By David Harsanyi
Wednesday, March 23, 2022
These days, questioning the efficacy of a vaccine is a
nihilistic, anti-scientific assault on society itself. And yet refusing to
define the meaning of “woman” — a question a peasant in the medieval world
could have correctly, and straightforwardly, answered — is treated as a
completely normal moment by the press. Ketanji Brown Jackson says she “not a biologist,”
admitting that the definition of “woman” is physiological and not
psychological, to avoid offending progressives. She, of course, knows well what
a woman is. The fact that such a silly question can’t be directly answered
reflects the insanity of the political moment. There is a chasm between arguing
that a “society should make accommodations for transgender Americans” and “men can get pregnant,” and yet Democrats are now going with
the latter.
Jackson’s answer is also a reminder that the liberals’
rock-ribbed belief in “science” often relies on reverse-engineered junk science
concocted to prop up trendy new theories. Liberals are no more interested in
science than anyone else. Scaremongering over GMOs, which are not only
completely harmless but a lifesaving technological advancement, is
anti-science. Opposing fracking, which is as safe as any other means of
extracting fossil fuels, is anti-science. Please tell me more about your homeopathic organic cures, enlightened Democrat. However
inconvenient it is for proponents of abortion, denying that life begins at
conception — “I have a religious view that I set aside when ruling on cases,”
went Jackson’s crafty answer — is also anti-science. As is the notion that a
person’s perspective can determine whether something is alive or their gender.
And you don’t have to be a biologist to understand why.
No comments:
Post a Comment