Politicians, political hopefuls, media loudmouths and many more have been revealing their ignorance in ways that, well, actually are not all that shocking or alarming. That is not to say I don't find their message, their beliefs and their rants to be utterly reprehensible as they continue their fight to pull us back to a time when women knew their place, the oppressed dared not cry for help and white men with a little bit of power were looked up to, not because they were respected or admired but because the masses hoped that just maybe a crumb or two might fall their way.
The Doonesbury comic strip expertly tackled the latest rampage of ignorance by putting out some creative, even brilliant satirical works of art that delved into abortion-law changes. Some newspapers chose not to run them because they viewed the content offensive. I wouldn't argue with that. It was offensive. But what people overlooked is that it was meant to be offensive because the attack on women’s rights that it was taking aim at was intensely horrifying.The best satire often tackles its subject in such a way, using offensive material — in a brilliant way in this case I must say — to reflect the nature of what initially inspired the creative work.
But you want to know what stood out to me the most lately, as I watched, listened to and read about people, especially liberals, spew venom at their latest outrage —hypocrisy.
First, I should point out that I consider myself to be quite liberal, especially when it comes to my social views. I support gay marriage, would never take away a woman's right to choose, believe our government largely acts in ways to protect and improve its fiscal assets no matter the costs at the prodding of its corporate donors, and think not too much but not enough funding has been sent the way of public education and human-service organizations so they can adequately do their jobs.
In the same breath, I find liberals largely to be the biggest group of hypocrites to have ever walked the planet.
Yes, I wince when someone's religion causes them to want to restrict the rights of others who behave in ways that contradict their own beliefs.
Hate groups frighten me and make me see red, especially when witnessing the emotional toll their actions take on their victims.
When I witness people lack empathy for the disabled, downtrodden and all around less fortunate while espousing what resembles a survival of the fittest mantra I sometimes cry.
Yet I cannot say I am right and they are wrong, and I never consider myself more enlightened because of my viewpoints, which are merely different.
In fact, their actions do not surprise me, as it's no shock when, say, a Christian condemns homosexuality. Such individuals do not pretend to condone or support such actions. Indeed, they openly admit their opposition.
Yet liberals claim to be the most accepting, diverse, open-minded group of individuals around. What many, not all, but many fail to recognize is that they are only open and accepting as long as you subscribe to their definition of diversity and their type of openness.
I have witnessed many a liberal friend claim to be open and accepting and in the same sentence spit venom at the belief systems of, say, Christians.
That doesn't seem very open to me. How open is someone who only accepts individuals who subscribe to his or her form of viewing and behaving in the world?
Anyway, as we cheer Garry Trudeau, slam some media outlets for censoring Doonesbury and condemn individuals for their own ignorance, maybe we should glance in the mirror and examine ourselves.
Reach Editor Stephen Bartlett at email@example.com.