Hardesty, Oklahoma, wretched hive of scum and villainy

[Liberal]

@Brainiac4

Is it possible that you’re wrong? That the real problem is religious intolerance, the small-mindedness that you yourself said he should expect to encounter? That perhaps he was persecuted for his beliefs (or lack thereof, if you prefer that formulation)?

Of course it’s possible. And as I said repeatedly, I’m sure that he did indeed encounter some such small-mindedness, but which, in his postings, he exaggerated beyond all credulity. Meanwhile, as I said, his daughter had been a local hero, adored by her whole football team and coach. Try to understand my position, which is simply this: it was not until he made the whole thing into his personal cause that she began to suffer for it all. She was doing fine, certainly better than many “outcast” teens in a high school environment.

This is my reasoning, which I’ve already expressed, but here’s a summary:

1. Why would he move his family to a place in middle America that he knew or should have known was populated by the very sort of people he describes in his postings as monsters? Okay, so he has the right. He also has the right to move them to South Central Los Angeles, but should he?

Even so…

2. Why did he not teach his daughter to be tolerant of others, which is something he demands for himself? He could have encouraged her to support her team but abstain from praying, which was exactly what she was doing until he flung shit at the fan.

Even so…

3. Why didn’t he go through ordinary channels, meeting the officials in their offices rather than going to their homes? I understand that he has described his visit in a manner that makes him look good, but what else would you expect? There is a right way and a wrong way to go at these things.

Even so…

4. Why did he burn every conceivable bridge, painting the whole town as a gang of whores, drug addicts, and criminals (see previously cited exerpt from his postings) which is ridiculous on its face since the jury acquitted him of charges.

Even so…

5. Why did he wait so long to take her out of school if he thought she was in such danger? There were so many things he could have done so differently every step of the way. His daughter went from hero to zero quite suddenly, and it all seemed to coincide with his maniacal tirade.

Now, you may disagree with any or all of that. But it is not a random position to hold; it does not come out of nowhere; and just because it flies in the face of a dozen or so people at this particular board doesn’t mean it is untenable.

So let me ask you: isn’t is possible that he used his daughter for his own purpose and to promote his own agenda? If it is impossible, explain why. If it is possible, then give me the same consideration you want for yourself. Just because I’m the odd-man-out in an otherwise unanimous consensus doesn’t mean I’m any more biased than the rest of you.

My concern is and always has been for the daughter. Unless she moves to Europe or something, she is going to have to live in a world that is overwhelmingly theist. I simply think her father would have done better to teach her how to hold to her beliefs while at the same time being tolerant and respectful. If you disagree, that’s fine. But don’t think I’m restating my position over and over just for the fucking fun of it. I mean, damn.

[tdn]

@Liberal

2. Why did he not teach his daughter to be tolerant of others, which is something he demands for himself? He could have encouraged her to support her team but abstain from praying, which was exactly what she was doing until he flung shit at the fan.

Where did you get that from? The girl showed respect yet didn’t pray. There is no indication that the father then flew off the handle. None. You’re making that up. What happened next was that charges were drummed up against her and she was kicked off the team. A year later, she was let back on the team. Is that when the father started flinging poo? No. Once again, that’s your own fiction. More charges were drummed up, and she was kicked off the team again. Now, you may claim that what she was kicked off for was stuff she actually did. Even so, at this point the father is still not part of the story, as much as you want him to be. Next, students harassed the girl, calling her a devil worshiper. The teachers joined in.

And that is when the father went to the principal.

[Liberal]

@tdn

Where did you get that from? The girl showed respect yet didn’t pray. There is no indication that the father then flew off the handle. None. You’re making that up. What happened next was that charges were drummed up against her and she was kicked off the team. A year later, she was let back on the team. Is that when the father started flinging poo? No. Once again, that’s your own fiction. More charges were drummed up, and she was kicked off the team again. Now, you may claim that what she was kicked off for was stuff she actually did. Even so, at this point the father is still not part of the story, as much as you want him to be. Next, students harassed the girl, calling her a devil worshiper. The teachers joined in.

And that is when the father went to the principal.

We’ve covered this already. I think you have a mixture of fact and fiction. You don’t know whether she stole the shoes or not. You don’t know how many students harassed her, either. Like I said on page 1, I’m sure she was taunted, but what high school student isn’t, other than the most popular icons? And you certainly don’t know whether teachers joined in. But the father’s shit slinging did not begin when you say. That’s when it culminated. Do you have any reason to believe that he sat around like a deaf mute for more than a year? He was likely egging his daughter on, encouraging her to make as much trouble as possible. That’s just the kind of guy he is in my opinion, which is just as valid as yours. I’m not asking you to think as I do; I’m just asking you to acknowledge that your opinion is not the only conceivable one. I’ve conceded that you may be right. Your refusing to make the same concession while encouraging the board to ignore me shows that I’m not the unreasonable one here.

ETA:

And for the record, I’m done here. It’s going in circles, and you will never acknowledge that you could be wrong. Don’t bother responding unless you just want to crow. I won’t be opening the thread again.

[Miller]

@Liberal

Of course it’s possible. And as I said repeatedly, I’m sure that he did indeed encounter some such small-mindedness, but which, in his postings, he exaggerated beyond all credulity. Meanwhile, as I said, his daughter had been a local hero, adored by her whole football team and coach. Try to understand my position, which is simply this: it was not until he made the whole thing into his personal cause that she began to suffer for it all. She was doing fine, certainly better than many “outcast” teens in a high school environment.

What’s your evidence that his daughter’s social life went down the tubes after her father became directly involved? Doesn’t this directly contradict the girl’s own recollection of events?

This is my reasoning, which I’ve already expressed, but here’s a summary:

1. Why would he move his family to a place in middle America that he knew or should have known was populated by the very sort of people he describes in his postings as monsters? Okay, so he has the right. He also has the right to move them to South Central Los Angeles, but should he?

You’re right that it does not make sense for a man who passionately hates and fears Christians to move to a small, very religious town. Which strikes me as a pretty good indication that he did not hate and fear Christians until the ones in this town began harrassing his daughter. Do you have any evidence that his attitude towards the people in this town predates the contretemps over his daughters atheism?

2. Why did he not teach his daughter to be tolerant of others, which is something he demands for himself? He could have encouraged her to support her team but abstain from praying, which was exactly what she was doing until he flung shit at the fan.

Where has his daughter been intolerant towards religion? What specific actions did she take that did not support the team?

3. Why didn’t he go through ordinary channels, meeting the officials in their offices rather than going to their homes? I understand that he has described his visit in a manner that makes him look good, but what else would you expect? There is a right way and a wrong way to go at these things.

Do you know that he did not try to go through normal channels before he approached the principle at his own home?

4. Why did he burn every conceivable bridge, painting the whole town as a gang of whores, drug addicts, and criminals (see previously cited exerpt from his postings) which is ridiculous on its face since the jury acquitted him of charges.

The trial where he was acquited was not held in Hardesty, but in the larger township of Guymon. Regardless, even if he did over-react to his harrassment, that does not retroactively excuse the harrassment.

5. Why did he wait so long to take her out of school if he thought she was in such danger? There were so many things he could have done so differently every step of the way. His daughter went from hero to zero quite suddenly, and it all seemed to coincide with his maniacal tirade.

The only “maniacal tirade” I’ve seen is the one he wrote describing the long series of harassments his family suffered after his daughter sat out the prayer circle. Is there another maniacal tirade I’ve overlooked?

Now, you may disagree with any or all of that. But it is not a random position to hold; it does not come out of nowhere; and just because it flies in the face of a dozen or so people at this particular board doesn’t mean it is untenable.

I count at least three assertions in your reasoning that have, as near as I can tell, absolutely no factual basis to them. So, yes, a good portion of your position does indeed come out of nowhere, and are entirely untenable.

So let me ask you: isn’t is possible that he used his daughter for his own purpose and to promote his own agenda? If it is impossible, explain why. If it is possible, then give me the same consideration you want for yourself. Just because I’m the odd-man-out in an otherwise unanimous consensus doesn’t mean I’m any more biased than the rest of you.

Sure, it’s possible. Absent any evidence, there’s no reason to believe him over the township. Thing is, he’s actually presented evidence to support his version of events. Where’s the evidence that supports your version of events?

My concern is and always has been for the daughter. Unless she moves to Europe or something, she is going to have to live in a world that is overwhelmingly theist. I simply think her father would have done better to teach her how to hold to her beliefs while at the same time being tolerant and respectful. If you disagree, that’s fine. But don’t think I’m restating my position over and over just for the fucking fun of it. I mean, damn.

Which, by any reasonable reading of the evidence presented in this thread, is exactly what he has done. Once again, do you have any evidence - any at all - that indicated the contrary? Anything that was generated prior to the point where the alleged harrassment began? The closest you’ve come is an admittedly overheated rant about how he and his family have been treated since the harrassment began, which I think excuses a good part of the rhetorical excess of his rant.

[Miller]

@Liberal

That’s just the kind of guy he is in my opinion, which is just as valid as yours.

No, I’m sorry, but your opinion is not as valid as tdn’s, because you are making shit up out of whole cloth to support your preconception of what happened here. tdn is basing his opinion on the sworn testimony in a court of law, and supported by forensic evidence, both of which were found credible by a panel of twelve jurors.

[tdn]

Thanks, Miller. One is reminded of the quote about being entitled to one’s own opinions vs one’s own facts.

[Mighty_Girl]

@Miller

tdn is basing his opinion on the sworn testimony in a court of law, and supported by forensic evidence, both of which were found credible by a panel of twelve jurors.

Yeah, but did the jury see the TV show?

:rolleyes:

[FordPrefect]

@Liberal

We’ve covered this already. I think you have a mixture of fact and fiction.
[…]
I’ve conceded that you may be right. Your refusing to make the same concession while encouraging the board to ignore me shows that I’m not the unreasonable one here.

Fuck me, this is insane. You want your opponents in this thread to acknowledge that they may be wrong, not by any actual evidence (ometimes in spite of the evidence), but by shit you have made up in your head?

Is this some sort of analogy to your form of revelational theology, or are you just fucking around?

[Qadgop_the_Mercotan]

@FordPrefect

Fuck me, this is insane. You want your opponents in this thread to acknowledge that they may be wrong, not by any actual evidence (ometimes in spite of the evidence), but by shit you have made up in your head?

Is this some sort of analogy to your form of revelational theology, or are you just fucking around?

Many people believe (subconsciously or otherwise) that the intensity of their feelings about something must correlate with the truth about that thing. They then go to great lengths to rationalize this, despite solid evidence to the contrary.

[tdn]

@Qadgop the Mercotan

Many people believe (subconsciously or otherwise) that the intensity of their feelings about something must correlate with the truth about that thing. They then go to great lengths to rationalize this, despite solid evidence to the contrary.

That’s so true! I believe it with all my heart!

[FordPrefect]

As much as I know that Qadgop the Mercotan “you might be right, but you are really wrong” “concessions” still annoy me