So now, apparently, we have to pretend that Donald Trump is a monster because he made a humorous comment at the debate about an imaginary “400 pound” hacker. It wasn’t enough to accuse Trump of being sexist because he said some not-so-nice things about specific women. It wasn’t enough to accuse him of being racist because he said some not-so-nice things about illegal immigrants from Mexico. Now the hysteria brigade wants to make sure everyone knows that Trump is a FAT SHAMER!

According to the New York Times, America’s legion of obese citizens were fit to be tied when Trump made the off-hand remark.

“The hair on the back of my neck definitely stood up,” one random fat woman told the paper. “How many of our youth were sitting there and watching these debates, and thinking that this is O.K. to talk about and shame people based on their appearance?”

Yeah, our youth are notoriously sensitive when it comes to other people’s flaws, as anyone who has been to high school can attest.

Trump’s remark was in response to a question about the hack into the Democratic National Committee. Trump said that Hillary Clinton was too quick to blame Russia, when she didn’t have any clue who was responsible for the invasion. He speculated that it “could be somebody sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds.” Apparently, just mentioning the possibility of a 400-pound individual is enough to send liberals into a frenzy.

“Wouldn’t it be great if fat people were the ones to keep Trump out of office?” asked Kimberly Massengil, who the Times identifies as “a self-described fat person who specializes in photographing people who are fat.”

The article tells us that when it comes to shaming the obese, Trump is a symptom of a larger societal problem.

“Obesity experts and activists say fat-shaming is one of the last bastions of acceptable discrimination, and Mr. Trump’s public body shaming simply reflects a culture in which it is still considered acceptable to mock people for their weight,” they advise.

If true, that’s pretty scary, but not in the way the paper thinks.

The truth is, we need to expand “acceptable discrimination,” not curtail it. In some cases, protection makes sense. Sex is not a choice. Race is not a choice. Homosexuality…well, you be the judge. Age, not a choice. Religion is an exception to the pattern, but we live in a country founded on principles of religious freedom.

Being fat, on the other hand, is a result of a person’s decisions. Even die-hard liberals would scratch their heads if someone suggested a law banning discrimination against bodybuilders, but there’s really no difference. If it’s wrong to criticize fat people, then the walls come down. Suddenly, there is no standard for preferred behavior. Before long, we’ll have to “accept” child molesters, murderers, people who surgically add horns to their foreheads, and men who pretend they are women.

As you can see, we’re well on our way.