Bullock Texas State History Museum
Demonizing Opponents Was Begun by the Left
RECEIVED Thu., Nov. 30, 2006
Mr. Black,
Re: “Page Two,” Dec. 1: Would you agree that this tactic to demonize and silence one's opponents did not originate on the far right? It began on the left as an effort to force people to be "politically correct." The right only copied it, and now the left is crying about it. As an example: there are well-meaning people out there who believe that, unlike race or gender, homosexuality is a trait defined by a behavior. Whether that behavior is inherent or learned is for another time. But your own publication, along with others, will ridicule, belittle, and insult anyone who voices such ideas. Does not that qualify as an effort to silence such ideas? Does not your own publication engage in exactly the same sort of tactics as you complain of being used against the Chicks? Whatever side one comes down on in the discussions of "gay rights," why is it acceptable to support the "pros" while completely denigrating (in frequently virulently personal terms) the "antis"? The Chicks have no less right to speak out than any of the rest of us. But just because they can sing, they have no greater right nor any greater level of protection when they do speak. I expect some nasty responses to this letter. It's a risk I accept by jumping into this arena. And it's the same risk assumed by the Chicks when they ventured from singing to politics. Usually, the greater the level of notoriety, the greater the level of response. Seems to me that it goes with the territory.
Re: “Page Two,” Dec. 1: Would you agree that this tactic to demonize and silence one's opponents did not originate on the far right? It began on the left as an effort to force people to be "politically correct." The right only copied it, and now the left is crying about it. As an example: there are well-meaning people out there who believe that, unlike race or gender, homosexuality is a trait defined by a behavior. Whether that behavior is inherent or learned is for another time. But your own publication, along with others, will ridicule, belittle, and insult anyone who voices such ideas. Does not that qualify as an effort to silence such ideas? Does not your own publication engage in exactly the same sort of tactics as you complain of being used against the Chicks? Whatever side one comes down on in the discussions of "gay rights," why is it acceptable to support the "pros" while completely denigrating (in frequently virulently personal terms) the "antis"? The Chicks have no less right to speak out than any of the rest of us. But just because they can sing, they have no greater right nor any greater level of protection when they do speak. I expect some nasty responses to this letter. It's a risk I accept by jumping into this arena. And it's the same risk assumed by the Chicks when they ventured from singing to politics. Usually, the greater the level of notoriety, the greater the level of response. Seems to me that it goes with the territory.
Scott Sexton
