Wednesday, September 21


How much does logic figure into any important decision you make? Is it a major consideration—or only one of many evaluations? When it comes to the values by which you order your life, do you try to anticipate the results of your actions by mentally or intellectually following the likely responses to those actions that logic would demand? Would it be reasonable NOT to consider logically what those results might be?

For instance, for homosexuals to desire passive acceptance of their chosen lifestyle would be one thing. To demand that all people approve of their sexual preference is another thing altogether. In the minds of some homosexuals, those who are only attracted to members of the opposite sex are the ones with the problem, not the homosexual. It is necessary sometimes to remind them that if every person in America (or the world, for that matter) practiced homosexuality, the human race would cease to exist. As of this writing, to my limited knowledge, two individuals of the same sex cannot procreate except by artificial means. On the other hand, a male and female can breed and produce children, which would seem to be the way nature intended. Logic.

Another instance: Nancy Pelosi doesn’t believe that everyone should be locked into a job so that they can have healthcare. They should be able to do anything or do nothing except write poetry and still be afforded health coverage. Apparently, a number of people bought into that concept, because we have almost half of working-age Americans (47%) drawing some form(s) of government subsistence. That sounds wonderful—I don’t have to work, and the government will see to it that I can still eat, have a place to live, and have free healthcare. Where do I sign up? . . . Only . . . What if every American chose to avail himself/herself of that opportunity? I heard someone explain to a newsman who was obviously intellectually inferior that nobody needed to work, that President Obama could pay for all that, “out of his stash”. Where did he get that ‘stash’? Formerly, it came from taxpayers. But if we are all taking advantage of the government’s ‘freebies’ . . . There is no stash. Logic.

One more: I know that the makers of Skittles were deeply offended when Donald Trump the younger used that delicacy in a word picture regarding the fallibility in admitting large numbers of un-vetted immigrants. Allow me to use another equally flawed example. Suppose a friend gave you a list of babysitters he had obtained somewhere. And suppose he told you that only one of the thirteen on that list was a homicidal maniac. The others are as good as gold. Assuming you have young children that you dearly love, would you take a chance that the one babysitter you hire to keep the children tonight will not be the one with the penchant for murder? Oh, and somebody who has never met any of the babysitters will give you his personal assurance that your babysitter is reliable, dependable and loves children. Take the chance? I thought not. Now, we know as much about my mythical babysitters as we know about many of those we are allowing to immigrate to America from nations like Syria, Iraq—places where it is impossible to conduct a dependable vetting process. Logic.

We have been following the twisted logic of the secular humanists (Democrats) for eight years now. Is it logical that we sign up for another four to eight years this November by electing Hillary Clinton as President? I didn’t think so. That would be illogical.

No comments:

RINO Blog Watch (Blog)

RINO Forum - User Submitted News

RINO Forum - Elections

Recent Posts

Contact Form


Email *

Message *

Views (since Blogger started counting)

Blog Archives

Follow by Email - Widget 13

Click Here To Become A Conservative Blogs Central Blogger

Back to TOP