You're Always A Winner When You Debate Strawmen

Let's put on our bright yellow plastic gloves, face mask and leather apron and take a look at the inner workings of a glibertarian mind. Megan (of course) McArdle, discussing Greg Gutfeld's desire to open a gay bar near a mosque because "the Muslim faith doesn’t look kindly upon homosexuality":

Gay Bar at Ground Zero
This is kind of a jerk move.

Yes it is. Trying to deliberately insult and hurt Muslims because you're a religious bigot is most definitely a jerk move.

But it's a brilliant jerk move.

In other words, McArdle acknowledges that only jerks would want to be deliberately insulting and provocative to someone because of his religion, and she is one of those jerks.

I am hoping that at least one person will attempt to explain why we should support the mosque near Ground Zero, but not the gay bar next to the mosque near Ground Zero.

Why? Only jerks would support the idea of a club created solely to insult those of a different religion. And who are these imaginary people that believe in free speech for some (Muslims) but not others (anti-Muslim bigots)? Besides Gutfeld, of course, who doesn't like freedom of speech and religion when it applies to people he personally dislikes.

I would find that very entertaining.

Why do you think defending religious persecution is entertaining? It's almost like you've set up an imaginary strawman liberal in your mind who will obediently support free speech for Muslims but not for bigots. And you can't wait to hear his argument because you love to laugh at imaginary liberal hypocrisy. It's either that or the amusing-bigotry defense.

(I support both, with the caveat that I'm not really sure that there's a shortage of deliberate provocations in today's America. And I'm pretty sure that there's not a shortage of deliberate provocations from political broadcast personalities. But he's certainly got a right to do it.)

So you support both in the name of free speech. That still doesn't explain why you find the defense of religious persecution so amusing. Or imaginary strawmen, to be fair.

I'll be surprised, however, if he manages to get a liquor license from Bloomberg's government.

Not a word about the pawns in this little mental morality play--the gay Islamic men and women who would supposedly visit this club despite its provenance, so that Gutfeld can pretend he's fighting the Muslim Caliphate using the mighty weapons of spite and a disco ball. But if Gutfeld's investors want to lose millions running a club with no customers, at least they'll be providing some jobs to unemployed New Yorkers.

ADDED: Roger Ailes also notes the emptiness of McArdle's head argument.