Fear Hate other People Forum

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pinto Girl @ Mar 27 2007, 05:16 PM) [snapback]413189[/snapback]</div>

You are right hate speech, disrespect and intolerance as used by the DEMs is derailing discourse. Of course the DEMs have never been part of any solution since FDR.

Diversity is overrated as a benefit to American society. In reality it is nothing more than a guise for affirmative action programs. Of course anyone daring to disagree is labeled, many times by the DEMs, as a bigot. The result of diversity in the US will be a split into several societies using geographical boundaries, such as states. Your area will become PacWest--CA,OR,WA.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Stev0 @ Mar 27 2007, 01:39 PM) [snapback]413007[/snapback]</div>

I totally disagree with you. If you think that the quote from the Huffington Post is "restrained in showing dislike for our current administration," you have an even more skewed-to-the-left viewpoint than I do. I would argue that, when the words "hate-driven punks" enter the lexicon, we've left the world of "rational discourse."

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pinto Girl @ Mar 27 2007, 05:16 PM) [snapback]413189[/snapback]</div>

AMEN

Very well said. I completely agree.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(bhaynnes @ Mar 27 2007, 04:15 PM) [snapback]413210[/snapback]</div>

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(PLM @ Mar 27 2007, 04:27 PM) [snapback]413219[/snapback]</div>

Diversity is a fact. The human race is diverse. Different colors, languages, religions, genders, sexual orientations, etc.

We can learn to live together and enjoy each other's diferences, or we can fight each other until we exterminate ourselves.

If you believe that people different from you cannot share in your nation, your state, your neighborhood, then I think you have defined yourself, and I don't need to type the word.

But if the human race can shed itself of its bigotry, then there is no need for boundaries or divisions. Every individual is different than every other individual. The only way the human race will survive is if we learn to celebrate those differences, rather than classifying people into categories according to their external, visible differences, and trying to keep ourselves apart.

And this is not a party-line issue. There are plenty of bigots in both parties, and plenty of people in both parties that see the similarities rather than the external differences.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(PLM @ Mar 27 2007, 06:27 PM) [snapback]413219[/snapback]</div>

Bigot: One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.

Uhhhm, don't mean to be the one to break the news, but according to the dictionary, you're sounding awfully much like a bigot right now.

------------------------

Diversity is a fact. The only choice is whether you will embrace it...or rail against it.

If one embraces diversity, America is/becomes once again a melting pot (remember that term, it was true when my parents came to this country from Greece, learned the language and the customs, and prospered) Remember how folks used to come to this country and ASSIMILATE? That's what I believe needs to be revived again, now.

And dividing us against ourselves is not going to help, in my opinion.

So, tell me --again-- how embracing diversity will cause the Country to be torn assunder? I'm a bit flummoxed by the paradoxes inherent in your assertion.

--------------------------

I have to say, for the life of me I can't even believe we're discussing such a thing.

Or, if you'll permit a moment of immodesty, that I'm wasting time at work explaining things like these to adults in the 21st Century.

What should we discuss next? If women really should be able to vote? If interracial marriages are **really** such a good idea? If facilities for blacks and whites can, in fact, be separate and equal?

Should we debate the best way to lynch someone? Whether wearing a KKK uniform (or whatever those goofy robe outfits are called) should be allowed under freedom of expression? I mean, it's just a white sheet, right? They're probably cool in the summer and warm in the winter (like sheepskin seat covers are supposed to be).

How about the Confederate flag? After all, it's heritage...not hate...

How about, whether it's okay to call someone a faggot (and you're NOT his friend)...?

Seriously, the more I think about it, the more absurd it becomes.
[big sigh]

------------------

And, to finish up, regarding your comment about affirmative action...the sooner the bigotry stops, the sooner affirmative action will stop, too. So, actually, it's up to you...keep thinking as you do, and you have only yourself to blame for the continuance of affirmative action programs. You're living proof that it's not time for them to end!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Betelgeuse @ Mar 27 2007, 05:33 PM) [snapback]413220[/snapback]</div>

You're right, Huffington is a bit too conservative for my tastes, but she often makes a good point.

You're also right that using "hate-driven punks" to describe the current administration is totally inappropriate. She left out the word "evil"!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Stev0 @ Mar 27 2007, 10:16 PM) [snapback]413296[/snapback]</div>

Just because it's true in your (and my) view of things does not mean that it is reasoned, useful debate. It's an emotional reaction to the current state of the country, but implying that it's reasoned debate is nearly as laughable as Fox News's assertion that they are "Fair and Balanced."

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Betelgeuse @ Mar 27 2007, 08:47 PM) [snapback]413306[/snapback]</div>

It depends on context. If it's, say, an official debate, an editorial, or on a serious TV interview, you're right, that's no way to talk. However, if it's someone's personal blog, then anything goes; I've seen highly regarded blogs on both ends of the spectrum use much, much worse language. Of course, one could argue whether blogs add anything to reasonable debate, but that's another topic...

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pinto Girl @ Mar 27 2007, 02:16 PM) [snapback]413189[/snapback]</div>

I'm all for more polite discourse, but I really don't see examples of "hate speech" here. I see plenty of insults, but I don't think they rise to the level of hate speech.

I do think the polarized, insult-laden posts are a barrier to true communication, but it seems to be what people like. I'm a bit fascinated by it, because I certainly don't enjoy being insulted. I have always thought that other people would be like me, and not enjoy being insulted, but evidently that's not always the case.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(larkinmj @ Mar 27 2007, 05:13 PM) [snapback]413152[/snapback]</div>

Well, I'm generally in agreement with everything this mod who banned me says, meaning he's at least left-leaning. However, on the topic at hand at that point, he didn't agree with my viewpoint...said I was using emotion instead of fact...then compared me to his children...then banned me. And I too have called people worse, I think. Meanwhile, the other guy that I was actually volleying with (it wasn't a mod) went on to insinuate that I was a whore and bad mother, and he wasn't banned. I was irritated, to say the least.

I think doofus is one of those words that, while it is an insult, is about the least-insulting insult out there. I was a HUGE Bloom County fan back in the day, and thought it was hysterical when Berke Breathed used it.

Oh well, que sera,sera. And I agree with Pinto's assessment to some extent. Now that I have four posters on ignore that regularly incite me, and have promised myself not to read them, I'm happier with PC. Of course, when others quote them, I still see some of the inanity. And insanity, too.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(livelychick @ Mar 28 2007, 09:04 AM) [snapback]413469[/snapback]</div>

Whoo, boy! Careful, there. You're just asking for a ban!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Stev0 @ Mar 28 2007, 01:42 AM) [snapback]413391[/snapback]</div>

I totally agree that, in a blog, anything goes. I'm a big fan of free speech, to the same or greater extent than anyone I've ever met. However, pointing out that blog posts like that are not reasoned debate is a very fair (and true) criticism. And saying that you've seen worse does not hold a lot of weight; of course you've seen worse! But that doesn't mean that we shouldn't hope that all of them can become better!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Betelgeuse @ Mar 28 2007, 10:43 AM) [snapback]413495[/snapback]</div>

Funny!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(PLM @ Mar 27 2007, 03:27 PM) [snapback]413219[/snapback]</div>

Have you forgotten the long discourse the PacWest has had for years? I believe the accepted name is Ecotopia!

 

I feel the need to come to the defense of the mods. From what I can see, most everything on both sides goes, but occasionally someone steps over the line and gets slapped down. C'est la vie! I also think it's important not to whine to the mods when/if one is slapped down, after all it IS their job to attempt to moderate the conversation. Surely if one's post is deleted, and one thinks the point of the post is worthwhile, one can repost using less forceful language. If one gets sidelined for a week, one can use that week to craft an even more persuasive post for one's return.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(MarinJohn @ Mar 28 2007, 10:22 AM) [snapback]413603[/snapback]</div>

Better yet, Salmon Nation. Bioregions are better ways to manage these areas.

Ecotrust

Diversity is EVERYTHING in this world.

 

We've had the diversity discussions on this board so often...some people's views remind me of this exchange from "Anchorman:"

Champ Kind: What in the hell's diversity?
Ron Burgundy: Well, I could be wrong, but I believe, uh, diversity is an old, old wooden ship that was used during the Civil War era.


Same level of understanding. Funny in the movie. Sad in reality.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wildkow @ Mar 28 2007, 03:35 PM) [snapback]413776[/snapback]</div>

Um, weren't you supposed to go away or something?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Stev0 @ Mar 28 2007, 06:05 PM) [snapback]413796[/snapback]</div>

No, no, no. You don't understand. It's because of "creationist time." In the world where 13.5 billion years is really 6000 years, going away forever is equivalent to staying away for . . . oh. . . about 4 days.