bookmark_border“How many of you commenting on this…”

“How many of you commenting on this have ever had: mumps, measles, rubella, chickenpox, polio, diphtheria, tetanus, whooping cough? At age 6 to 7 I had the mumps, measles, chickenpox, rubella. My parents were concerned when I had the measles and the chickenpox at the same time because the doctor questioned if I might not survive. I never want any other child to go through that. Would that the vaccines had been available when I was young.”

This is a comment that I saw on a social media post about the state of Florida’s decision to abolish vaccine mandates. This comment just didn’t sit right with me. At first glance, it’s hard to argue against someone who themselves have had a disease that vaccines are designed to prevent, and who wants to spare others from the same suffering. But I see the issue of vaccines completely differently. And the person who made this comment doesn’t seem open to other perspectives at all. She seems to think that because she has actually experienced what it’s like to have the diseases that vaccines are designed to prevent, her perspective (as well as the perspectives of those who have had similar experiences to her) is the only one that matters on this issue. With this comment, she is subtly claiming the moral high ground for herself and dismissing the experiences and perspectives of other people.

Here is my perspective:

Personally, vaccines had a huge negative impact on my childhood. I remember, from the ages of roughly four to six, the sickening feeling of dread that I would experience each time that my mom told me that I had a doctor’s appointment coming up. At each appointment, I was subjected to painful, invasive, and gruesome shots. I didn’t have the power to say no; I didn’t have any say in what would happen with my body. The dread that I felt leading up to each appointment, the sick feeling in my stomach that I experienced when waiting for the doctor to inform me how many shots I was about to be subjected to, is one of the most vivid memories of my childhood. The routine practice of vaccination was by far the biggest negative aspect of my life during those years.

I don’t believe in mandatory vaccination, because I don’t want any other child to go through what I experienced.

I wish that vaccines hadn’t been available when I was young, because then I wouldn’t have had to get them. I wouldn’t have been subjected to the years of dread and pain that mandatory vaccines inflicted.

That’s my experience.

My experience matters, and my perspective matters, just as much as the experiences and perspectives of people who got sick and wish that they had been able to get a vaccine.

It’s hard to argue against someone who has gotten so sick that they nearly didn’t survive, and wants to spare others from having the same experience. But my perspective is just as valid as this person’s, my experiences just as important and deserving of empathy. I suffered as well, and also want to spare others from having the same experience that I did. I’m tired of being silenced, attacked, insulted, called an “anti-vaxxer” and “anti-science,” my perspective disregarded again and again in favor of pro-vaccine voices.

It’s hard not to have empathy for someone who nearly died from a contagious disease. But the little girl who was subjected to painful and unwanted medical procedures deserves empathy too. Having a needle injected into your arm is not nothing, particularly when it happens again and again, month after month, year after year. For young children, as well as some adults, getting a shot is experienced as painful and gruesome, and this is a completely valid experience. Living in constant dread for years is not nothing. Being denied any say in what happens to your body is not nothing. The suffering inflicted by vaccines is very real. Vaccination significantly reduces quality of life. And these harms need to be weighed against the benefits of vaccination in preventing diseases. Because the little girl who existed 30 years ago, and who wasn’t allowed to voice her perspective or stand up for herself, matters. The fact that one little girl had mumps, measles, chickenpox, and rubella, is no reason for another little girl to be punished by having her rights violated, her preferences disregarded, and her quality of life destroyed.

As sympathetic as this commenter seems, she, like so many pro-vaccine people, is denying the existence of any perspectives other than hers. She went through something bad, so all that matters is preventing other people from experiencing the same bad thing that she did. She wishes that she had gotten vaccines when she was a child, so all children must be forced to get them. She has a preference, and so her preference must be imposed on everyone. My experiences are different from hers, and so they don’t matter.

But in reality, her experiences do not negate mine. Her desire to prevent suffering does not negate my fundamental rights. Her preference to have gotten vaccines is not a license to impose this preference on other people. Her wish that vaccines had been available to her as a child, does not make it okay to force them on other children against their will.

Let’s circle back to the question, “How many of you commenting on this have ever had: mumps, measles, rubella, chickenpox, polio, diphtheria, tetanus, whooping cough?” By asking this question, the commenter seems to be implying that if someone hasn’t had one of these diseases, then they’re in no position to give their opinion on the issue of vaccines. She is implying that having had some of these diseases gives her the moral high ground and makes her perspective more valid than others. But it’s just as important and relevant to ask: “How many of you commenting on this have ever been subjected to years of constant dread and pain due to being forced against your will to get vaccines?” I have. And that’s just as important, and just as relevant, as having had a vaccine-preventable disease. Contrary to what this commenter seems to be implying, my perspective is just as valid as hers, and just as valid as anyone else’s.

bookmark_borderBullying people for being “incels” is the same as attacking the Confederates for being “losers”

I was browsing on Substack the other day, and while reading an article about a random topic (link here), I came across the below comment:

Anyone who unironically uses the word “incel” as a pejorative is demonstrating severe sociopathic tendencies, in my opinion. Imagine how sadistic and devoid of compassion you have to be in order to bully people who are unattractive and unpopular SIMPLY FOR BEING UNATTRACTIVE AND UNPOPULAR. If that’s not an example of kicking someone while they’re down, I don’t know what is. These people are acting as if unattractiveness and lack of popularity is a mortal character flaw in and of itself–as if it makes their target morally irredeemable and sub-human–as an ad-hoc method of justifying actual bullying and evil behavior toward those who most likely don’t deserve it. And the people who throw the “incel” label around casually are typically the ones who claim to be the most compassionate. What a joke. I know someone’s going to read my comment and respond with “You sound really upset about this. You sound like an incel! This is exactly what an incel would say!”

I agree 100% with this comment and feel that a very similar point could be made about the Confederacy.

People attack and insult the Confederacy, and argue that it shouldn’t be honored with statues and monuments, because it lost the war. As if losing a war somehow demonstrates poor character. As if a lack of population, resources, and supplies is somehow a character flaw.

Losing a war has nothing to do with character. Winning and losing are determined by things such as population size, resources, and supplies. These are things that have nothing to do with character. Which side wins, and which side loses, has nothing to do with which side was right and which side was wrong.

People who attack and insult the Confederates for being “losers” are attacking and insulting the Confederacy for having a smaller population, fewer supplies, less advanced technology, and a less industrialized economy.

When you call the Confederates “losers,” you are acting as if a lack of population, resources, and supplies is a character flaw. Just as, by using the word “incel” as a pejorative, you are acting as if unattractiveness and lack of popularity are character flaws. But these aren’t character flaws. And there is no logical reason whatsoever to believe that they are.

People who call Confederate soldiers “losers” as a pejorative are demonstrating the exact same attitude as those who use the word “incel” as a pejorative. Just as the latter group of people are choosing to bully those who are unattractive and unpopular simply for being unattractive and unpopular, the former group of people are choosing to bully a nation that had a small population, fewer supplies, less advanced technology, and a less industrialized economy… simply for having a small population, fewer supplies, less advanced technology, and a less industrialized economy.

As the above commenter correctly points out, this way of thinking is sadistic, completely devoid of compassion, and is the very essence of kicking someone when they’re down. It’s also completely irrational and has no basis in logic or reason.

And, as the commenter also correctly points out, the people who do this are generally the people who claim to be the most compassionate. When in reality, their decision to equate a lack of attractiveness, popularity, resources, and supplies with poor character demonstrates not only their complete and utter lack of logic, but also their complete and utter lack of compassion for the people who need it the most.

bookmark_borderNew Raphael Semmes statue unveiled!

The statue of Admiral Raphael Semmes that I blogged about here has officially been unveiled!

Here are a few pictures from the days leading up to the unveiling (all posted by the Raphael Semmes SCV Camp #11 unless otherwise noted):

Here are some pictures of the ceremony from the Semmes SCV Camp.

Here is a beautiful photo of the statue from Monuments Across Dixie.

Here is a post by the Virginia Flaggers with more photos.

This excellent post by Dixie Forever contains more info about the history of the Semmes statue.

bookmark_borderExcellent post from Dave Smith…

This truly hits the nail on the head:

 
 
 
 
 
View this post on Instagram
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

A post shared by Dave Smith (@theproblemdavesmith)

(source here)

And some of the comments on the post are spot on as well:

“The thing about Kimmel is that he has never been funny.”

“The funniest thing about Kimmel was the irony of him losing his job for something he celebrated when it happened to others.”

“People need to realize Kimmel would applaud you losing your job for anything you say or think that doesn’t match left wing politics.”

bookmark_borderDon’t be someone who simply destroys and tears down…

An excellent post from Monuments Across Dixie:

 
 
 
 
 
 
View this post on Instagram
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

A post shared by Monuments Across Dixie (@monumentsacrossdixie)

Indeed, although writing and reading about history are meaningful pursuits, something even more meaningful is making history, specifically creating new statues and monuments. Nothing compares to the sense of pride that I feel when looking at statues like these:

Additionally, as the post states, it is indeed more honorable to build and create than to destroy and tear down. This is a fact lost on the “woke” bigots who think that destroying as much beauty and good as possible somehow gives them a claim to the moral high ground.

bookmark_borderExcellent article re: progressives’ hypocrisy on free speech

Check out this Substack post by Kaeley Triller Harms, which eloquently explains the despicable reactions to Charlie Kirk’s murder and the hypocrisy that they demonstrate.

Here is an excerpt:

For years, the Left has tightened the noose around free speech, punishing dissenters, reporting neighbors, threatening livelihoods, even lives, for the crime of calling a man a man. And now? Now you want to posture as defenders of open discourse. Really? Where were you?

And here’s the bitter irony: even as conservatives grieve, even as we bury our dead, your late-night court jesters use our wounds as punchlines. Jimmy Kimmel’s ‘primary job’ is to entertain, to unite audiences in laughter. Instead, he exploited a brutal murder to insult half the country. Tell me: what other job in America allows you to spit in your customers’ faces while they’re mourning and still keep your paycheck?

But now – when it’s your speech at stake – you cry ‘free speech’? Do you know what happened to a conservative for speaking freely last week? He was executed while addressing an audience at a university. Until you confront that reality, don’t expect sympathy.

I’ll tell you what’s happening. You built this system. You enforced it on everyone else. And now you’re beginning to taste its consequences.

I agree 100% with this analysis.

You can read the rest here.

bookmark_borderA vigil for Charlie Kirk and a visit to Christopher Columbus

On Thursday night, I attended a candlelight vigil for Charlie Kirk. Conservatives, libertarians, and supporters of free speech gathered on the Boston Common to pay tribute to the political activist who was murdered for speaking out about his beliefs. It was heartwarming to be among fellow non-woke people, a rarity in my state of Massachusetts, holding candles as the dusk settled around us on the steps of the State House. The crowd was sufficiently large that it was difficult for me to see or hear the speakers, but I still enjoyed the comforting and welcoming atmosphere. Even though I didn’t know anyone, I didn’t feel uncomfortable or out of place. Unfortunately, the event ended rather abruptly when the police kicked everyone out of the Boston Common, apparently because Antifa had threatened to blow people up.

One positive result of the terrible but unsurprising actions of Antifa was the fact that I had time to visit Christopher Columbus. After cops spread out across the Common, herding people towards the exits, I meandered towards the North End to visit my favorite statue. Passing through the congested streets, lined with restaurants, caffes, and cannoli shops that were still packed with happily chatting patrons at nearly 10:00 p.m., I smiled as Christopher came into view. He looked somewhat ghostly, with lights starkly illuminating his white marble face, but as magnificent as ever as he surveyed the neighborhood from his granite pedestal behind the gates of St. Leonard’s Church. I was happy to see him, and I like to think that in some strange way (although I understand that scientifically there is no way for this to be true) he was happy to see me as well.  

As I passed beneath the wrought iron gate, I was enveloped by the soft music and tranquil atmosphere of the church’s aptly named Peace Garden. Lanterns bathed the garden in a warm glow, and the banter of the diners trickling out of nearby restaurants faded into nothing. Several statues share the garden as their home, and each is lovingly cared for and surrounded by beautiful landscaping and flowers. Because Christopher is the garden’s newest resident, the landscaping around him was, for a while, relatively meager and plain. But no more. I was heartened to see that in addition to beautiful rose bushes at his feet, he now has a huge sunflower next to him. As tall as he is, it added a bright and cheerful touch to the nighttime scene.

Until that moment, sunflowers had been one of the numerous, numerous things tainted for me by the atrocities that our society committed against statues. There was a sunflower garden in the park that Christopher used to call home before a sadistic bully ripped his head off of his body. The organization that runs the park, rather than publicly condemning the vicious destruction of the statue that had been its namesake and centerpiece, continued to make lighthearted social media posts as if nothing was wrong. Ignoring what was done to Christohper, they posted about children’s events, shared senior and engagement photos that people had taken in the park, and gushed about the various flowers that were blooming… including sunflowers. So for over five years, I haven’t been able to glimpse a sunflower without being reminded of the cowardice of the people that should have stood up for Christopher but failed to. The tall, yellow flowers, like so many previously innocuous objects, locations, and people, were transformed into a painful reminder of horrible events.

But as soon as I saw the sunflower next to Christopher, this completely changed. Now, sunflowers are associated with Christopher himself. Now, the tall, yellow flower is innocent once more, and even has positive associations, due to its proximity to the statue that I love.

I went up to the fence to share a few moments with Christopher. I told him about the vigil that I had come from, and the fact that Charlie Kirk was murdered at least partially for speaking out in defense of statues like him. I like to think that Chris was proud of me for going. I told him that I liked his roses and his sunflower, and that he looked awesome as usual. I like to think that he remembers me, even though it has been six months since I last saw him. I told him that I had wanted to visit him over the summer, during one of the traditional Italian feasts that take place in the North End, but my time and energy limitations didn’t allow it. I like to think that he forgives me. 

I wandered around the grounds for a bit, glancing at the other statues, the flowers, the various signs and plaques, and an interesting sculpture called the Noble Journey. Two women strolled down the main path and stopped to look at Christopher, and a few moments later a young man did as well. I realized that to Chris, I might be just one human among hundreds, thousands, and perhaps millions of visitors that he receives. I realized that he might not care about me or even remember me at all.

Do you like having so many people come and see you? I asked him. I could tell by his benevolent gaze that he did. You like everyone, I remarked, unless they’re a jerk, or a woke person. But maybe you like me a little better than the average person? Maybe you remember me from all the times I’ve visited you over the years, in your various locations? And in the slightly humid air of the warm September night, I could feel him answer yes. 

I walked back out, beneath the wrought iron gate, and turned to admire him one more time – he surveyed the still bustling streets from his serene perch and caught the eye of several passersby who turned their heads to look at him – before saying a final goodbye. I stopped to purchase a strawberry and raspberry flavored gelato from one of the many cute shops that lined the streets. And I made my way home with a refreshing treat, positive memories of another visit with my statue friend, and a small piece of my trauma healed.

bookmark_borderRest in peace, Charlie Kirk

“The left claims that destroying a century-old Robert E. Lee statue by a great American artist represents ‘healing.’ The truth is the exact opposite. Letting the South publicly honor its experience during the Civil War was a major part of the nation’s post-war healing, and allowing different political factions to celebrate their own heroes is a key part of political harmony. Destroying the Lee statue isn’t about healing. It’s an act of aggression, a show of dominance and hatred by people who want America’s history, its historic values, and yes, its historic people wiped out.”

– Charlie Kirk

(source here)

I’ve written numerous times that the atrocities perpetrated against statues and monuments are the exact opposite of healing. Charlie Kirk thought so as well, and articulated this idea perfectly. This quote shows that Charlie truly understood. He had the courage to speak out for what is right, and he paid with his life.

Thank you, Charlie.