Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

More Lovely Tolerance From The Left...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Darth Executor
    replied
    Originally posted by Carrikature View Post
    This mostly feels like an equivocation of 'discriminatory'. There's nothing wrong with requiring certain qualifications to join a group, nor do I really care if the BSA chooses to exclude people based on certain criteria. When it comes to public servants, though, it's in our own best interest to expect them to conform to certain behaviors. That goes double when the public servant is expected to perform a service where impartiality is a basic requirement. So sure, prevent them from joining pro-gay movements. That's fine with me.
    Yeah bro it's in "our" best interest to make homophilia (IOW, liberalism) a requirement of being a public servant.

    The idea that ideological tests for public servants serve "the public's" best interest is absurd. It serves the interest of whoever believes in the value being enforced. It certainly does not serve the interest of anybody else.

    Leave a comment:


  • Carrikature
    replied
    Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
    Y'all realize that if judges aren't allowed to be involved in scouting they also cannot be involved with gay rights groups which are inherently discriminatory - unless they allow those with anti-gay positions to not only belong but hold office (in which case they are morons). Sauce works on geese and ganders alike.
    None of this bothers me, Teal.


    Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
    All groups are discriminatory at some level. There's no group with no membership qualifications at all - even humanity requires being human (some of y'all have more trouble than others with that ).
    This mostly feels like an equivocation of 'discriminatory'. There's nothing wrong with requiring certain qualifications to join a group, nor do I really care if the BSA chooses to exclude people based on certain criteria. When it comes to public servants, though, it's in our own best interest to expect them to conform to certain behaviors. That goes double when the public servant is expected to perform a service where impartiality is a basic requirement. So sure, prevent them from joining pro-gay movements. That's fine with me.

    Leave a comment:


  • Carrikature
    replied
    Originally posted by RumTumTugger View Post
    No Carri that is not what I'm suggesting. I'm suggesting that you stand up to the Intolerant bullies who would have you believe the Boyscouts are the same as the ku klux klan and neo nazi groups. That is what they are saying here Carri and that is what I'm standing up against bullies who say you do and say and think what we want you to or else. that is what this is about Carri nothing else a group of bullies who want others to think like them or be treated like second class citizens or worse slaves.
    Please, please, show me even a shred of proof to back up these claims. You can't do it, and we both know it. The irony of the second half of this post is that you support laws that also "say you do and say and think what we want you to or else".

    Leave a comment:


  • Teallaura
    replied
    Y'all realize that if judges aren't allowed to be involved in scouting they also cannot be involved with gay rights groups which are inherently discriminatory - unless they allow those with anti-gay positions to not only belong but hold office (in which case they are morons). Sauce works on geese and ganders alike.


    All groups are discriminatory at some level. There's no group with no membership qualifications at all - even humanity requires being human (some of y'all have more trouble than others with that ).

    Leave a comment:


  • RumTumTugger
    replied
    Originally posted by Carrikature View Post
    RTT, how would you know if I looked at it? That's a silly thing to say. Of course I looked at it. I understood your point, too. I think it's a false one, and it blatantly ignored what the fuss is about, which is what I said. It's possible to stand for multiple things, after all, and it's possible that people like some of those things but not others. Do you really expect us to believe that these 'intolerant liberal bullies' dislike the parts you pointed out? Do you expect us to believe it's impossible to correct flaws in what is otherwise a good thing? Do you mean to suggest that we should ignore such flaws simply because there are good things there too? I would hope not, on all counts.
    No Carri that is not what I'm suggesting. I'm suggesting that you stand up to the Intolerant bullies who would have you believe the Boyscouts are the same as the ku klux klan and neo nazi groups. That is what they are saying here Carri and that is what I'm standing up against bullies who say you do and say and think what we want you to or else. that is what this is about Carri nothing else a group of bullies who want others to think like them or be treated like second class citizens or worse slaves.

    Leave a comment:


  • Psychic Missile
    replied
    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
    what do you think this thread is about? saying that judges can't belong [youth] organizations that discriminate based on sexual orientation.

    Yeah keep shifting those goal posts around.
    What goal posts? You made an assumption based on something I didn't say.

    Leave a comment:


  • Carrikature
    replied
    Originally posted by RumTumTugger View Post
    actually Carri you did not even look at the other part that was bolded where they promise to help others so who's looking at strawmen here? And I know very well what the Intolerant liberal Bullies dislike about the Boy scouts I was pointing out that the Bullies don't care about what the Boy Scouts really stand for they'd rather focus on the views held that they don't like the Boy Scouts for holding and so will bully anyone who supports them thereby showing who the real intolerant people the ones who want you to lock step into their way of thinking or else.
    RTT, how would you know if I looked at it? That's a silly thing to say. Of course I looked at it. I understood your point, too. I think it's a false one, and it blatantly ignored what the fuss is about, which is what I said. It's possible to stand for multiple things, after all, and it's possible that people like some of those things but not others. Do you really expect us to believe that these 'intolerant liberal bullies' dislike the parts you pointed out? Do you expect us to believe it's impossible to correct flaws in what is otherwise a good thing? Do you mean to suggest that we should ignore such flaws simply because there are good things there too? I would hope not, on all counts.

    Leave a comment:


  • RumTumTugger
    replied
    Originally posted by Carrikature View Post
    Yep. It's clear that you didn't understand my response to RTT. I didn't say that religious reasons were the only thing the fuss is about. The bolded above is explicitly false. Anyone remotely familiar with this case (which is everyone here) knows full well that the gay discrimination is what is the primary issue. The religious aspect is an additional concern, and if KG's correct about atheists not being allowed then it's a legitimate one.

    My response to KG was in response specifically to the question he asked. I've made no strawman.
    actually Carri you did not even look at the other part that was bolded where they promise to help others so who's looking at strawmen here? And I know very well what the Intolerant liberal Bullies dislike about the Boy scouts I was pointing out that the Bullies don't care about what the Boy Scouts really stand for they'd rather focus on the views held that they don't like the Boy Scouts for holding and so will bully anyone who supports them thereby showing who the real intolerant people the ones who want you to lock step into their way of thinking or else.
    Last edited by RumTumTugger; 01-30-2015, 05:13 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sparko
    replied

    Leave a comment:


  • Carrikature
    replied
    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
    OK let's start over. You said RumTums post was straw and the fuss was all about the line above her bolded text.
    That line reads "To do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law;" which means you are saying the fuss is about it being a religious organisation.
    I responded that no, it was because they didn't allow gay scoutmasters.
    KG said they did allow gay members.
    You then reiterated that they didn't allow gay scoutmaster, which is what I said.

    That means your initial comment about RumTums post being nothing but straw and that it was about it being a religious organization is straw itself. Because it being a religious organization, which it is not, is not what all the fuss is about. It is about people not liking that they don't allow gay scoutmasters.

    clear now?
    Yep. It's clear that you didn't understand my response to RTT. I didn't say that religious reasons were the only thing the fuss is about. The bolded above is explicitly false. Anyone remotely familiar with this case (which is everyone here) knows full well that the gay discrimination is what is the primary issue. The religious aspect is an additional concern, and if KG's correct about atheists not being allowed then it's a legitimate one.

    My response to KG was in response specifically to the question he asked. I've made no strawman.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sparko
    replied
    Originally posted by Carrikature View Post
    Try again. I quoted RTT in the post to which I responded to RTT. My comments about the scoutmasters were in response to KG, which is who I quoted in that post.
    OK let's start over. You said RumTums post was straw and the fuss was all about the line above her bolded text.
    That line reads "To do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law;" which means you are saying the fuss is about it being a religious organisation.
    I responded that no, it was because they didn't allow gay scoutmasters.
    KG said they did allow gay members.
    You then reiterated that they didn't allow gay scoutmaster, which is what I said.

    That means your initial comment about RumTums post being nothing but straw and that it was about it being a religious organization is straw itself. Because it being a religious organization, which it is not, is not what all the fuss is about. It is about people not liking that they don't allow gay scoutmasters.

    clear now?

    Leave a comment:


  • Carrikature
    replied
    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
    which has nothing at all to do with your comment to rumtum above. Talking about burning straw.
    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
    no he wasn't. He even quoted Rumtum in his post.
    Try again. I quoted RTT in the post to which I responded to RTT. My comments about the scoutmasters were in response to KG, which is who I quoted in that post.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sparko
    replied
    Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
    Post 24? He quoted me...
    which was a followup from my comment to him about gay scoutmasters being what all the fuss was about. It's called a "thread" because one post leads to another.

    Leave a comment:


  • KingsGambit
    replied
    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
    no he wasn't. He even quoted Rumtum in his post.
    Post 24? He quoted me...

    Leave a comment:


  • Sparko
    replied
    Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
    He was responding to my question.
    no he wasn't. He even quoted Rumtum in his post.

    Leave a comment:

Related Threads

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by little_monkey, 03-27-2024, 04:19 PM
16 responses
162 views
0 likes
Last Post One Bad Pig  
Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
53 responses
400 views
0 likes
Last Post Mountain Man  
Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
25 responses
114 views
0 likes
Last Post rogue06
by rogue06
 
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
33 responses
198 views
0 likes
Last Post Roy
by Roy
 
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
84 responses
379 views
0 likes
Last Post JimL
by JimL
 
Working...
X