Deace Admits Defeat – Conservative Consistency on Pizza Hut, Smoking, Abortion, and Sodomy
Nathan Greene
Post a Comment
2 References
By Emily Geiger
I was listening to Steve Deace last night, and he had an interesting email from a self-described liberal who called Deace out on an apparent double standard on his positions on the smoking ban (he’s against it) and on the Pizza Hut driver who shot his robber and may lose his job over it (he supports the driver).
The liberal listener pointed out that Deace has been arguing that service industry employees, such as bartenders and waitresses, who don’t like smoke should not choose to work in smoky bars and restaurants if they don’t like smoke.
The liberal listener then went on to point out that, if the Pizza Hut driver in question wanted a safe job during which he could carry his (duly licensed) concealed weapon, perhaps he shouldn’t have chosen to work in a dangerous occupation for a company that specifically prohibits its employee from carrying weapons.
It’s an excellent point, and one which neither Deace nor his listeners could refute. So, it seems that, to be logically consistent, you either need to be against the smoking ban and against the Pizza Hut driver, or for the smoking ban and for the Pizza Hut driver’s right to carry his weapon and defend himself.
Of course, a lot of the conservative listeners who were supportive of the Pizza Hut driver were also against the smoking ban. I still don’t get why so many conservatives are so against the smoking ban.
I know conservatives are generally against government interference, but consider this analogy. Despite being against government interference in one’s personal life, true conservatives believe the government should be able to interfere in a pregnant woman’s life to prevent her from having an abortion. Why? Because conservatives realize that the choice of abortion affects another person: the unborn child. Because of this, conservatives understand that the moral position is to defend innocent life.
The same is true of the smoking ban. Generally, we don’t like government interference, but when someone’s personal choice affects the lives and health of innocent others (i.e. little ol’ me who might like to have some pancakes at Village Inn or perhaps even a fruity adult beverage without an asthmatic coughing spell kicking in), that is morally wrong. I always hear people talking about second-hand smoke, which is a concern, but with the prevalence of allergies and asthma, those are probably of greater concern for your average restaurant/bar patron. The moral choice here is to protect innocent life and health.
Here’s another thing I don’t understand. Only about 20% of the adult population smokes, and many of those are only “social” smokers. So why does this relatively small minority get to dictate the environment which the rest of us must endure? Conservatives already get a bad rap for trampling on minority rights, so why not do it now when it is actually justified?
And another thing… smoking is not a natural state; it’s not the status quo. It’s not like we come out of our mothers’ wombs toting a pack of Marlboros and a Zippo. Smoking is an unnatural behavior which damages one’s body… not unlike the behavioral choice made by people who, as Deace likes to say, can’t look between their legs and tell what gender they are. So why should a smoker’s “right” to take part in this unnatural behavior take precedence over my right to breathe good, clean, natural air as God intended?
So, how does all this apply to the Pizza Hut situation? Well, I think, once again, it all goes back to what is moral. Protecting innocent life, in this case, the delivery driver protecting himself, is the winning side of the argument.
However, I do have to say that I kind of sympathize with Pizza Hut… as Deace pointed out, they are truly between a rock and a hard place. No matter what their policy on drivers carrying weapons, or who gets shot, they are going to get sued.
I should also say that I am definitely a very pro-gun female. A gun is one of the few things that can essentially make me physically equal with a man and allow me to protect myself.
But, I do have to wonder about the logic of the listeners advocating that all Pizza Hut drivers be encouraged to carry weapons and display stickers on their cars advertising this fact. Many believe this would deter robberies of delivery drivers.
I think this may be true in regard to your average, run-of-the-mill teenaged hooligan who might want to steal a few extra bucks. But, I worry that the hard-core, meth-head may use this knowledge to justify (in his own warped mind) using deadly force against the driver before the driver even has a chance to defend himself. In other words, there may be fewer robberies overall, but the robberies that do occur are more likely to be deadly for the innocent driver.
Just a hypothesis, but probably not out of the realm of possibility.
Reader Comments