Theory of Relative Rights

Snakes, as cold-blooded animals, can not regulate their own body temperature. As a result, when they get too hot they become disoriented and eat themselves. Similarly, liberals will riot against, shame, and cause destruction to the very people that advocate the values and ideologies they claim to uphold.

CNN's article "Milo Yiannopoulos is trying to convince colleges that hate speech is cool" calls Milo a hatemonger and even suggests he is a white nationalist. Of all the people for liberals to be triggered by, it is Milo Yiannopoulos. Milo, the gay, libertarian, Catholic journalist of Jewish descent (sweet, mercy!).

The reason for all this outrage is due to Milo exercising his first amendment rights in the form of speech seminars. Hmmm, free speech... Is that not something the left will jump to defend when it come to the Black Lives Matter movement or a feminist protest? Why is it that everyone who expresses opinions differing to the left are considered Nazis? 

The simple answer is that, to liberals, rights are relative. They decide what is good and bad based on their opinions. Which is somewhat impressive considering how low their standards are. They set the bar on the ground and manage to dig a hole to get under it. They have dug so low that they have fallen into a pit of hypocrisy stew which they marinate in. 

For example, liberals are notorious for supporting the LGBT 

community, yet welcome Muslims into the U.S. with open arms. "Progressives" advocating Muslims, followers of the Quran (which commands them to kill homosexuals), put themselves in a state of irony and confusion. This is why when the Orlando shooting took place, all liberals could do is scratch their heads and blame firearms for the horrific misdeeds of terrorists. 

The left calls Milo "dangerous", but what is dangerous to the left? If not terrorist attacks, what? The danger to liberals is a hint of Christian virtue. The blaze helps shed light on humanitarian hypocrisy by stating "liberalism is nothing more than a protest against Christianity. It hates what is Christian and embraces or tolerates whatever is not."

This is how they constantly manage to contradict themselves. They have no morals, they just hate ours. They fear the Bible so much that they are willing to advocate anyone who blatantly opposes it. 

I have recently written a blog explaining that if you have no definite moral standards, any moralistic judgment you make is just as justifiable as it is meaningless. The left hates the idea of one divine deity because if the people choose to follow that creator, they will stop bowing to media, pseudoscience, and other ridiculous propaganda. 

What Milo has stated, that liberals can not simultaneously support "Syrian refugees" and the LGBT community, has been said repeatably before. The difference now is that the words are coming out of a homosexual's mouth. Now they hear this being preached but still do not receive the message. 

In a fit of anger and confusion, the snake of liberalism attacks Milo and, as a result, is revealed as illogically hypocritical, attacking itself. This is a snake who's beliefs say "don't tread on me... unless you can justify doing so with your worldly opinions."