Posted on 06/27/2003 8:51:48 PM PDT by sourcery
An article appearing on the WSTM-TV, New York, web page summarizes the ongoing destruction of the Bill of Rights by the "New Americans" whom I chose to call "Kindergarten Babies".
The "Kindergarten Baby" is the American who is no longer able to psychologically deal with combinations of words, or physical actions, that make him or her "feel bad." They lash out. One only has to listen to the news, or go to the Government Schools, to hear "How did that make you feel," to hear the mantra of the "Kindergarten Baby".
I am an educator. I have sat in meetings years past, quite nauseated, where discussions were centered on students writing diaries of one kind and another. The emphasis was to develop "better self expression." One of the questions students were to answer when they were able to guess the correct answer to a math problem was "how did that make you feel." Yes, the jokes circulating on the Internet are correct. Many of you did not realize that joke was making fun of the process by which your rights were being systematically demolished by the mentally ill liberal left that is managing this nation for a number of totally psychotic and a-social causes, including animal rights, the NWO, Socialism, Political Correctness, and Communism.
We have had our national patriotic statements:
Now we have a new battle cry, that of the "Kindergarten Baby:" how did that make you feel? With that battle cry, we have a legal and governmental system devoted to the systematic destruction of the Bill of Rights that was codified to delineate all those rights which are unalienably those of the American.
Here is the Judicial decision that led to the article by WSTM-TV:
S.G. v. SAYREVILLE BD. OF EDUC., No. 02-2384 (3d Cir. June 19, 2003)A school's prohibition of speech threatening violence and the use of firearms was a legitimate decision related to reasonable pedagogical concerns and therefore did not violate a kindergartener's First Amendment, Due Process or Equal Protection rights.
Please note the incredibly psychotic word: "concerns." Concerns = Feelings. Note also the use of "pedagogical" to add emphasis to "concerns." This use of pedagogical, as in "pedantic formality: a haughty, pedagogic manner," implies the victim's unmitigated right to not be made to "feel bad" by the actions of others. My God, what have we wrought??
To read the full text of this opinion, go to: [ PDF File]
Oh, you say: "This is just a child. I wouldn't want that child saying that to my child." Your thinking is being hijacked!! You are being drawn into the circle of "Kindergarten Babies," whether you like it or not. You are "lashing out." If you sense even the slightest revulsion, it says you may be lacking some of the common psychological skills needed to deal with the unintentional or intentional violation of your personal boundaries. you have a problem.
Making a person feel uncomfortable by the employment of irresponsible or childish words or actions is no longer a matter of the recipient having the personal responsibility to "deal with it" (as per some little child childishly pointing a finger or saying "I wish you were dead"). It is now a matter of blaming others for making a person uncomfortable. It is a matter of lashing out in a Politically Correct way.
Why blame others for ones discomfort? Because the recipient, as I said above, is lacking the basic psychological skills needed to deal with the adversity of having their boundaries violated. The violated, as per a wonderful article on the JPFO web site, is subconsciously thinking about getting even, but the mere thought of doing so is so revulsive as to make the person resort to the only tool available to them, fixing blame and extracting punishment.
Anything to do with guns, including little children pointing their fingers at one another or other people, makes a significant portion of the American population uncomfortable. This is one activity that violates the boundaries of most people, even at great distances. I, for one, become instantly uncomfortable in gun shops where some nit-wit is looking over a firearm, waving the business end hither and yon past me. Ordinarily I deal with it by either leaving the store, or, more likely, demanding that the person not to point the thing my way.
The mere mention of hand-guns in some liberal circles throws them into a fear that is best described by the article on JPFO.
When making the other person responsible for your discomfort becomes the driving force of society, there is no place for a "Bill of Rights." A Bill of Rights gets directly in the way of "blaming," and must be destroyed before punishments can be meted out. Hence the destruction of the Bill of Rights.
Enter portions of the legal profession to:
a) Personal Gain
b) A new system (NWO, Statism, Communism, Socialism, Totalitarianism)
"Kindergarten Baby, wash your face in gravy."
If you have time, enter "Kindergarten Baby" into Google and read a story or two by people who were unable to deal with taunting. Then ask yourself who was responsible for their inability. I will answer that question for you. It was their parents. Would you even dare suggest that to them? No. The blame falls on the taunter.
This thing has been going on for 2 generations now, perhaps more. Parents quit parenting. When they left their children bereft of the tools necessary to cope with taunting and bullying, they left their Bill of Rights standing on the execution wall to be shot to pieces by the product of their neglect, the "Kindergarten Baby," who is busily lashing out, placing blame, and extracting punishments.
Bingo. There is confusion between having some STANDARD of right and wrong, with fairness being a RESULT, as opposed to someone's feeling of "fairness" being the STANDARD of of right and wrong -- they put the cart before the horse. "Fairness" is a goal of all social engineers because it is an entirely unobjective standard. This is especially true when the left brings us "fairness" that is not moderated my traditional morality (of any sort) or logic. All that is left is this demand: "What I want is right because I want it!" This stands fairness on its head.
If fairness is to mean anything, surely it would mean a compromise between opposing sides, with the side that is less moral or less rational having to concede to the other side. But since morality and reason have been thrown out of the equation, "fairness" rests solely with whoever has the most political power. Thus is "fairness" reduced to the morality of the highwayman or tyrant: "Give me what I want because I have the power to rob or kill you!" I am reminded of a story about the philosopher Karl Popper arguing with a Nazi. Finally, the exasperated Nazi waved a pistol in the air and said something to the effect of, "This does my arguing for me!" (Popper soon fled Austria). Civilization cannot long endure if it panders the thug's view of "fairness."
Last week I watched a local PBS show about the history of life on Barnegat Bay. It was a touchy-feely documentary, in a nostalgic way. Then at the end of the show, the solicitation for feedback was not "Tell us what you thought about the program, but "Tell us how this program made you feel."
As a kid(25-30 years ago) my favorite shows were documentaries because I learned from them and enjoyed that they made me think. These days I find it hard to get through one since they tend to push how you should feel about issues rather than giving you the facts to decide for yourself.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.