Why Can’t We Separate The Personal From The Political?

Being too friendly with today's villains.

Color me confused that in today’s modern world of global communication,  we appear to still be in those fraught times where the Chinese don’t want you getting too cushy with any members of the Mongol horde and contact might get you viewed as spy and saboteur.  Don’t even go near their horses.

Since when did life become Saul Alinsky’s Rules For Radicals that’s now applied to everyone and every damned sphere of life?

After the events of Florida’s school shooting  – which looks far more disturbing in how it came about via deliberate changes to school discipline and policing  – social media and the internet in general became it’s usual shouting match and echo chamber that ensues after any mass shooting.

What alarmed me in particular this time was that to some gun control advocates, anyone who didn’t denounce the NRA as a terrorist organization or opposed gun control was personally responsible for the shooting and was of course a vile, despicable, human being who supports kids being murdered.

That’s a pretty easy strawman to beat in public for an applauding mob.   But wait, are’t these the same people who are interested in diversity?  Not when it comes to worldview and politics apparently.   In fact dissenters need to be isolated, dehumanized, and possibly targeted.   If you can cost them friends and family as well as various public shamings, all the better right?

Welcome to conversation in the 21st century on the internet which is now spilling over into people’s actual real lives.  Rid yourself of dialogue and arm yourself with a cell phone and your targets contact information and workplace details that can be submitted to a two minute hate twitter mob.

Perhaps we are much more divided in terms of worldview and culture in America then we ever have been, but since when did dissenting views equal incompatibility with even spending time or associating with someone?

Recently I was having a conversation with a family member – one that I very much respect -who was surprised at how I could become “friends” with someone in the Dissident Right who my family member considered to have rather reprehensible views. (Granted, most of my family members would consider him to have said reprehensible views.)

He was particular surprised by me using the word friend.  Why would you become friends with someone with views and speech seen as inexcusable or unacceptable?  (While I don’t agree with this friend on everything, he is still a friend.)

Well regardless of where you are on the political spectrum, it’s a damn good question.

How I Became a Deplorable With Detestable Views

Picking my friends, associates, or villainous enemies to be denounced on twitter based on what they think or hide in perspective closets has always simply been a matter of how and where I meet people.

Hookah lounges. Bars. Concerts. Churches. Raucous Parties. Parties I will not mention.  Internet Forums. Gaming Circles. Gaming Servers. Family functions. Work.  My Old Campus.

Years ago before Trump was a thing, I used to play an online browser game called Astro Empires. While I’ve retained a friend from that game, one other “friend” – a rather progressive one – on Facebook told me he couldn’t be friends with me anymore because my views were detestable.   We even really enjoyed soccer too!   (At that time I was first stumbling across the Manosphere.)

When I reflected upon that moment, the recent conversation I had between me and my family member prompted that EUREKA moment in my puny bigoted backwards brain; plenty of people today view life style, worldview, political, or even cultural differences and disagreements as the whole of a person.


If their views are too far out there or “offensive”, their friendship is something that’s found to be shocking.  I find this notion troubling as to what it implies; you are what you secretly dare to ponder upon in the late night hours when you entertain crimethink thoughts about the nature of man, society, and any other specifically touchy controversial subjects where voicing opinions on what you actually think could get you fired from your job because guilt by association.

Talking to people, associating with them, or even communicating or working with them on mutually agreed ideas – even if you differ with them on everything else is certainly not allowed.

What happened to Quinn Norton, which while it certainly didn’t happen to me reminds me of myself.   She got fired hours after being hired by the New York Times for talking with the wrong people. Quinn dared to “associate” with Weev or the greatest deviant villain alive on the internet today, Andrew Aurenheimer founder of the Daily Stormer.  Whoops.

Obviously Quinn is the opposite of a Nazi, but the fact that she had communicated with him on just ONE idea they shared the same opinion on and that she felt was important produced some sort of alternate internet depiction of her as a Nazi.

I was called a Nazi because of my friendship with the infamous neo-Nazi known on the internet as weev—his given name is Andrew Auernheimer; he helps run the anti-Semitic website The Daily Stormer. In my pacifism, I can’t reject a friendship, even when a friend has taken such a horrifying path. I am not the judge of who is capable of improving as a person.


This philosophy also requires me to confront him about his terrible beliefs and their terrible consequences. I have been doing this since before his brief time as a cause célèbre in 2012—I believe it’d be hypocritical for me to turn away from this obligation. weev is just one of many terrible people I’ve cared for in my life.


I don’t support what my terrible friend believes or does. But I strongly advocate for people with a good sense of themselves and their values to engage with their terrible friends, coworkers, and relatives, to lovingly confront them for as long as it takes, and it would be wrong to not do so myself. I had what I now see as the advantage of coming from a family of terrible people.


This taught me that not everyone worthy of love is worthy of emulation. It also taught me that being given terrible ideas is not a destiny, and that intervention can change lives.

One article that covered her reaction to her Twitter scalping had this particular gem of a comment posted:

“There’s a big difference between being friends with people in private and changing their minds personally, one-by-one, and being friends with people publicly and normalizing their BS. If friendship with the Nazi is so important to her, let them be friends. But if it’s part of her public persona, that makes it part of NYT’s public persona, that makes a big cultural voice voting for white supremacy – welcome to 2018. Everyone can see everything, everyone can hear everything.”

Right there in this tripe of slime comment is everything that is wrong with social media, the internet, and our outrage culture in general.  I’m picking on this comment in particular because this is EXACTLY the kind of attitude I see reflected by so many saintly twitter and social media stake burners when they light their torches.

Being friends with bad people – or those deemed to be by our new cultural overlords – is the same thing as “normalizing” their views.   Pious peasants don’t associate with heretic harbingers or they risk becoming them or promoting them.

Even if you are friends with a Troll,  Sauron, Nazi or worse -a Communist considering their body count in the 20th century – talking, eating, communicating, gaming, participating in gay orgies, or shooting the shit with them isn’t going to “Normalize” anything.

We aren’t our political or worldview beliefs.  We are Jack, Jon, Joan, and June who are living life in the 21st century in the digital age afflicted by social media Popes who think that too many “radical” blog posts or social media rants are the absolute embodiment of what someone is 24/7.

Can’t the friend police ever take a damned break?  Don’t they have lives? Is this really what they want to reflect upon gloriously when on their death beds?

I always viewed having various friends and associates like a 9-5 job where after you got done talking about what you thought – no matter how heinous it was deemed to be, you then went on with your life.  You kept drinking beer, smoking stogies, and telling stories late into the night with them.

In fact,  I would imagine myself as a professor or his neighbor.  I could have a daily talk with some uber male feminist ally like Michael Kimmel, have very different conclusions, and go back to grabbing a beer with him later while throwing darts.

The disagreements, while fundamental to our worldview differences and how we choose to life life and spend time would fade while we live our normal lives. One would leave work, go home, unwind, and enjoy time with family and friends.  Another would go to the bar, play softball or volleyball, or watch the newest Game Of Thrones episode together.

That right there. Normal life.

Journey Of Self Discovery

When you form your worldview and outlook on life, it happens over time – often in a kind of butterfly and domino effect of situations, events, friends, and where you spend your time.   It’s a journey, just maybe not as adventurous and  epic as something out of Lord Of The Rings.

I’m far from a modern day Jesus, but I  have and do associate with plenty of sinners, reprobates, and people who are today’s version of heretics.

Lately there’s been a wave of miserly curmudgeons who want to dictate who you can and can’t hang with.  If you deviate, you are labeled some sort of ist /ism or more frequently a fascist or Nazi lover.

It’s not like I went out trying to make friends with hardcore druggies, dangerous online deviants, violent biker types, or Molotov cocktail wielding AntiFa activists.  Rather I simply kept looking for the truth and I was going to wherever it led.

I wanted to find out who I was.   Being drawn to controversy, mischievous and dirty humor, abstract in-the-clouds freedom of speech ideals, gaming, history, rebellion, cigars and smoking, etc all played apart in the paths I would choose at the forks in the road.

In fact, it was similar creating a character class with attributes in an RPG.  I was forging an identity as there were flaws in my current thinking and approach at the time that left me feeling like I was wasting away in the wind while others clearly were not.

What led me even more into the devious, deviant, and every “ist” and “ism” under the sun circles is the simple fact that they were as hostile as I was to control over freedom of association.

Not once did the mean miserly misogynists sexist racists in the manosphere writhe in constant shouting, shaming, and denunciation of myself for being friends with feminists, social justice advocates, Black Israelites, “liberals”, Trump haters, ect.

Neither did those in the #GamerGate, the Dissident Right, and even in horrible dangerous despicable your-soul-may-perish-for-eternity places like the Roosh V forum.

In fact,  not once did some White Nationalist or Supremacists types I talked to flip shit over the fact I talked to Jews, had Jewish friends, and didn’t loathe them.  Even in the case of me being mixed race, my family being mixed race of various sorts, and plenty of friends and associates being every kind of ethnicity, race, culture, factions and members of various “groups”  did this occur.

After a while, I realized where the real “bigots” were coming from and who was surprisingly far more “tolerant” despite having all sorts of views I didn’t agree with.  At the end of the day, I didn’t have to be fully 100% on board with Nazis jackbooting in Harlem with a Hivemind to agree with them that feminism is bad thing.

Look what happens to people like Laci Green who are still ardent feminists and social justice advocates who dared to ask questions and not be completely in lockstep.  They of course get all the nasty labels deliberately designed to rid them of their humanity, making them acceptable targets.

After all, if someone isn’t human and their views have no place in “acceptable” society, then there are no rules that limit what you can do to them.  The insane exaggerated hyperbole and straw-men they are tarred with is therefore not only “acceptable” but apparently some sort of cosmic justice.

Dissenters must be squashed.  For some in uber progressive circles where they spiritually and mentally self-mutilate themselves for not being better allies, they reach a breaking point.   The term “Peak Trans” comes to mind.  Now they not actually suddenly jump to the right politically, but they end up realizing that they can’t survive in a hive mind which allows for no free thinking.

Social media just exacerbates this problem of free thinking.  Express views where you question a popular and accepted narrative?  People lose their minds and you become a Nazi, ist, or ism.  People will take screenshots of denouncing you and “defriending” you.

One is either a hero or a villain – no in between.  If you associate with them in anyway or dare to be friends with them, then via guilt by association, you also become a hero or villain.

I suppose this is the evidence that we needed to prove that friends on social media really aren’t friends. However, too often have I seen family befall the same fate.  Even for family members, certain beliefs are too far and suddenly you are disowned even if the son denies the accusation.   I didn’t know we were all secret Muslims at our core.

Pearce Tefft proclaimed that “Peter Tefft, my son, is not welcome at our family gatherings any longer. I pray my prodigal son will renounce his hateful beliefs and return home. Then and only then will I lay out the feast.”

To quote the guy from 300 who get’s kicked into that bottomless pit, “This is madness.”

I have two sons, and regardless if they became die-hard SJWs who loathed every view I espoused, they’d be welcome in my house.   I’m not pouring years of time, smelly diapers, long nights, and the joys of watching them crawl, walk, and start talking down some drain filter because of what they might believe.

In fact the mere thought of it really bothers me.  I can see not marrying or dating someone because of it, but your very own flesh and blood?

However,  this isn’t a new phenomenon.  It’s one of human nature.  Plenty of family members, villagers, tribesmen, etc. have disowned each other to the point of the sword because of differences in belief.

However that was then, this is now.  Right?

Supposedly the Enlightenment and Age of Reason were supposed to put us past this, but they haven’t.  I’m not going to bother to go into the reasons for that, but I will say that social media obviously fuels this polarization and dichotomy of us vs them.

For some people, they aren’t just content to “de-friend” and dehumanize you, they also believe you need to lose your job, be unable to pay your mortgage, and ensure you are out on the streets. Your family who you support financially? They don’t give a shit.

I’ve been an advocate of fighting fire with fire – specifically those people who threaten to or go after people’s jobs.  However, with finances being tight for myself and with me being the sole provider for my wife and two sons, it’s hard for me to imagine attempting similar retribution to someone, even if they were the aggressors in trying to get me or people with whom I hold similar views with fired.

At some point, we have to draw the line as to how far one should go in a polite and civilized society – while it still barely remains one.

To all you activists out there, regardless of your stripe and creed, how far are you willing to go?

I don’t consider activism, political stances or worldview to be this ever constricting bubble where you dwell permanently, but if your entire life and purpose is based on “activism”, where else do you go to seek your identity? To seek who you are?

Seriously, consider that so many ardent screaming activists are often far removed from the situations and people they express outrage about.  Do those who scream about gun control the loudest with the biggest platforms live in Baltimore in the ghetto?  Often they don’t.

So many people say they want “diversity”, but it seems we pervaded by a culture that encourages us not to have friends or to cut them loose if they won’t come to similar views as ourselves.  Diversity indeed.

Those same people are then shocked when they exit their bubble and briefly enter another where very different views are held.  You’d think they’d embrace that diversity, but often they just point, shriek, and scream “HERETIC!”   Often, that’s where the mutual conversation ends and the pitchforks and torches begin.

Is this really how any of us want to live?  Where we can’t separate someone from their politics or opinions?  I certainly don’t, but I fear far too many do.


Will It Be Possible For Our Kids To Find A Spouse?

Picture is from The Spruce.

Pandora’s Sexual Box

Rod Dreher may be labeled a cuckservative on many an occasion, but I find his blog at the American Conservative to be quite relevant to the situation of many Christians and those shocked liberals who wonder how such an “immoral” man like Trump could have been elected president.

He makes the following point in a post about the accusations swirling around G.H.W. Bush and Weiseltier and how loose the definition of sexual assault is and what it means for our kids when they enter the dating market in their futures.

“In this climate, I can well imagine that people are scared to death to show the slightest romantic interest in anybody in the workplace, for fear that they’ll be accused of “sexual assault.” How are people supposed to meet each other for normal human courtship, then? I ask this as the father of two sons and a daughter. I don’t want these kids to grow into adults who sexually harass or who are sexually harassed. But I also worry about false accusations that could ruin them professionally and personally. If you aren’t worried about this too, you aren’t paying attention.”

(Yes, I do actually enjoy reading Rod and I think the Benedict Option is a worthy alternative.)

While the left has been annihilating any of the Christian moral foundations to American law and culture, they haven’t come up with any coherent worldview to indoctrinate the populace and the “identity” based alternatives they offer have caused a backlash from people who don’t want to turn the other cheek.

In fact, they don’t even care about being Christian.  It’s a nominal thing for them just like it is for those Muslims who were born into it, but prefer life in the West with booze, drugs, and fast sex.  They have no “faith” to hold them back to the moral high ground.

Indeed, a wake-up call for those who were convinced that the less “religious” people became, the more “progressive” and educated they would become.  I suppose Trump’s election are making a few on the left quite woke.

Now remember, when prudish backward bigoted Christians pointed out the Pandora’s box that would be unleashed with unbridled and encouraged sexual degeneracy, they were dismissed, ridiculed, and of course labeled.

Now that the box is open and the Titans are wreaking havoc without restraint.   Women, like men,  were encouraged by feminists to engage in sexual deviancy and meaningless hook-ups in a culture and system that still retained the foundations and some men influenced by the Christian moral framework.

That’s gone. Tinder is here, and everyone is meat.

Those of us who don’t lie to ourselves know that men and women respond to sex differently and that women regret one night-stand far more than men.   Obviously sex being more emotional for women and physical for men is misogyny.

Well, now the cultural identity left is forced to scramble to rectify the new imbalances created when they opened Pandora’s box.   That includes the “Dear Colleague” letter on Title IX,  an ungodly obsession with “sexual assault”, the constant attacks on “toxic masculinity”, demonizing of any male spaces, and an overall attempt to make men pay – in anyway possible – for pumping and dumping.

It has already turned the dating scene for many men – and women – into a nightmare.  High insane unreasonable standards are thrust into normalcy.  Blue collar men are thrown out of pool right away and single mothers and divorced women in their late 30s to early 40s are treated as potential booty calls at most.

The Depressing World Our Children Will Inherit

I try to avoid a pessimistic mindset when it comes to the future, but in this situation and circumstance the current reality seems to be growing worse.   Me and my wife have two young infant sons.

What will the dating world look like for them when they go out and try to find a woman worthy of marriage?  (Which means definitely not in the workplace anymore.)

As their Father, I will impart into them all of the “Red Pill” knowledge and wisdom I’ve accrued – admittedly not that much compared to better men out there. However, I fear they will be punished for their realistic attitudes, noble intentions, and their eventual ascent into manhood.

Rod makes a good point as to the kind of world our kids are going to enter when it comes to trying to find a spouse.  I too am wondering just how far this insanity is going to go – on top of the increased hatred of men that my sons are certain to experience in a bleak future.

If they go through a similar “prodigal son” phase as I did, will it cost them everything?  Will I have to tell them to video record their encounters just in case they have bad judgement?

If “affirmative” consent is being seriously considered – which it has via implementation as law in places like California, what will that mean when my sons engage in actual flirting, mannerisms, and “game” that makes women actually want to talk to them, date them, etc?  Will asking a girl out immediately equate to “sexual harassment”?

Before I met my wife, I would go to bars with friends.  I recall one time where a semi-drunk girl came up to me and started grinding on my body a bit as I was standing with my back turned to her. She also kissed my neck.  She gave me that “Ewww” vibe.

I didn’t see her as attractive and I wasn’t looking for an easy bang/getting laid that night – more of a guys night out – so I nicely and gently pushed her away and went to the other side of the bar. I wasn’t harsh about it, but it took a bit of effort to claw her off me so to speak.

I didn’t give her permission. I certainly wasn’t “inviting” it with my demeanor and behavior at the time. Was it sexual harassment or even sexual assault?  If you accept the feminist concept of it, then you bet your ass it is.  Should I post #MeToo and try to find out who this girl is shame her, get her fired from her job, etc?  Apparently so.

Rod links to a series of tweets by Cathy Young who makes some astute points on what we are unleashing:

On the other end, I’ve done similar things. I’m a firm believer in physical touch and slow escalation when mingling out in public – granted touching ones arm, shoulder, etc. If a girl didn’t like it, they usually moved away from me or in the very rare case would tell me not to touch them. That was the end of it.

So it comes down to that “permission” concept. The sexual revolution and it’s current sense of how any kind of sexual anything goes doesn’t seem to reconcile with how sex and human interaction works. Yet the irrational idea of “affirmative consent” is making its way out of colleges and into law.

It used to be a given that if you were with someone, even married to them, usually you didn’t need “permission” to initiate affection with them. Now this is under scrutiny, if not direct assault.

My wife doesn’t get “affirmative consent” from me when she wakes me up in the middle of the night when she’s feeling a sudden burst of passion. Sometimes I go with it, sometimes I end up pushing her off – both often in a semi sleep state which she tells me about in the morning. (In my defense, I have a high sex drive, but wifes is even higher.)

By the logic coming from these people on “sexual harassment/assault” every couple must be doing it to each other every day.  Sometimes I’m tired and I don’t feel like having sex, but I oblige my wife who desires the release.  Again feminists will find it border line rapey – diminishing the true horror the concept should incur within us.

That leaves us in a place where anyone scorned has massive power. Eventually it will go overboard the Salem Witch Trials and have a stop put to it. Thing is, how many relationships and people will be utterly ruined before that happens?  The tally is rising in the moral paragon of Hollywood and media who lectured us about our bigoted misogyny and these shitlists of the accused are coming out all over.

We let this sexual “freedom” out of the bottle, but we never did examine those implicit parameters which guided it prior. We assumed the nature of the beast would be enjoyed in the same way it was before. Now people are finding out everything has to be “set in stone” to the point of killing how humans sexuality and romance actually occurs.

Now we are in for a turbulent unpredictable future – something that doesn’t bode well for allowing a society to remain stable.

The Steps Of Life – The Early Patriarch

Recently, my life has become like one of those sack races at a school party.  My wife is in the sack with me – almost twice a day on average – and often we are trying to hop in different directions when it comes to our plans, ideas, and how we want to spend our time that day.  Our marriage is yet young. As we seek to better communicate and understand the stubborn other, a new path in life opens.

As the experts hum repeatedly, much of marriage is all about communication.  Usually, you don’t start off to well in that department.  The specific verbal and non-verbal manner of that communication is a different skill all in itself – one that is often unpolished.

Through the communication we stumble through now, I’ve learned something important. Your priorities will shift so much in your life – especially with an infant that much of what you did and who you were before marriage wont be the same.

If you want to be that great family patriarch of old, most of your available time in a day must be spent nurturing your family – specifically your wife in the early years and your children.  Just as anything substantial in life requires much time and investment, your family is no exception. (Infants are quite the time investment when they won’t fall asleep at night and continue to cry.)

I’m now building my legacy, but that is a time and life investment that will consume my time in life.   Less going out with friends to the bar.  Less video game binges into the wee hours. Less wasting of time period.  My hobbies now tend to include research about the best ways to get my son crawling early and my social activities tend to involve my wife.      (Father and son hobbies will come as my son grows older.)

In a way, I’m being forced to be more productive and deliberate as to how I spend my time – an odd side effect of having a family that I had no clue about.   It is however a welcome one, in that it forces some discipline upon you, something I’ve struggled to do over my life.   Dragged by my heels to be better.

Much of my generation is hedonistic in we view ourselves.  Usually, it’s all about what makes me happy and satisfied now and anything that get’s in the way is a problem – or in the cases of some RP enthusiasts – supposed Beta behavior.   What most players don’t realize is that when you get married, your wife needs your time. It can feel a bit strangling at times with a loss of space being your gut instinct, but new instincts will develop as your marriage goes on.

Essentially, if you want to build that next generation and a culture that will last – think of what Roosh is trying to build – your excess pleasures, desires, and frivolous hobbies will have to take a back seat.  It becomes less about what makes you happy and more about what is necessary for the success of your family.  I’m selfish and I’ll admit it, a hard RP to swallow is that what makes me happy isn’t necessarily going to make my wife happy or even my children.  (Have another one on the way in that department.)   Basically, we mature as men because we must.

Some men might take it as the nail in their coffins of their prior lives, but it simply means that a transition is taking place.  What I’m realizing now is that if you want a family, a legacy, love, growing old together, and many of the usual romantic dreams, much of your bachelor self will shed it’s skin permanently.    So in order to get your new skin, you have to shed the old.

I no longer have as much time for video games and my usual pleasures of flesh. Instead, I often limit them to an hour a day at most so I can focus on spending time with my wife – who needs my attention and help even more so being that I knocked her up again.  Remember, marriage is a different adventure and the skills needed are far different from the arsenal of most players.  Finding that key balance becomes as valuable as gold and a key component into becoming that patriarch.

In a young marriage, your wife is needy – as is mine.  When you decide to have your first kid, pregnancy adds another element to that.  We hear alot about shit-tests but not alot about comfort tests. I recall a conversation with my wife when she was in tears about how I didn’t comfort her, wrap my arms around her, and tell her everything was going to be okay when our son was in the NICU for 3 weeks after he was born. She wanted me to hold her in my arms and not let her go.   I was supposed to be strong, but while I thought I was, I didn’t pass that strength on to her.

Logically I thought that she already knew she had my support – and I was coming to be with her everyday in the evening when I got off work.   (Remember how powerful and dominant a woman’s emotions are, especially after birth.)  However, I didn’t verbally communicate my thoughts on how she was feeling and how everything was going to be fine. I probably wasn’t physically affectionate enough either and obviously we couldn’t bond and come together through sex in the weeks after birth.    (You really do have to be on your game and making it an intrinsic part of yourself.)

This was a hard lesson for me to learn.   Men… we often have to learn how to love – both in how we show and how we do it. Love is what girls so desperately need, just as respect is something men need when it comes to marriage.

Now do you lose who you are? Everything that makes you… you?


Your family becomes you.

My son Julius.
My son Julius really likes bathtime.

I as a man and father, and my wife as a woman and a mother, are now putting our feet on the next step up the stairs of life.  It’s all happening very fast as is the excitement about it.   About 3 months ago, we moved down to Missouri.  I won’t say where, but I do like what I see down here.  Housing is cheap – though so are wages.

(Luckily, I’ve got a job in which I can make a good amount of money.  It’s a sale job, and I will essentially have to internalize game in a sales oriented manner. )

Arguably, it’s probably one of the most important skills a man can learn that he can apply to many other aspects of life.  I never realized its application that many had waxed eloquently about until training for my current job.  (Also, a quick pro-tip I’ve learned: He who complains the most gets the most. ) Furthermore, me and my wife are going to be moving into an apartment, which is will be our first place on our own with each other.

In order to start a community, you have to have a place of your own to do it.  I’ve seriously considered trying to start an RVF tribe where I live. However, I’ll need to devote more time to conversing with the men of my area – specifically fathers.  Even in my online reading, I find myself reading more of Dalrock, DeepStrength, FreeNortherner, and Davis Aurini.  (Vox Day as well.)

I often want to help men who struggle with women out – as I see who I was in them. At the same time, I’m also realizing that men with families really do need other family men to come together to eat, drink, converse, and to sharpen each other’s lives.    The conversation at the table really will differ then it did in our bachelor days. Behold, the next step in life.

If You Support Abortion Rights, You Should Opposed Forced Vaccinations

Do You Get A Say In What Happens To Your Body?

Today, the question that is captivating the public’s attention is, “Do you alone make the choice’s over your own body, or do others have some say in it?”  You would think that most of the people who insist that only you have a choice over your body – abortion rights namely – would do the same with the debate over vaccination. Apparently not.

Our wise friends at the “The Good Men Project“, a hotbed of consistent bad advice for men lays another gem of wisdom onto us in an OpEd through author Shawn Henfling,

“It is my opinion that the CDC recommended courses of vaccinations become compulsory, not voluntary. Exclusions for personal belief should hold no weight when considering the greater public health. ”

I’ve seen the Daily Beast, The Huffington Post, and several other more liberal publications lambast Chris Christie and Rand Paul for daring to suggest that mandatory vaccinations conflict with parent rights.   I don’t agree with Christie much, but he is right on this.  In fact, it conflicts with both the rights of the parents and the “body” rights of children in general.

Remember, if it is your “body” and the government shouldn’t be able to control what you do with it, that doesn’t only apply to just “abortion” and reproductive rights, it applies to every other issue that concerns your body under the sun – including vaccinations.   Unfortunately,  this rather simple level of consistency is not only rejected by some liberals, but is lambasted as irresponsible.

What’s gets even more bizarre is that condemnation of people who hold “anti-vax” positions aren’t just limited to liberals, but to conservatives as well.   The “anti-vaccination” movement actually started on the left, but then was taken up as well by religious conservatives and now millennial libertarian/liberal types.  This is actually bi-partisan support and opposition on the vaccination debate.


You must accept the needle.

You Don’t Own Your Body

Okay, at some level I see their point when it comes to vaccination of kids about to enter a school.  If a disease would spread unchecked from your kid, because you don’t want to get a vaccination, I could see arguments as to why you shouldn’t be able to send your kids to that school.  In fact, the Supreme Court has ruled that if you wish to put your kid in a public school, they must be vaccinated. (This is all the more reason to homeschool and give your kids an actual education.)

I however reject this totalitarian idea that the parents must comply and then force their kids to get a vaccination.  I can understand if the kids demand one, but they so often don’t.   Leave it up to some of these liberals – and even conservatives as well – to politicize the issue and suggest quasi-fascist like ideas of control upon the populace despite it being our “bodies”.   Conservative leaning The Federalist believes that opponents to vaccination simply don’t understand it:

Calls to jail ‘anti-vax’ parents, for instance, strike me as extreme and disturbing. But vaccination is not about protecting the vaccinated so much as it is about protecting others from disease-carriers. Vaccines are properly understood not on the basis of narrow self-interest but as a defense of the human species.

Speaking of calls to jail people and/or parents who won’t vaccinate their kids, Mr. Alex Berezow in an opinion column for USA Today, appears to be sick to the point of twisted in strong tyrannical state power and the “collective good” in his article entitled: “Jail ‘anti-vax’ parents.”    Yes, he actually said that.  We’ve heard about the dangers of radical individualism upon American culture, but never forget the effect of radical collectivism upon the culture with statements like this, “Put simply, no person has the right to threaten the safety of his community.”

I can’t help but shake my head in dismay at the implications of that statement. Yes, an individual must consider the impact of their actions upon a community, but that doesn’t automatically equate to trumping individual rights.


Employing Common Sense

Unlike some folks, I don’t actually oppose the concept of vaccinations. I do however want to make sure they have been thoroughly tested and I also don’t trust our government in this regards – and no, that doesn’t make me some tinfoil hat conspiracy theorist.   I just firmly believe that “choice” as my liberal friends seem to selectively apply should most certainly apply here.

Rand Paul – love him or hate him –  articulated this point in a CNBC interview about the subject:

“I’m not arguing vaccines are a bad idea,” Paul said. “I think they’re a good thing. But I think the parent should have some input. The state doesn’t own the children. Parents own the children.”

It is here yet again, that I find myself in agreement not only in agreement with Paul, but with the hippies, treehugger, eco-friendly folks, vegans, organic foods people, ect on yet another issue.  I continue to shock myself.  I don’t care if the science is 100% in favor and support of vaccination. Choice on an individual level isn’t sacrificed even if it is.

Mr. Henfling is essentially saying  that the argument of its “your” body only applies to reproductive issues. Good to know there is a principle level of consistency at the core.

I wonder what other things we can force upon people in the name of “social responsibility.” Note that scary word of “compulsory” and how it usually impairs the freedom of others. I guess that doesn’t matter if you can justify it under “social responsibility”.