2009/08/08 at 9:55 am (american history, political correctness, politics, Psycho Donuts)
Tags: American Dream, campbell california, free speech, freedom, human rights, Jay Adler, political correctness, rights
I think that one of the major aspect of this Psycho Donut “controversy” that draws my attention is the degree to which some Americans have lost their understanding of our basic rights. The rights of free speech and the right to own property have always been two of the cardinal rights under our Constitution and core to our society.
People are now willing to junk the very foundation of our society in the name of being “offended”. The astounding thing in the case of Psycho Donuts is that the “offense” is so microscopically trivial that it… crazy. Someone calls a half-shaved coconut / half crushed-peanut donut “bipolar”. So what? It harms nobody.
Now, I know that the folks that have gotten themselves all worked up over this will claim that somehow this don’t leads children to suicide, etc, etc. They are always quite vague as to how this happens. Essentially, they just assume that it does. Because it must; it allows the Offended to assert that their “rights” are being violated.
Well, maybe a better way to put it would be that it allows them to assert that the rights of someone else are being violated. That someone else is usually conveniently offstage… or better, an abstract group, such as “the children”. The Offended Person has somehow decided that s/he speaks for that group.
Even if the Offended One is a member of that group, it’s arrogant to simply assume that one speaks for everyone else. Did everyone get together and elect you King of the Bipolars or Spokeswoamn for “the children” or “Grand Poobah of Head Trauma”? No? OK, speak only for yourself, then.
The problem here, is these folks take their Offense and use it to stamp on the actual rights of others. I’ve seen a couple examples online recently, Here’s a snip of one:
This is demented and should be stopped by the licensing body in California that must have human rights requirements of their own. The business however offensive to the impaired among us has been operating for months. … I am not an attorney but I do have years of legal training. There is some levity and outrageous supporting opinions reduced to writing on the Internet. If I were the owners or the vocally or written supporters in a situation that potentially because state charges have been filed could conceivably evolve into a Federal Discrimination case furthered by the Justice Department and the ADA, a lot of donut people may be taking the stand for a long time.
and further :
Maybe someone with clout should get a law firm and proceed to the Justice Department and file a Discrimination Complaint. The complainant does not have to fear a counterclaim in this instance and and may not be, under federal law hindered or restrained from the filing.
Creepy thing 1 : Notice how even individuals who voice support for the target of the Offended should be harassed by legal and governmental means? And the writer considers that to be a Good Thing?
Creepy thing 2 : Notice how the term “human right” is being twisted for the sake of convenience? What “right” is being violated by donuts and internet free speech?
Creepy thing 3 : Notice how the goal is to ruin a small business, it’s customers and well-wishers?