This is not the same thing as having a biblical worldview, as clearly demonstrated by his recent and (very terrible) answers on heartbeat bills and his fumbling the question of whether a man can become a woman. He is a very transactional man, and the coinage of his realm is personal loyalty. Why does French get to hold his nose to support the drag queens, and we don’t get to hold our nose as we go to vote for someone like Trump? Trump has been invaluable in a number of ways (always remember Dobbs), but it is also plain he does not have a coherent worldview. So because Trump is almost certainly going to get the nomination, and is going to be running against some Bolshevik, why is it not permissible for a voter to say “this is the price we have to pay for freedom”? If that makes us enthusiastic for adulteries, as French claimed, then it makes David French enthusiastic for the sexual grooming of children. They would much rather vote for a true-blue family man-with the marital ethics of Pence, the strategic genius of Stonewall Jackson, and the policy positions of Calvin Coolidge. Since freedom is apparently the kind of thing you can go into the marketplace of ideas and purchase, why doesn’t French allow other believers to do the same thing? They are willing to vote for someone like Trump, not because of his adulteries, but rather despite them. ![]() A distinction that he grants to himself is one that he refuses to grant to others. ![]() The thing that makes David French so hypocritical-as opposed to simply wrong-is that he does not apply this standard across the board. If we get to restrict them, then they get to restrict us, and he doesn’t want that. French argues that allowing for such things is “the price we pay for freedom.” So if you follow this line, it would be hitting below the belt to say that David French types “love their drag queens.” His argument is that he loves freedom, and putting up with drag queens is the price you gotta pay. I happen to reject that argument, but I am able to distinguish it from the idea that drag queenery is the best thing since French toast. His argument for this is a pro-liberty argument, not a pro-drag queen argument. He wants them to have access to public libraries in order to be able to read to the widdle kids. So Let Us Deal with the French Slam Firstĭavid French wants the public square to have room for drag queens to do their thing. ![]() He dwells on top of an aquifer of righteousness, which he can easily draw on for occasions like this. The only one who came out of the week’s revelations with reputation unscathed was David French.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |