Sick teacher writes horrific things--FIRE HIM! by piratenews

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Sick teacher writes horrific things--FIRE HIM!

POSTED BY: PIRATENEWS
UPDATED: Monday, November 1, 2010 12:36
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 3174
PAGE 2 of 2

Saturday, October 30, 2010 1:22 PM

You missed the edit I made after I re-read your post. I noticed, finally, the line you put in about exceptions to the generalities. It's very likely I'm not reading carefully enough. I'll try harder in the future, but my focus and ability to remember has always been lacking.

I still don't quite agree that conservatism is defined by misogyny and homophobia or that there's a current of it underlying it.

I'm also frustrated that you continue to see my defending people from generalizations as my being conservative, but I think we've wrung enough emotion out today.

I don't mean to make you feel like a louse either. And I'm uneasy about you, and Sig, and kaneman, and a few others right now, but that's not a reflection on you but my own problems I'm having to deal with.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, October 30, 2010 3:49 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
And I'm uneasy about you, and Sig, and kaneman

Wny? What have I ever done to you? Putting me in the same category as an out-an-out-troll is insulting.

Thanks Byte. You took a conversation about ideas and made it personal.

And BTW... I found the replies to me different once my gender was well-known. I'm not saying that everyone on the board is misogynistic (there, does that get around the possible hurt feelings that I might have said someone was "a" misogynist?) but people certainly do react differently if they believe you are a man or a women.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, October 31, 2010 3:11 PM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

I don't think those on the “right” are necessarily mysogynistic, but I agree there is an underlying current in the way it is expressed at times, and certainly by many of the right’s "leaders" and candidates in the Tea Party. What Cav wrote was “by these little boys on the right”—by which I took it he meant our ugly RWAs, not conservatives in general. Those here are certainly ugly and certainly misogynistic. He did open it up to “the right”, and I’m afraid I agree with it to a degree, but I’m not going to get into the specifics of what have led me to feel that way. I do tend to agree with Sig about

Quote:
Male conservatives.. sigh. So friggin' fragile!.

but I would widen that to leave out the “conservatives”, for the most part! And yes, I think “fragile” is an apt word; those most misogynistic do seem to be so out of a sense of defensiveness and low self-esteem, from what I’ve observed.

Here our RWAs definitely have it in for the females--it may be political, I can't say, but I see the "Uglies" attacking females here in a different way than they attack males.

Quote:
I understand it

Thank you Rose; if I’d thought about it, betcha I would have thought you would be the one person who DID...and possibly Frem, I dunno.

Quote:
I really dont know why people like Nix arn't rabid Ron Paul fans.

"Most people want to preven(sic) other people from doing things they don't like...."

If those two were connected, I don’t see how that would make me a Ron Paul fan...I don’t think I have ever tried to prevent anyone from doing anything...I’ve expressed my views, and decried the ugliness I see here, but I think any reasonable, rational person would decry the obscene attacks that are prevalent here. Doesn’t mean I can control them, but free speech means I can speak up against them. Mike’s remark about getting “policed” is at least in part aimed at me, I know from private conversations. The thing is, those conversations took place because HE approached ME to ignore the Uglies, a couple of times, which made it doubly ironic to me that, once I decided to try hard not to engage in the gutterspeak, he kept right up with it.

River,

Quote:
How much policing goes on from your side?

I do, and I’ve noted others as well making occasional comments. Please note how many times I HAVE remarked on Mike being the major one on the left here who gets into the gutter with the Uglies, and decried it. On occasion so have a couple of others, but I’ve never seen Word One from any RWAs (NOT righties, because we have some semi-civil righties, but the several TRUE RWAs here) attempting to moderate any other RWAs viciousness. Except you, I grant...since you reverted to semi-civility yourself, I’ve seen you decry the asinine personal attacks, so I guess one or two on each side evens out. I think the attitude about this is partly because there are very few on the left who DO get into the gutter—mostly Sig and Mike, actually—whereas the gutterspeak from the RWAs slathers the entire forum and virtually every thread!

As to wishing someone’s death, particularly in the ugly way it’s done here, it’s as inexcusable as some of the other things written by the Uglies. It’s called lack of self-control, or in their cases I’m guessing lack of any desire for self-control whatsoever. They get off on it. That’s a sign of sickness. Being on the internet is no excuse; being offended by it has nothing to do with have any actual fear, it has to do with how sick it is.

I’m not sure why you see Byte as attacking you, Cav...I haven’t observed her singling you out, tho’ I could have missed it. But in this case I think she’s just responding, not targeting you because you’re you, but because of what you wrote. It made me frown a bit at first too, until I thought about it, and I still believe it’s a pretty generalized stereotyping. You wrote

Quote:
It's the central problem with the right as I see it

—that’s a pretty solid generalization and stereotyping, you can’t deny that.

Didn’t know you were a conservative, Trader...you don’t come across as one particularly. But if you are, that’s SO kewl, as I’ve long wished for a civil, intelligent conservative to give us their point of view, so I welcome you!

Kane, as usual, isn’t worth responding to; he is unable to see the difference between calling someone who is gay “gay” and using vile words to harass and denounce them. As usual. Nor is PN, with his filthy attacks. He’s not representative of anyone sane or reasonable, so he’s easy to ignore.

As to policing their own, HAH, nobody here does. I agree that four or five asses do not represent the entire right wing; again I wish we had some reasonable people who DID, but that’s the way it is.

Thanx, Mike, for the video about that teacher...I’m glad it’s come home to roost. What he wrote is just plain horrible, and however he tries to apologize, the fact that he wrote it stands on its own merits. And yes, yes, YES, Trader, it disgusts me that people like that are accepted when what we need so desperately is civil, open-minded teachers who don’t bring their biases into the classroom AND that when one is found to have such ugly views, they should go.

CTTS, that you were most hurt by comments from other females (didn’t know you were!), but I don’t think what’s being discussed is being hurt; rather I think it’s the deliberate extreme nastiness. I’ve been—“miffed” I guess is how close I can come, because it’s hard to “hurt” my feelings by people like those we’re discussing---by remarks of some of those here whose opinion I care about, but that’s not the same as being disgusted by deliberate, personal attacks filled with obscenities.

Also,

Quote:
I don't see the hate speech against Niki on this thread as misogynistic. Unless a poster says something explicit about Niki as a woman, I don't see the misogyny

You’re wrong; the attacks against me have frequently been ABOUT my being female...in other words, describing me in female terms, whore, cunt, etc. So yes, I see it that way as well as being politically motivated. You’re right it’s not the MAIN fuel, but that doesn’t make it any less of what it IS.

Lastly, Sig, I don’t think

Quote:
You took a conversation about ideas and made it personal

I think she was expressing her feelings, for whatever reasons she feels them—we can feel hesitant about this person for that reason and another person for another reason, and sometimes the “reasons” turn out to be miscommunication (I think you’re right, Frem) and not really anything concrete. But I don’t think she was lumping you with trolls, just saying that at the moment, she’s a bit leery of you (for whatever reason) and is leery of X and Y at the same time. I can see how your name in the same sentence could mislead you—heaven knows it happened to me when she said I was “just a bit saner” than...I think it was PN? But I didn’t get the impression she was putting you in the same category. JMHOs

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, October 31, 2010 5:49 PM

FREMDFIRMA

Re: Miscommunication.

I think a big part of it happens to be the fact that some people (SixStringJack, Me, Byte) employ a free-associative "wiki-walk" thought process, versus the conventional linear method, and at times this becomes extraordinarily difficult to translate to meaningful exchange of information between the two - particularly when one end says something which makes perfect sense, TO THEM, but leaves the other end scratching their head without a clue, and eventually having to put their own meaning to it, which from that perspective may or may not have anything to do with how it was intended.

It's like following a snake as opposed to an earthworm, the destination might be the same, but all the landmarks are different.

Hell, it wasn't till I began to consider "Communicating with the normals" an actual skillset that needed to be WORKED at, that I really made much sense at all to other people - and it wasn't till I started considering "others" to be PEOPLE, that I ever cared to try.

But anyhow, don't assume everyone else uses the same thought processing, cause it just ain't true, and while folks around here have put effort into understanding the how and why of RWA thinking, for example - seems a bit light on any effort to understand the sidewinder thought processes of non-linear thinkers.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, October 31, 2010 10:55 PM

HKCAVALIER

Hi Niki,

Just a couple things about "It's the central problem with the right as I see it." Imagine if I'd said, "The central problem with the automobile is its production of carbon monoxide." Would you immediately assume that I hate cars? Would you tell me that I was wrong because some cars run on electricity and simply don't produce carbon monoxide? That's the kind of argument I'm getting for why I can't say what I've said about the right.

I don't see it as a generality except in the sense that when right wing people go there it tends to get ugly because right wing culture resonates with misogyny in a way left wing culture simply doesn't. Lefties who hate women do it in spite of being lefties. A feminist lesbian who beats her girlfriend does so without support from her ideology. I'd say that her progressive ideas are out of sync with her misogynistic feelings. And right wing folk who don't resonate with misogyny will find themselves, at times, fighting against the prevailing right wing culture. Just as right wing atheists have to contend with the religious overtones of so much right wing rhetoric.

Of course there is misogyny on the left, but I see it as an inconsistency within progressive culture, a holdover from when the world was simply a much less progressive place in general than it is today. Conservative culture has a tendency to hold on to traditional values and, like it or not, misogyny, homophobia, etc. tend to come bundled with a lot of our traditional values, don't they?

Leftism resonates with political correctness in a way the right doesn't tend to. This leads to a self-censorship and denial in the left that the right, rightly, scoffs at. Talking about a movement's weaknesses can be very, very useful. It can be hard to see one's own weaknesses. Sometimes we need someone from "the other side" to point them out.

Dreamtrove and I have some rather serious disagreements about, well, a whole lot of things. I think he's dead wrong in a lot of his conclusions as I presume he disagrees rather thoroughly with mine. But he's a first rate mind and his "generalities" are always meaningful, if not necessarily persuasive--to me, I mean. His generalities about the left don't bother me because he makes them systematically and logically, based upon his premises. He educates me as I would hope my observations and analysis might aid others here.

The suggestion that I have erred in discussing the right as a whole strikes me, if you don't mind me saying so, as a typically lefty sort of objection: I might be wrong, how can I say such a thing, it's rude or it's (horrors) judgemental, etc. All very PC objections. Lefties have a horror of stereotyping others that right wingers just don't tend to have.

Is it not fair to say that there are two subcultures here and these subcultures have certain characteristics which distinguish one from the other? Who do you think has the right to talk about these differences, if not each and every one of us who live with them? People on the right like to talk about the "culture war" while lefties tend to deny it or at least condemn the notion as "inappropriate" or something. Have I just resorted to a baseless stereotype?

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 1, 2010 1:32 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Not all generalities are baseless though: case in point, a lot of Anarchists ARE bugnuts crazy, halfass nihilists and less organised than a herd of cats...

But it ain't all of em, still, it's a matter of whether the rest of a given group finds them tolerable, or calls them out at every turn and corner, see ?

By NOT calling them out, the rest of the group gives tacit approval - this is, mind you, one of the primary causes of my blistering loathing for most religions.

Of course, in the case I mention, there's very little harm in being bonkers and willful, as opposed to being hateful, mind.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 1, 2010 5:13 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
I think she was expressing her feelings, for whatever reasons she feels them

And I was expressing mine. The knife cuts both ways.

Actually, I'm not mad at Byte. But I wanted her to feel a little of what she dished out. Feelings are just that: feelings. But if you are trying to be careful of OTHER people's feelings (yanno, think of someone besides yourself) you don't necessarily have to express them.

I see an awful lot of self-important feeling-expression on this board: Rappy, who is so frightened he just wants to kill everyone who isn't like him; Wulfie, who is so angry and PTSD from his upbringing he just want to kill everyone who isn't like him; Kaneman, who feels so inferior she just wants to provoke people into acting stupidly; Whozit who's pretty much the same; and PN... well, PN is just plain schizo... Fault in the mentation.

People seem to think that their hurt feelings are so gosh-darn important that they have the right to insult, intimidate, and threaten anyone who doesn't bow and scrape to their feelings of inadequacy and fear. Here to tell them... they should get over themselves. Life would be a lot easier if they weren't walking around as giant bruised egos all the time.

ETA: FWIW, men tend to rationalize their feelings... ascribe to them meaning and importance which they don't have. Cloak them with important-sounding names like "freedom" or "security" or "progress", when they are REALLY just internal, individual states of being. I know few men who have ever had a head/heart debate because they acknowledge no "heart". But unacknowledged feelings are dangerous. To put this in blunt terms that most men would understand: unless you acknowledge your feelings as feelings, you will be hag-ridden by them.

There is one person on this board who actually uses those feelings to reach out and understand others, and that is HK. Feelings are powerful things... they can drive anyone who has them to do horrible things. Maybe we should all take a lesson from HK.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 1, 2010 6:17 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

' "Rue" meant to me only that the poster in question had lived long enough to have regrets. '

Yes. That, and the bitter herb.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 1, 2010 6:55 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Damn, Frem, very astute. Now that you point it out, I can see it, by remembering when I had to read paragraphs by you or Byte (dunno Jack) because I was confused first time around. There you go Byte—you were just running yourself down (at least that’s how it sounded) by saying you were somewhat incoherent, and I think Frem’s right, you’re just not as linear as some of us. I’ve been told I’m linear AS HELL—in fact I’ve been told I communicate like a lawyer (which I HATE!), so I accept that I think linear enough for it to be remarked upon. Wish I had more free-association, myself, it would be less “strictured”.

Cav, I never assumed you hated people on the right; that’s miscommunication. I assumed you were imparting to them one specific characteristic, and you know how many arguments we’ve had here about “generalization”, so I spoke up against it. Unfortunately, I believe you’re right about the left; we ARE overly PC and absolutely, I know it’s a weakness. It seems to be part of the same weakness that cripples our legislators, that makes it seem they are ball-less, etc. I think there’s something in the thinking that connects those, along with the fact that liberals tend not to be as aggressive and, in my opinion, have more conscience.

So okay, I give. I’ve not thought of it specifically as misogyny, but if I think about it, I think I see it. I remember recently Meagan McCain pointed out the irony that, whenever Palin or any of the female candidates gets dissed by the left, the right screams “they’re only picking on her because she’s female!”, yet, since she has come out against some of what’s happening on the right, she says you wouldn’t BELIEVE the attacks she’s gotten, and a good portion of them attacks against her “female-ness”. I remember how Clinton was gone after, and I believe the two justices wouldn’t have been attacked in exactly the manner they were, had they not been female.

We’d have to find a study to find if righties beat their wives and all that more than lefties, but politically, I do see it. Again, not entirely, maybe not even “mostly”, but it’s a mentality I can recognize. And it’s fair to say it’s encouraged in our “traditional values”, as those are viewed by many on the right—especially hard-core righties and RWAs, in whom I definitely see the “good old boy” mentality...like the jokes about the candidate being popular with right-wing voters ‘cuz he has a pickup truck.

I disagree, however, that it’s the, or a, central problem...I think it’s a REFLECTION of the central problem, which would take more thought to intelligibly connect this early in the morning for me.

I can’t speak for other liberals, but I know I DO have strong feelings about judgmentalism, even tho’ I do it myself, I recognize. I try not to, but I know it’s there, in spades. And yes, I do recognize that there are two subcultures, in many ways, and yes, we have a right to talk about it. I do, more often than not, or at least allude to it, so I could hardly deny that I believe it.

You’re right; I’m wrong, except I do think it’s more of a reflection of the central problem than THE central problem.

I agree Sig that Byte saying her feelings were hurt, insofar as what each of us feel is about us, not necessarily about the other person, AND that if you’re daring to hang around here in RWED, you’re going to GET your feelings hurt. As well, that the internet lends itself to miscommunication and misunderstanding hugely, so it might not even be intended. It’s something I fully accepted about this place, and one reason that, while the things said to/about me sometimes piss me off, I recognize the source and my “feelings” can’t be hurt by them. I guess my feelings only get affected when someone I respect or like here says something cutting, and I sometimes speak up then; and often it’s cleared up, or at least I find out the reason they wrote it. Personally, I think Byte does a heckofa job holding her own here, given I have seen a reflection of gentleness in here that I see missing in some others. I can understand any reasonable person leaving this place, given what goes on here, and many have, in just the time I’ve been here. I miss Anthony something fierce, and there are times I want to pull away, too. I’m just glad she sticks around, because I find her voice an important one.

I never knew “Rue” had that meaning to you, Rue, thank you. I thought it was part of your name or something, as I’ve seen it used as a woman’s name. I’ll keep that in mind, it’s meaningful. What is the bitter herb, if I may ask?

Byte, you are DEFINITELY not insane, especially compared to some here! While I know you share some of the same difficulties as I where mental health is concerned from things you've written, I tend to more view you as "quirky", which I think is neat...CERTAINLY neater than those who, as you said and I added to, those who refuse to view their opponents as human, rather as merely targets.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 1, 2010 7:45 AM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

What's going on?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 1, 2010 7:47 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

I got seriously ill and family got seriously ill ... and I came back months later with a fresh and distant perspective. And I saw that nothing had changed over the many years.

As for the nature of the board, people were still posting the exact same rants, invested in the exact same dysfunctions, posting the exact same bogus claims. A handful learn. Little changes. And while there are a few shining exceptions - precious few - it struck me that the board is a cesspool of ceaseless mindless twitching passing itself off as people.

I truly enjoy the presence of a few. Otherwise, not so much.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 1, 2010 9:47 AM

THEHAPPYTRADER

Quote:
Didn’t know you were a conservative, Trader...you don’t come across as one particularly.

Haha, I get that a lot out in the real world, or rather I did at college, which I suppose ain't quite the real world. They say I'm too nice or too smart or listen to well etc... and while I'm a little offended that they are basically demeaning and stereotyping a political philosophy I mostly subscribe too, I take the fact that they view me as an 'exception' to be a small win. Maybe if they run into me or enough like me they'll become less prejudiced. These same people who criticize conservatives on a daily basis for not opening their minds, refuse to open theirs. I'd call it ironic, but the fact that a conservative was intelligent enough to grasp the concept of irony might just be more system shock then their preconceived notions can handle. In all likelihood it'll trigger the 'you're a racist/sexist/homophobe/insert blanket generalization that had nothing to do with the topic here' defense mechanism, their by allowing them to continue ignoring your contributions and preserve their 'perfect' understanding of the right.

Most of my friends are quite liberal (not many conservatives in the college of the arts). However, issue to issue, we'll often have similar takes on things, but as soon as the political parties come out it's just not fun anymore. When the parties come out I'm not allowed to think for myself and my positions and opinions are chosen for me by these self-righteous elitists who assume to know more about my beliefs than I do. I can try to correct their assumptions but they don't seem to hear me. Of course, it's not prejudiced when liberals do it, it's progressive.

Quote:
Conservative culture has a tendency to hold on to traditional values and, like it or not, misogyny, homophobia, etc. tend to come bundled with a lot of our traditional values, don't they?

No, not in my experience. But perhaps if you could elaborate I might better understand why you think that. Maybe 'Traditional Values' differ from region to region, so I'll just make a case for mine. I was raised in the south and we were taught to respect a woman, open doors, give them your chair, and things of that nature, 'specially if they were elderly. Is that misogynist? Homosexuality wasn't mentioned at all. Values concerning relationships and sexuality weren't split into 'gay sex,' 'straight sex,' 'bi sex' or whatever, so I assumed this meant sex and relationship ideals were universal. The values basically amounting to not being an ass and respecting your partner and their parents. But what do I know, I'm only a member of the subculture you are stereotyping.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 1, 2010 10:04 AM

KANEMAN

One more day WhOOOOT...

Kwicko, I formally condemn your mother for not aborting you. Yeah, I'm sure her brother was happy to have a son, but you are inexcusable....

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 1, 2010 11:09 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

I disagree, and possibly because your experiences ARE regional. Nonetheless, the South had/has it's own prejudices against women--again, a generalization. While they treated them with courtesy, they were happy to have mistresses, which their wives were supposed to accept. They kept women all dolled up but (remember "Gone With The Wind?") strong women weren't accepted, for the most part; they weren't respect (or even participated) in politics, government or any serious business affairs. And more. Those were considered "traditional values"...much has changed and I can't speak to the South today, but

Misogynism isn't necessarily about treating women badly, it's about not recognizing them as equals, as people with brains, etc. And it exists across the nation, certainly, but there is a "flavor"to the Tea Party movement that is easy to see which represents a definite bias against women, in my view.

As to Republicans, some comments by same: Liddy on Sotomayor: "Let’s hope that the key conferences aren’t when she’s menstruating or something, or just before she’s going to menstruate. That would really be bad. Lord knows what we would get then."

Bill Kristol: "White women are a problem, that's, you know -- we all live with that." Kristol attributed Clinton's victory in the Democratic primary to "the tears," saying, "She pretended to cry; the women liked it." Hume asked Kristol, "You think she pretended?" Kristol responded, "I do," to which Hume replied, "I don't." Kristol added, "The women were sorry for her, and she won."

Beck: "Beck-Palin, I’ll consider. But Palin-Beck — can you imagine, can you imagine what an administration with the two of us would be like? What? Come on! She’d be yapping or something, and I’d say, “I’m sorry, why am I hearing your voice? I’m not in the kitchen.”

RNC co-chair Jan Larimer: "Women sometimes need a little more handholding, or they need their friends to help them make a decision. And by our going in and talking to them and recruiting and educating and training them to either get involved in a campaign or become a candidate, we’re giving them the tools so that they can do that on their own.”

Medina County (Ohio) Republican Executive Committee: "Let's take Betty Sutton out of the House and put her back in the kitchen."

Thomas Mitchell (editor of the right-wing blog Las Vegas Review-Journal): "Therefore, we must repeal the 19th Amendment. Yes, the one granting suffrage to women. Because? Well, women are biased. According to Mitchell, "Men are consistent. Women are fickle and biased".

I could look for more, but it's enough to show a certain mentality toward women.

As to homosexuality, I totally reject your argument:

Quote:
Homosexuality wasn't mentioned at all. Values concerning relationships and sexuality weren't split into 'gay sex,' 'straight sex,' 'bi sex' or whatever, so I assumed this meant sex and relationship ideals were universal." That's a heck of an assumption. Given most conservatives who speak on the matter are anti-homosexuals, and that religion is more prevalent among conservatives than liberals, I think the fact that it wasn't mentioned speaks for itself.
Quote:
Unlike the Reform movement, which does not consider itself bound to the Biblical text, the Conservative movement does claim to be bound to the text. And the text - certainly in regard to males - seems to be very clear. Indeed, many members of the Conservative movement agree with the Orthodox on this issue. The followers of this view maintain that homosexuality can be "cured," and that those with homosexual inclinations should seek treatment.
http://www.answers.com/topic/what-is-the-conservative-view-of-homosexu
ality

How often have we heard a conservative quote the bible: "You shall not lie with a man as with a woman"?
Quote:
The conservative view on homosexuality is mostly driven by religion, using several religious references to support main arguments. First and foremost, the conservative stance claims that homosexuality is a chosen lifestyle and that it is something one does. The cause of this behaviour lies mainly in poor parenting, previous sexual molestation that usually occurs during the childhood years, and even demon possession. It is believed that the addiction of homosexuality entraps individuals in the behaviour, making it difficult to escape.

Homosexuality is sinful, according to the conservative view, as it is unnatural, abnormal, and deviant and mirrors that of disordered behaviour. This condition threatens the family unit and thus, the social stability both in and around the family.
http://www.suite101.com/content/homosexuality-a-lifestyle-repressed-by
-religio-a147310#ixzz1449Y02U4

I find it amazing that you try to say hatred of homosexuals isn't rampant within the conservative movement. Your experiences may be otherwise, and I FULLY agree that there are probably many conservatives who don't hold these views, the fact is we hear them out of conservative mouths and conservative LEADERS' mouths far, far more than out of liberal mouths.

A stereotype is a commonly held public belief about specific social groups or types of individuals. Stereotypes are sometimes standardized and simplified conceptions of groups based on some prior assumptions.

As to traditional values, it is something the right talks about constantly. I'm not sure even they know what they mean by the term, but this isn't too far off the mark:
Quote:
Traditional values refer to those beliefs, moral codes, and mores that are passed down from generation to generation within a culture, subculture or community. Since the late 1970s in the U.S., the term "traditional values" has become synonymous with "family values" and imply a congruence with orthodox Christianity.

It is also not necessarily a political idea, though has come to be associated with a particular vein of Evangelism and politics, embodied by some American politicians such as Ronald Reagan, Dan Quayle, and George W. Bush, and the Christian right more broadly, as embodied for example by Pat Robertson.
Wikipedia

I would agree with the following:
Quote:
Traditional, historical American values have in the past, included a faith in God, prayer and the Bible, which has for a large part, been the foundation of other national traditions, such as: honor and respect for the family, diligent work ethics, absolute values of right and wrong, honesty in business practices, wholesomeness in leadership, respect toward authority, moderation rather than excess, marriage as a prerequisite before having sex or bearing children, a family which consists of both a father and mother, taking responsibility to provide for our own — such as one’s spouse, family and children, and so forth.
http://www.victorious.org/tradvalu.htm

Republicans have long railed that liberals/Dems don't have, or don't have as good, "traditional values" as they do; yet how many Republican legislators have we seen who don't abide by those values? That is the point, to me.

While I don't think misogyny or homophobia are part of traditional values, from my observation they go along with those who most espouse those values.

My experience with conservatives has been much like yours with liberals, with the exception that mine have tended to have the conservatives, once they know I'm a liberal, become more aggressive and derrogatory, to the point where in very short order it becomes personal, and "you liberals" gets thrown around a lot.

Personally, I'm quite happy to be friends with and communicate with conservatives, I wish there were more civil and intelligent ones here in RWED. The majority, unfortunately, are not, so I'm happy you're here.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 1, 2010 11:13 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

I appreciate all the attention... but wow.

I gave Rue, and give Sig, shit for their beliefs. Nothing more, nothing less.

In fact, was it not I who was FAR more outraged and angered at the repeated rape of the girl in Cali?

Im not mysoginistic. I just believe that if you want to run with the wolves, you better be able to pull your own weight.

"Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 1, 2010 11:15 AM

CANTTAKESKY

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
You’re wrong; the attacks against me have frequently been ABOUT my being female...in other words, describing me in female terms, whore, cunt, etc.

I was talking about the death threats in this thread, and I didn't see misogynistic language here. I've been gone on and off, so obviously I've missed the history of those other attacks on other threads. That is vile, Niki. I'm sorry to hear it.

-----
"Tch, secret government killing activity! That's why I don't pay taxes!" -- Sheik Amar, Prince of Persia: Sands of Time

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 1, 2010 11:19 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Oh. Well, I've had plenty of wishes for my death, too, if that's what you mean.

Thanx for the concern, but they don't bother me; they're just reflective of what I hate about this place. Actually, I'd rather more were aimed at ME than at others, given it DOESN'T bother me but Ihate that it upsets others.

Quote:
In fact, was it not I who was FAR more outraged and angered at the repeated rape of the girl in Cali?

Your memory is faulty. At least I was here for THAT discussion, so I know.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 1, 2010 11:33 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

MY memory is faulty?

YOUR answer was to call the cops, to watch and wait for someone to stop it!

MY ANSWER was to STOP IT.

BIG DIFFERENCE.

"Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 1, 2010 12:36 PM

THEHAPPYTRADER

Quote:
I disagree, and possibly because your experiences ARE regional. Nonetheless, the South had/has it's own prejudices against women--again, a generalization. While they treated them with courtesy, they were happy to have mistresses, which their wives were supposed to accept.

If everyone who lived in the south were an aristocratic plantation owner, that might actually make sense. Those were the actions of the social and political elite, you know, the guys who think those rules don't seem to apply to.

Conservatives have been unhappy with the republican party for a little while now as most do not feet they are accurately representing conservative interest. That's why Obama won the election and that's where the Tea Party came from. It's one of the things that makes it frustrating for conservatives right now, because we want fiscal responsibility and small government but what we often get from 'our' candidates are tools of big business. I suspect the 'political class' in general (democrats and republicans alike) aren't doing a very good job of representing their people.

Quote:
How often have we heard a conservative quote the bible: "You shall not lie with a man as with a woman"?

I was trying to stay within the secular realm, but I'll post a few quotes from that article I put up earlier clarify that verse a mite and show what it really means. Taking these things out of context and without research can be dangerous.

Quote:
Leviticus 18:6 reads: "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female. It is an abomination." A similar verse occurs two chapters later, in Leviticus 20:13: "A man who sleeps with another man is an abomination and should be executed." On the surface, these words could leave you feeling rather uneasy, especially if you are gay. But just below the surface is the deeper truth about God -- and it has nothing to do with sex.

Leviticus is a holiness code written 3,000 years ago. This code includes many of the outdated sexual laws we mentioned earlier, and a lot more. It also includes prohibitions against round haircuts, tattoos, working on the Sabbath, wearing garments of mixed fabrics, eating pork or shellfish, getting your fortune told, and even playing with the skin of a pig. (There goes football!)

So what's a holiness code? It's a list of behaviors that people of faith find offensive in a certain place and time. In this case, the code was written for priests only, and its primary intent was to set the priests of Israel over and against priests of other cultures.

The bit on football makes me chuckle. Anyway, moving on.

Quote:
Jesus and Paul both said the holiness code in Leviticus does not pertain to Christian believers... I'm convinced those passages say nothing about homosexuality as we understand it today...The Jews were a small tribe struggling to populate a country. They were outnumbered by their enemy...

Leviticus is the opposite of conservatism, it is the epitome of the over-regulation that they fear from a Liberal Government. Rather ironic huh? So don't take them seriously, they are not accurately representing Christianity or the conservative philosophy.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE