Sedonaman’s List

Abortion

Abolition of private property

Abolition of tradition

Adultery

"Alternative lifestyles"

Anti-Americanism

Anti-democracy

Anti-subsidiarity

Assisted suicide

Death taxes

Defiance of legitimate authority

Distribution of condoms in K-12

Diversity (except viewpoint)

Euthanasia

Female masturbation workshops in universities

Fornication

Glorification of debauchery

Godless Marxism

"Hate" crimes laws

Hate for religion (except Islam)

Hate for those of faith (except Islamics and Islamic bombers)

Homosexual special rights

Intolerance of the good

Isolationism

K-12 Indoctrination into Godless Marxism

K-12 Indoctrination into homosexuality

K-12 sex education

Lack of moral clarity

Moral equivalency

Moral Relativism

Nietzscheism

Obliteration of God from the public square

Parole of vicious criminals

Pedophilia (except by Catholic priests and Republicans)

Polylogism

Pro-Europeanism

Racial quotas

Radical egalitarianism

Redistribution of OTHER peoples’ money

Release of known terrorists

Same-sex "marriage"

Sodomy

Speech codes

The individual human will (will to power)

Tolerance of evil

Tolerance Über Alles

UN one-world government

Unlimited government

Unlimited taxation

"Victimless" crimes

Voting rights for aliens (legal or otherwise)

Voting rights for felons   

The Chickenhawk Fallacy

            The blogosphere is teaming with articles regarding Barbara Boxer’s latest faux pas so I felt it important to throw something into the fire to further fan the flames. The latest argument against the war in Iraq to come out of the Left is that the decision to go to war is being made by those who have no personal stake, nothing to sacrifice, because their children are not serving in the military. Furthermore, the lack of any military service on the part of these “Chickenhawks,” disqualifies them authorizing any use of the American Armed Forces. The only individuals qualified to make decisions on how to conduct the war in Iraq are Democrats who previously served in the military, Generals waited until retirement to voice their “true” opinions (Instead of resigning their commissions when asked to act against what they now say was their better judgment), and political pundits who failed to make it in talk radio.

            The fallacy here is so ridiculous one may be overwhelmed at where to start in the deconstruction. The first and most obvious place is the United States Constitution. I don’t recall reading a single clause in which military service was required to serve in any higher office. Yet the President of the United States and Congress are given specific roles and responsibilities over the United States Armed Forces. It should then be concluded that since the Framers never intended military service to be a requirement for directing the use of the United States Armed Forces, it is silly and unconstitutional to do so now. Any Senator or Representative making official remarks about Chickenhawks is actually in violation of the Constitution and should be duly censured.

            Legalities aside, there is such an amazing hypocrisy to these remarks that would send any sane person into hysterical laughter upon hearing such statements. If we were to actually hold our elected officials to this sort of standard across the board in all legislative decisions, we find some glaring inconsistencies between the actions of the Neo-Liberals and their deeds.

• What right does Ted Kennedy have to make decisions regarding taxes? He certainly doesn’t pay his fair share, choosing instead to hide his wealth in offshore trust funds.
• What right does Nancy Pelosi have to make decisions regarding welfare? Neither she nor her children collect.
• What right does Hillary Clinton or anyone else in Congress have to make decisions regarding Universal Health Care? They will receive the best Health Care the tax payers can provide for the rest of their lives and would certainly not authorize the same level of health care for all of America.
• What right do the male members of Congress in FAVOR of keeping abortion LEGAL have to make any decisions regarding abortion since they have no personal stake in it?
• What right does John Kerry have to make legislation affecting public education since he has no children in public schools?

I could go on and on about the pronouncements of the entire Democratic Party where they have opined and made legislative decisions about subjects in which they have no personal stake. However, I would be guilt of my own fallacy. They have been elected to make such decisions. That is what the United States Constitution is all about. I may not agree with the actions of Hillary Clinton, but the people of New York have entrusted her to be their voice in the Senate. I must respect no matter how much I question the wisdom of Hillary’s legislative actions.

Somebody correct me if I am wrong but I do not recall anyone questioning President Clinton’s use of the military based on his lack of past service. There were other arguments offered but nobody called him a chickenhawk.