Thursday, July 20, 2017

They Seem Weak on their Concept

California  has banned state-funded travel to states that aren't sufficiently LGBT friendly.  Virginia Postrel points that they missed some much more LGBT-unfriendly places:
California’s intolerance in the name of tolerance is also selective and ethnocentric. It applies only to U.S. destinations. For many LGBT people around the world, living under Texas or Kansas law would be a great liberation. Forget high-profile offenders like Russia. What about Turkey or Singapore? A consistent policy would even deny travel funds for Poland. If the community of scholars can span regimes as diverse as China, India, and Iran, surely it can make room for North Carolina.
Hat tip to Instapundit.

Of course Apple and many other SJW companies treated North Carolina as a pariah over transgender bathrooms, while continuing to do business in Muslim countries, because it is not about the LGBTs but disapproval of conservatives.

1 comment:

Joseph said...

This supposed inconsistency becomes more understandable once you realize that the fundamental principle of leftist thought isn't "defend dissenters" or "be fair to the poor" or even "progress." The fundamental principle of leftist thought is "follow the crowd." (The progress part comes in when they try to save time by getting ahead of the crowd.)

The persecutors of gays in Iran, etc. are thought to be following the local crowd and are thus acceptable. People who refuse to photograph gay weddings in the US are thought to be dissenting from the crowd and are thus unacceptable. Similarly, a politician who opposed gay marriage a few years ago was acceptable then because he was following the crowd at the time, provided he has changed his mind since.