Dustin Hartl Speaks

I am a conservative college student on a path to becoming a political opinion blogger.

Leave a comment

The Return of Milo Yiannopoulos

The profit, otherwise known as Milo Yiannopoulos, is returning. Yiannopoulos, who was accredited with the discovery of the black hole of free speech known as UC Berkeley, is starting a company called Milo Inc.

Image result for milo yiannopoulos

With a $12 million dollar start up, he is creating a company to recruit conservative writers, comedians, and a variety of other resources to make “progressive lives a ‘living Hell.'” He is starting this business with anonymous donors and partners and it will have to compete against other established organizations such as Breitbart, the Blaze, FOX, and more.

He also announced that his book will be released, even though his book deal was cancelled between him and Simon and Schuster. The activist lost his six figure book deal when a video surfaced of him satirically joking about a sexual misconduct experience of his.

The comments lead to his invitation to be the keynote speaker at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) to be revoked by the American Conservative Union. This didn’t stop him though, as he has new ideas of where the conservative movement is going.

“He said that Milo Inc. would be dedicated to ‘making the lives of journalists, professors, politicians, feminists, Black Lives Matter activists, and other professional victims a living hell.'”

As a conservative, free speech is often the forefront of my battles. Between the rioting at UC Berkeley and the latest tactics, and antics, by the left, it seems that nothing can be said today without offending one group or another.

Conservatives around the country are hailing Milo for his return to the spotlight. His rise was unprecedented, his success was unseen, and his voice resonated for weeks after he spoke.

With the current state of freedom of speech, it is nice to see that there is going to be another company dedicated to insuring that conservatives, from all backgrounds and paths to success, can find employment and a bright future. I commend Milo for his ability to rebound with, what seems like, not a single scar.

The predators of the left really chased him into a hole, but with the help of other tired conservatives, it seems that hole lifted him out and left behind the fear of falling. I believe that Milo can come back harder, better, and more vocal than ever before, but with a different approach.

He is going to create a new generation of conservatives behind him. If he couldn’t turn conservatives towards his way of thinking, he will create a new ideological brand.

I look forward to seeing what Milo accomplishes in the next few weeks, months and years. For him, there is only one way to go and that is straight to the top.

Leave a comment

Roe v. Wade: Revisited

It has been a little over three decades since the most controversial Supreme Court case was decided. Since then, many other decisions have arisen that offer women an easier path to obtaining abortions.

According to lawyers and professors, an unborn child is called a “fetus,” not a “baby.” According to the dictionary, a fetus is “an unborn offspring of a mammal, in particular, an unborn human baby more than eight weeks after conception.”

So, an unborn child is a fetus and a fetus is an unborn child. Ergo, aborting a fetus is still murdering a child.

While discussing this in my Constitutional and Civil Rights course, it was stated that the choice is left up to the mother on whether or not to have an abortion and they do not need the consent of the father. This is, once again, ironic.

I call it irony because the father in either situation is being told that although he contributed to creating life, he can not have any input on what happens to it. Thus, if the mother chooses to keep the child and he doesn’t want it, he is still stuck paying child support.

How is it that when there is consensual sex, the father, an equal contributor to the creation of the child is not allowed to have input on the outcome? What if the father wants to keep the child and the mother wants an abortion?

In these cases, the mother is allowed to have an abortion simply because she wants to. There is no need for a reason or explanation, the father is left in the dark and is left to wallow in his despair, while the mother chooses the easy way out of her own decisions.

Abortion is, with exceptions to sexual assault or health risks, the cowards way out of a decision one was not prepared to handle the outcome of. When a child is conceived, the moment the egg and the sperm are intertwined, life is created.

This, of course, would imply that abortion is murder and I’d say that implication is correct. The best way to approach this is to assume one doesn’t know how abortions are done, in which case, below is a diagram depicting one.

As one can see, the child is torn apart and pulled from the womb. Many have said that the child can feel this happening and often try to move away from the instruments trying to tear it apart.

I believe that abortion is wrong, but I know that it is up to the individual to decide what is right for them. That is why I will educate others in the hopes that one day, abortion practices are ended.

Within the coming weeks, I will be writing a post on the history of Planned Parenthood and why we should be creating an alternative healthcare provider for women.

Leave a comment

Re: My Thoughts on Fat Acceptance by Liz Houtz

A fellow blogger wrote a post today on the “fat acceptance movement” and her thoughts on it. It was meant to draw attention to the narrative of false labeling and the fear of expressing concern because of the possibility of being called things like “bigot” or “fat-shamer.”

Growing up as a big guy, I have had my fair share of debates about the fat acceptance movement. These mostly stem from my inability to accept that someone is healthy if they are 600 lbs and unable to walk without an oxygen tank.

I am not a bully and I believe you should do what makes you happy, but at the same time, it is expected that others can find you unattractive or express concern over your habits. In today’s world, we have doctors who are simply afraid to tell someone their health is in danger and they need to lose weight.

Houtz said, “I find it alarming that some people choose to ignore the health risks that obesity causes, and when friends or family tell them they should consider diet and exercise so they can be healthier call it fat shaming.” This concern is one that many doctors, physicians, and therapists have been struggling with and it is one that many fear will cause it to become harder to talk openly with patients.

Houtz also said, “Those are people who care about them telling them that they’re worried about their health. They’re giving them suggestions to make life changes so they can have a healthier, better quality of life. In the end, people have their lives and it’s their choice if they want to be healthy or not. It’s up to them. That’s all I have to say.” This is something that I actually disagree with.

When someone is overweight, they can cause other people’s lives to become harder. How can this be?

For example, you are on a plane and you paid for your ticket, imagine having someone who ought to have bought two seats sitting next to you and they only bought one.

This is a problem that a lot of airlines are facing and they can not address it. They are afraid that bringing this topic to light would cause a panic and an uproar from social justice warriors and those who are apart of the “fat acceptance movement.”

This movement should not be about making others accept who you are,  it should be about taking personal responsibility for your health, body, and environment. If a doctor says to lose weight, you probably should (he is the one with a Ph.D).

When someone says they are concerned about your health, take a serious look at it and think about if this is what you want with your life. This “movement” is not really a movement, it is a plague.

I believe that if you want to change, you can. If I wanted to go on a diet and lose weight, I could, I am taking personal responsibility for my actions, my body, and my environment. Those involved in the movement should be doing the same.






Universities and Diversity

Since coming to university, I have noticed that most of the events, programs or speakers that come here are here to promote the “diversity” agenda. Don’t get me wrong, diversity is great!

I, however, do not appreciate constant “cultural diversity” requirements or qualifications for classes or clubs. Cultural diversity, in my opinion, is just as, if not less, important as diversity of thought.

If, for example, someone is on the left and believes X and Y, while someone is on the right and believes Z, then would the “diversity” requirement suit someone who already believes in X and Y? Or would that just be pushing an agenda and covering it with the “diversity” cloak?

If someone on the left truly wants to promote diversity, then they should be going to speakers or events that are based around rightist ideas and beliefs. For example, why don’t they attend an event about why the Second Amendment should be protected instead of something they already agree with?

This is an interesting topic, as I have started working to uncover the origins and roots of it. The roots, in my belief, start with stacking a university administration with far left ideologies and then brainwashing young people to think they are contributing to diversity, when in reality they are merely playing into the left’s plan to convert everyone into liberal fascists.

That was a big jump, right? Well, it is not really far off.

If we look at Margaret Sanger, the mastermind for planned parenthood, we would see that she hired black priests, or community members, and got them to convince others that abortion and birth control are what is best for their community. This was of course wrong as she really just wanted to control the population of black Americans and maintain a “pure” society.

Universities across the country are starting to adopt this method of brainwashing and coercion. They are enlisting student organizations and insisting that X and Y are the right policies to follow.

The student organizations are the blindly following instead of thinking about Z. Those of us who do think about Z see that this method of making sheep is working.

Diversity of thought is one of the ways that we can ensure that everyone is not only accurately represented, but that they are also heard. Cultural diversity ensures that those in the culture are heard, or rather the general population of the culture, where diversity of thought ensures that everyone, including the non-general population, is heard.

It is important to note that the support of a few leaders of a group should not suggest that everyone in that group agrees with the ideas presented. That is where cultural diversity is failing.

The women’s march, for example, was a small portion of women who happened to agree on a few issues. This failed to represent the ideas of women who voted for Trump, who are pro-life, who carry guns, want an immigration halt and generally disagree with the social justice ideology.

I think it is high time that we start promoting the individual belief over the generalized ideas of the specific group. Diversity of thought is the only way this can happen and this is the only method that can actually yield results.

People on the left always want us to stop generalizing, so I suggest we tell them to stop generalizing and assuming everyone thinks the same way because guess what? No one does.