Question from Ms. Anna Flaxis, Des Moines, Iowa:
Dear Editor:
Q.: Why do you people stubbornly reject the belief in “Intelligent Design”? Isn’t evolution just a theory?
Ans.: So is gravity [theory of gravity], the orbit of the Earth around the Moon [heliocentric theory], the atomic theory, and the theories of thermodynamics and buoyancy. Incidentally, how can the belief that the World, including, all its fauna and flora were created by a Deity in six days, just in time for the Sunday Sabbath be considered intelligent? Lastly, what is it that would, sufficiently qualify you, as a mere mortal, to adjudge a Deity’s work, as intelligent or not.
Question from Ms. Sarah Tonin, Brentwood, Long Island:
Q.: Why should we teach critical race theory to our children, instead of the eternal righteousness represented by their America?
Ans.: Our Nation and its children can only advance, sociologically and morally, by the candid revelation of its history, inclusive of its dark periods, in the context of truth and in sincere resolve for its continuing improvement. Children are suitably inclined to respect their parents and country when they are advised of the empirical truth, good and bad.
Question from Billy Goethe, Intercourse, Pa.
Q.: Shouldn’t homosexuals be barred from teaching children to protect young students from being subtly inculcated in non-traditional sexuality?
Ans.: People are straight or homosexual, depending on their innate hormonal inheritance, and not upon their volitional choice or through social interaction with teachers or anyone else. You can take no especial credit for being randomly born with hormones, consistent with your visible gender, nor ought the minority of individuals be judged harshly, who are randomly born with diverse hormones.
Question from Mrs. Igna Ramos, of Bronx, N.Y.
Q.: Why does plinyblog always come down so hard on the “Right to Life” movement; don’t they agree that human babies have a right to live?
Ans.: Of course, all babies, without exception, have the universal right to live; no one disputes this basic assertion which, frankly speaking, is entirely irrelevant to the issue. The assertively false choice of name, “Right to Life,” is a tactically misleading and a cynically false propaganda device, chosen by this tribe of pseudo- religious, cynically manipulative zealots, far more interested in political power than candid decency and humane empathy. We consistently deride these fraudulent and insensitive people because they perniciously cling to a false guise of morality but promote acts and policies contrary to any minimal conception of empathy or respect for human rights.
The fetus at a very early developing stage in a women’s uterus is a scientific and medical entity, viz., a potential baby. The mother, for subjectively valid reasons, may feel the need to halt its full progression to babyhood. At the earliest ontological stages, the entity still remains part of the mother’s own physiology. Her deliberated, ultimate decision, in cases of rape, unintended pregnancy, extreme privation or other subjectively significant reason, psychiatric or otherwise, to terminate the early, ongoing process, should be personal and inviolate.
In addition to the employment of its tactically misleading name, the professed, ”Right to Life” organization, publicly expresses the pseudo-religious assertion, that such termination, albeit, at an early nascent, formative stage, is homicide. To emphasize the sincerity of such public assertions of moral rectitude, they have, knowledgeably, committed premeditated and intentional murder of physicians and nurses, engaged in abortion procedures. Their flagrant hypocrisy is as well, clearly disclosed by their eternal disposition, after the event of the birth of the child, to vigorously oppose programs of its desperately needed food, health or other assistance. They irrationally aspire only to protect the fetus.
Members of “Right to Life” generally support unregulated gun ownership and the atavistic institution of the death penalty [capital punishment]. It is demonstrably apparent that their basic intent is the acquisition of political influence; evidently, they could not possibly care less about “life.”
Question from Bill O’Lading, Shreveport, La.
Q.: Why has plinyblog.com, been so intense in its hatred of Donald J. Trump?
Ans.: The sentiments expressed, have been intimately analogous to our eternal abhorrence of termites, that eat away and undermine the foundations of our family home.
*[Editor’s note: Readers are encouraged to send comments or questions to: pliny36@gmail.com for prompt and attentive response.]
-p.
plinyblogdotcom 