In response to “Hollow argument” published in the Oct. 31 print edition of The Malibu Times

Informed that someone had mounted a response to my critique of Mr. York, I expected an intelligent, rational and specific point-by-point rebuttal. What I got was the kind of raw emotionalism I associate with the progressive mindset. Let’s have a look:

I, too, salute the Times for its willingness to publish my work product. How that fact shows that the paper has more respect for the Constitution than do I eludes me. I think it eluded Mr. Dresser as well, but his emotionalism may explain the lapse. Mr. Dresser disapproves my take on SCOTUS and CJ Roberts but, again, fails to cite chapter and verse. No scholarship here. His next point would be a laugh riot were the issue not so important in the social fabric scheme of things. Any rational adult who would argue, as does Dresser, that there are more than two sexes, needs more help than I can offer. BTW, “sex” and “gender” are not synonymous. Sex is assigned at birth. That some find themselves at odds with nature does not change the fact that there are only two choices here, not a bunch of made up, touchy feely “genders” that nature never intended and does not recognize.

Obama violated the Constitution with his DREAMer program. Period. All the humanity, empathy and compassion on Planet Earth do not and cannot override the Constitution. If Mr. Dresser disagrees, let him point us all to that section of the document which authorizes anyone from the Executive Branch to act in this lawless and reckless manner. As for children separated from their parents, remember who did that first? BHO! Also, these people have broken the law and have no rational basis to argue for family unification. That was a choice they made by breaking into our country. And, by the way, if Mr. Dresser happens to be a family man, and happens to be arrested for criminal misconduct, he and his children will be separated, too. Nothing new here. As for the unsanitary cages, those stories have been debunked repeatedly. The pictures to which he probably refers were pictures of detainees under the Obama administration.

The recurring theme in Mr. Dresser’s response is blind emotion. LGBTQ folks are entitled to the evenhanded application of both state and federal Constitutions. But no more than that. And certainly no more than any other citizen should expect. Restated, there is no special dispensation because someone feels that he was dealt a dirty blow at birth and that his feelings don’t match his genitalia. Sorry! Not gonna have it.

In closing, I invite my critic to respond, but this time to explain with specificity just what has his knickers in a knot. Then we can have a worthwhile exchange of views. I await his next salvo with enthusiasm.

Steve Jones

(0) comments

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.