|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,483 Year: 3,740/9,624 Month: 611/974 Week: 224/276 Day: 64/34 Hour: 1/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The Totalitarian Leftist Tactics against the Right | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
You're struggling with vocabulary, I'd say that you guys are the ones struggling with the vocabulary. You're more hung up on my word choice than what I'm trying to say.
but the real story here is that what you and Faith are doing is name-calling, and the name doesn't fit. Shallow and pedantic
What if someone calls the right anarchistic. Does calling the right an ugly name really help? Does it help improve mutual understanding? Does the discussion make better progress? Then don't participate? I would be asking why the person thought the Right was anarchistic, what they were seeing that made them think that, how they thought that fit, what the problem is and what they wanted to do about it, etc. Why care what particular name was called? Especially if the name doesn't fit.
To whom other than government (not necessarily the federal government, but of course ultimately the federal government) should little girls being directed to the men's bathroom look (or vice versa)? Huh? You think that a little girl should ask the federal government if she's directed to the men's bathroom? I'm sorry, that's confusing. What are you asking? I'm not sure I understand, but I think my answer would be that she should look to her parents.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
New Cat's Eye writes: Too, only one state passed a law restricting bathroom use *before the guidance was issued (abe for pedantry). And a number more in the legislative pipeline, as has been mentioned before. Before the guidelines? How many?
Now that Trump has rescinded the Obama guidelines, these states are free to resume formulating legislation that tells people what bathrooms they can use, That wasn't true when you acknowledged Message 293 and it isn't true now.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22480 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.8 |
New Cat's Eye writes: I'd say that you guys are the ones struggling with the vocabulary. You're more hung up on my word choice than what I'm trying to say. You're the one who's determined about a word choice. By your own admission it is hyperbolic and doesn't fit, but you continue anyway. There's no other conclusion to reach but that you just like name calling, just like our current president who is doing us all so proud.
Then don't participate? You're getting trollish again, and I'm beginning to wonder if you're serious. You've admitted that you do this.
I would be asking why the person thought the Right was anarchistic, what they were seeing that made them think that, how they thought that fit, what the problem is and what they wanted to do about it, etc. Why care what particular name was called? Especially if the name doesn't fit. We've already been through yours and Faith's reasons several times, so we're already way past that, yet you persist anyway. There seems no reason or justification other than that you just like calling people names.
To whom other than government (not necessarily the federal government, but of course ultimately the federal government) should little girls being directed to the men's bathroom look (or vice versa)? Huh? You think that a little girl should ask the federal government if she's directed to the men's bathroom? I'm sorry, that's confusing. What are you asking? I'm not sure I understand, but I think my answer would be that she should look to her parents. Are you playing dumb? Here, let me try again. You said:
New Cat's Eye in Message 414 writes: They're looking to the federal government to help them figure out which bathrooms people should use, for crying out loud. So she thinks she should use the girls room. Her parents think she should use the girls room. But the school administration thinks she should use the boys room. The parents and school administration talk. They reach an impasse. So to whom other than government should the little girl (in the person of her parents bringing suit on her behalf) look? --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22480 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.8 |
New Cat's Eye writes: New Cat's Eye writes:
And a number more in the legislative pipeline, as has been mentioned before. Too, only one state passed a law restricting bathroom use *before the guidance was issued (abe for pedantry). Before the guidelines? How many? More than 10 had plans for legislation or legislation already in the pipeline as I recall, don't remember exactly how many. This Atlantic article says that "11 states sued the Obama administration over its guidance on Title IX." This NPR article says, "State legislatures in New Hampshire, Colorado and Texas, among other states, have also considered bills that would restrict access to restrooms for transgender people," which isn't specific as to number. I can't find the original article I remember reading months ago now. Oh, wait, here you go: "BATHROOM BILL" LEGISLATIVE TRACKING:
quote: Now that Trump has rescinded the Obama guidelines, these states are free to resume formulating legislation that tells people what bathrooms they can use, That wasn't true when you acknowledged Message 293 and it isn't true now. Turns out it was true then and it's true now. How about that. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Modulous Member Posts: 7801 From: Manchester, UK Joined: |
It's not federal laws in general that I have a problem with. Title IX is great Do you object to people clarifying what Title IX means? Do you object when that clarification is abandoned? Do you find it objectionable when people find it objectionable when that clarity is lost?
It's being outraged because you cannot rely on the feds for guidance on things like which bathroom choices people should make that I think is far enough to call totalitarian - even if technically the usage of the word is not strictly correct. The guidelines do not give guidance on which bathroom choices people should make.
quote: The guidance doesn't say anything about what bathroom you should use. It says that a trans-girl should be treated as a cis-girl under Title IX. This includes bathroom use:
quote: Stakeholders were asking for clarification from the relevant Federal Departments. Those departments issued a set of guidelines to clarify some specific points raised regarding he general nature of Title IX.
I'd prefer free individuals interacting over an authority dictating behavior, not visa versa. Title IX is the only authoritative thing in effect which you say 'is great'. The guidelines merely state that the protections in Title IX should extend to transgender students. Individuals are still free and can still interact regardless of the guidelines which merely are intended to clarify Title IX:
quote: By saying it should be construed to mean 'gender identity' rather than biologically determined sex (which isn't strictly a coherent thing anyway). Why is being upset at those guidelines being abandoned totalitarian? They don't demand what bathrooms people should use anymore than Title IX does. Title IX doesn't say cis-girls must use bathrooms for cis-girls. It simply prohibits discrimination of girls. The guidelines just assert, in consistency with other decisions made by courts, that transgirls are to be regarded as girls when interpreting what Title IX is prohibiting. Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 306 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
No, not at all. The first amendment prevents the federal government from violating a preexisting right. It limits the government rather than giving it more authority. It doesn't identify people's characteristics and tell people how to behave. All it does is say what congress cannot do. That's the opposite of these guidelines and the mentality of expecting the federal government to advise you on which bathrooms people should use. If you have been living under a rock for the past few years I advise you to come out from under it and look up the facts on this great new thing we have called the internet.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
That's the opposite of these guidelines and the mentality of expecting the federal government to advise you on which bathrooms people should use. This a gross distortion of what the guidelines do. The guidelines tell state governments, and essentially nobody else, not to dictate what bathrooms they should use. Period. The sole penalty being a possible loss of Title IX funds. Do you take Title IX funds? Under the guidelines, it was anticipated that folks would pick their own bathrooms and locker rooms rather than have the state do that. Now, why do you make this gross mistake? It is because you want to misuse the term totalitarian. But how are the guidelines totalitarian, while the laws they are a reaction to are the height of freedom? Because you cannot draw a straight line; because you are literally defending the freedom to discriminate as some kind of right. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson Seems to me if its clear that certain things that require ancient dates couldn't possibly be true, we are on our way to throwing out all those ancient dates on the basis of the actual evidence. -- Faith Some of us are worried about just how much damage he will do in his last couple of weeks as president, to make it easier for the NY Times and Washington post to try to destroy Trump's presidency. -- marc9000
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
Perhaps these fake Christians just grit their teeth when they read JC talk about feeding the homeless, doing as you would be done by and eye of needle stuff. The standard answer from the Christians in question is that those verses are for Jews only. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson Seems to me if its clear that certain things that require ancient dates couldn't possibly be true, we are on our way to throwing out all those ancient dates on the basis of the actual evidence. -- Faith Some of us are worried about just how much damage he will do in his last couple of weeks as president, to make it easier for the NY Times and Washington post to try to destroy Trump's presidency. -- marc9000
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Just wondering what "fake Christians" you have in mind? I've never heard of any kind of Christians who say Jesus' teachings are for the Jews only, and all the Christians I've ever known are very zealous for doing good works.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
Just wondering what "fake Christians" you have in mind? I've never heard of any kind of Christians who say Jesus' teachings are for the Jews only, and all the Christians I've ever known are very zealous for doing good works. That's a fair question. I don't know exactly what Tangle meant by "fake", but my comments addressed dispensationalists. I don't know where you stand on that issue, and I don't consider them necessarily to be "fake Christians. I do believe that dispensationalism is bad doctrine. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson Seems to me if its clear that certain things that require ancient dates couldn't possibly be true, we are on our way to throwing out all those ancient dates on the basis of the actual evidence. -- Faith Some of us are worried about just how much damage he will do in his last couple of weeks as president, to make it easier for the NY Times and Washington post to try to destroy Trump's presidency. -- marc9000
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9504 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.8
|
NoNuke writes: I don't know exactly what Tangle meant by "fake", but my comments addressed dispensationalists. Fake Christians are those that ignore Jesus's core values of loving thy neighbour and do as you would be done by etc in favour of their personal interpretations of their quote mined bible. Faith is a fake Christian. It's not intentional - it's not fraud - she's just not the real thing, she's a corrupted version of a Christian with views that JC himself would have called an abomination, to use an oft quoted word.Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. "Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined:
|
NCE writes: That's the opposite of these guidelines and the mentality of expecting the federal government to advise you on which bathrooms people should use. A little clarity needed here. Which guidelines are you claiming advise you on which bathrooms people should use?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9146 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.3 |
Ahhh now that's the rub isn't it.
NCE makes all these claims of totalitarianism and as of yet has NO examples, but it is not beneath him to make shit up to reinforce the narrative he wants to play. ConservaWorld at it finest and most basic. Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness. If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up why would you have to lie?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2337 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
Faith's theology comes from the imperial church of post 325 A.D.
She complains of persecution ONLY before 313/325 then it is a Rome that is a God ordained institution. Equal rights are evil to her so she can call them "Totalitarian" Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
From Message 423:
You're the one who's determined about a word choice. By your own admission it is hyperbolic and doesn't fit, but you continue anyway. Well, I mean, it is in the thread title.
You're getting trollish again, and I'm beginning to wonder if you're serious. You've admitted that you do this. Wasn't this thread a bit of a joke to begin with?
To whom other than government (not necessarily the federal government, but of course ultimately the federal government) should little girls being directed to the men's bathroom look (or vice versa)? Huh? You think that a little girl should ask the federal government if she's directed to the men's bathroom? I'm sorry, that's confusing. What are you asking? I'm not sure I understand, but I think my answer would be that she should look to her parents. Are you playing dumb? Here, let me try again. You said:
New Cat's Eye in Message 414 writes: They're looking to the federal government to help them figure out which bathrooms people should use, for crying out loud. So she thinks she should use the girls room. Her parents think she should use the girls room. But the school administration thinks she should use the boys room. The parents and school administration talk. They reach an impasse. So to whom other than government should the little girl (in the person of her parents bringing suit on her behalf) look? So you have a child with a penis who thinks they're a girl and wants to use the girls' bathroom but the school doesn't want them to. That should be the school administration's decision. If there's really a discrimination case to be had then it should end at the individual state, imho. From Message 424:
More than 10 had plans for legislation or legislation already in the pipeline as I recall, don't remember exactly how many. This Atlantic article says that "11 states sued the Obama administration over its guidance on Title IX." Well that cannot be from before the guidelines... From your tracking link:
quote: So, the claim that the guidelines were in response to multiple states passing laws is false. The guidance, itself, even says that the feds were being approached with increasing questions from the schools and parents, as I've already quoted.
Now that Trump has rescinded the Obama guidelines, these states are free to resume formulating legislation that tells people what bathrooms they can use, That wasn't true when you acknowledged Message 293 and it isn't true now. Turns out it was true then and it's true now. We can't be talking about the same thing. What in the guidelines prevents a legislator from formulating and proposing a bill? That the public schools may risk federal funding may make them not want to, is that what you're talking about?
How about that. That's spelled "howbow dah" now Once we get back on track, I'll try again to show you what I see is the totalitarian nature of this type of approach to government. The typical lefty response to leaving it at the state is that there could be states that decide to do things differently. Like, there isn't enough total control of a centralized governing body to rule everyone and make sure we're all doing the same things... hmm.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024