An argument with the Left: Extreme Close-up

Yesterday, perhaps mainly out of boredom, I decided to post what some might call a rather controversial status update on facebook. In all likelihood, my comments were inspired largely by recent events in Montreal, as well as other previous conversations I've recently had. Any bolded emphasis that follows is mine.

Here's what I posted:

Jason Thompson wonders why we don't see any straight-pride parades and/or festivals? How is that fair?

In response, one of my 'friends' kick-started the debate with this:

Because straights have not been persecuted the way gays have. There no white history month either. Or Hitler rememberance like the holocaust...

A reasonable point and yet I wanted to see what else he could offer. The discussion continued:

Are you suggesting [name removed] that just because something bad happened in the past that we, as a society, have to shun it entirely? Do I have be some sort of victim before I can comfortably express myself, or do I have to live my life feeling sorry for the way that my ancestors may or may not have victimized others? Am I naturally excluded from liking who I am just because I happen to be a white, straight, male?

I've never been a fan of political correctness in any way, shape or form. All it really seems to accomplish is to enable the continuation of the divisions that it alleges to combat. Despite what some in society might like to believe, not all of the actions of the past were done with sinister intent. We do not have to demonize the totality of our history just because people were hurt along the way.

I thought that it was pretty clear at this point that the main point of this conversation would revolve around the futility of political correctness and whether or not it actually achieves what it sets out to do. However, I very quickly found that the conversation took a rather different turn for the worse.

In response to my question whether or not I should be rightfully excluded because of my demographic (white, straight, male), I was told that I needed to be sensitive because it is likely that "[I] have never ... experienced persecution or segregation."

Here's where things start to get really interesting. He continues:

I'm not a fan of political correctness either. Let's face it though. ... There are just things that should not be brought up because of sensitivity. Should I bring up to you how I feel Mormonism is the retarded cousin of Christianity? No. I should ACCEPT certain things about people, and be sensitive about it. Just because I feel that way, doesn't mean I have the RIGHT to voice said opinion.

That this individual preaches the value of keeping his mouth shut while at the same time putting in that not-so-subtle jab at my personal faith was surprising but, unfortunately, not all that unexpected. So I did what I do with my students in the classroom and called him on it.

But you just did voice your opinion (retarded cousin? come on...) and THAT kind of commentary demonstrates the new kind of so-called tolerance that degrades more than it would like to let on. Yours, unfortunately, are the only overtly negative comments in this whole thread. And mandating that I HAVE to be sensitive because of the assumption that I have never suffered to the same degree as other marginalized groups is the whole problem with political correctness in the first place.

. . .

Is that what you think tolerance is all about and that you can pick and choose who to extend your favour to? I think that its you who has the uphill battle through life.

I stand by my comments that our modern sense of equality and tolerance is more of a sham designed to make people feel better about themselves rather than enact any real change. When I can have a reasoned discussion with someone who can convince me otherwise, without resorting to a more critical track, I might be persuaded.

What followed, which I will gladly spare those who have taken the time to read this so far, was a lengthy tirade mainly questioning the sincerity of my faith and those who choose to follow it. How it even became the issue in the first place still evades me. Here, though, are a two remaining highlights that stood out to me.

1. My original post belittled the "hardships and efforts" of homosexuals. I fail to see how at any time during the entire exchange I belittled anyone. The mere claim that I have done so is not enough to establish said belittling. That western society is full of so many thin-skinned ninnies and tattle-tales who can't settle their own differences is a rather unfortunate byproduct of this day and age.

2. Ethnic and lifestyle celebrations are there because they have been earned through tribulation. Recognition is deserved because something has been overcome. How exactly does one quantify hardship? And at what point does it earn widespread acceptance within a society? What about all the other groups who have not yet garnered the attention and justice that they are looking for? Why does even have to be earned in the first place?

And in a final, grandiose gesture, he promptly 'un-friended' me. I guess he showed me.

I thought a lot about the exchange while at work today and I'm still a little upset about it. I can honestly say, though, that his comments about my religion don't bother me. Frankly, I've heard worse and I'm not naive enough to expect everyone to like anything about my faith if they don't want to.

What bothered me most was how quickly the discussion degenerated into an infantile screaming match. What started off as a discussion about political correctness and our modern concept of fairness, became an attack on one aspect of my identity. Not anywhere did I make unreasonable attacks or ever seriously advocate for a 'straight-parade.' This individual resorted to the tactics of too-many in all parts of the political spectrum, but more especially on the left. Instead of staying on task, another issue was used as a scapegoat of sorts, and any reasonable discourse came to an end.

I consider myself a pretty open-minded individual. Frankly, I don't care what people decide to do with their lives. As long as people leave one another alone and use a little common courtesy life is pretty good for most of us. However, I do not like being largely demonized because I choose to be more conservative or traditionalist. That's my decision to make and no one has any right to question that. If you on the left are as tolerant and accepting as you like to say you are, then you might not revert so often to using the 'bigot' and 'knuckle-dragger' labels. And in all fairness, it works both ways.

One of the greatest things about this country is that people can agree to disagree. I think we've been pretty fortunate in Canada to not see so many of the horrors that have plagued other parts of the world. When was the last time we saw a civil war here, or a military coup to overthrow a government among other things? Tempers can flare up from time to time but most of continue going about our daily lives because that matters more. I think everyone could benefit from being able to communicate and be really honest with one another, sometimes brutally at times. The frustration and lingering resentment are not worth the price of taking it so personally so frequently.