In my last post, where I dealt with an apology from IL Senate candidate Steve Raushenberger for referring to homosexual marriage as "abnormal", little Parklife pooh-poohed my comments as a 2.4 on the "unfortunate-postings-richter" scale due to current coverage of the Tyler Clementi suicide. Oh, yeah. And the post was "homophobic" too, of course. Idiocy. I can just imagine his outrage had I posted the Ellen Degeneres call for a stop to bullying, which I was hoping to do. AOL or Yahoo had the vid and now neither does and I don't feel like searching for it. It's not necessary.
I was not surprised that Degeneres would weep over the death of this kid, or the other two or three she mentioned who also took their lives after being harrassed in one way or another. It is indeed sad, unfortunate, horrible, tragic and any number of other somber and negative adjectives one could think to apply to such an event. Of the few things in this life that can really get me going emotionally, the death of a kid is tops.
But, though I won't go so far as to say that Degeneres' concerns are motivated solely to promote the agenda homosexuals pretend doesn't exist, I have to object to the implication that there is something more devastating, more tragic, that a bullied homosexual kid would take his own life than any other bullied kid. I mean, why focus only on homosexual kids and not all kids who are bullied? But she calls this sad event a wake-up call to a phenomena that is epidemic. I don't believe it is.
This isn't the first time I've touched on this topic. It's come up in discussions of the infiltration into schools by homosexual activist groups posing as folks concerned about bullying, but only dealing with bullied homosexuals, while they really seek to further the agenda that homosexuals pretend doesn't exist.
Bullying by kids against other kids is as old as human existence. I'll bet it's older than the oldest profession. Kids are mean bastards. They really are. They are guided to be something better if they have half-way decent parents, but left to their own, well, I wouldn't want to leave them to their own devices. Lord of The Flies, anyone?
Kids who are bullies will bully for any reason that presents itself, and in lieu of such a presentation, will create one to serve the purpose. Kids who are bullies think bullying is fun. They get a kick out of it, and like adult bullies, they are charged up by the feeling of power they get from running roughshod over a helpless victim. The reason to bully is irrelevant to them. The victim might be fat, short, a different race, might have a big nose or wear thick glasses, might be the teacher's pet or be a goody-two-shoes or yes, might be as queer as a three dollar bill in one way or another. But what is common among these unfortunates is that they are all weaker in some way, or appear to be or are when they find themselves within the circle of the bully and his lackies.
So the bullies go for it. They do what they do and if the kid is a homo, that's just an excuse for the bully to express his personal brand of malevolence. But is the homo more likely to get bullied? I don't know if we can make that judgement. According to FBI hate crimes stats for 2008, 7780 single bias incidents revealed that 51.3% were motivated by race. Of that number, only 1200 were anti-homo events, which is a bit less than 15.5%. Ellen says it's a growing issue, but we're told that kids these days don't have as much a problem with homosexuality. I'm confused. 15% of the total hate crimes doesn't sound like an epidemic. 77% of school kids claim to have been bullied. If 15% of those are homosexuals, what of the other 85?
I'm not trying to minimize the seriousness of child homosexuals killing themselves. But even to claim that they are killing themselves in greater numbers would require some evidence (as if the reason for kids killing themselves matters in the first place). I've found that half of the kids who consider themselves Goths have considered suicide seriously. (Or perhaps it was half the Goths have done so. I don't recall for sure and it's besides the point.) Depression among teens is commonplace and a major factor in all teen suicides, be they homos or not. The real issue here is that kids consider suicide at all. The reason for it is irrelevant.
So, notice the two major irrelvancies. The reason to bully and the reason to kill one's self. The reasons for either are of no concern to any rational and truly caring person. I don't care why a bully bullies. I just want him to stop. And I don't care why any kid wants to off himself. I just want him to go on living.
If you're going to say that you are concerned about bullying, then deal with the agressive tendencies of the bullies. Come down hard on every incident and make that one of those "zero tolerance" thingies that are all the rage in schools these days. There is absolutely no legitimate reason for bullying. Bullies need help. Some need incarceration. Left unchecked, they're more likely to go on to do worse things.
If you're going to say that you are concerned about the victims of bullying, then show concern for them all equally without favoring the homosexuals as being in greater need of protection. That's absolute crap and an assault on the dignity and value of all those other kids who are suffering just as badly at being bullied and harrassed for a different reason.
And if you say you are concerned about teen suicides, don't pretend that homosexuals are checking out in greater numbers. From what I've read, it's up across the board and the reason is the least important aspect. The choice of suicide as a viable option for anyone is reason to be concerned, and those who preside over kids should take pains to learn about the warning signs.
Finally, if the Ellens of the world want to insist that homosexual kids are somehow more likely to commit suicide over bullying or harrassment, doesn't that say something about the nature of homosexuals? Amongst those who aren't impacted by the pressures of the activists pushing the agenda that homosexuals pretend doesn't exist, there is still the question of which comes first: are emotional problems the result of being homosexual, or can emotional problems result in some turning to homosexuality? Of all the aspects surrounding the issue of homosexuality never to have been settled definitively, this is but one. A minor one perhaps, but when the issue concerns kids, I don't much care what the activists think or feel. It's something that needs to be settled.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
63 comments:
"Homophobic" is a petty pejorative designed to put anyone who dares question the Gay-Lesbian-Bisexual-Transgender-Questioning lobby on the defensive. It is a transparently childish put-down, but it actually works to silence many wimpy people.
Ironically, the real homophobes are those who fear the GLBTQ lobby so much that they cater to all the movement’s demands. They are the ones with the irrational, paralyzing fear of doing or saying something politically incorrect. You see it in political, educational, media and church leaders who will do and say almost anything to appease. It is really quite pathetic. The Christians and "Christians" (real and fake) who do so are the most cowardly of all.
Suicides are always tragic and Satanic. People want scapegoats. They try to blame Focus on the Family and the like (as if the bullies just left "Love Won Out" conferences).
Bullying predates agriculture. There are things we can do to minimize it and help protect kids, but you'll never get rid of it completely.
Gay clubs and the “Day of Silence” and such have no place in schools. The GLBTQ propoganda machine just uses the Trojan Horse of being anti-bullying to get them in. It is all part of the drive not just for tolerance, not just for affirmation, but to silence all critics.
But why have sex clubs and school-sponsored protest days just for that? All you need is a simple and thoroughly enforced anti-bullying policy:
"If you physically or verbally harass other students on or off school grounds you will have swift and serious consequences. It doesn’t matter if you are bullying because they are gay / straight / fat / thin / smart / dumb / pretty / ugly / etc., or if it is just because you are a jerk. Zero tolerance. Training over. Now go to class and learn something."
I would also challenge kids to be anti-bullies (i.e., to call out and challenge the bullies). It is amazing what a few leaders can do.
And again, that doesn't require calling deviant behavior good.
Lol.. that was better that I thought. And a bonus comment from 4Simpsons!
"I'm confused."
Must be because you missed the whole point. But, thank you for playing.
Why do you bother, Parko? You don't say anything. You seem to be implying things, but what they are you don't have the spine to spell out. I'm convinced you're a sad and pathetic little toady who knows so very little but tries to appear as if you do. I pity your worthless existence.
What did you not get about the "I'm confused." part of my post? Let me spell it out for you, since you're incapable of catching the simplest concepts:
Degeneres says that homo kids killing themselves over harrassment and bullying is "epidemic" in numbers. But we're told that kids nowadays are less likely to have a negative view of homosexuality. How can such incidents be growing to epidemic proportions within a group that has overall a more favorable view of the condition? What "point" do you think I'm missing?
And when you can muster the spine to post a comment on the level of a Neil Simpson, then perhaps you might have some room to critique his more thoughtful and intelligent comments. Until then, you once again expose yourself for the idiot you plainly prefer being.
Lol.. Ma.. You being a Cubs fan explains a lot.
Please, re-read (or read for the first time) Ellen's comments. She wants to stop bullies. Thats it.
By the way... How's that book going that Vinny suggested?
I support ALL Chicago teams, even in the stupid sports, like soccer. That is, I want MY soccer team to beat YOUR soccer team every time, even if I won't waste my time watching it happen. I want MY la crosse team to beat YOUR la crosse team every time, even if I won't waste time watching it happen. I want MY water ballet team to beat YOUR water ballet team...and between the Sox and the Cubs, I wear either hat according to my mood and will defend each team against die-hards for the other.
Now that the important stuff is out of the way...
I watched Ellen's statments in the video of it and all of her examples were homosexual kids. If she's talking about bullying in general, why was this the case. I could see using this latest case as the springboard for a rant against bullying despite the reason the kid was victimized. But she listed only homosexual kids. And why did it take the deaths of homosexual kids to make her stand up against bullying if she was referring to bullying in general. As I said, bullying has been going on since the dawn of time. Who you crappin'?
BTW, have you read any of the books Vinny suggested? You've shown no indication you have any knowledge of the topic. You haven't shown that anything I've said or presented is wrong. Neither has Vinny (he's only given opinions, but no definitive proofs), but at least he's doing some heavy lifting. You have, however, done a great job proving you're an idiot.
"Who you crappin'?"
Lol.. I'm not even sure what that means. But, Ellen states that bullies, in general, are her target. More than a little interesting that you would post on this topic. You know, being that you are a bully.
"That is, I want MY soccer team to beat YOUR soccer team every time"
If I were a fan of the Chicago soccer team, then you would want to beat yourself? Lol.. Now I'm confused.
Why do you hate soccer? Not enough commercials?
"BTW, have you read any of the books Vinny suggested?"
I thought you would never ask. I've read "13 Bankers" and done the interviews with the authors. Plus, some other books on the topic that Vinny didnt mention... Lewis and Sorkin are fun reads. There was at least another one, but I cant remember the author.
"I watched Ellen's statments in the video of it and all of her examples were homosexual kids."
Exactly. You watched a diced and spliced video as always. I've got a DVR so I can watch her entire show at my leisure. It's an excellent show. But I doubt you know that because you can't get over her gayness to sit and watch it. Since she made the "statement" she's had several guests that were bullied growing up and none of them because they were gay. She's trying to show young people, ALL who are bullied, that this too shall pass and that they can have rich and full lives in the future.
"You watched a diced and spliced video as always."
Marty,
Are you trying to compete with Parkie for the title? Degeneres made the video. It wasn't "diced and spliced" unless she did it herself. And no, I don't watch her show. Not because she's a lesbian, but because I don't watch a lot of TV. I happen to think she's quite funny, as I happen to still enjoy Elton John music (I even have a couple of his albums). But I doubt this info matters to you since you're so filled with hate for those who stand by God's Truth (lefties like to talk like this---thought I'd give it a try).
I would wager that I'm far more concerned about homo kids than you are because I know that their souls are at stake and you pretend they aren't. I know they can resist their wicked temptations like we all should, and many of us do, but you think they have no choice in the matter whatsoever. I know that being called a "homophobe" or a "hater" or a "f**kin' wackjob fundie a**hole" is worth bearing if a sexually confused child can be turned back to the straight and narrow. But you, apparently, share that attitude and find a child's sexual searching something to be encouraged rather than guided.
If Degeneres has widened her focus on her show to fight against bullying of all kinds, you'll pardon me if I'm suspicious that it took the suicides of few homosexual kids to motivate her concern. As I said, bullying has been around forever. There's nothing new about it. And teens have been killing themselves forever as well. I knew two personally and a few more who made legitimate, but fortunately failed attempts.
The question still stands: if homo kids are killing themselves in greater percentages when bullied than other victims of bullying, why is that so? How can they be bullied more often when we are constantly told that young people don't see homosex as a big deal anymore? Perhaps if the homo community didn't lie so much, we'd have a better handle on these things.
"Are you trying to compete with Parkie for the title?"
LoL.. The title of beating ma to a pulp! LoL… Trust me.. the title is up for grabs.
"I would wager that I'm far more concerned about homo kids..."
LoL.. Yes.. I can tell.. very concerned.
"I know that being called a homophobe…"
Ahh.. The cross you carry ma.. Must be very difficult being homophobic and caring for homosexual kids.
"If Degeneres has widened her focus…"
LOL.. "If…" LOL… If ma learned to pay attention.
"The question still stands"
Does ma have any ability to admit he is 110% wrong? He couldnt even admit how AIDS got started. He thinks people are NOT animals. And now, he doesn't watch Ellen but thinks this is about homosexual kids being bullied.
Update.. on the chase for the title…
Parklife 2
Marty 1
Ma 0
"LoL.. The title of beating ma to a pulp! LoL… Trust me.. the title is up for grabs."
No. That would be the title of Village Idiot. That's not really up for grabs. You're running away with it. Your little scorecard is way off as you have far more points in your shut-out. Let's look at the latest blatherings:
First of all, you "lol" a lot. THAT indicates idiocy right there.
"LoL.. Yes.. I can tell.. very concerned."
There you go laughing again. But again, you pretend to be in on something but say nothing to indicate what that might be. If I'm NOT concerned, how would a village idiot like yourself make that case exactly?
"Ahh.. The cross you carry ma.. Must be very difficult being homophobic and caring for homosexual kids."
Once again, I'm not your mother. But I never said the burden was tough to bear. I don't really have any problem with losers calling me names, particularly when the names don't apply. I just wonder when you idiots will explain why you think they do.
""If Degeneres has widened her focus…"
LOL.. "If…" LOL… If ma learned to pay attention."
(Again the clinical idiot laughs.) How typical that you don't address the entire sentence from which this snippet was ripped out of context. If my original comment wasn't right there for all to read, some other village idiots might assume something other than the point I made. (Idiots are woefully dishonest.)
"Does ma have any ability to admit he is 110% wrong?"
I don't know anything about your mother. But for me, I'm well aware that one cannot be more than 100% of anything. Now if I was wrong, and of course you have no ability to show that I am, I can easily admit to being so when faced with facts and truth and incontrovertable evidence. All I ask is that my opponents be so kind as to present any.
"He couldnt even admit how AIDS got started."
Hey Idiot. I've never even been challenged to suggest it's origins. But here's the real important part: I don't freakin' care how it started. I'm content knowing that it will die out if perverts, drug addicts and anyone who puts sex above common sense would end their destructive behavior. That's the most important aspect of the AIDS issue.
"He thinks people are NOT animals."
That's because I'm not an idiot. Normal, thinking people don't think people are animals.
"And now, he doesn't watch Ellen but thinks this is about homosexual kids being bullied."
Not just "now". NEVER. But YOU tell ME this ain't about homosexual kids being bullied.
As I said, I suspect Degeneres is paying lip service to non-homo kids being bullied or she wouldn't have waited for homo kids to kill themselves before speaking out against generic bullying.
"But YOU tell ME this ain't about homosexual kids being bullied."
That is. Yes.
"As I said, I suspect Degeneres is paying lip service to non-homo kids being bullied or she wouldn't have waited for homo kids to kill themselves before speaking out against generic bullying."
I don't know that to be the case and neither do you. She may have spoken out against bullying in the past. I've just recently started watching her show. But, honestly, Marshall, after watching the past couple of months, I can't imagine Ellen paying "lip service" to anything.
"I don't know that to be the case and neither do you."
Hence the expression, "I suspect".
"I've just recently started watching her show."
So you defend her with only slightly more experience with her than I have. I see.
"But, honestly, Marshall, after watching the past couple of months, I can't imagine Ellen paying "lip service" to anything."
Well, if Marty says she's cool, I guess she must be.
OK. I'm late to the party it would seem, but today, I posted on a similar subject.
The article I linked to suggests the "spate" of suicides are directly linked to bullying of homosexuals, but a careful read of the article proves nothing of the kind.
Ahh.. speaking AIDS. Nice of you to show up Mark.
Not animals? Please tell.. what do "normal" thinking Bible thumpers think these days?
"Ahh.. speaking AIDS. Nice of you to show up Mark."
Is that what passes for cleverness in your ward at the institution, Parkie? I'll bet all the other idiots think you're a hoot.
"Not animals? Please tell.. what do "normal" thinking Bible thumpers think these days?"
I said "normal thinking PEOPLE". Some may indeed be people of faith, but not all. Some are atheists. But normal thinking PEOPLE understand that people are human beings and quite distinctive from animals. Only idiots try to make the case that we are just like animals simply because we are mammals. But you go on believing that if you like. Idiot.
You know what? If you're a homo, and you go around intentionally trying to prove to everyone that you are a homo, you kind of deserve what you get.
Normal kids make fun of anyone or anything that's different than themselves. Its been that way since the creation of mankind.
Kids who aren't weird in some way don't get bullied. How hard is that to understand?
If they don't want to be bullied, they need to conform.
It's not fair, and it's not the way it should be, but it's the way it is. And that's a fact. No amount of re-education and "warm and fuzzy" campaigning will change human nature.
Parklife, you are not even a good Liberal. Liberals are supposed to be compassionate and tolerant (at least, that's what you all try to tell us, even though we know it's not true). You are neither.
BTW, Art. Parklife has you confused with me. I'm the one that mentioned the origin of AIDS.
When news about the disease first broke in the 70's, the consensus among doctors and experts was that it started when a Haitian man decided it might be fun to have sex with a Green Monkey. He got AIDS from the monkey, and then, since he was a homosexual with multiple partners, he quickly spread the AIDS to other homosexuals, and then the virus spread to other Haitians as well.
That is why the very first joke about AIDS I ever heard was this:
"What is the worst thing about having AIDS?
Trying to convince your mother you're a Haitian."
The second AIDS joke I ever heard was, "What do you call Rock Hudson in a wheelchair?
Roll-AIDS"
Haitians and homosexuals. The first reported AIDS cases. First for a reason.
And yes, since the AIDS virus is carried in the blood, it soon spread into the heterosexual community via blood transfusions and bi-sexual encounters. But it started with homos.
Wow... Mark, you are a special kind of stupid.
Ouch. That hurt.
Go to Hell, Park.
Oh, I forgot, you're already on your way there.
if AIDS isn't a gay thing (primarily) then why is AIDS research and funding always a LGBT issue.
"you're already on your way there."
Not to judge or anything.
Just for kicks Mark, who else is going to hell? Do you have a list?
By the way, thank you for reminding me what a fraud your church is.
"By the way, thank you for reminding me what a fraud your church is."
Oh, this should be good for a few laughs. Why don't you describe just how Mark showed you what a fraud his church is, Parkie? I can't wait to hear this.
Educated atheists and educated theists of many different stripes all agree on one thing: Humans are animals.
We evolved the same way every other living creature on earth has, we share ancestors with other animals.
If you sincerely believe that humans aren't animals - fine. Just don't go pretending that that is a popular or rational idea. It's not. You're in a very small (although unfortunately powerful) minority on that one I'm afraid.
Perhaps you and your family are animals, Joe, but mine are all human.
And evolution is a lie.
"And evolution is a lie."
QED
Joe,
I'm aware that there are theists, even Christians, who don't believe that evolution is incompatible with Scripture. But the best you can say about them or their atheist counterparts is that they think humans are animals or descended from them. The only thing that can be said to be factual, is that there are similarities between humans and some animals. All that means is...there are similarities. Nothing more. If that's all you need to know to believe that humans are animals, I'd say that it is you who pretending what is or isn't rational.
We might be warm-blooded and have hair (some of us), so we might be properly grouped with other mammals, but that only means that human beings are mammals. It doesn't mean we are animals.
Really?
"I can't wait to hear this."
You're right. I was just guessing that Mark is.. Muslim? j/k.
"we might be properly grouped with other mammals"
ma, do you talk to scientists with that mouth?
By the way, ma, what is the point of your blog? What do you hope to gain?
Marshall wrote: "so we might be properly grouped with other mammals... It doesn't mean we are animals."
What's the difference??
You say we're mammals, just like dogs and cats are mammals. But we're not animals like dogs and cats are...
This makes sense to you??
Makes sense to me. Animals are not capable of talking. Animals are not capable of abstract thought. Animals are not capable of Constructing complex structures using logic and scientific principles. Animals are not capable of fashioning and using weapons or tools. Animals are not capable of doing thousands of things humans can do. Animals can only do what they instinctively are born to do.
I am not an animal, Joe and Park. I can't say the same for you.
Definition of MAMMAL
: any of a class (Mammalia) of warm-blooded higher vertebrates (as placentals, marsupials, or monotremes) that nourish their young with milk secreted by mammary glands, have the skin usually more or less covered with hair, and include humans
— mam·ma·li·an\mə-ˈmā-lē-ən, ma-\ adjective or noun
Examples of MAMMAL
1. Human beings, dogs, and cats are all mammals.
Yeah, Joe. Makes perfect sense to me.
You guys have to remember that for the purpose of scientific classification, humans may be grouped with other life forms all falling under a broad term such as "animal". But for one person to regard any other as an animal is the basis for all sorts of evil. Indeed, for any purpose other than scientific classification, to regard any person or people, or even people in general, as animal is a twisted sort of arrogance and condescension, a psuedo-intellectual ploy to further some wacky notion of our place in the world and diminish our uniqueness and God given worth and value. The worst among us, the Hitlers, Husseins, Stalins and bin Ladens have more worth than any animal, though they make it harder to keep that in mind.
"By the way, ma, what is the point of your blog? What do you hope to gain?"
How it could possibly matter to someone like YOU, Parkorama, is beyond me.
But since you've asked, I have no firm point at all. I have opinions (extremely fine, cogent, logical opinions at that) that I wish to express, usually on the issues of the day, and hope to engage in some decent exchanges to see if I can persuade or be persuaded. I think my ability to persuade is less than I'd prefer it could be, but better than I fear judging by how many lefties refuse to engage any longer. Yeah, I'm saying they've split because they could not refute the logic of my arguments.
Some, like Vinny, leave in mid-discussion, pretending I'm unable to keep an open mind. That's rubbish. I have never banned anyone from this blog, even trolls worse than yourself, though I've deleted some comments for their abject stupidity. Mark has had a comment deleted, but I now regret having done so as Dan Trabue has continued to pretend he said something he didn't.
If I can feel that I've learned something, and I was learning quite a bit until Vinny bailed on the last discussion in which he involved himself, then obviously I've gained a great deal.
But I also gain a great deal of entertainment when people like yourself visit to say nothing but comments lacking wit or cleverness hoping to mock me or my opinions. I would add that such is always a failure if no substance accompanies the snark.
And of course there's always a good laugh when the average lefty exposes their goofy leftist ideologies. But I'll always stifle the laugh if the visitor shows a sincere desire to engage. Someday you should try it.
That was a missed opportunity.
Considering humans as animals is but one tool those with certain worldviews or philosophies use to deny there’s an author or creator of the universe. One tool they have in their arsenal to deny such things as universal or absolute truths. Sadly, many Religious leaders have adopted a humanistic philosophy – or “bended” their religion to accommodate this philosophy. “It’s all perception don’t ya know”.
Equating human beings to animals allows them to champion such absurd notions as ever changing mores or morals. Morals and standards are nothing more than “fad”. That is, (said in my best nasally condescending voice) “As society advances, so does its morals; what the many may consider as wrong currently, may not be actually wrong, it’s just that we haven’t advanced enough as a society to overcome our customs and totems. What is wrong today may be perfectly acceptable tomorrow.”
Poppycock and balderdash! And a recipe for disaster! Because the more you dehumanize humanity, the greater chance that crimes against humanity will occur. The debate on homosexuality is but one battle in the greater war. Those who view homosexual activity as acceptable, elevate personal perception (or wants) over universal truths (homosexuality being a destructive behavior).
lol... blamin.. That was amazing. I'm not sure how you worked homosexuals into that one.
Park doesn't know how Blamin worked homosexuality into that.
Well, it's pretty self explanatory. All Parklife has to do is read it. Of course, reading it would require a capacity of abstract thought.
And, as we already established, animals don't have that capacity, and Park admits he's an animal.
Well seems to me you're either animal, vegetable or mineral.
I'm animal. I gather Park is, too.
If you're not, then you must be a rock or a turnip. I'm guessing turnip.
"lol... blamin.. That was amazing. I'm not sure how you worked homosexuals into that one."
There he goes with the "lol" thing again, as if he just can't believe the things we say. What an idiot. Not sure how Blamin "worked in" homosexuals into a discussion about homosexuals? Not surprising coming from you. At the same time, you had no trouble working in "humans are animals" into the thread. What a putz you are!
Now Jim, on the other hand, actually gives a far better run at cleverness with his comment, though he, too, fails to distinguish between mere classification and reality. We, that is, we on the right, are distinctively NOT animals EXCEPT for the purposes of classification. But, we don't classify ourselves as such as you, Jim, and Parkalarkadingdong does. No. We know we are exceptional creatures being formed in the image and likeness of the Creator, the God of Abraham, Who sent His Son Jesus to save us from our sins. We have dominion over all His creation including the animals and unless you're a sheepdog, no other creature comes close to having that mandate.
And because we are not animals, we are not slave to our urges, instincts and desires. That makes self-control distinctively human unless that quality is abdicated as we see it is with addicts, hedonists, and the sexually immoral. This goes to what Blamin was saying. And by golly we even have the ability to control how we react to harassment and bullying. Unfortunately, some kids aren't taught that.
I have to say that I feel compelled to give props to People magazine, of all rags, on their article surrounding the Clementi suicide. They allowed for the fact that homo bullying was not established for one thing. That alone is reason for kudos, but they also spoke of bullying apart from those victims who are homosexuals. They feature several short pieces about kids who have been victims, with one about twin boys who are portly, another about a muslim girl from Pakistan, a bi-racial chick, and a few others I didn't have time to read. It marks the first instance where the notion that homosexuality isn't the only reason kids take crap from other kids. I applaud them for their even handedness.
As a sidebar, the twin fat kids spoke of something that made me laugh for its dark creativity. Kids, being mean bastards, are also the source of some of the most clever insults known to man. Parkie could take lessons rather than routinely failing in his attempts to be clever. It seems these kids were accused of engaging in "Twinsest". The suffering of the brothers is not in the least bit funny. But that mock is. How sad that wit is used to hurt. It reminds me of how I dealt with teasing my second oldest endured as a youngster. She had a sense of humor that even amazed her teachers when she was in pre-school. I told her that if what some jerk said to her was actually funny, she should go ahead and laugh right with them. If it wasn't, she should tell them to try harder next time. The result was that those who mocked her well got to like her because she didn't, and wouldn't, take it hard. AND, the Parkies couldn't hurt her anymore because she realized how stupid were their attempts. Best of all, she was no longer depressed or insecure due to teasing or harassing. It just never bothered her anymore.
Marshall wrote: "We know we are exceptional creatures being formed in the image and likeness of the Creator, the God of Abraham, Who sent His Son Jesus to save us from our sins."
What arrogance... to think we're somehow "exceptional" and the favorite pet of some god somewhere... It amazes me when atheists are accused of being arrogant - because it seems to me to be the opposite.
"We, that is, we on the right, are distinctively NOT animals EXCEPT for the purposes of classification."
Did anybody say anything different? Taxonomy is the name of the game ma. And nobody here has argued anything different than humans are but one of the many different classifications. You, mark and blamin seem to have spun out of control regarding what you think my point was.
I will say that each animal has its own classification, making it a separate species. Therefore able to be classified separatly. In your system, you have place humans at the top of this pyramid. I say, "good for you".
Another interesting point is that Mark seems to support bullies:
"If they don't want to be bullied, they need to conform."
And, ma, you seem to be against bullies. But, you cant muster the intestinal strength to tell mark that he is wrong.
Each of these two issues seems to be a re-occuring problem. One, ma & co. projects what they believe the oppostion argument is, then react to that (this whole post is an example of that). Second, ma has the inability to correct his followers. But, that is why ma is so lovable.
"What arrogance... to think we're somehow "exceptional" and the favorite pet of some god somewhere... It amazes me when atheists are accused of being arrogant - because it seems to me to be the opposite."
Whether or not there is a God (there is, of course), it is not "arrogance" to acknowledge our exceptional status within creation. And truly, folks like you, Joe, are indeed arrogant to assume a posture of extreme sophistication in your false concession that you are no better or worse than a weasel, a slug or an AIDS virus. It is not arrogance to state fact. I did not state it without provocation and find it to be so self-evident as to see no need to bring it up without some wacky faux-intellectual pronouncement that we are all animals being put forth as if it is a profound statement.
But don't worry, Joe. I do concede your right to call yourself whatever you like, including animal. But just as homosexuals have no right to redefine marriage or demand they be accepted as "normal" when they plainly aren't, you have no right to insist that I agree with you regarding whether or not you are an animal or something more exceptional.
Little Parkie,
"And nobody here has argued anything different than humans are but one of the many different classifications."
Recall, Parkster, that you simply stated that I didn't think humans are animals. You said, "He thinks people are NOT animals." I responded to nothing more until Joe mentioned that many people believe that we are. It was only then that the subject of classifications came up. Still, I do not consider humans to be animals ever. I simply acknowledge that scientifically we are classified as such, but I never said I agree with that classification. No matter how much we may resemble any other being, we are distinct from the rest of creation and so much so that we cannot ever be appropriately grouped with any other species. This is not true of the animal kingdom and any species within it.
As to what your point may have been in pointing out that I don't believe humans are animals, I could only guess if I gave a rat's ass. As I don't, it is up to you to explain yourself more clearly, if that's even possible.
"And, ma, you seem to be against bullies. But, you cant muster the intestinal strength to tell mark that he is wrong."
Mark can tell you that I've disagreed with him on more than one occasion. That wouldn't fit the image of me you'd like to project, but it is true. That I failed to call him on this particular point means nothing other than I failed to call him out. But as you like to think you're sharper than he, why have YOU not called him on it? Don't know how? Don't know how in an intelligent, thoughtful manner?
As it happens, I had intended on speaking on Mark's statement to find out what he meant by it. I'm going to assume he was referring to homo kids conforming their sexual preferences, but whether or not that is the case, I would still say that I don't entirely agree with the point.
But I will say that conforming to whatever drives the bullies' aggression IS one way of dealing with it. Just not a way I'd favor. I'd prefer the victim fight back in any of a number of ways. The best way is directly. If a victim turns and beats the crap out of the bully, the bully and any witness learns a valuable lesson about assuming one has the right to push another around and assuming the other will take it. That's a language the bullies readily understand. Many will say it's not the Christian way. Unfortunately, more than just the victim is at risk. Other potential victims will be spared and THAT'S very much a good thing. That's peace through strength and when bullies are afraid to bully, there is time to convince them logically that bullying is wrong.
So there you go, Sparky. I've clearly opposed Mark's opinion, while at the same time leaving him the opportunity to fully explain his position, where I can again oppose it if I feel so compelled. I've done so with a clearly fleshed out alternative and am still willing and ready to go further to clarify if need be.
Now it's your turn. Show you have some sack, some spine, some shred of manhood (even if you're a woman) and explain exactly what the opposition argument is if I've had it wrong all this time. Are you capable of more than just lame drive-by snark that fails to demonstrate cleverness? Can you show you're more than just an idiot in search of a village to call your own?
I mean if homosexual kids don't want to be bullied, the boys should start dressing like boys, stop walking like girls, stop talking like girls. If the Lesbian kids don't want to be bullied they should stop acting, dressing, and talking like boys.
If either of them don't act, dress, walk, and talk differently than the norm, they wouldn't be bullied.
Look, if they want to be homosexual they can be homosexual without advertising themselves.
I worked with a guy for years who was a homosexual, and I didn't know it until I had worked with him several years. I was even assigned to room with him on a company incentive Cruise, and I still didn't know. I also was assigned to room with a guy who looked like Hulk Hogan during Management development training, and I found out later he was a homo, too, but I didn't know it at the time.
Conversely, I now work with a guy who swishes around wiggling his hips worse than most women, talks with the familiar lisp, wears pink, and occasionally even makes suggestive comments about men he sees, not to mention that he has been seen during working hours making out with his boyfriend.
He is so demonstrative that sometimes I think he is trying too hard to convince people he is gay. Maybe he really isn't. Maybe he's trying to convince himself.
Bullying isn't confined to picking on ho9mosexuals. Kids bully other kids because they are different. They don't have to be homos to be bullied. And usually, they aren't. As I said, if these kids don't want to be bullied, they should stop being different. After all, homosexuality isn't genetic. It's a choice.
Does that clarify things for you?
OK. Now that Mark has clarified his position, I can say that I do NOT agree with it. Again, a victim changing his ways to satisfy the bully is indeed one way of dealing with bullying. But I steadfastly reject that option. This would be the same as the United States becoming muslim to avoid attacks by radical muslims, and we AIN'T gonna do THAT.
No. I do not in any way support recommending that victims of bullying change anything for the sake of stopping the suffering. It is the bullies who must change.
Now, that is not to say that I do not encourage all homosexual kids to seek whatever help is necessary in order to correct their unfortunate beliefs about themselves and to whom they are attracted. But not to placate bullies. Bullies don't get to dictate anything. How does a bi-racial kid change his racial make-up? How does a Jew or Pakistani or Japanese kid change his ancestry? A fat kid can get in shape, but not for any other reason than it is better for him health-wise and self-image-wise.
The only thing we need to do for bullies is to punish them if they won't stop, and counsel and guide them toward a more Christian way of treating others. We DO NOT change ourselves for bullies.
So, unless Mark needs to clarify his position even more, one can see that as stated thus far, I have absolutely no problem opposing him on this. I'm so glad you challenged me, Parkie. Though you hoped to denigrate, you've allowed both Mark and I to clarify our positions more fully. Here's your opportunity to pretend you intended to do just that.
MA,
Re: you response concerning Mark’s statement.
Agreed – placating bullies are not the answer, probably, never the answer. But race, ancestry, and religious beliefs are not a valid comparison to Mark’s point. The “fat kid” example is getting closer.
I’ve enjoyed your musings, both here and on other blogs for years. I don’t think I’m mistaken when I say you’ve raised the valid point of societal shame used as a tool to correct what society deems as unacceptable behavior, heck, not just unacceptable, but boorish, ill-mannered, and inconsiderate, behavior.
What Mark describes is an in your face flaming deviant, a “sashay-er” that’s more or less daring anyone to call him/her out. While, bullying is never the answer, and something we should all strive to halt, we’re working from a definition of bullying as we perceive it, that is, mainly physical bullying; with extreme societal (societal defined as within the “bullyier” and “bullyee’s” social circle) ostracism. If a centralized gov’t gets hold of this issue, what they consider bullying will little resemble what you or I consider bullying. If you doubt me, think back to the debate on the definition of torture.
“Mark” my words on this – there will come a time when simple attempts to shame for boorish behavior will be defined as bullying! You and I can try to draw a line based on what we believe is reasonable, but, (big but) bureaucrats will become involved, heck not just any bureaucrats, but educational bureaucrats…“I can’t believe you got that ‘tramp-stamp’ tattoo, everyone’s going to think you’re a whore” (expelled for promoting a hostile learning environment). “You shouldn’t be so in-your-face with your sexuality” (expelled for judging from a Judeo-Christian perspective…etc)
Joe Agnost, the basic building blocks of all matter are similar. And just as it is with capitalism (I know your type is going to hate this…) the whole can be greater than the sum of its parts. And some, “sum of parts”, can be greater than other “sum of parts”. That’s why the “sum” that is human beings is greater than the “sum” that is merely jellyfish, or mice, or rocks, or a particle of hydrogen. Duhh. If you can’t comprehend, you’ve been watching to many Disney movies.
Certainly there are other ways to prevent bullying, although I don't believe punishing the bullies will stop it completely. I merely presented one way that would help.
Having said that, I disagree with this part of your comment:
"How does a bi-racial kid change his racial make-up? How does a Jew or Pakistani or Japanese kid change his ancestry?"
These are hereditary differences that can't be changed. They don't compare with homosexuality, which is a choice.
Don't forget, I pointed out two very real instances where homosexuals didn't behave like homosexuals and consequently, were never bullied.
So, my point remains valid.
"I mean if homosexual kids don't want to be bullied, the boys should start dressing like boys, stop walking like girls, stop talking like girls."
Mark, were you bullied in school?
"Now that Mark has clarified his position, I can say that I do NOT agree with it."
Amazing! Now you just have to call him an "idiot" to treat him like everybody else you disagree wtih.
No “proof” here – just anecdotal evidence.
While anti-bullying initiatives are noble, I notice a large amount of previously bullied kids supporting any and all initiatives, no matter how cloying they may be, tend to be leftwards.
Bully’s raise my ire! Especially those towards my children; but (big but), kids are cruel, is it better to teach kids how to deal with the inevitable, or seek to stop the unstoppable?
The unfortunate incident that bought about this debate has another layer that’s not been discussed … that being … a well adjusted child or young adult would not have taken such drastic actions. Not trying to place “blame”; just stating facts as I see them.
It is the responsibility of parents to raise well-adjusted children with the tools to “fight injustice”. We cannot legislate, without trampling basic rights, each and every instance where little Johnny or little Jane are made to feel uncomfortable. Any attempt at such makes us as individuals, and a nation – weak. It can be a cruel world folks! Equip or ignore.
Parklife,
I don't call anyone "idiot" for simply holding a different position. I might call their position "idiotic". In your case, as in feo's, your comments are routinely idiotic and void of substance. It can only mean that you are an idiot in the most clinical sense. See your medical professional.
Blamin,
Totally common sense comment with which I totally agree. Keep 'em comin'.
"anti-bullying initiatives"
Blamin, is this your idea? Ellen is trying to change a culture that leads to kids taking their own life. Why is it so hard for conservatives to be against death?
"idiot" vs. "idiotic"
Marks comment was idiotic. Good thing I'm around to call a spade a spade. Too much heavy lifting for you I suppose.
I should note that it warms my heart to see how you run off in different directions. Twisting and turning, making desperate grabs to justify your insanity.
"Why is it so hard for conservatives to be against death?"
What an idiotic thing to say. I think Blamin was quite clear that he opposes kids taking their own lives and until you can show that they were physically forced by the bullies to do so, your comment will rank high on the idiotic scale. Blamin puts the focus on the suicidal kids themselves, where it ought to be. With some 75% of kids reporting at least one incident of their having been bullied, only a tiny fraction of that number even consider suicide, much less see the act to its tragic conclusion. Why do they give in to the urge that most kids never even consider? Bullying won't end. It can't be stopped without 24/7 supervision, and even then it's iffy. Better would be to teach kids that there are better ways to deal than suicide, and that suicide is never the answer for anything. They don't need to despair over the opinions of some Parkli...I mean...idiots.
"Marks comment was idiotic."
There. Feel better now? I hope so, because I don't decide whom to call what on the basis of some idiot's opinion.
"I should note that it warms my heart to see how you run off in different directions. Twisting and turning, making desperate grabs to justify your insanity."
I should note that I also don't let idiots dictate the direction I take in any conversation. (Actually, I have no problem letting the conversation go where it pleases and just follow along.) If you prefer to remain on a specific point, first have one and then spell it out clearly so that we can see just what a bright boy you are. Then I'll address it if I feel like it. The other alternative is to create your own blog so you and the voices in your head can fix the big problems of the world to your own liking.
Finally, I find it ironic that you feel qualified to point out insanity. Thanks for the laugh.
Parklight –
I applaud Ellen’s stated objective. But I think we should take the opportunity to ask a few hard questions. Maybe “We” – that is – you and me – us and them can do more than pay “lip service” to an issue. Maybe we can look at “root” causes.
Why would a person take the most severe of irreversible actions? That is the question we should be asking. Most assuredly bullying has a place in this debate, but also so does the mental health of the “victim”.
What caused such a “stunted” sense of self-esteem? Why was this individual ill/un-equipped?
A well-adjusted individual, an individual prepared to take on controversy would not have taken the “most severe and “ending” of “way outs.”
Lets look at the “whole” picture.
Do you/Can you objectively do this?
"What an idiotic thing to say."
Lol.. ma.. With you being the king of stupid that almost means something.
"There. Feel better now?"
Just.. can't... do.. it.. Can ya'? Can't come out and call a spade a spade? Don't worry, it gets easier with practice.
"Then I'll address it if I feel like it."
Lol.. ma.. what part of you thinks I care about your opinion. I post here to see what bat-crazy thing you will say next. And, trust me, you never disapoint.
"Thanks for the laugh"
No, Thank YOU for the laugh.
"Maybe we can look at “root” causes."
blamein, you sound like a liberal.
"Most assuredly bullying has a place in this debate"
Yes, of course. Most of the time ma is doing it.
"Do you/Can you objectively do this?"
Knock yourself out. I'm against bullies. Mark is for them. ma is undecided (but mostly against) and you are rejecting unproposed legislation on the topic. Let me know if you have an update.
Sparkie,
Here's why it is an idiotic thing to say:
Nothing any of us have said indicate we support death. That's number one. Number two is that liberals, especially the president you support, are major supporters of something far worse than ignoring (or being too stupid to understand) that suicidal teens need help dealing with life's pressures (as if you care at all, worrying more about their sexual choices than their emotional well-being). Worse than that, and that's bad enough, you support the willful killing of the unborn, usually by ripping apart their still forming bodies. Only stupidity compels someone like yourself to then say something so completely asinine as "Why is it so hard for conservatives to be against death?" Idiot. And you dare insist I call Mark and idiot after such a question? Talk about bat-crazy!! Once again, putz, thanks for the laugh. Did you go somewhere to learn this level of stupid or does it just come naturally?
Oh goodness me! Was I bullying you? Idiot.
Wow. Stupid just flows out of Parkie like the snot running down his nose. The following showed up in my inbox but didn't post here. Maybe blogger has an automatic stupid blocker of which I am unaware:
-------------------------------------
Parklife has left a new comment on your post "What's Really Important":
"Nothing any of us have said indicate we support death."
Only that Mark supports bullies. Which in turn lead to death. Therefore, Mark supports death. Easy as pie.
As for you, ma, I think you are for blowing people up in Iraq and Afghanistan. Again, you support death. Oh, what about the "death penalty"? Are you for that? Death, death and more death.
"the president you support"
Umm… what do you mean by support? He manages from the middle. Yawn..
"suicidal teens need help dealing with life's pressures"
Lol.. ma.. you are the one against Ellen. She supports getting emotional help to suicidal teens. Ahh.. such is life.
"as if you care at all"
Please stop the sniveling. I have more respect for conservatives than that.
"worrying more about their sexual choices than their emotional well-being"
Lol.. nothing could be farther from the truth. You were the one fixated on GAY teens (Please see the original post). I am the one wanting bullies and suicide of all kinds to stop. You seem to be very worried about sexual choices (Might you be gay?). I just want government out of my personal life.
"you support the willful killing of the unborn, usually by ripping apart their still forming bodies."
Honestly, ma.. I’m not sure how I come down on the abortion issue, I’ve never been pregnant.
"And you dare insist I call Mark and idiot…"
I double dare!!
For starters Mark is an idiot. I’ve learned that I can call people names like this because its in the bible. It turns out I’ve had this wrong in the past. But, the bible says its okay.
"Was I bullying you?"
You tried. But seeing as how you can hardly hold a conversation, I don’t take it personally.
So due to the above, I have some fun ahead rubbing Parkie's nose in the stinking pile of stupid he left above during time outs of the Bulls game. Let us begin:
"Only that Mark supports bullies. Which in turn lead to death. Therefore, Mark supports death. Easy as pie."
Two things very stupid here: First, Mark doesn't "support" bullies in the least. His comments focused on the victim's method of dealing with it. Even though I don't agree with how that focus manifested, it doesn't in the least bit indicate support for bullying but is in fact, separate from his position on bullies themselves. Stupid people will make these types of stupid leaps of logic (I use the term very loosely in Parkie's case) rather than seek clarification for something that to the stupid, sounds so wrong.
The second problem bullying doesn't lead to death as if the victim is forced into taking their own lives. How one deals with the sadness and depression is what is really important here. I pointed out a case where a well loved homosexual teen killed himself when his best friend spurned his advances, while still proclaiming his undying friendship. Should we say that unrequited love is something that needs to be fixed? How stupid.
"As for you, ma, I think you are for blowing people up in Iraq and Afghanistan. Again, you support death."
I support blowing up evil people who refuse to stop attacking those who won't bow to their ideologies. Putting them to death when they insist on killing or maiming even the stupid among us if we don't comply with their demands is to protect the innocent. Such death I support proudly, though I'd prefer they cut the crap and learn to accept that we don't believe in their false god. That you can't see the distinction makes you appear to be very stupid.
"Oh, what about the "death penalty"? Are you for that?"
Very much so for those who murder. Those like myself would prefer never having to implement this ultimate punishment for the most heinous crimes against our fellow man. But to do any less shows a lack of respect for life. I'll let you ponder this one for awhile. Take your time.
""the president you support"
Umm… what do you mean by support? He manages from the middle. Yawn.."
Oh. My. Gosh. You obviously don't know where the middle is. Your yawn is appropriate. You need to wake up and pay attention (as if it would do you any good).
"Lol.. ma.. you are the one against Ellen. She supports getting emotional help to suicidal teens."
Note the incessant "lol's". The loon laughs a lot. But I oppose Ellen's lifestyle and I oppose her waiting for a homosexual to kill himself before weeping over teen suicides. Teen suicides didn't just start when some were led to believe that homosexuality was OK.
"Please stop the sniveling. I have more respect for conservatives than that."
Some things are so stupid as to defy understanding. What the hell is this supposed to mean, what makes you think anyone believes you respect conservatives at all, and where does this "sniveling" crap come from? I don't "snivel".
"You seem to be very worried about sexual choices (Might you be gay?)."
How typical to question MY sexual preferences. I worry about peoples' souls. Kids are being conned by deviants who were themselves conned into thinking that giving in to deviant urges is what freedom is all about. I worry about such people convincing enough deluded people into supporting legislation that forces the rest of us to treat such behavior as if it is normal.
"Honestly, ma.. I’m not sure how I come down on the abortion issue, I’ve never been pregnant."
Funny. "Let's see," Parkie ponders. "How do I feel about the killing of the innocent unborn? Do I approve or oppose putting babies to death? Hmmm. I just can't decide." Stupid to the max.
"For starters Mark is an idiot. I’ve learned that I can call people names like this because its in the bible. It turns out I’ve had this wrong in the past. But, the bible says its okay."
What's stupid here is, like the lame "are you gay?" gambit, is to think this hasn't been used before. While suggesting that I'm not the perfect Christian I've never claimed to be, Parkie turns the light on himself where he should have shown that HIS "theology" has produced the graciousness and kindness he has so adamantly denied himself by the combative and nasty tenor so common in every comment since his first.
"But seeing as how you can hardly hold a conversation, I don’t take it personally."
So hard to judge, really, but this might possibly be the stupidest line of the whole stupid last comment. Trying so hard to deliver a shot, but failing miserably as if that is the intention does not provide an example of what "holding a conversation" looks like. I can't recall an instance of you actually trying to engage in a civil conversation with anyone. It's one thing to suppose you have any room or right to criticize, but to do so without offering anything of substance, anything to "show me how it's done", anything at all, just exposes you for the fool you are. You need to disappear and return with a better attitude, a better tone, as if you have a clue and the neighborly desire to simply share it.
FYI Marshall....Actress/Singer Demi Lovato has checked herself into a treatment center for problems she says are caused by years of bullying which she discussed with Ellen Degeneres
two years ago. So this proves that Ellen has been concerned about bullying for quite some time. I told you so.
ma,
You take yourself wwwwaaaaaayyyyy to seriously. Accept yourself for the joke that you are.
Post a Comment