Kinsley seems to arrogantly assert that because his values do not impose on me then his values are somehow 'better' than mine. Are his values better than mine if they happen to include for some reason known only to Michael Kinsley randomly killing ill children in a hospital in China? I cannot conceive of how that murderous event might directly impose on me just as I cannot conceive of how an unknown woman killing her unborn child would directly impose on me but my value system finds them both of the activities to be unacceptable.
Michael Kinsley is an arrogant elitist SOB who thinks that because he considers himself, as do most liberal intellectuals, open-minded and unwilling to draw a line in the sand when it comes to repugnant human behavior because he can excuse it based on whether the behavior personally imposes on him or not he is somehow better than some of us. If that is not elitism I do not know what is.
Kinsley could have used this same flawed argument to justify standing silent as Hitler killed 6 million Jews. Surely that would have not been a direct imposition on him either. Unless he was a European Jew at the time. But, I imagine Kinsley would say, that is different.
No, Kevin, Kinsley doesn't make a good point. What he says is disgusting.