The Homosexual Agenda, The aclu, And Your Children...

[Shogun]

Provided the halfway house he lives in will allow him to stray so far.

I realize that I am probably turning you on with all this abusive language but do you really have to project what you look for in a man to this board?

 

[Shogun]

NO ONE has claimed ( well maybe the racist Pale Rider) that the murderers were justified, their crimes lessened by, or that it excuses their actions any, by noting poor choices by people ( and we do mean poor, not accidental).

As to the Christian in Muslim lands.... umm ya it would be their fault in a lot of them since they live or went to a country that gives them less rights, less legal rights, less legal protection. Now the people that live there have little choice, but I bet you dollars to donuts that the people living in those countries know full well not to provoke an incident, no matter how right they may be. Any Christian that preaches the faith in those kind of places should know they place their life in peril. No it does not excuse the murder of them by Muslims, it does though reflect on poor choices.

I tell ya what Shogun, assuming your white, go to an all black run down section of some city infested with gangs, and then start telling people your rights to be there. Be sure to have a lot of money and flash it around and wear expensive jewelry. Hey wait a minute, do that in any neighborhood controlled by gangs no matter the color of their skin. Do it on bums row.

Go to Central Park in New York City in the middle of the night and wander through all the dark unlit sections, it is after all your right to be there isn't it? Again flash your money and wear lots of expensive looking jewelry and clothing.

Exersize your rights and then if your still alive let us know how well that worked out.

Ahh.. I see.. So, in this modern America you are comfortable drawing your own lines of segregation? Your own gangland map? someone who wanders into central park should have KNOWN better? A hooker skirt wearing woman should have KNOWN BETTER?

and, this is the richest, a CHRISTIAN DEAD IN A MUSLIM NATION SHOULD HAVE KNOWN BETTER?

I should keep that quote handy, gunny... Im sure it will come in handy the next time your side is railing against muslims in palestine and iraq. I hope no one in your family ever gets raped, dude. I'd hate to be in your shoes as you try to explain to your neice why she should have made better choices about what to wear. Indeed, Emmet Till sure did make a poor choice in DARING to whistle at a white girl. Yes. Obviously, that is as pertinent in the violence equation as racism. SURE, dude. sure.

I hope you four take some time to read about how blaming the victim perpetuates the cycle.


and, don't mind me laughing when I see you demonize a muslim for reacting in the M.E. since you seem to thoroughly believe that the victim should have made better choices.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I guess it's a good thing you are not the voice at the end of any psychic hotlines. If those guesses convey your ability as a cognitive creature then I feel sorry for whoever gets to dress and feed you.

THATS your 'evidence"? I guess it's no real shocker why you reject concepts like ethnocentrism.

ps, what you THINK and what is truth seems to be leagues apart. Perhaps you should practice reading this weekend.. you know, start with a little nancy drew and work your way up to books with more words than pictures?


Indeed, I would ask you to explain how you've come to the determination that I don't vote (despite posting on a politics messageboard) and am a felon...

....but that would probably take more of your fuzzy logic and half-understood jargon so...


If you don't like it when your words come back and bite you in the ass then perhaps you shouldn't ask for evidence.... 'cause, unlike you, I have no problem backing up my assertions with more than half assed googled letters to the Advocate and misunderstood studies.

She was using your psychic ability to read minds and determine what people are and did or associate with.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Then, praytell..


What exactly would you say to a rape victim coneying your point? Le'ts see you spell it out. Pretend RGS is a rape victim after wearing an ultra slutty whorish outfit and going out drinking and got raped and show me how you would tell a VICTIM about their POOR CHOICES.

Again, I hope you are not a councellor.


and no. there is about as much safety plan for predicting rape as there is predicting wich house gets robbed. But, I guess anyone who moved in to a crime ridden area just made their own mistake... right?


Why won't you tell me how christian missionaries could avoid being killed by muslims by just making better choices, allie?


HMMMM?

Christian Missionaries can avoid being killed by Muslims by NOT preaching in that area. Pretty damn simple really. Unless your now going to provide us with statistical evidence that missionaries in non Muslim areas are in serious danger of being killed BY MUSLIMS.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Ahh.. I see.. So, in this modern America you are comfortable drawing your own lines of segregation? Your own gangland map? someone who wanders into central park should have KNOWN better? A hooker skirt wearing woman should have KNOWN BETTER?

and, this is the richest, a CHRISTIAN DEAD IN A MUSLIM NATION SHOULD HAVE KNOWN BETTER?

I should keep that quote handy, gunny... Im sure it will come in handy the next time your side is railing against muslims in palestine and iraq. I hope no one in your family ever gets raped, dude. I'd hate to be in your shoes as you try to explain to your neice why she should have made better choices about what to wear. Indeed, Emmet Till sure did make a poor choice in DARING to whistle at a white girl. Yes. Obviously, that is as pertinent in the violence equation as racism. SURE, dude. sure.

I hope you four take some time to read about how blaming the victim perpetuates the cycle.


and, don't mind me laughing when I see you demonize a muslim for reacting in the M.E. since you seem to thoroughly believe that the victim should have made better choices.

Still waiting for your evidence anyone has made excuses for murderers, suggested they be treated differently for the actions of their victims, etc etc... perhaps you just forgot those questions?

 

[jillian]

Let me see if I understand Shogun's position.

I think part of the confusion here is that Shogun, like other liberals, believes that no form of consensual behavior is in any sense to be criticized, judged, etc. If it feels good, do it, so long as it's between consenting adults.

Some of us don't agree with that. But that is really a separate (though related) issue from: what should our attitude be to people who have bad things happen to them, where they were doing something that they knew might evoke those bad things?

We have a few words available to us: "blame", "responsibility", "fault" .. but these carry all sorts of other connotations, so I would like to see if we can agree on anything without using these words at all.

Suppose a friend of yours tells you he (or she) is going to try to climb Mount Everest, without extra oxygen. (It can be done, but the death rate is not low.) They have a family, and children.

They are a good person. But they have this very strong compulsion to climb Mount Everest. Perhaps they hope to write a book about it, and project themselves into the public eye. They know the dangers.

In the course of their attempt, they die ... say from an avalanche. They leave behind grieving children, now deprived of a parent.

At the same time, another friend of yours, also with children, is killed in an automobile accident that is entirely caused by the carelessness of the other driver.

Now, do you feel in any way different about these two people? Is your grief and sadness about the death of the first person -- the Everest climber -- mixed, in any way, with some other feeling which is not present toward the second person?

If so, could you explain what that extra feeling, or thought, is?

This thought experiment is directed towards Shogun in particular, but everyone else is invited to respond.

Once we have determined this, we can carry on, and replace melting piles of avalanche-prone snow as the immediate cause of death, with human beings.

Maybe this will help... it's from a battered woman's handbook put together by people far wiser than I on this issue:

You are not alone.
You are not to blame.
You do not deserve to be abused.

Every woman is at risk for becoming a victim of domestic violence (6).
Domestic violence happens regardless of socio-economic status, race, ethnicity, age, education, employment status, physical ableness, marital status, or childhood history.

http://www.opdv.state.ny.us/about_dv/fss/intro.html

No one deserves to have acts of violence perpetrated on them. And no victim is partially responsible for the violence of others. I have every right to wear a low cut dress that comes up to the top of my thighs if I choose to. Rape/abuse/hate-generated crimes are all the decision of the violent to commit.... they are responsible for their actions.

 

[Doug]

This is a fast-moving thread and the half-page signature option means just a few posts can be quickly eat up a whole page.

I call your attention to the next-but-last post on page 24, which proposes a thought experiment that might bring some clarity.

 

[Shogun]

are you REALLY trying to compare a mountain with the criminal actions of a criminal?

really? When did the mountain choose to kill a climber? How, exactly, does one hold a mountain accountable? Where is the criminal element again?

So, by that logic then do you REALLY blame the pals for killing jews who made the poor choice of carving out an israel from muslim land? Should THEY have made a better choice?

Better yet, what better choice should the Challenger astronauts have made?

and how in the WORLD can you think it is logical to compare environmental hazards with criminal behaviour?

WOW.

Ill ask you then...

Tell me exactly how you would breach the subject of telling your freshly RAPED wife what a better choice of clothes to wear next time...



Clarity? the only thing that is clear is the length some of you people will go to rationalize the same shit that white mississippi was rationalizing with Till.

 

[Shogun]

This thread, RGS?


Hey, I hope you are having a great week even though this is how you chose to end your workweek!

 

[Doug]

Shogun and Jillian: You are confusing two different things: sensitivity in talking to people who have been traumatized, and the content of what we might say to them, perhaps at another time, about their own behavior.

If a young woman were to be so foolish as to dress as Jillian asserts she has the right to, and to hitchhike across town, say through an area where white stockbrokers live, late at night, and met her likely fate ... were she to survive, of course the first thing I would say to her would not be "Hmmm... perhaps you shouldn't have dressed like that, nor hitchhiked, and especially at night."

But if I were talking to her about the wisdom of her act at a different time -- say, before she did it -- I would say: anyone whose only advice to you is that you have the "right" to dress that way in any time and place you choose, is an ... well, I fear Jillian's anger, so I shall say, such a person is mistaken.

I do not understand why no one from the "do whatever you please, when you please", kamikaze camp wants to at least discuss seriously the example I raised.

Quite right, that the snow bears no moral responsibility for killing the people who risk their lives climbing. This is why I chose that example. It allows us to dispense with one part of the problem, and look at the other: the person who, knowing that their behavior is going to be risky, does it anyway, and dies.

What is our attitude to them, besides sadness at their death, and sympathy for their surviving friends and relatives?

What liberals -- or at least the kind of liberal we are arguing with here -- hate to even think about is personal responsiblity.

Everyone should be able to do whatever they feel like, and the world consists only of victims with rights, and their oppressors.

Since in the real world there is likely to be a high death or injury toll among members of the chosen victim-group who actual follow this suicidal advice, of course we need to continually expand the power of the state to protect them. Thus the concept of "hate crimes" and even "assaultive speech".

Our liberal friends do not want to admit of the concept of personal responsibility even in my artificial case where all other issues have been removed.

Why?

Because to let under the tent the camel's nose of the concept of personal responsibility in our imperfect world would then allow us to discuss the issue without demagogic emoting, thus depriving them of their best weapon, and perhaps even of their reflexive method of arriving at their opinions. (Anger be damned.)

We might then even take up the question raised by the Emmett Till case, as exemplified by my conservative quotation, where the issue of racist victimization was mixed in an unsettling way with the issue of the oppression of women.

 

[mattskramer]

Shogun and Jillian: You are confusing two different things: sensitivity in talking to people who have been traumatized, and the content of what we might say to them, perhaps at another time, about their own behavior.

If a young woman were to be so foolish as to dress as Jillian asserts she has the right to, and to hitchhike across town, say through an area where white stockbrokers live, late at night, and met her likely fate ... were she to survive, of course the first thing I would say to her would not be "Hmmm... perhaps you shouldn't have dressed like that, nor hitchhiked, and especially at night."

But if I were talking to her about the wisdom of her act at a different time -- say, before she did it -- I would say: anyone whose only advice to you is that you have the "right" to dress that way in any time and place you choose, is an ... well, I fear Jillian's anger, so I shall say, such a person is mistaken.

I do not understand why no one from the "do whatever you please, when you please", kamikaze camp wants to at least discuss seriously the example I raised.

Quite right, that the snow bears no moral responsibility for killing the people who risk their lives climbing. This is why I chose that example. It allows us to dispense with one part of the problem, and look at the other: the person who, knowing that their behavior is going to be risky, does it anyway, and dies.

What is our attitude to them, besides sadness at their death, and sympathy for their surviving friends and relatives?

What liberals -- or at least the kind of liberal we are arguing with here -- hate to even think about is personal responsiblity.

Everyone should be able to do whatever they feel like, and the world consists only of victims with rights, and their oppressors.

Since in the real world there is likely to be a high death or injury toll among members of the chosen victim-group who actual follow this suicidal advice, of course we need to continually expand the power of the state to protect them. Thus the concept of "hate crimes" and even "assaultive speech".

Our liberal friends do not want to admit of the concept of personal responsibility even in my artificial case where all other issues have been removed.

Why?

Because to let under the tent the camel's nose of the concept of personal responsibility in our imperfect world would then allow us to discuss the issue without demagogic emoting, thus depriving them of their best weapon, and perhaps even of their reflexive method of arriving at their opinions. (Anger be damned.)

We might then even take up the question raised by the Emmett Till case, as exemplified by my conservative quotation, where the issue of racist victimization was mixed in an unsettling way with the issue of the oppression of women.

This thread moves so quickly and I have been so busy that I might miss a post or two but I would like to reply to the quite above. I lean toward Libertarianism. For the most part, I think that consenting informed adults should be free to do as they please as long as they don’t interfere with the freedoms of others. I also believe in responsibility, as people should be held accountable for the things that they do to other people. If a woman wants to hitchhike while scantily dressed, she should be free to do so. If the gets assaulted, it is the assailants fault. She is the victim. Snow is an inanimate object. It does not know what it does. Human beings are held to a much higher standard. If I saw such a woman who had been assaulted, first I would help her seek restitution and punishment from those who attacked her. Then I would advise her to be more careful about her activities.

 

[Shogun]

So then I take it you would tell your freshly raped wife that it was, in part, her fault for dressing how she did and being where she was?


that attitude is as despicable as your comparison of a mountain and a rapist is fallacious. The SOLE responsibility in making the decision to hike up a mountain falls on the mountain climber himself since the mountain makes no choice about killing. A RAPE VICTIM DOESN'T HAVE THAT SAME PREROGATIVE. The very fact that you take this route to rationalize away the your criticism of the victim conveys clearly that you do, in whatever iota part, blame the victim for criminal behaviour acted upon them. In essence, NO CRIME can become seperate from the "poor choices" of the victim if you know where to point a finger.

Get shot while your bank is robbed? I guess you were too stupid to bank in a good neighborhood.

Get murdered on your way home? I guess you should have taken another route.

Get Raped on prom night? Stop wearing DRESSES in public!

Get beat and killed by some rednecks who don't like fags in their bar? Of COURSE he was asking for it!

Just tell me that you think Emmet Till should have kept his eyes on the floor like a good BOY and be done with it. That WAS, it seems, his bad choice, right?

Again, what bad choice did those astronauts make again? Oh, it doesn't make sense to blame inanimate objects with no criminal liability for their deaths NOW, eh?


Hell, it's probably just a bunch of feel good emotional lefties who would tell a rape victim that she didn't cause her attack anyway, right?

 

[Shogun]

This thread moves so quickly and I have been so busy that I might miss a post or two but I would like to reply to the quite above. I lean toward Libertarianism. For the most part, I think that consenting informed adults should be free to do as they please as long as they don’t interfere with the freedoms of others. I also believe in responsibility, as people should be held accountable for the things that they do to other people. If a woman wants to hitchhike while scantily dressed, she should be free to do so. If the gets assaulted, it is the assailants fault. She is the victim. Snow is an inanimate object. It does not know what it does. Human beings are held to a much higher standard. If I saw such a woman who had been assaulted, first I would help her seek restitution and punishment from those who attacked her. Then I would advise her to be more careful about her activities.

But would you hold even the slightest blame against her for choosing to wear what she did wherever she was at when she were raped?


Thats the crux of this. My counterparts seem to thing, to a degree, mat shepherd was ASKING for trouble by not staying out of goat roping bars. If this logic were true then every man who has ever hit on a chick in a bar would have a good chance of being drug outside and pulled behind a truck for miles and it would have been, apparently, partly their own fault.


I contend that this is utter bullshit and no illogical mountain analogy makes this the fault of liberals.

 

[mattskramer]

So then I take it you would tell your freshly raped wife that it was, in part, her fault for dressing how she did and being where she was?


that attitude is as despicable as your comparison of a mountain and a rapist is fallacious. The SOLE responsibility in making the decision to hike up a mountain falls on the mountain climber himself since the mountain makes no choice about killing. A RAPE VICTIM DOESN'T HAVE THAT SAME PREROGATIVE. The very fact that you take this route to rationalize away the your criticism of the victim conveys clearly that you do, in whatever iota part, blame the victim for criminal behaviour acted upon them. In essence, NO CRIME can become seperate from the "poor choices" of the victim if you know where to point a finger.

Get shot while your bank is robbed? I guess you were too stupid to bank in a good neighborhood.

Get murdered on your way home? I guess you should have taken another route.

Get Raped on prom night? Stop wearing DRESSES in public!

Get beat and killed by some rednecks who don't like fags in their bar? Of COURSE he was asking for it!

Just tell me that you think Emmet Till should have kept his eyes on the floor like a good BOY and be done with it. That WAS, it seems, his bad choice, right?

Again, what bad choice did those astronauts make again? Oh, it doesn't make sense to blame inanimate objects with no criminal liability for their deaths NOW, eh?


Hell, it's probably just a bunch of feel good emotional lefties who would tell a rape victim that she didn't cause her attack anyway, right?

 

[mattskramer]

But would you hold even the slightest blame against her for choosing to wear what she did wherever she was at when she were raped?


Thats the crux of this. My counterparts seem to thing, to a degree, mat shepherd was ASKING for trouble by not staying out of goat roping bars. If this logic were true then every man who has ever hit on a chick in a bar would have a good chance of being drug outside and pulled behind a truck for miles and it would have been, apparently, partly their own fault.


I contend that this is utter bullshit and no illogical mountain analogy makes this the fault of liberals.

Perhaps she can hold a tiny microscopic portion of the blame – a very small portion. After all, one skinny white skinhead can’t expect to get away with shouting racial slurs at the top of his lungs in a deserted back alley in Harlem at 2:00 in the morning. Still, in the rape example, the woman’s responsibility for getting raped is slim-to-none.

 

[007]

yea, Allie...

I'd take those laurals too from an obvious gay hating homophobe.
Be PROUD of your common brethren! It sure is true that it takes FEELINGS to hold criminal behaviour against the criminal and not the victim..

Hell, if this were a black man selling crack ole Cock Rider would have an entirely different take on making excuses for criminal behaviour..

The irony of his selective application probably isn't hilarious.

Ya know... you won't suck me into your long, drawn out, worthless tirades of psychobabble. It's not worth it. You don't listen.

But I will tell you this "once, I DON'T HATE QUEERS, HOWEVER, I DO FIND THEIR LIFESTYLE AND SEXUAL ACTIONS FULLY DISGUSTING AND PERVERTED." And that is the "NORMAL" reaction for "NORMAL" people, which is, by the way, the vast majority of people on earth. So you throwing around your buzz words you read out of your liberal response handbook doesn't mean shit son. It's old and stale, and doesn't work on me. Try and be original for once, and address the truth. I know that's hard for you liberals who base all your arguments on your "FEELINGS," but try understanding FACT for once. If you can't see and understand facts, then this argument is perpetual and senseless with the likes of you, jillie, the old pervert penis man doni, the incest boy mattskramer, and the rest of you homo enablers and apologists.

 

[Doug]

Well, since the liberals here refuse to discuss my example, let me try another tack.

Let's think operationally.

A pretty young woman is dressed in provocative clothing -- Jillian's description will do.

It is close to midnight.

She is at your apartment, where you,as a good liberal, have been instructing her on her rights. (No sarcasm here -- you really have.)

She decides to go home. She has no car, no money for a taxi, nor do you.

She says, "Hey, no problem. I'll hitchhike. As you just said, I have a right to dress as I please and go anywhere I want in public, at any time."

Your response?

 

[mattskramer]

Well, since the liberals here refuse to discuss my example, let me try another tack.

Let's think operationally.

A pretty young woman is dressed in provocative clothing -- Jillian's description will do.

It is close to midnight.

She is at your apartment, where you,as a good liberal, have been instructing her on her rights. (No sarcasm here -- you really have.)

She decides to go home. She has no car, no money for a taxi, nor do you.

She says, "Hey, no problem. I'll hitchhike. As you just said, I have a right to dress as I please and go anywhere I want in public, at any time."

Your response?

I don’t know where you are going with this but I will respond:
While you are basically free to do as you like including the risky activity of hitchhiking, I think that you would be safer if I were to drive you home.

 

[Shogun]

Ya know... you won't suck me into your long, drawn out, worthless tirades of psychobabble. It's not worth it. You don't listen.

But I will tell you this "once, I DON'T HATE QUEERS, HOWEVER, I DO FIND THEIR LIFESTYLE AND SEXUAL ACTIONS FULLY DISGUSTING AND PERVERTED." And that is the "NORMAL" reaction for "NORMAL" people, which is, by the way, the vast majority of people on earth. So you throwing around your buzz words you read out of your liberal response handbook doesn't mean shit son. It's old and stale, and doesn't work on me. Try and be original for once, and address the truth. I know that's hard for you liberals who base all your arguments on your "FEELINGS," but try understanding FACT for once. If you can't see and understand facts, then this argument is perpetual and senseless with the likes of you, jillie, the penis man doni, the incest boy mattskramer, and the rest of you homo enablers and apologists.

if by Liberal Handbook you mean APA standards then I'm sure I'll live knowing that a person like you is dubious of my sources.


You are no better in your attitude, acknowledged as hatred or not, as George wallace standing on the steps of Foster Auditorium at the University of Alabama.

 

[Shogun]

Well, since the liberals here refuse to discuss my example, let me try another tack.
Let's think operationally.
A pretty young woman is dressed in provocative clothing -- Jillian's description will do.
It is close to midnight.
She is at your apartment, where you,as a good liberal, have been instructing her on her rights. (No sarcasm here -- you really have.)
She decides to go home. She has no car, no money for a taxi, nor do you.
She says, "Hey, no problem. I'll hitchhike. As you just said, I have a right to dress as I please and go anywhere I want in public, at any time."
Your response?

What the hell would my response as a gentleman have to do with predicting the potential of RAPE according to her dress? Is the only reason you drive someone home because you don't want them to get raped? Damn, dude. You are reaching far and wide today. Usually you have a better game than this.