Free speech follies

For there is a tremendous amount of dark humor to be found in the post-Christian era, where it is ironically far easier to argue for the moral and scientific imperative of rape than it is to make the case that rape should still be considered a crime, much less a moral offense. As Daniel C. Dennett writes in "Darwin's Dangerous Idea," the full extent of precisely how dangerous the idea of natural selection is has not been understood, much less accepted, by the vast majority of those familiar with Darwin's theory of evolution.

Vox Day

Another meander from Vox Day. I know, I know, the title says it is about free speech, but call me conventional, I like to see at least a thesis paragraph that ties the two (very thought-provoking) sections together.

First up is the inevitably humorless way in which PC liberals of the female and metrosexual persuasion approach satire. Feminists like to flirt with nihilism, but only as long as societal entropy doesn't engulf their pet concerns. Put another way, it's all very funny until someone makes a joke about rape.

Second is the hypocrisy of Google (once again) in censoring (yes, it is censorship) material that is (potentially) offensive to Muslims while giving the material (potentially) offensive to Christians a pass. No one should be surprised at this. Google's management has a history of kowtowing to leftward political correctness. And I beg to differ with Vox's assertion that "this is not censorship." There is no etymological or conceptual requirement for government involvement in the act of censoring. Google is a provider of information. Any act by any entity to prevent access to information in the interests of a particular agenda is censorship. But don't start dialing your Congressman's office just yet. Google is (for now) still a private corporation and not (yet) a propaganda arm of the government.