sparc,
What is the status of gay rights in Islamic theocricies? What would happen to an openly gay man in such a country? I do not know whether the penalty is death or not, but it would not surprise me. december overstates his points and goes for effect rather than precision. He paints with an overbroad brush. More accurately he could have stated that some, including the late Fortuyn, feared Muslim immigration because they feared that the fundamentalist Islamic intolerance for homosexuality will come with it. Should intolerance by a religion be tolerated in the name of tolerance? He thought not. And he posted in the manner of an AM shock jock rather than the CNN analyst. You won’t look to his posts as a reliable source of factual information and for a balanced perspective. (I look to posters like tamerlane for that). But again, the thread had a point worthy of discussion, even if you disagreed with his take on the issues. I concurr that the style gets in the way of the intent, especially in a forum like this, where most posters are really interested in coming away a little more knowledgable then they were before. But he is far from the worst poster in terms of either stylistics or content.
I answer that at some length in the thread in question. Short take is that in comparison to the US and the EU they are a bit behind evolution and in a few cases miles behind. The death penalty exists in theory in one or two places, but has not been applied in a recent memory; it is an obsolete law that is forecast to disappear.
In fact the only one place that has seen any large scale infringement of gay rights in recent times is Egypt – and although unacceptable it was at no times close to routine murder or the death penalty. If you consider gay bashing and resulting deaths in the US, you end up with a pretty similar situation on average. Being openly gay is definitely not easy in any part of the Arabic world (is it in the West?), on the other hand they have a long and well celebrated gay tradition culturally speaking.
Somewhat of an understatement, but OK. Fact is you are right; I wouldn’t, I don’t think I need to, but some people do take what’s written by december at face value.
Exactly and that is why I even bother with him. I still fly off the handle at him at times, but I truly try to stay calm these days and just show him where he strays.
You have to see one thing though, even if december doesn’t intend to be bigoted with what he says that’s how it comes across if you belong to one of the ethnical or cultural groups he spouts opinion about. If I say; “American Jews generally support mass murder of Arabs,” how does an American Jew feel about that? You could put it this simply; december is insensitive and unintentionally mean spirited to whole groups of people, if you’re part of one of those groups you trigger on that.
Sparc
You may be right. On the other hand, maybe Guinastasias memory has somehow turned 3,000 dead and missing into 60,000. And maybe Guinastasia has slightly oversimplified decembers position. Maybe his actual position was something along the lines of…
1…Given that the Allende regime had destroyed the Chilean economy and…
2…given that Pinochet gave Chile the strongest economy in Latin America and…
3…given that the Pinochet coup was the least bloody coup or rebellion in Latin American history and…
4…given that communist regimes have a history of incredibly bloody oppression…
then…is it possible that, bad as Pinochet was, Chile was better off under his rule than it would have been had the Allende regime survived.
Not a bad debating point in my opinion. If, of course, this was his actual position. You could always look it up.
As for Guinastasias point that
**
it’s simply meaningless since without even cracking a book I can name six individual communist reigns with death tolls at least 200 times greater than Pinochets; Lenins, Stalins, Maos, Titos, Kim Il Sungs and Pol Pots.
Anyway, I don’t think decembers earlier thread lets Arafat off the hook.
Just a quick side question, IzzyR - would you consider a statement of fact in the Wall Street Journal’s editorial section to be just as reliable as one in their news sections?
December has tried that one more than once, ya know, both directly and via citing their subsidiary, opinionjournal.com.
<<Just a quick side question, IzzyR - would you consider a statement of fact in the Wall Street Journal’s editorial section to be just as reliable as one in their news sections?>>
Well, I would. One can disagree with their opinions and the way facts are slanted. Even conservatives recognize that they sometimes get a bee in their bonnet and give disproportionate focus to a particular issue. But, their facts have been accurate.
We already know you would, december, as stated above, even if it’s something that the WSJ would never publish as fact in their news section - the latest version of the Juanita Broaddrick story, for instance.
But the fact that you would take the WSJ opinion page as fact, without questioning it, isthe problem under discussion in this sidebar.
Now, do you consider William Safire’s assertions of fact in his opinion columns in the New York Times, which you excoriate as biased pro-Palestinian (!!!), to be either more or less solid as the facts stated in their news sections?
We will return you to your regularly-scheduled thread shortly, after these messages.
Great, December. Let me remind you of the following post:
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&postid=2108981&highlight=oped#post2108981
All I can conclude is that according to you any source with a trace of liberal perseptives is not to be trusted (when it doesn’t suit you). Slightly conservative sources, however, get the facts right under almost any and all circumstances (since most often they suit you).
Are you in any way concerned that you may be creating a false sense of security about understanding what’s happening in the world? Do you ever look at something and think “wow, maybe I’m wrong after all”? Isn’t it funny how all RELIABLE data fits right in with your weltanschaung all the time?
Please do not generalize my specific criticisms of the Times to “all liberal organs.” The Washinton Post editorials are almost all reasonable and honest, although I disagree with many. Columnists like David Broder and TV peole like Tim Russert are outstanding. On the web, two sites written by liberals that I read regularly are spinsanity.com and dailyhowler.com.
The deterioration in the Times is specific to that once-great newpaper. Try reading the archives of smartertimes.com You’ll see what I mean.
I do worry about it. I try to bring balanced information in by reading the New York Times every day. Liberals might do the same thing by reading opinionjournal.com daily.
Don’t make assumptions about what I read and don’t read December. And by the way, one of the reason I live in New York is because there are people like Mr.Stoll dedicating themselves to scrutinizing the facts of this large city’s main information source for a living.
Remember, however, that although Ira Stolz is a responsible editor, he definitely has a conservative agenda. Nonetheless, I welcome the recent New York Sun and hope that it will enrich our city’s media world.
My main contention with you is that you pick and choose your data like it was a candy basket collected specifically for you. And it’s like Sparc said. Discussions with you spiral into a red herring rhetoric of “let’s discuss the source”!
Correction: Ira Stoll (not Stolz)
Absolutely. Even if it’s too late to get through to a particular poster, you can at least provide an alternative (more rational, less paranoid) viewpoint for other, less-informed posters who otherwise would see december-style posts going unquestioned or undebated, and assume they were gospel.
I do hold out hope that one day december may overcome what I now believe to be misinformations and misinterpretations deriving from some serious, psychological paranoia. I am starting to think that there may be some reason in december’s past for this - perhaps personal anti-semitic attacks on him and his family that have since permanently coloured his world-view in rather extreme shades. Maybe he still feels extremely deeply about the holocaust, which is fair enough, I cannot imagine - being of western christian descent - how that would feel to have happened to my “people” in such recent history.
Either way, sadly, december’s viewpoints, way of expressing them, paranoia and deep distrust towards any Israel-questioning news sources, damages his cause rather than furthers it, IMO.
Now let me get this straight. Are you saying that December screwed up by claiming Pinochet only killed 60,000 people? Shit, then he truly doesn’t know what he’s talking about and criticism for the veracity of his claims are justified. According to http://www.oneworld.org/ips2/nov98/16.31_064.html ,
istara might be right
What a dipstick he is ! You don’t have to be a history major to know that the 60,000 figure is full of crap. Very annoying. I find it very annoying indeed. We want the straight dope around here, not bad dope.
grienspace…
From the Pinochet thread…december…quote:
“It bears clarifying here that the Chilean revolution was – by far – the least bloody of any significant revolution in Latin America in all of the Twentieth Century – 2,117 dead and missing, on both sides, in 17 years.”
From this thread…Guinastasia…quote:
“I still recall his “Pinochet got a bum deal” thread. Apparently, because only 60,000 were killed and/or disappeared compared to the millions of victims of communism.”
From this thread…grienspace…quote:
“We want the straight dope around here, not bad dope.”
To be fair he seems to not have made such a claim. At least he didn’t do it in the thread that still exists (one got zapped in some server debacle)
Not that it matters, but I just stumbled on an a completely unrelated error in that thread.
december,
Hitler and the Communist regimes of the USSR all together killed 50-55 million people, including combatant victims of WWII on the Allied side (Third Reich approx 25 million and USSR approx 29 million). If you’re really liberal in counting you might be able to make it 60 million, figures adding up to a lower figure at 45 million have also been seriously forwarded.
Sparc
Hey Sparc…
You just can’t let december win one, can ya?
Do me a favor though…notice that Guinastasia refered to another thread with what appears to be a misrepresentation of decembers position and that it has already caused two posters who are generally respected and well regarded (and I definately include myself as one with a lot of respect for these guys) to belittle december without justification. Then think about how that might apply to certain arguments that you may be involved in in Great Debates.
Ron (trolling for allies)
Thank you Sparc and zigaretten for clearing that up.
It’s ironic that certain posters want to help me “overcome…misinformations and misinterpretations,” who want to promote “the straight dope…not bad dope,” and who want to show how not to be a “dipstick” – these posters didn’t get their own facts straight.
Unfortunately, this sort of thing is not uncommon. When I was young, Joseph McCarthy was infamous for demonizing people whose politics he disagreed with, even if his criticisms of them were inaccurate. Unfortunately, some right wingers still do this, as do quite a few liberals.
Okay, I screwed up the numbers. I appologize. :o So this time, hit ME, not december!
:smack:
Okay, I did a search for the thread:
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=71728&highlight=Pinochet
So I appologize-my memories of the actual debate were fuzzy.
Even still, I think it speaks for itself.
Just forget my brain lapse.
errr…
Sorry december, that all came out wrong I did not mean that as any ad hominem. In my narrow-minded passions for the history of 20th century conflicts and oppressive regimes I thought it might interest you. Obviously I see that this doesn’t come across that way in this context. In any case the mistake you made is frequent one, that’s why my history knee jerked a little, not because it was you making it.
Then again there are very many that care to give you fair chance. As for when we don’t always do; as you call some people will answer december. For instane, you could have avoided the cheap shot towards the lefties right there, it would have gained you a lot more points.
Sparc
Sorry December I’ve always respected and enjoyed your posts that I’ve read, but when Guinastasia a veteran and well liked poster who is a history major reported that you claimed Pinochet was responsible for 60,000 killed or missing in Chile I took her word without verification. My mistake:smack:
Come to think of it, why would an American conservative feel the need to inflate the 3000 number by a factor of 20? I should have checked.
You’re confusing me here. There were two seperate criticisms made of december’s cites there [*
I agreed with the first. The second one I disagree with for the very reasons described above.
I could not find him doing this. Could you direct me to the post you refer to?
Yes.