Well, certainly to discriminate solely on the basis of race is. It's bad to discriminate solely on the basis of religion, or gender, or age, etc. etc.
But is discrimination always bad?
To discriminate simply means to make distinctions, and then to act on those distinctions. If you're my best friend, and you decide to have an affair with my husband, I may discriminate against you by never talking to you again (or something more mean). I'm making a decision to treat you a certain way because of something that you did.
On this anniversary of September 11, too, I think some more discrimination is warranted. I think we should discriminate and marginalize those from other faiths who say that all Jews are pigs, or that we should insist that women veil themselves, or that it's okay to mutilate little girls' genitals so that they can't enjoy sex later. These ideas led directly to the jihadist culture that caused September 11, and if we could take a firm stand against it, perhaps we'd be more effective in combatting it.
In fact, I think the world could use a lot more discriminating, even in just our personal spheres. We need to bring back honest to goodness shame! When people do something that seriously crosses a moral code, we should discriminate against them so that they feel the shame. I wouldn't force anybody to wear the Red Letter A, like in The Scarlet Letter, but at least telling people that we think pornography use is wrong, or cheating is wrong, or lying is wrong, isn't bad. It would do society a lot more good if we began insisting on certain moral codes again.
I was reminded of this when the ACORN scandal broke this week. For those of you who aren't familiar with it, a 25-year-old filmmaker and a 20-year-old friend went undercover at ACORN, the community organization where Obama got his start, to show how leftwing and nefarious the organization is. It's currently receiving billions and billions in stimulus money, and is in charge of much of the census, at the same time as it is under investigation in 15 states for election fraud.
These two walked in there and claimed that she was a prositute who needed to buy a house, nad he was her new pimp. They gave her information on how to lie and cheat on her taxes so she could get a loan, and then she dropped the big bombshell.
She has 13 15-year-old El Salvadorean girls who are going to come work with her for a while. How should she declare them on her taxes to get tax breaks?
The workers gave her advice on how many to call dependents, and how to just hide the rest. That's right. They didn't try to rescue child prostitutes. They told their "abductor" how to hide them.
But what struck me was this exchange (from the transcript). I can't copy it, but I'll retype it:
Shira: First of all let me tell you something my job is not to judge people....I don't like nobody to judge me so therefore I don't judge nobody else.
And earlier in the transcript she was going on about how "we don't discriminate against anybody".
They have taken the language of civil rights--discrimination is bad--and made it mean something totally different.
Discrimination is no longer about treating people badly because of something inherent, like skin colour (which they can't change). It's now about treating people exactly the same regardless of how they act (which they can change).
We're not getting rid of discrimination; we're getting rid of morality, which, incidentally, was responsible for the civil rights movement in the first place. People knew what right and wrong was, and they wanted to make sure the country reflected that. Now we're trying to make sure that the country erases all thought of right and wrong.
When you elevate "non-discrimination" as your highest value, as these ACORN workers have, you become proud of yourself simply for not discriminating.
But let's take this to its logical conclusion. It's easy to not discriminate against people who are responsible citizens. To say to yourselves, "I feel good about myself because I don't discriminate against them" makes no sense. Of course you wouldn't discriminate against them! But if anti-discrimination of any form is your highest value, then the way to express it is to stop discriminating against those who would normally be discriminated against.
In other words, if you're really going to achieve your highest value, you need to give people a pass who do truly outrageous things. Or else have you really done anything extraordinary?
So these ACORN workers heard about a girl involved in prostitution and her pimp, and heard how they were going to enslave 13 15-year-old illegal immigrants from El Salvador, and they told them over and over again how they wouldn't judge them. They probably went home feeling absolutely wonderful, because you can't get much lower than a prostitute and a pimp engaging in forced child prostitution. To not discriminate against them shows how absolutely non-judgmental they are! They have arrived!
When anti-discrimination becomes the new morality, it can only be expressed in extreme ways. The more moral transgressions there are to ignore, the more you have expressed your tolerance. Being tolerant against the nice and kind is easy; being tolerant against child molestors is much harder. The ones highest up the new morality totem pole, then, are those who excuse the worst. The world has turned on its head.
ACORN is a huge organization involved with billions and billions of dollars, and it is promoting this "non-discrimination", and thus its anti-morality, across the country. But it's not alone. Planned Parenthood advises pregnant 13-year-olds who were impregnated by their boyfriends in their 20s how to avoid getting child services involved, even though legally it is statutory rape. They don't want to discriminate, you see. Up here in Canada we have the same moral direction at our campus Women's Centres at universities, where rape is not reported if an abortion is needed. We have left wing organizations trying to legitimize all kinds of things. It is rampant.
And over and over again, this verse keeps running through my head:
"Woe to you who call good evil, and evil good." (Isaiah 5:20).
I wasn't sure whether or not to post on this, but I have some thoughts on Obama's Special Olympics gaffe, and I'd like to get them out.
First, a disclaimer. I completely believe in free speech. I am completely against political correctness. I don't think we should all second guess ourselves and watch what we say for fear of offending someone. For instance, I think people are far too scared to criticize some cultures because they may be labelled racist. But some cultures are bad, if not downright evil in some respects, and if we ignore things like Islamic honor killings or child marriage, we're doing a disservice to everyone.
But the reason that I dislike political correctness is that it distorts truth. It makes people watch what they say--EVEN IF IT IS THE TRUTH--so they don't offend. The key here is to avoid offense, not to speak the truth.
I'm in favour of truth, regardless of whether it causes offense (though, of course, we should also be tactful).
But that doesn't mean I'm in favour of causing offense if there's no truth behind it. Saying racist things against African Americans just because they're African Americans is wrong and should never be done. Saying that the African American community has an issue with illegitimacy should be done, in the proper context. Do you see the difference?
By the way, I think my culture has issues, too, primarily around lack of compassion, lack of fortitude in speaking up against moral relativism, and lack of commitment to our families. So we've all got problems.
Some are saying right now that Obama's comment that he bowls as badly as the Special Olympics was stupid, but nothing to get upset about. We should just leave it.
I don't agree. Though I'm not politically correct, I hope I don't go around gratuitously taking slaps at people just to make myself look better. And what he was saying had nothing to do with truth, and everything to do with offense. To cause offense for no reason except to boost your own ego isn't just stupid. It reflects a fundamental character flaw.
Now maybe he was just making a joke and it fell flat. We all make stupid jokes sometimes. But I don't think I've ever joked about the Special Olympics.
Especially not since 1996. Here's a picture of me with someone very dear to me. This was taken the night before my son Christopher had open heart surgery. Unfortunately, the surgery wasn't successful, and he died five days later. Christopher had Down Syndrome.
When we first found out, while I was still pregnant, it seemed like everyone was pressuring us to abort, especially the doctors. (You can read the story here). But we didn't.
It wasn't that I was happy about the Down Syndrome. I was devastated. What if my son could never read? Would I have to care for him the rest of my life? Would he ever get married?
But after a few days of panic, we began to read more and more materials about Down's. We joined listservs of Down Syndrome parents. And I became excited. I was going to be the best mom he could have!
I only had that chance for a month on this side of heaven. The rest of my relationship with him will have to wait until we're reunited. But so many people plot against these little blessings. The doctors didn't want him to be born. Many in my family didn't want him born. Keith's colleagues didn't want him born. And Obama thinks he's the subject of a joke.
What are we becoming when we start making jokes about the least of these? We're becoming cruel, heartless, and proud. It seems to me I remember Someone else saying something quite different about those who are maybe a little more helpless among us. He said, "whoever does this to the least of these my brothers does it to Me." So when Obama said that about the Special Olympics, he wasn't just talking about those with Down's. I know that sounds harsh, but that's what I think.
Did Obama intend to insult those with Down's? Of course not. Did he intend to insult those with other disabilities who compete in the Special Olympics? No, I don't think he did. But the point is he made that comment without thinking. I would never do such a thing, anymore than I would make fun of Obama because he's black. Such things don't register with me, as I don't think they do with the majority of good-hearted folk.
We live in a culture which denigrates the disabled without even thinking about it. When we realize what we do, of course we apologize, but the point is that we don't realize it. It's become so commonplace that it just slips out. And what does that say about us?
That's why I don't think it really matters whether he intended it or not. I don't think it matters whether he apologized (though I'm glad he did). And I do hope that he's learned to think a little bit more about those who are disabled.
But if we truly valued the disabled, such slips wouldn't happen. Canada really doesn't have the racist history that the United States does, and so I don't hear racist jokes. I really don't. We trained ourselves not to make them, because racism just isn't acceptable. So surely we can train ourselves not to make jokes about the disabled, either.
If we truly valued those with Down's, the way Jesus does, we won't make such jokes. Perhaps I'm taking this too personally because I still miss my son, but that's just the way I see it.
By the way, at the same time as I was learning about his gaffe, I was putting together a video trailer for my book, How Big Is Your Umbrella, which relates Christopher's story. I posted it the other day, but here it is again:
About Me: I'm a Christian author of a bunch of books, and a frequent speaker to women's groups and marriage conferences. Best of all, I love homeschooling my daughters, Rebecca and Katie. And I love to knit. Preferably simultaneously.
Stumble It!
