PDA

View Full Version : Contemplating the latest "Progressive" Demand Saying, "Is This a Hill Worth Dying On?



megimoo
04-05-2009, 04:03 PM
Marriage: A Hill to Die On

Back in the 1970s, William F. Buckley Jr. was invited to debate feminist author Germaine Greer at the Oxford Union, but found that he and Greer were unable to agree on the wording of the resolution to be debated. After a long exchange of trans-Atlantic telegrams, Buckley in exasperation cabled his final proposal: "Resolved: Give 'em an inch, they'll take a mile."

In that simple phrase, Buckley summed up a basic truth about the conservative instinct. Over and over, we find ourselves fighting what is essentially a defensive battle against the forces of organized radicalism who insist that "social justice" requires that we grant their latest demand.

We know, however, that their latest demand is never their last demand. Grant the radicals everything they demand today, and tomorrow they will return with new demands that they insist are urgently necessary to satisfy the requirements of social justice.

When they refer to themselves as "progressives," radicals express their own basic truth: Their method of operation is always to move steadily forward, seeking a progressive series of victories, each new gain exploited to lay the groundwork for the next advance, as the opposition progressively yields terrain.

Such is the remorseless aggression of radicalism that conservatives forever find themselves contemplating the latest "progressive" demand and asking, "Is this a hill worth dying on?"

My own instinct is always to answer, "Hell, yes." Nothing succeeds like success and nothing fails like failure.

Ergo, to defeat the radicals in their latest crusade (whatever the crusade may be) is to demoralize and weaken their side, and to embolden and encourage our side.

Even to fight and lose is better than conceding without a fight because, after all, give 'em an inch and they'll take a mile.

This explains much about why I disagree with some conservatives who say we should not expend much effort defending traditional marriage against the gay-rights insurgency.

Some conservatives are wholly persuaded by the arguments of same-sex marriage advocates. Others, however, are merely unprincipled cowards and defeatists. Concerned about maintaining their intellectual prestige, some elitists on the Right do not wish to associate themselves with Bible-thumping evangelicals. Or, disparaging the likelihood of successful opposition, they advocate pre-emptive surrender rather than waging a fight that will put conservatism on the losing side of the issue.

http://spectator.org/archives/2009/04/06/marriage-a-hill-to-die-on

Last Samurai
04-08-2009, 09:45 AM
The gay marriage bit is not such a "hot button" topic for me. If the poor schmucks want to be legitimized THAT badly..... be my guest.

I have only one contingency on my approval..... that, when the "marriage" is over, they go through exactly the same legal BS that the rest of us have to put up with. Lawyers, Courts and all. Alimory, splitting of the riches, who gets what, child support (if any), visitation..... all the little niceties us "straights" have had to endure since forever.

Would serve them right!

LS