Have We Really Come To This?

[Teallaura]

My amen was tongue-in-cheek.

Sure it was.

[JonathanL]

Sure it was.

right back at you.

[Teallaura]

right back at you.

C'mere, you....

[JonathanL]

C'mere, you....

No.

[Teallaura]

What?

[JonathanL]

What?

Nothing.

[Teallaura]

Oh, good... so, c'mere...

[JonathanL]

Oh, good... so, c'mere...

Why?

[Spartacus]

In your own thread, sure.

You don't have the authority to impose that stipulation

Um, you realize you are doing the opposite, right? Seer is definitely 'heavily invested in social justice causes' - just not the way you think he should be. So, you really think harping on thread titles demonstrates this 'demonstrat(ion) of genuine concern' you were talking about?

But the real problem is that this doesn't at all address my point - how is it okay to claim that only certain lives matter, even by implication (strong implication in this case)? If 'all lives matter' is not true, then neither is 'black lives matter' - and the importance of life comes into question. Seriously, do you think the crowd acted well in this case?

Think back to how you felt as you typed this post, Teal. Remember that feeling. That's how you feel when you're trying way too hard to find an argument. What you've produced is a flimsy post that relies more on (deliberate?) equivocation than on a decent grasp of my point r.e. O'Malley having it coming or my peevishness r.e. seer.

From what I know of his history, O'Malley has it coming. If the crowd understood that he was governor of Maryland and his policies therefore contributed to the way the situation in Baltimore developed, then African Americans can boo him all they like until such a time as he demonstrates that his understanding of complex racial and urban issues has substantially developed since his time as governor.

[Teallaura]

You don't have the authority to impose that stipulation



Think back to how you felt as you typed this post, Teal. Remember that feeling. That's how you feel when you're trying way too hard to find an argument. What you've produced is a flimsy post that relies more on (deliberate?) equivocation than on a decent grasp of my point r.e. O'Malley having it coming or my peevishness r.e. seer.

From what I know of his history, O'Malley has it coming. If the crowd understood that he was governor of Maryland and his policies therefore contributed to the way the situation in Baltimore developed, then African Americans can boo him all they like until such a time as he demonstrates that his understanding of complex racial and urban issues has substantially developed since his time as governor.

Point One: I have as much right as you to argue the off topic point in someone else's thread. More to the point, what you guys have been doing is disruptive. I chose to point it out in thread this time. I will probably just report it next. As a former mod, I do know how to make the case.

Point two: Your talking past me. My point has to do with content. You are off on personality. I am not struggling at all. You are floundering around trying to justify the indefensible.

Stated again: why do only some lives matter? That is what the crowd said by implication as you full well know. They booed not at the walk on but at that specific comment. It's silly to say the guy deserved it when I am asking for the rational justification for booing that specific comment.

I will spare you the trouble: it cannot be justified. The guy is a jerk doesn't justify the tacet claim that only some lives matter and those are only the ones that happen to be black.

King must be rolling over in his grave. It completely undermines his entire body of work.

[RumTumTugger]

You don't have the authority to impose that stipulation

But I do.

Moderator Notice

if you want to complain about the title of another members thread take it to the padded room where it belongs. if you don't the staff will move it and you won't like the title of the thread if we have to move it. This notice is for all members I just used Spartacus's post as a segue.

***If you wish to take issue with this notice DO NOT do so in this thread.***
Contact the forum moderator or an administrator in Private Message or email instead. If you feel you must publicly complain or whine, please take it to the Psychotherapy Room unless told otherwise.

[fm93]

Though don't you think it is actions that give weight to our words. So someone who tells the student that "all voices matter" and sets out to show the student that by responding to the student when he/she makes a point will have better results than someone who makes the right noises but does zip. Instead of booing the crowd should have said 'prove it with actions' and given the guy some time.

Spartacus has since addressed this.

Yes, no one said black people can not protest. Starlight said the politician was implicitly denying that the black people have suffered injustice. Saying 'all lives matter' does not need to be interpreted like that but rather is giving voice to a truth that all lives DO matter - because they do. Black lives matter as much as white lives.

Yes, but the people in that crowd believe that white lives are already being treated as if they matter, whereas black lives are not.

No, not like that at all since the Charleston shooting was documented by camera.

The killing of Eric Garner was also documented on camera.

[Spartacus]

Point One: I have as much right as you to argue the off topic point in someone else's thread. More to the point, what you guys have been doing is disruptive. I chose to point it out in thread this time. I will probably just report it next. As a former mod, I do know how to make the case.

Go right ahead.

Point two: Your talking past me. My point has to do with content. You are off on personality. I am not struggling at all. You are floundering around trying to justify the indefensible.

Stated again: why do only some lives matter? That is what the crowd said by implication as you full well know. They booed not at the walk on but at that specific comment. It's silly to say the guy deserved it when I am asking for the rational justification for booing that specific comment.

I will spare you the trouble: it cannot be justified. The guy is a jerk doesn't justify the tacet claim that only some lives matter and those are only the ones that happen to be black.

King must be rolling over in his grave. It completely undermines his entire body of work.

I'm not talking past you so much as I am a step or two ahead of you. Others have already explained this well enough. I don't feel particularly obligated to explain further when you're so evidently determined to be petulant.