Rosa Parks was born into a 1913 America with two strikes against her – she was a woman and an African-American. She would die 92 years later with the dignity of knowing she had scored a major win for equality in America.

Parks’ courageous act of defiance in 1955, refusing to take a back seat on a bus in segregated Montgomery, Alabama, focused – for all America – the spotlight on racial inequality.

But what would Parks think of the fight for equality in America today?

Concerning race, she undoubtedly would be baffled. Seeing black students on some campuses living in dormitories segregated from whites, she would conclude race relations had regressed. But she would be astonished to learn such segregation was not imposed by whites upon blacks but by blacks upon whites – and that on one college campus, blacks were demanding a “no whites – day of absence.”

Parks would be amazed at the role reversal skin color has taken in the 21st century – while 20th century blacks endured tremendous hardship due to their skin color, 21st century whites are targeted for the privilege their skin color reportedly brings them.

Parks would see the pendulum of racial and sexual equality in 2018 America swinging too far to the left, failing to have appropriately checked its swing at the centrist point of equality for all.

She would probably shake her head at outlandish advocates, donning “vagina hats” and embracing the illogical as logical, raising queries such as, “Is it really so illogical to hate men?”

Parks would see America’s fight for racial equality and women’s rights as a ship lacking stability. Over-compensating to correct a starboard list, that ship now lists to port. Correcting the list in one direction has only interchanged the disdain and intolerance one group holds for another.

From condemning racism against blacks, America has gone to promoting racism against whites – packaged as a scourge dubbed “white privilege” – justifying segregated residences for blacks to avoid exposure to it. Meanwhile, America goes from condemning sexual bias against women to promoting it against men.

Legions of left-leaning contributors to the ship’s port list reject logic in righting it – even if it means consuming their own for failing to totally support them. This was evident in the aftermath of Maxine Waters’ call to violence against Trump administration officials. When fellow Democrats Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer expressed concerns about it, a black women’s group accused them of racism. Sadly, the logic of accountability – holding one responsible for words uttered regardless of the speaker’s skin color – is lost on the group.

Perhaps Parks would also find worrisome the leftist lunacy over cultural appropriation. She would have understood one person copying what another does as the highest form of flattery. Thus, she probably would have taken great pride in seeing whites adopt aspects of black culture, such as the cornrow hairstyle. But some intolerant leftists choose not to take such an act as flattery but as theft – i.e., cultural appropriation – even to the point of initiating physical attacks for doing it.

Of course, in opening the “cultural appropriation” door, it can swing both ways.

Take, for example, an item that is an integral part of modern life: the toilet. While credit for its invention goes to two white men – 16th century courtier Sir John Harington, giving rise to the term “john,” and improved upon as a flush toilet by 19th century plumber John Crapper – no one today suggests usage by non-whites constitutes cultural appropriation.

Similarly, many professional sports, such as football and basketball, were invented by whites, yet today they financially benefit players of all races. Are non-whites guilty of cultural appropriation for engaging in them? Absolutely not as logic dictates, like the toilet, sports are there for all to enjoy.

As one African-American critic notes, America’s “obsession with diversity and inclusion is in the process of leading the nation to decline in a number of areas.” In the article “Diversity and inclusion now harming the sciences,” fellow WND columnist Walter E. Williams writes, “In the eyes of the diversity and inclusiveness czars, the STEM fields don’t have a pleasing mixture of blacks, Hispanics, and women. The effort to get this ‘pleasing mix’ is doing great damage to how science is taught and evaluated, threatening innovation and American competitiveness.”

The white privilege mantra is being pushed at several universities. A math professor ridiculously suggests “mathematics itself operates as whiteness” as an ability to solve algebra and geometry problems perpetuates “unearned privilege” among whites.

A professor at Purdue University’s School of Engineering Education takes male white privilege to a new level of absurdity. He claims the academic rigor needed to graduate from colleges is a “dirty deed” perpetuating “white male heterosexual privilege.” He adds, “scientific knowledge itself is gendered, raced, and colonizing.”

Thus, we have academics claiming that between diversity and knowledge, it is better to err on the side of the former. One wonders the comfort this preference of diversity over knowledge would provide to such academics were life-saving surgery upon their loved one needed and the surgeon involved was a product of their logic.

This logic arises on the issue of aviation safety, now jeopardized thanks to President Obama’s Federal Aviation Administration and its decision to embrace more diversity among air traffic controllers. Clearly, in entrusting the lives of millions of air travelers, performance alone should have top priority. Just like football fans want to see teams field only the best performers, regardless of race, so too do travelers want the same standard implemented when it comes to air safety.

Today, Parks would find ebony and ivory not in perfect harmony for reasons difficult for her to understand. Needless to say, she also would probably be a reluctant air traveler.

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.