Green Room

Liberal Logic: A Hodgepodge of Baffling Contradictions

posted at 9:04 am on June 6, 2012 by

You know, sometimes I am just completely baffled by liberal logic. And by sometimes I mean all the time. Case in point: the contradictory “hands off” and “hands on” policies regarding abortion/contraception and diet nannyism, respectively. Leftists are often big supporters of bloated government programs and federal intervention. However, on the abortion issue many claim to be downright libertarian. “Out of my uterus” has long been a rallying cry for liberal women. When it comes to abortion and contraceptive services, these women try to keep government at an arm’s length. However, when this “hands off” policy is juxtaposed with other liberal policies, the logic is contradictory.

Here’s where the contradiction occurs. While pro-choice advocates criticize Republicans for “interfering with the reproductive rights,” they are more than happy to allow the government to regulate everything they eat and put in their bodies. Take New York City Mayor Bloomberg’s recent ban on fountain sodas exceeding 16 ounces. In regards to the ban, Bloomberg said that he is simply “forcing” people to understand what’s good for them. This comes from a pro-choice guy who has had a positive relationship with pro-abortion group Planned Parenthood. Bloomberg is fully in support of women having the right to choose to end the life of their child, but when it comes to soda consumption, he is far from “pro-choice.” This is an ideology that is not limited to just Michael Bloomberg. Just take a look at Michelle Obama’s “War on Obesity.” She is fully in support of the government regulating what we eat, but taking a life should be your “choice.”

However, while there is a contradiction in this form of liberal logic, I do believe that I’ve discovered a way to rectify seemingly incompatible differences. It all comes down to our nation’s increased desire for immediate gratification. We have been taught to always look for the easy way out. Liberals are more than keen to provide that easy way out, especially if it includes government intervention. For example, while I do sympathize with the plight of single or impoverished mothers who become pregnant, I propose that abortion is the easy way out. Yes, carrying a child for 9 months is physically, emotionally, and financially taxing. However, in no way does that justify murder. Why not adoption? Abortion is the “quick fix.” Women who choose this option disregard the opportunity for adoption and providing happiness for a childless couple. They want to get rid of the “problem” quickly through abortion. In the words of our president, no one wants to be “punished” with a child.

This sense of immediate gratification also comes to play in the diet nanny state. Losing weight and remaining healthy is hard work. Why not take the easy way out? If the government “forces” you to eat correctly, it takes all the work out of losing weight. Positive changes take time and they are supposed to come from the inside out, not the top down. The government is incapable of creating a nation of perfectly healthy citizens, even if they regulate everything that we put in our bodies. We can’t make long lasting healthy changes if we are simply eating healthy because the government forces us to eat healthy. A nutritionally balanced lifestyle implies a personal choice. This choice is denied with the government heavily regulates the food industry. People in New York City aren’t going to opt for smaller sodas because they want to be healthy. They will opt for smaller sizes because they are being forced to do so by Mayor Bloomberg.

Our culture’s fascination with immediate gratification shows a dangerous trend. Often, when we as individuals seek immediate gratification, it implies that we give up some of our power. Often this power falls in the hands of the government. The government has legally certified murder under the guise of abortion. Want to be healthy? Let the government take care of your diet. However, when the government seizes power, it is sure to take more. For the short-term benefit of immediate gratification, we are potentially sacrificing our long-term freedom.

Hard work and diligence helped make this nation great. “Quick fixes,” have no place in the American character and they have no place in our government either. Here’s a life lesson that even I have learned thus far: Life is hard. We will have hard choices to make every day. Don’t give up your personal power and allow the government to make those choices for you.

Original Post at The College Conservative

Recently in the Green Room:

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Turned on Morning Joe to enjoy the sobbing this morning, more liberal logic from Howard Dean:

Winning this Senate seat in Wisconsin is a good thing because it essentially kills Walker’s radical agenda.

Next breath: These Republicans only voted against the Fair Pay Act in the US Senate because Obama supports it.

Spiders from Mars on June 6, 2012 at 9:40 AM

Well said Amy!

Donald Draper on June 6, 2012 at 9:41 AM

Basically, if you ascribe any rational thought AT ALL to the actions of liberals, that means you’re overthinking it.

If you want to understand the basis for liberalism, just ask this ONE question: “Will doing or saying this make the liberal feel good?”

If the answer is yes, he does it. If the answer is no, he does not. Period.

To wit: An aborted child is neither seen nor heard; it’s just a big empty space left after you have your fun. On the other hand, fat people are ugly; ergo they must be “helped” at all costs.

logis on June 6, 2012 at 10:03 AM

Liberals (unlike libertarians) who favor legalization of marijuana also engage in the same sort of contradictions — Cigarette smoke in the lungs bad; pot smoke in the lungs, good. Why? Well, because they like to smoke pot and there’s no big evil corporation selling pot, the way they do alcohol, fast food or big sodas.

Liberal ideology basically comes down to their own personal immediate gratification. If they like to do it, it’s fine, if they don’t like it, no one should be allowed to do it. And because they’re such wonderful higher forms of humanity, it means if they like to do something, like own 4 gianoumous homes with massive carbon footprints while telling everyone else they have to save the planet, well, they deserve it, because they’re working so, so hard to save the planet and its inhabitants.

And because their entire sense of self is tied up in the idea that their opponents are either stupid (the majority of the public) or evil (Dick Cheney, Scott Walker, Rush Limbaugh, etc.), it becomes a crusade to defeat the evil ones so you can push your ideas on the stupid ones, because the left knows what’s best for the masses more than they know it themselves.

jon1979 on June 6, 2012 at 10:14 AM

Amy, I am tempted to agree with your logic, but I don’t think that the liberal mentality follows any kind of logic. Based on my experience talking to them, I think liberal thought goes back to one thing: feeling. If it feels, it is.

So it feels bad to see fat people, and they want to legislate them away. They can’t abort them, so they outlaw what makes them fat. Babies, on the other hand, aren’t seen so it feels okay to kill them.

That’s my reduction.

JoseQuinones on June 6, 2012 at 10:31 AM

In regards to abortion vis-a-vis diet nannyism, I’m not sure if there’s that much of a contradiction. Philosophically, the left is not pro-choice; tbey are pro-abortion.

Which upsets feminists more: the complete lack of reproductive freedom, including forced abortions, in China, or legislation that requires women to see an ultrasound before aborting?

sadarj on June 6, 2012 at 10:57 AM

Liberals (unlike libertarians) who favor legalization of marijuana also engage in the same sort of contradictions — Cigarette smoke in the lungs bad; pot smoke in the lungs, good. Why? Well, because they like to smoke pot and there’s no big evil corporation selling pot, the way they do alcohol, fast food or big sodas.

Herein lie the seeds of a terrible dilemma for the left. Let’s say that their fondest wishes are granted and marijuana is legalized in all 50 states. In no time, we’ll have big evil corporations selling pot. Will pot suddenly become bad, or will they engage in mental contortionism to try to justify their self-indulgence? Oh, who am I kidding…

sadarj on June 6, 2012 at 11:02 AM

Liberal logic is an oxymoron.

cajunpatriot on June 6, 2012 at 11:07 AM

Amy, the problem you have is that for you and most people the Liberals we meet and talk to are best described as “useful idiots”

Lenin coined that phrase because it was accurate; in fact, the plan to implement world socialism relies on an army of such people. The occupier, café Marxist, student agitator and Hollywood limo Liberal are all short sighted, narcissistic, and illogical just as you say.

On the other hand, the people who provide the intellectual leadership and real world guidance for Liberalism, whether we call them Socialists, Fascists, or Progressives, are really only concerned with acquiring absolute power for themselves.

It’s possible to feel sorry for the kind of Liberals you and I meet, even to like them as people, but don’t expect to help them much, you can’t fix stupid. The important thing is to never forget that the people behind liberalism are truly evil

halfbaked on June 6, 2012 at 6:20 PM

The government has legally certified murder under the guise of abortion.

(Quoted from the article)

One reason liberal “logic” is so poor is because of their sloppy and sentimental use of language and reasoning, but unfortunately you are doing the same.

By definition, “murder” is unlawful killing. If the killing is lawful then it is not, and cannot possibly be, murder.

One of the reasons the so-called liberals have such confused ‘logic’ is that they twist and distort language and imbue words with emotions or meanings that they didn’t previously have. “New-speak” was not a minor component of the warning provided in “1984″ — control the language and you control the minds and the society, and that is exactly what liberals have been doing, and in the process they have made it increasingly difficult for society to have coherent conversations about anything of importance.

Language needs to be handled carefully. To discuss ideas carefully and rationally, we need precise words.

For as long as abortion is performed in accordance with the law, it is not murder. You might consider it to be reprehensible, sinful, dreadful, selfish, unkind, vicious, barbaric, unholy and shameful … but it is not murder, and you do neither yourself nor your argument any credit by misusing language in the same sloppy and sentimental fashion of those you find fault with.

YiZhangZhe on June 7, 2012 at 9:22 AM

All of the above.

AesopFan on June 7, 2012 at 10:22 PM