liberals and children

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Zhukov, Aug 28, 2004.

  1. Zhukov
    Offline

    Zhukov VIP Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2003
    Messages:
    3,492
    Thanks Received:
    301
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Everywhere, simultaneously.
    Ratings:
    +301
    http://www.townhall.com/columnists/dennisprager/dp20040803.shtml




    http://www.townhall.com/columnists/dennisprager/dp20040810.shtml
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. KarlMarx
    Offline

    KarlMarx Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2004
    Messages:
    3,231
    Thanks Received:
    490
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    ...
    Ratings:
    +490
    What's really pathetic is that the Democrats use a child to attack the other side while at the same time hiding behind her.
     
  3. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    Agreed. The democrats don't seem to have much of a problem using children:

    http://www.indcjournal.com/archives/000723.php
     
  4. freeandfun1
    Offline

    freeandfun1 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Messages:
    6,201
    Thanks Received:
    295
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +296
    They needed a 12 year old to reach the majority of the DNC voters. They are childish, so they needed a child to tell them how it is. Kinda fits don't it?
     
  5. Moi
    Offline

    Moi Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2003
    Messages:
    1,859
    Thanks Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    The ONLY GOOD place
    Ratings:
    +11
    Given how immature most liberals around me are, how they raise their kids to do whatever/wherever they want and how the democratic party has infantilized the population of the united states there is no surprise here.
     
  6. KarlMarx
    Offline

    KarlMarx Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2004
    Messages:
    3,231
    Thanks Received:
    490
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    ...
    Ratings:
    +490
    That's to make them easier to lead around by the nose

    :cow: :cow: :cow: :cow: :cow: :cow:
     
  7. nakedemperor
    Offline

    nakedemperor Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2004
    Messages:
    1,437
    Thanks Received:
    150
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    NYC
    Ratings:
    +150
    "That is why liberals do not generally want children to call adults "Mr." or "Mrs."
    Such titles render adults distinct from children."

    Where are the numbers on this? This is conjecture and generalization.

    "That is why liberal teachers often dress and talk similarly to their students and ask to be called by their first names."

    Again, conjecture and generaliztion. Also, in dressing/talking "like their students", the educational community is pretty fairly split on the benefits. Some say this engenders disrespect for the teacher. Others say it allows students to be more comfortable and open.

    "That is why liberals led the fight to lower the voting age to 18 and why California Democrats are now seeking to lower it further (as low as 14)."

    And what's wrong with that? 18 year olds can die for their country but that can't vote on the president that could be the one to reinstate the draft? 18 year olds are fully equipped to make an informed decision about the presidential election. And California Democrats are way left, so 14 is understandable for them.

    "That is why liberal educators worked to enable students to design college curricula. To many liberals, a 55-year-old professor does not know anything more than a 20-year-old about what students should be studying."

    Unflexible, dated college curricula that ask a student to study things with no relevance to their goals or that the students have no interest in are only useful to a point. Take Brown University, for example: there is NO core curriculum. Students choose every course that they wish to take, and are bombarded by outlets for faculty advising. When the 20-year old and the 55-year old work TOGETHER, good things happen.


    "That is why liberals don't worry about protecting children's innocence as much as conservatives do. The early sexualization of children is therefore not a problem to liberal educators. In a nutshell, the differing views of childhood innocence are what the battles over sex education in elementary schools, condom distribution in high schools and AIDS education in fourth grade are all about."

    The AMA, CDC, AAP, and NASIM.. ALL promote comprehensive sex education that encourages abstinence, but also says that if you DO have sex, you should use a condom. A Northern Kentucky University study showed that 61% of undergrads who had taken virginity pledges broke them, and were by far less likely to use condoms when they did have sex for the first time (conceivably because people have taken solemn oaths before God are less likely to carry condoms), and that 55% of those who remained abstinent had engaged in unprotected oral sex.

    HMMMM.

    Also, remember when Bush as governor spent $10 on abstinence-only sex ed? Texas had the 46th worst teen pregnancy rate in the country. When Clinton was Pres and Bush was Governor teen pregnancy dropped in every state in the union. Texas was second to last in its improvement.

    Abstinence prevents STDs and pregnancy. Abstinence education does NOT. And abstinence education grads are NOT significantly less likely to PRACTICE it.



    This stuff about liberals trying to blur the lines between children and adults? It's crap. It has no basis in reality. It's petty name-calling. The little girl at the DNC, wow, that's a compelling argument... 12 year old...Democrats...Convention...oh dear God they're trying to blur the lines between child and adult!!

    Whatever.
     
  8. Zhukov
    Offline

    Zhukov VIP Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2003
    Messages:
    3,492
    Thanks Received:
    301
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Everywhere, simultaneously.
    Ratings:
    +301
    Which of course means that 39% of the people who took viriginity pledge didn't.

    How many people had sex who didn't take the virginity pledge?

    See the flaw in your argument? If one person didn't break the pledge, it worked.

    So? What's wrong with conjecture and generalization? In fact you offered conjecture and generalization in the very same post in which you seemed to deride their use.

    This an opinion piece based on years of experience, including over 20 years hosting a radio talk show that discusses nearly every facet of life and over 30 years teaching at the college level.

    More than that, my own experiences are not in conflict with his generalizations. I've noticed that the liberal teachers I've encountered in my life have dressed more informally and behaved in a more familiar manner than what few conservative teachers I've known. In my opinion there is a direct correlation.

    Simultaneously a conjecture and a generalization. Where are the numbers?

    Do you realize you just agreed with the author's premise?

    And with that, I'll stop.
     
  9. ScreamingEagle
    Offline

    ScreamingEagle Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2004
    Messages:
    12,886
    Thanks Received:
    1,610
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,159
    It's just another example of the Left's relativisim. If an 18 year old can vote, then surely a 17 year old can, and why not a 16 yo, a 14 yo, a 12 yo? There is no such thing as a set standard to them.

    A 12 yo speaker like that would be heralded by the Left as an example why 12 year olds should be "old enough" to vote. In the Left's warped world they of course would think that this little 12 yo puppet on a string would be mature enough to vote - and do other things as well.

    Can you imagine a whole new block of voters being created if the voting age was lowered to 12 and can you imagine who the manipulated children would vote for? Especially since the libs pretty much control the public schools. There is a method to their madness.

    The morally bankrupt Left is also for lowering the age of consent for much the same perverse relativistic reasoning. Just as they argue that 20 year olds should have equal input to a 55 yo professor, they argue that a 12 year old should be able to consent to sex if she wanted to. In the Left's sick world they see nothing wrong with a 55 year old man marrying a 20 year old or a 12 year old. It's all relative to them.

    Of course, on the other hand they profess to "protect the children". However, in the name of "protection" they are out to upsurp the role of the parent and replace it with the State. For example, just look at how they push legislation that does not require anyone to tell an underage girl's parents that she is pregnant or having an abortion. Look at all the special "rights" of the child that are being promoted from the Left. Or how they teach about condoms and sex in school to "protect" them. Or question them about guns in the household. Parents are unable to raise their own children as they see fit.

    The Left is out to manipulate and control society through our children and this latest stunt at the Democrat convention was only the tip of the iceberg. The iceberg has actually grown so large that the Left actually felt comfortable in having the audacity to insult VP Cheney using a child.
     
  10. Merlin1047
    Offline

    Merlin1047 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2004
    Messages:
    3,500
    Thanks Received:
    449
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    AL
    Ratings:
    +450
    Okay, okay. Here's the real truth. The Democrats put a twelve year old girl on their podium because they needed at least ONE person up there who didn't have a whole platoon of skeletons in his/her closet.

    And apparently those who wrote the author condemning his criticism of this twelve year old's comments seem to have forgotten the spectacle of Democrats energetically booing the Boy Scouts during the 1998 convention.

    Ain't selective retention a wonderful thing?
     

Share This Page