Should Op-Ed Threads Be Held To A Standard of Being Rubber Room or Flame Zone Material?
...
Censor, ban, restrict? Why are right wingers always so alarmist and Flame Zoney, Rubber Roomy in their responses?
The Collapse of Iraq and the Rise of ISIS: Made in America?
Why are right wingers always proposing we censor, ban or restrict free speech? I can remember back when I was young, and I met my first stupid adult... before I realized that stupid right winger and conservative were two totally different beings. ... but back then, conservatives fought back against stupid right wingers who called for censorship of books, lyrics, speech, protests. Strongly against it in no uncertain terms. Even if it offended people, right wingers believed only they had the free right to speech and it shouldn't be abridged for any reason other than .....well you get it.
I know of NO conservative today who is calling for bans on anything involving books, lyrics, protests, speech or anything else. Conservatives are mostly against this stupid PC bullshit that seems to be permeating society these days... where everyone is offended by the least little thing and believe they have some kind of goddamn constitutional right to NOT be offended.
Dear
Boss
RE: bans on anything else
1. One recent example are conservative candidates in Tennessee calling for BANS on Mosques.
Bans on Shariah Law fall apart legally, because Shariah refers to ALL areas of Islam practice: the prayers, the charity, etc.
So banning "Shariah" means banning Islamic practice all together, clearly against the Constitution.
Now
Boss can you guess the political affiliation of people pushing to ban this?
We won't get into BANNING Muslims from immigration, if you think that's a outlier fluke and not within the mainstream rightwing.
2. How about BANS on gay marriage, where laws and amendments were written and passed on that.
And guess which group still boasts support for enforcing state legislated BANS?
3. Do you want more? like BANS on stem cell research?
Does that count under BANS on information?
Sorry Emily, we're not having a debate over what constitutes a ban and what doesn't. I am not responsible for everything done by every Republican in the country. I have no control over what other people do. I made the statement that Liberals want to ban free speech in a thread which seems to be a liberal call to ban free speech. If you or anyone else wants to distort my comments into something else, that's up to you.
In the past, I have commended you on your efforts to be fair and bipartisan. To try and find areas of agreement and compromise between the two major political views. I'm now going to tell you something and hope it doesn't hurt your feelings... You're living in the past. You're attitude is about 10-15 years behind the times. What you're attempting to do would have worked in the 1990s.
What it does today is get you run over. You're red meat to the radical and rabid liberal left. Your willingness to try and be objective and fair is exploited and taken advantage of. These people have become radicalized fanatics and can no longer be reasoned with on anything. Your position of mediation and negotiation is their default position when they fail to cram their radical agenda down our throats against our will.
Dear
Boss:
A. I'm living in the future.
When people don't forgive differences, that's living in the past. That's projecting the old problems onto the new situations, instead of using these opportunities to get past them.
JakeStarkey of all people is one in a position to move forward.
Probably one of the closest equivalents on here, who speaks like the Republicans who integrate with liberal positions, as I am one of those crossover Democrats who aligns with as much conservative interests, ideals and meanings lost in the shuffle. The fact Jake and I don't agree is why we need to work together, to cover those bases. Of course these groups are going to clash when all sides feel threatened and put on the defensive. It's human nature to defend oneself when your freedom and security is under attack or threat.
By addressing these mutual fears and forgiving and accepting our differences
Boss we move toward a more progressive inclusive future.
And we restore the UNIVERSAL Constitutional and Christian ideals of INCLUSION that are heading for fulfillment, following this path we are on of Restorative Justice. So we move forward,
Boss. And yes, it brings up the past issues, in order to resolve them.
The conflicts that come up are part of the growth toward that greater understanding and inclusion.
Boss what we are seeing is a transition stage like teenagers thinking "their parents lived in the past"
Well, this generation is having to grow up, become adults, and understand WHY those "outdated" parents insisted on making certain decisions and enforcing standards we thought were oldfashioned. When we become parents, then we understand why. So that's where we are with government.
People need to grow up. People go through stages such as Fowler's religious development.
With overcoming past issues from racism to genocides and religious/political wars,
there is a collective GRIEF process going on, that is thrown into the mix.
We are all going through this as humanity, so there is going to be a rough up and down learning curve.
I say we move together toward a stable future. Not judge what we see, which is people
finally facing up to all the issues suppressed from the past -- coming out in FULL FORCE because we now have global internet access to share and discuss these things LIKE NEVER BEFORE.
Of course it's going to be a mess, a mass ClusterFU,
Boss.
That is why I value you,
JakeStarkey and everyone here for sticking to your positions.
We need to do that to sort things out. Like the 50 states that need to represent their sovereign interests,
BEFORE we all negotiate how to put things together as a union. We need to stand our ground,
our beliefs, and include that in the mix. Conflicts are supposed to be included, not judged as obstructions.
B.
Boss as for "wanting to cram ideologies down other people throats"
There are 4-5 types of leadership styles or approaches to conflict management.
This is only 1 of those 5.
1. Accommodating - YOUR way is put first
2. Competitive - MY way is put first
3. Collaborative - OUR way is put first
4. Avoidance - NO way is put first
6. Inclusive - ALL ways are put first
I am 6 and try to work toward 3.
If you react negatively to 2 you may be 2. But the point is still to try to move toward 3 - where do we agree equally and try to focus there, while we work around the other differences and conflicts, especially if these will not change. We need to manage that especially, if we are going to fulfill standards of "equal protection"
and representation under law of ALL interests ALL beliefs.
it is common for people like you and me, Jake and others of strong convictions, to get into defensive turf wars between people or groups who "set off" or threaten each other by pushing their way equally as the other group pushes back in defense. I set some people off, others set me off. You and Jake may set each other off, but I see us as fair and able to manage conflicting ideas when communicating. Jake is open to say where there is a limit that we are not going to resolve, very honest, and that's all we can do. Is admit where those lines are.
If our conflicting ways of pushing is how we come across when expressing and defending our beliefs from infringement, then that is part of the puzzle
Boss. Of course we are going to have this come out openly.
So how do we align not only our ideals, but our communication styles to work things out and not clash?
We have an advantage here, we can work as a team, so if we have clashes, someone else can help.
There are also different roles in the facilitation process.
Some ppl are geared for being the arbitrator that just says yes or no, that does or does not work,
and is not responsible for sorting out why and fixing any obstructions preventing a better solution.
Some ppl are suited for facilitation and mediation, remain neutral, and just help the others make
their points instead of getting stuck in conflicts over 1-5 above, taking insult or threat over setbacks.
Some ppl are suited for sorting out and interpreting the pieces and offering ways to focus or fix things.
I try to figure out which ideas or which people can be used for which, and encourage putting this together.
It's up to all of us to find out what we are suited for, and where our ideas fit or clash and try to manage that.
Boss this is about sorting out the past so we can build and organize resources for a sustainable future.
Thanks again for being here to play the role you play. We need people to say yes means yes and no means no. I am one of the open ended people who does try to include all people and views in the mix.
But I have limits also and will not put up with imposing by coercion by exclusion or bullying to force things,
but will seek to find where we might agree, point by point, and form a consensus or agree to separate.
I believe
JakeStarkey is an ally in this, and does NOT want imposition any more than YOU DO.
The very reason you might both clash is also why we will not stop until we reach agreement.
NEITHER you nor I nor Jake wants some other group imposing by force against free will!
So we have that in common. We will not compromise for mere bullying and abusing govt to force agenda.
That's a good thing,
Boss, to stand our ground. We need to do that to get anywhere, to know where our limits are and enforce that. Why is that a bad thing? You do the same thing, you and I come across to
JakeStarkey as "wanting to force our way onto others" and it scares people off as much!
Jake tells me I come across this way all the time, pushing this consensus thing
the way people have seen Obama abuse consensus to mean FORCING it on people.
NO, that is not what I mean at all. But if that is how I come across, people get scared.
Just like you get scared when you think people are trying to do this.
But
Boss remember there are different styles of leading and managing conflict.
No everyone is trying to push "my way over your way"
Most people I know sound like you, scared that others are doing that.
So most people feel they are trying to DEFEND their way against oppression by bigger bullies.
Most people feel like you, just trying to defend what is right from some agenda abusing govt and media.
Get rid of the fear, and then we can deal with our real differences and what is going to work or not work.
Happy New Year
Boss
Take care and keep on keeping on!
