top of page

The Tyranny of Tolerance: Governor Cuomo Tells Pro-lifers To Leave NY

From the onset Rambling Spirit has expressed how it supports openness to dialogue and freedom of thought. The recent comment of Governor Andrew Cuomo of New York conspicuously opposes those principles, because no matter how rigid "extreme" conservatives may seem, politicians on the right do not go as far as to tell their opposition to leave their state.

But Governor Cuomo has gone that far, despite associating himself with a party that preaches acceptance and tolerance toward alternative lifestyles. In an interview on the Capitol Pressroom radio show, the governor recently said “Who are they? Right to life, pro-assault weapons, anti-gay — if that’s who they are, they have no place in the state of New York because that’s not who New Yorkers are.” Speak for yourself, Mr. Governor. I know many New Yorkers from upstate who are very pro- New York and also very "right to life," etcetera. I really think his comments may cause those Upstaters to start entertaining the idea of forming their own state that's pro-individual rights, pro-freedom and pro-America. In fact, I'd encourage them to do so. Apparently his tolerance philosophy doesn't extend to traditional lifestyles. According to the leader of New York, the beliefs of conservatives are not an alternative in his state. Many of the wealthy conservatives who live there now will probably leave New York, and so I wonder where his extreme position will leave New York. The great wealth that made it the Empire State, the world capital of commerce, will go to another state. As statistics already show, Florida, which is very pro-family and pro-business, recently surpassed New York as the third most populous state in the country. Texas is thriving as well. Does Governor Cuomo think conservatives will change their way of life just so they could live in his state? They'll probably just change their address and go where people still believe in America. Those who think conservatives are evil are really starting to confuse me. Their main shtick, one could argue, is that morality is relative and one way of life is as good as any other. Meanwhile, here they are imposing their morality upon conservatives. Why is a moral imperative considered less rigid when it condones "alternative" lifestyles while condemning traditional ones? Why are dead-end lifestyles that say 'no' to life considered more liberating than those that bring life into the world? On this 40th anniversary of the March for Life, I must mention that the real judgmental people are not those who support traditional moral values, but rather those who tell such people to leave their state or say 'How dare they come to San Francisco!' Here's to those who know what true freedom, liberty and independence are all about. Stay headstrong. As Congressman Chris Smith of New Jersey said today in Washington, "We are winning! To the youth, never quit or grow weary or discouraged. Your generation will end abortion." Editor's Note: to read more opinions on this topic, check out this link: [if !supportLineBreakNewLine] [endif]

bottom of page