Comments Which Conservatives Block From Their Blogs For August 30, 2023

 Aug 26

To Heidelblog and John Vecchione for the portion of Vecchione's article on a Federal court decision to  block the Government from coercing big Tech to censor speech. I believe the speech being censored is concerned with ant-vax positions. In his decision, the Federal judge likened the government to a mob boss.

So some conservatives are celebrating both a court case in which misinformation and even disinformation on safety issues, such as the use of vaccines, can be protected free speech and states that prohibit CRT and other woke materials from being taught in schools because such materials do not promote patriotic views of history.. Of course, the mere content of the latter is regarded as indoctrination even though indoctrination is a teaching method, not content.

In the above case, anti-vax and possibly other wrong information that can endanger individuals and even the general public is counted as free speech. Perhaps, if the 5th Court was located in Germany, would it strike down and compare Germany's anti-Semitism laws to a mob boss dictating what could be said? The answer could tell us whether we conservatives are arguing for free speech or partisan speech.

Of course, we don't have to move the 5th District Court to Germany to find out. For we already see some conservatives celebrating the above ruling, which can still be reversed, while supporting Republican states that prohibit the teaching of CRT and other woke materials in public schools. Here we should note that a conservative state also tried to prohibit the teaching of CRT and woke materials in private businesses. And didn't Trump also interfere with, if not prohibit, private businesses that had federal contracts from teaching teaching their  employees CRT and other woke materials? And didn't the Trump Administration censor all references to climate change in the EPA and possibly some other agencies? And so it seems that, for some conservatives, only conservative speech can be protected as being free speech.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To William Bednarz and the posting of his article the denounced liberalism as being hegemonic and caused a denial of reality and thus an unworthy replacement for Christian Order over a nation when the Church holds sway over a nation. This article was posted in the Imaginative Conservative website.

Let me see if I understand Bednorz's point. Liberalism's exercise of power is hegemonic while Christianity's exercise of power is establishing the right order. And that is the case even though liberalism allows Christianity to exist and operate in society as an equal to other religious views, Christian order would force a Christian view of life on the unbelievers in society. 

Bednarz then seems to add that to infringe on the Church's duty to order society is to infringe on Christianity. But is that what Jesus taught in the Gospels or the Apostles taught in the Book of Acts or in the Epistles? And when we look at the history of Christendom, wasn't it Christian order than mandated religious wars, the enslavement of people, the ethnic cleansing of indigenous people, racism, religious persecution, the exploitation of countries and regions from other continents for their natural resources, imperialism and colonialism and colonialism?

So, again, why would he call it a 'liberal hegemony' when liberalism was embraced and followed and 'Christian order' when the Church was the dominant political power?