It is simply amazing to me to hear how certain activist groups in
this country define the words “freedom,” “equality,” and “tolerance.”
To members of these groups, to “tolerate” means nothing less than
“tolerating” their point-of-view alone, without giving any thought or
consideration to opposing viewpoints. Furthermore, you’re “free” to
agree only with them, otherwise you’re intolerant and,
naturally, against equality as well.
Nowhere in the realm of public debate is this principle being so
blatantly practiced than by GLAAD — the Gay
and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation — in attacking the very Jewish
points-of-view expressed by popular radio talk host Dr. Laura
So important is it to GLAAD (that its opinion about the personal
behavior of the people they supposedly represent be the only
point-of-view being offered in public) that the group has launched a
(dare I say it?) holy war against Paramount’s plans to put Dr.
Laura on TV next fall.
At issue are comments that Dr. Laura regularly makes on her radio
program promoting God’s law and Judeo-Christian ethics regarding male
and female attraction / behavior. Because Schlessinger regularly states
that God, through the Bible, simply makes no allowances for promoting
homosexuality or presenting it in a favorable light, she has been
ruthlessly assaulted by GLAAD.
Naturally, if you’re a homosexual, I could see where you might take
exception to Dr. Laura’s point-of-view. But whether her opinions on the
matter are right or wrong does not give GLAAD — or any other group or
person — the right to stifle those opinions in any way, shape or form.
What GLAAD and its liberal apologists in government and the
establishment press routinely fail to mention is that Dr. Laura doesn’t
have nice things to say about heterosexuals who behave badly. Using the
very same criteria — God’s law and Judeo-Christian ethics regarding
male and female attraction / behavior — Schlessinger routinely
chastises callers who so much as hint that they’ve been unfaithful to a
spouse or have treated sex as something other than an act to be shared
with a partner you have first married.
But, no, GLAAD would have you believe that Dr. Laura exists only to
GLAAD officials need to get a life and a cause: Dr. Laura will
verbally beat you silly for a number of different personal behavior
habits if they don’t fit moral standards she applies consistently to a
number of different issues.
At the same time, GLAAD officials and members have every right to
speak their mind in opposition to Schlessinger’s viewpoints — they just
can’t use the First Amendment to take Dr. Laura’s First Amendment rights
away because that ain’t “tolerance,” folks, in any way, shape or form.
I’ve heard the good doctor speak about homosexuality, sexual deviancy
and many other forms of “alternative” personal behavior and the problems
that such behavior causes. But, I cannot remember her once calling for
the universal destruction of all homosexuals, sexual deviants, or people
with personal behavior she disagrees with. That would be a
textbook example of “intolerance” — especially if the government agreed
(and then agreed to enforce that decree) — not the grossly
inaccurate definition supported by GLAAD.
To these people, it is “intolerant” of you to simply disagree with
their points-of-view, but, at the same time, they never admit to
the same kind of intolerance when they disagree with you.
Our freedoms in America work both ways; there is no freedom
otherwise. There is only “freedom” in the sense that you are “free” to
espouse “acceptable” viewpoints. But, by using that logic, we would
then have to say that people in Iraq and China are laden with tons of
“freedom” because they publicly support the “accepted” viewpoints of
their respective dictatorial regimes.
The beauty and brilliance of the United States Constitution is that
it supports equality for all while allowing all of us our “say” on
anything we wish to speak about. If groups like GLAAD or any others
think they are championing “equality” by trying to silence Schlessinger
or by trying to force a company like Paramount into abandoning a program
company officials obviously think would be successful, then they need to
re-examine what the terms “freedom” and “equality” really mean.
Because, if they don’t, then they’ll never realize that the tactics
they are using to stifle free speech and expression in the 21st century
are the very same tactics others used against them to stifle
their right to speak and express themselves freely in the 20th
Agreeing with Dr. Laura is not mandatory in this country. But
agreeing with GLAAD, the last time I checked, isn’t either.