There is No Such Thing as Freedom of Speech, Only Trolling Fields - Redux

I came across a couple more monographs about the impending war, the real live physical one we're about to enjoy as a result of all the horrific emotional and spiritual violence spewed about right now. I'd written about it a bit recently in this blog effort, and ruminated a bit just as these fellows did about how expansive and even secessionist it will get.

That emotional and spiritual violence? 

You can't miss it in all the things people are saying to one another out there. It is worse with readily available social media content splashed everywhere -- the world is now just one big massive trolling field.

Last September I put up a blog post about this thing, Freedom of Speech, sharing something I've shared in various places, a Truth Rule if you will.

There is no such thing as freedom of speech.

Sure we think we can say what we want and in good ol' America you'd think you'd be free to say anything you want and it's really a nice feature of the good ol' U-S-A and its ironclad constitutional protections and... and... and...

Um.

Just the other day during a presser the fine college basketball coach for the South Carolina women's team, Dawn Staley, was asked what she thinks about a man-pretending-to-be-a-woman participating on a team in her sport, women's college basketball.

Two things right out of the gate. One, the questioner used the term "transwoman," which already concedes the debate to the sodomist voice by giving it any measure of legitimacy. To say it truthfully the term "transwoman" should never be used, and while it is a bit more unwieldy, "man-pretending-to-be-a-woman" should be employed instead, to be fully truthful.

Secondly, and more importantly, the thing freedom of speech, is so much less of a factor than the thing power of reach. What I say here in this blog post will reach not nearly as many people. But Mrs. Staley? Her team is in the title game playing a team featuring the consensus best player in the sport. She's got cameras and microphones shoved in her face, and whatever she says will definitely be considered something to listen to, something that carries some measure of authority or importance.

So, how did she answer? Well, there are four basic ways anyone could answer (assuming she doesn't just keep her mouth shut and look like someone who doesn't hear well) and we could touch a bit on the real meaning of each one.

No. 1: "Yes." This is what she said, giving in: Men-who-say-they're-women should be able to play in the women's game. This is, of course, what the rabidly DEI-minded people want her to say, and significantly Mrs. Staley knows that. She knows if she answers any other way, the sycophantic media are going to roast her, so at this point she just goes along to get along even though if she were actually to follow through on her foolish consideration she'd be exposed as a cheat when she gets guys (who'll say they're gals) from the South Carolina men's team to beat up on opponents next year.

No. 2: "No." If she said this she'd likely add the following to soften the blows from the leftist screechers, only because this is almost always what you hear from prominent people who don't like the LGBTQ stuff but easily see the guns pointed at them: "But this is just my own religious belief so I'm free to have those religious beliefs and my religion tells me it isn't such a good thing to mix up genders and it's just my beliefs and my religion and my freedom, thank you." This enables the media to paint her as some conservative extremist and, well, those kinds of people are just that way.

No. 3: "I don't know." She could just let it go with the intent that she's just a humble basketball coach. This may be a fine work-around but it'd be likely she'd add, again in the name of trying to get everyone to look at her in a favorable light, "But look, I'm tolerant and caring and I like diversity and inclusion just as much as anyone else, thuh end."

No. 4: "I don't care." This is a sort-of "Leave me alone" response, which would have been perfectly justified because the question itself was a fully loaded gun pointed right at her head. The problem here is she would appear to be mean and thoughtless about people who are in pain enduring gender dysphoria and all that stuff.

Again, asking the question in that setting was really just a set-up. It was a point-blank shot on the trolling field at someone who shouldn't have to be put through that.

Here's the thing.

What if she answered the question with the most truthful and righteous response?

What if after saying, "No," instead of all that freedom of religion blather setting herself up to look like some weird voodoo-practicing Neanderthal, she said this:

"Men-dressed-up-like-girls are not females, period, no matter what they may say they feel. As such they should not be invading any place where only females belong. What is more harrowing is the whole thing goes way beyond whether a guy is playing on a women's sports team. It is about people being forced to acknowledge, embrace, or even celebrate a wicked lie, one that actually destroys healthy relationships, families, and communities. This isn't just my opinion, it is objective transcendent truth, and the people who try to push the lie are committing a grievous evil. That you even asked me that question and put me in this difficult position is part of that evil. I'm happy to talk about basketball, or even the one deliverance from that evil and that is Jesus Christ and a deep abiding faith in Him."

How intolerant! How divisive! How mean and rude and downright nasty!

And, really, I wonder if Mrs. Staley would be keeping her job after such a statement.

I wonder. I know I lost my teaching job when I told my high school seniors in the classroom that marriage was only that between a man and a woman. And remember, I was teaching Civics so such a topic is allowed in a class like that -- and I did so respectfully and graciously, calling no one out, and letting students debate me on it and even have the last word. And most students concurred with my position, enthusiastically, and some told me so.

It was those very few who were "triggered," complained, and ::BOOM::

Yes, I too am afraid an imminent real live civil war is about to ignite because of all this.

In that blog post I mentioned, from last September, I'd written about the "Suicide Prevention" wristbands that were in a basket on the counter of the district administration office. I'd shared my thoughts why they were there: what was really going on in those high schools to make students think about suicide? And if they weren't thinking about it, what good is wearing a wristband to get them thinking about it? 

What I didn't mention in that post was along with the words "Suicide Prevention" was a number you could call to talk with someone who would, of course, try to convince you not to commit suicide. Sounds like a good thing, but again, a suicide-minded person might be more emboldened to think about actually doing it just to talk to some person who at least sounds caring because they are certain that no one else does. 

But here's the thing: who were the people one could call? The phone number on the wristband was for something called The Trevor Project. The Trevor Project is an organization that encourages LGBTQ-minded people to continue their pursuit of holding a sexually immoral and unconventional identity. They will effusively tell the caller to courageously embrace whoever they want to be sexually and no one should bully them into anything else. And of course they will tell them that the reason they want to commit suicide is the refusal of snide ugly moralistic busy-bodies -- especially if they are parents -- to accept them for "who they are."

The reality is the present self-destruction epidemic happens because these young people are so influenced by a materialist atheist humanist Epicurean ideology that is sweeping up more and more hearts and souls. The Trevor Project is just one of many powerful conveyors of such ideas.

Talk about Power of Reach.

The gospel has Power of Reach too. If the Trevor Project people can get on the line and keep people in that self-destructive morass, why can't true genuine followers of Christ share real love with them?

In fact this is one of those twisted parts of the Truth Rule related to this thing freedom of speech. It isn't that people don't say things, everyone does. But when the apostle Paul had his speech going, he was doing much of it from prison cells. Yet hundreds of millions have been and still are are profoundly touched by the words he wrote down, words God shared with him for us to get, understand, and put deep in our hearts.

Indeed Jesus Himself never wrote a thing, His disciples wrote everything for Him. But it didn't mean it wasn't God Who ultimately had the Power of Reach to reach lost souls with His touch, His voice, His healing and deliverance and salvation.

That's the blessing from this whole thread. There is indeed so much evil out there all around us, so much wickedness spewed about, so much ugliness seeping into the hearts of wounded hurting people -- all of it is despair and decay and death...

How much is He THE Power of Reach...

__

The first image is a stock photo that shows up every once in a while on the web, that is silent film star Harold Lloyd there. The second is simply a screenshot of Mrs. Staley's press conference. Even though I follow none of it and watched none of it, I did note that her team did convincingly win the championship game.

__


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Official Roman Catholic Position is the True One

The Rationale of an Excommunication

A Nation Under the Influence