"...you're a tyrant and not as open-minded as you claim to be."

Those are words I read from a close friend, yesterday. I had a long time to think about those words and came to a few realizations.

In my 32 years on this Earth I have had the time to analyze what I will support, stay neutral on, and fight against. I have traveled to many places around the world, been surrounded by various cultures, ideologies, and societal structures, and have had experiences which the greater populace has not. Point being, I have an ample amount colors on my pallet to paint my positions.

At this point, the aforementioned colors have shown me some definite things:

1.) I am a Christian; although I am not even close to being the "model Christian", I do try to be. And as I grow older, this is becoming more and more important to me. So yes, I do believe in God, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit. I do go to service (or as we call it in the Armenian church "badarak"). I do believe Christ's message to love all people, but that doesn't mean the world is pity party for those who choose not to contribute or help themselves if able. I do believe in charity, if it is out of the kindness of the heart and soul, not if someone if forced into it. And, of course, I believe in the morals set forth by the religion.

2.) I am a conservative. No, not the evangelical Christian conservative that tells everyone they're damned to hell if they have a belief counter to mine. I am the type of conservative that believes in civil liberties, the right of choice (within certain limits), and minimal government interference is one's life. I believe in family values, hard work, and commonsense. I believe in the free market, capitalism, and am completely against socialism in any form.

3.) Unless you are family or a close friend, I don't care about your feelings. Feelings do not take precedence over fact - ever. The more we entertain emotion over truth, the more we travel away from fact-based common sense and logic. As an example, the Armenian Genocide is factual historic event, with evidence as far as the eye can see; however, in the current state, is it the best move for the United States to recognize it? On the political stage, probably not so much; morally there is no question - the answer is yes.

4.) Not sharing certain opinions doesn't automatically make someone a "bad" person. Outside of views on extremes such as pedophilia, rape, non-justifiable homicide, abuse of people/animals, and a few others which automatically make people complete scum if they are party to them - differentiating views do not generate an automatic negative epithet. Let's take the very words which spurred this, "tyrant" and "closed-minded" (condensed from "not as open-minded as you claim to be"). Would those labels have been given if views were in-line, regardless of the approach? My gut feeling is they wouldn't have been. Not aligning with your beliefs doesn't make me any more closed-minded than you telling me I am "closed-minded" for not believing what you do.

5.) It's important not to label people until they have actually committed an action which warrants the label, especially, when with epithets such as "racist", "sexist", any "-phobic", "bigot", etc. If you label someone without evidence, you’re actually the one worthy of the label.  If you come across someone like this, it’s most likely not worth your time to engage them in discussion, as they are void of reason.  Ad hominem attacks are the weapon of choice for the left. They will use them regardless of politeness or substantiated evidence. There is simply no détente.


6.) Again, there is no détente. Knowing this truth, speak bluntly and to the point. Do not concede simply out of fear of being labeled, disliked, or even of losing a friend. No matter what, you are going to deal with this is one way, shape, or form, so just say what you mean and mean what you say. Beating around the bush will only prolong the discussion and open the door to “so what you’re saying is”, and your words will quickly be twisted into an abridged version of “Mein Kampf”. (Disclaimer: I am not evoking Godwin’s Law.  I am, however, using Hitler as he is the only person the left seems to be aware of.)


7.) Religious views follow everyone to the voting booth, and there is nothing wrong with that. It’s when the government starts directing religious establishments or vis-à-vis that we have a problem. No one should be forced by the government to go against their religious views if no one is in danger, period.

I could add more, but I am simply short on time. 

While writing this I came to the understanding I have been pushed into to many of these realizations by my personal debate experiences or dealings with leftists, because of how they are quick to judge based solely on emotion.  Till this day I have never ended a friendship with someone who was a leftist, and I have never labeled someone without evidence. On the other hand, I can name at least a dozen times this has happened to me.  Whatever you do, don’t fall into these types of traps or display the same behavior.  Stay calm, provide evidence, and don’t let emotion take over. Let them degrade their own argument and character through your composure.

P.S. To my friend who was the catalyst for this piece – don’t take everything I have written on your shoulders, as much of it doesn’t apply to you.