Second Amendment and some FAQ's about the Texas Concealed Handgun License.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)