Discriminating
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-02-2011, 09:27 AM
RE: Discriminating
(05-02-2011 08:54 PM)Ghost Wrote:  Hey, BnW.

Quote:The "Rosa Parks" comment just really set me off (obviously).

Out of curiosity, for what reason?

Because it was a ridiculous strawman. Again, it was like someone saying "I'm hungry" and you then lecturing them on world hunger. No one was claiming any kind of systematic societal discrimination. It was a venting thread about personal experiences. What you did was first claim the discussion was about something different and then attack people - and one person in particular in my view, and someone who did nothing to deserve it - with your own world view, a view that had absolutely nothing to do with the discussion at hand.

That's the reason.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2011, 10:37 AM
RE: Discriminating
Hey, BnW.

It was not a strawman. It wasn't a misrepresentation of an opponent's position, it was my position. I'm not trying to tell you that you can't react in an honest way, but I'm just tired of having the term strawman thrown in my face, particularly when it doesn't apply. Whatever your opinion might be about the sensitivity of how I said it, what I said is nonetheless a perfectly valid response to what has been said in this thread and in no way a misrepresentation of an opponent's position (And note that I do not quote Trilliuim13 once. When I said "Dear, everyone" I meant everyone).

Quote:cfhmagnet: Either way, I'm training for a promotion that I hope to get in the next 3-9 months, and have decided that it may be best for me to shut my mouth when it comes to religion at work.

Dbutz: I would never bring the subject up with a superior because it's not worth the risk.

No J.: If I was in that position and I was asked if I believed in evolution I would probably say "no."

catdance62: I am always uncomfortable with the prayer bit, but just keep quiet.

BnW: If you leave a job it could take a long time to find another one, so sometimes you need to suck things up.

No J.: Never stick your head above the edge of the trench when there are snipers in the area.

Monkeywithcrayons: It's not that I've ever feared being fired for my opinions, but the fact is I enjoy being able to pay my mortgage right now and I don't want to jeopardize that by a desire to quit a situation that became untenable because I spouted off an unwelcome opinion, which is perhaps not very brave of me.

The only deviations were from Monkeywithcrayons and The Ketola, who both made statements that I feel could best be classified as don't ask, don't tell:
Quote:Monkeywithcrayons: I don't discuss religion at work but I don't plan to hide that I am atheist should anyone ask, which they haven't in the two years I've been there.

The Ketola: I don't plan to bring up the topic of Religion or Politics in the work place, but should I be asked my religion, my political status, or any other sort of question, I will happily answer it, no matter the location.

At any rate, I'm not trying to shit on your answer to my question about why the Rosa Parks statement upset you. Thank you very much for answering it and answering it truthfully. I'm pointing these things out because I don't think that what you said about me in your answer is fair to me. Do you see where I'm coming from?

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2011, 02:34 PM (This post was last modified: 06-02-2011 02:49 PM by BnW.)
RE: Discriminating
Fine, it wasn't a strawman. It was an outright attack. It wasn't a point, it was an attack. Please don't try to pretend you were just "stating a position" because you were not.

Quote:Discrimination? Ever been owned and sold, denied the right to vote or marry, to mingle with others, or be on the streets after curfew? Been imprisoned, tortured, put to death, put in concentration camps, or butchered with machetes? Been told you couldn't speak your language, or post it on signs, or been re-educated? Had your lands taken away, been relocated, or had your treaties ignored? Been given blankets infected with small pox? Been put on a no-fly list, profiled, or held in Guantanamo indefinately without trial? No? Well, I guess worrying about a job is about the same. This isn't discrimination, this is being on a different team, an unliked team (like a Soviet in the States during the Cold War) and not having the guts to take your rights. It's whining. It's pathetic.

What exactly is your position here? And, it gets better (I love the first part of your next paragraph, btw):

Quote:And no wonder people don't like you. The Suffragets, MLK, Mandela, Gandhi, Parks, Milk, the list goes on. These were people who had the law against them and who spoke out against that injustice and against the injustices perpetrated against them every day and who fought for dignity and inclusion. Who do Atheists have? Hitchens and Dawkins? Educated men of priviledge who winge and whine, who arrogantly flaunt their intellectual supremacy and tell everyone how stupid and unworthy of life and humanity they are. It's vomitous. It's an affront.

So, basically, our choices are to agree with you and do what you claim you would do (and it's always easy to claim that's what you would do when it's not your life) or we are ... what exactly?

And, don't give me this nonsense you did not go after anyone in particular because, really, that's bullshit. My comments about legal rights were made to one person and one person only and based on her specific situation. I did not make any kind of sweeping commentary about rights being infringed so your comment really had to be directed at one person.

Finally, I need to get back to: no one said anything about any of this. No one said anything that any reasonable person could interpret as comparing the situation to those of the Suffragets, MLK, Mandela, Gandhi, Parks, Milk, etc. So, you want to claim it's not a strawman, fine, it's not a strawman. Then it was either an incredibly poor job of reading comprehension or it was just you taking a shot at someone who is in a tough situation.

Anyway, I'm sure everyone else is probably pretty sick of this particular fight so if you feel the need to keep going with it, it's probably best for the community at large if it gets taken off line.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2011, 03:44 PM
RE: Discriminating
I was originally going to reply to the topic of this thread only; but after reading through the thread, I see I must say more.

First, I am openly Atheist at work, but recently did get some under their breath comments and looks from a few coworkers.

OK. Now about the controversy with Ghost. First I want to let you all know that I added you or am in the process thereof, to my buddy list. BnW is added already.

Second; I thought that Ghost's writing..(No pun intended), was well thought out, and I did not see any problem in what he was trying to point out. (Though I thought him a little harsh on the Intellects). Never the less; I agree with him. What I believe he is pointing out is that the Discrimination we Atheist put up with is minuscule in comparison to the discrimination that such people as Rosa Parks had to deal with and fight against!

Ghost, I'm adding you now.

The Beauty of The Scientific Method , is the Anticipation of a Better Explanation.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2011, 06:23 PM
RE: Discriminating
Hey, Chesstime.

Cheers!

BnW.

You are beneath me.

I offer an olive branch, yet again, and you smack it away, yet again. What you've said is on the record and believe me, others can see through it. The only thing you've accomplished is to tarnish your own reputation.

I'm only gonna comment on one thing you said.
Quote:My comments about legal rights were made to one person and one person only and based on her specific situation. I did not make any kind of sweeping commentary about rights being infringed so your comment really had to be directed at one person.

Your vanity is staggering and your commitment to anger in the face of evidence is telling.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2011, 09:25 PM
RE: Discriminating
Ghost

I'm actually not angry at all and I was not trying to smack away an olive branch. You asked, so I answered. There was no anger in it from my side. As for my vanity, you specifically commented on something I said in your original post, and that was what I was referring to. I may be vain, and I probably think this thread is about me, but in this instance, where I'm responding to something that was specifically about me and even mentions me by name, I don't think you can really call that vanity. Well, maybe you can but I don't think you can accurately call it vanity.

Chesstime

2 things:

First, I am sincerely flattered that I've written anything here that you felt was worthy of being added to your buddy list. I realize there is a fair amount of sarcasm going back and forth right now so I hope you'll believe me when I say that the comment is honestly sincere.

Second, my issue was not with Ghost's overall point. I understood his point and, for the record, I don't think his point was wrong. What I took issue with was it was a counter to an argument that no one had made. No one was claiming anything like what he was stating. That, in and of itself, is not so heinous but the whole package of the delivery just got to me, and, again, I felt it was really an attack on one person who did nothing to deserve it. Now, there is some history between Ghost and I which definitely contributed to the incident and, being honest about it, I'd have to concede that I probably would not have reacted that way to someone else.

Anyway, and speaking of vanity, this discussion has become less about a specific topic and more about two specific people and that really can't be good for the community at large. So, I am going to drop it at this point.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2011, 09:45 PM
RE: Discriminating
(06-02-2011 09:25 PM)BnW Wrote:  Chesstime

2 things:

First, I am sincerely flattered that I've written anything here that you felt was worthy of being added to your buddy list. I realize there is a fair amount of sarcasm going back and forth right now so I hope you'll believe me when I say that the comment is honestly sincere.

No Problem. I'm adding people who I see responding intelligently to my thread, and to other threads I've read and posted. I still have some to add.

Anyway I found the discussion stimulating if a little heated. I therefore added you both.

The Beauty of The Scientific Method , is the Anticipation of a Better Explanation.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: