Boundaries? We don’t need no stinking boundaries
today at 10:31 am
It’s been almost three weeks since I read the subject column of this piece and I’m still struggling to respond. Cal Thomas and his ilk skate by regurgitating worn out tropes and talking points, making any attempted counterpoint the equivalent of trying to get your dog to stop licking himself.
We get it. Democrats are bad. Anything else you heard on Fox “News” you’d like to pass along?
A recent post by Cal Thomas appeared in SCNOW out of Florence, South Carolina entitled, What happened to boundaries?
Well, Cal, except for Republican pundits, senators, congressmen and the people who invaded the Capitol, all the boundaries in my life remain intact.
In his piece, Thomas seems to both conflate and confuse boundaries with rules. He correctly describes the defined playing fields of games as boundaries.
From chess to baseball, football and tennis, boundaries define the field of play.
Rules, as Thomas notes, change, as they should. Was the NFL supposed to ignore emerging data on CTE (chronic traumatic encephalopathy)?
The space within three feet of our bodies defines our personal boundaries. Invade that space at your peril.
Relationships, platonic or otherwise work best with boundaries. We need to let our friends and lovers know what to expect from us and what we expect from them.
As human beings however, we should accept no boundaries. The same goes for us as a society. There should be no limits to what we can achieve as individuals or collectively.
At one time here in America, Black people were not supposed to look directly at White people. They were supposed to look down, avert their eyes.
They were supposed to accept a level of treatment five rungs below the treatment we afford our dogs. I don’t know if those were rules or boundaries, but they should never have existed.
It’s hard to tell from Thomas’s piece if his problem is with gays or Blacks, but like all bigots, he resents being called a bigot.
If you’re tired of hearing about racism, imagine what it’s like to be its victim.
Thomas equates granting equal rights to the LGBTQ community with treating polygamists as a protected class. Never mind that polygamy, a chosen lifestyle is illegal and homosexuality is neither.
The most infuriating claim Thomas makes in this piece (his writing overflows with infuriating claims) is the following:
Conservatives eschew liberalism in all of its forms. Most cite a deep-rooted connection to their Christian faith.
Is it reasonable for one political party to reject each and every principle of the other? Is there no common ground?
I’m a gun-toting Liberal. Doesn’t that afford me some recognition by the radical Right?
As for their deep rooted connection to their Christian faith, that’s just a bunch of hooey. Conservatives who support the lifestyle, corruption and lies of Donnie Trump are a lot of things, but Christian isn’t one of them.
Conservatives who only fight for the right to life until birth and then support denying the fruits of their labor health care, food and shelter are a lot of things, but Christian isn’t one of them.
Asserting that Conservatives are the real Christians is not just blatant hypocrisy, not just a shameless lie, it’s downright blasphemy.
It could accurately be said without fear of contradiction that Christianity is strong with the Liberals. Very strong.
Finishing out his piece, Thomas talks about standards and whether or not we have them or if not having them is the same as having them. Very confusing.
It’s not even clear if the standards to which he refers are rules, boundaries or something else entirely.
Come to think of it, it’s probably easier to get a dog to stop licking himself.
Subscribe to the Chicago Board of Tirade
* You will never get SPAM
* Your email address will never be sold or given away
* You will only receive emails on days I post
* You can unsubscribe at any time
* Just type your email address in the box below and click the “Create Subscription” button