Is any American "a waste"?

[septimus]

@Euphrosyne

Can people from different positions, backgrounds, parties, perspectives hold productive conversations?

Is it possible for Americans of different political / cultural persuasions to read others’ comments, paying careful attention to the substance of others’ comments, considering thoughtfully what others are saying?

I don’t know. Let’s see if YOU can do it. In another thread I wrote:

@septimus

Yes. And which party is it, again, which seeks to

• deny women the freedom of their own bodies?
• deport law-abiding residents who’ve been in the country for decades?
• disallow transsexuals from using public bathrooms?
• deny government jobs to those who voted for the autocrat’s opponent?
• impede the voting rights of those unlikely to vote for the autocrat’s party?
• impede workers’ ability to form trade unions?
• arrest users of a recreational drug whose use is allowed by the people and state government?
• disallow the use or espousal of science by government scientists?
• impede poor people’s opportunities for healthcare and education?
• use the autocrat’s bully pulpit to inhibit a free press?
• Et cetera.

Meanwhile, what is it the progressives have done that is so bad? Ask a cake maker to make a cake??

OP: Ask the Twitterer if he pulled his definition of “Freedom” from Orwell’s 1984. If not, suggest that the word “Democrat” be replaced with the name of the American party that actually does favor oppression.

In a follow-up I clarified that I am NOT particularly a social progressive, and do NOT think a wedding-cake designer should be coerced. My post above used strong exaggerated language to MAKE A POINT. The point is that many partisan extremists seek to deny freedoms FAR MORE IMPORTANT, in my opinion, than the alleged oppression against cake designers.

And how did you respond? Let’s see:

@Euphrosyne

Thank you, Septimus, for your kind invitation to reply to the additional items in the list you created of our government’s “denial of freedoms.”

Your characterization of government encroachments on your fellow Americans’ free speech rights as “horrible injustices inflicted on cake-makers,” a droll comment, would appear to indicate a view of those rights of the American people that have been set forth in our Constitution verbatim et litteratim, as not preeminent.

I have no idea how to even begin to reply.

I wish you a very pleasant day. And God bless us, every one.

You thanked me for giving you the opportunity to opine on a list of freedoms, BUT DECLINED THE OPPORTUNITY to do so. We’re left to GUESS how you feel about

• disallowing transsexuals from using public bathrooms;
• denying government jobs to those who voted for the autocrat’s opponent;
• impeding the voting rights of those unlikely to vote for the autocrat’s party;
• impeding workers’ ability to form trade unions; etc.

You did grasp that my assessment of the oppression against cake-makers was somewhat tongue-in-cheek; ignored that I SUPPORT the cake-makers’ rights, just regard them as of lesser importance to the other freedoms I listed; and then DISMISSED MY QUESTION WITH CONDESCENSION. I’ve frequently said that my quarrel is not with “conservatives”; it’s with the “willfully ignorant.” If you have an informed opinion about why labor unions should be suppressed, fine. But if you COMPLETELY IGNORE the problems I list just to make condescending remarks about cake-maker oppression, what should I conclude?

Well, go ahead and ignore this too, I guess.

I wish you a very pleasant day. And God bless us, every one.

[monstro]

I kinda feel like ya’ll are debating Cleverbot’s twin–Christianbot.

[Euphrosyne]

@monstro

I kinda feel like ya’ll are debating Cleverbot’s twin–Christianbot.

I’m not a “bot.” I have been here the last few days as a diversion during breaks between work from home, and caring for my husband.

It doesn’t seem to be working out all that well.

[Euphrosyne]

@septimus

I don’t know. Let’s see if YOU can do it. In another thread I wrote:
In a follow-up I clarified that I am NOT particularly a social progressive, and do NOT think a wedding-cake designer should be coerced. My post above used strong exaggerated language to MAKE A POINT. The point is that many partisan extremists seek to deny freedoms FAR MORE IMPORTANT, in my opinion, than the alleged oppression against cake designers.

And how did you respond? Let’s see:

You thanked me for giving you the opportunity to opine on a list of freedoms, BUT DECLINED THE OPPORTUNITY to do so. We’re left to GUESS how you feel about

• disallowing transsexuals from using public bathrooms;
• denying government jobs to those who voted for the autocrat’s opponent;
• impeding the voting rights of those unlikely to vote for the autocrat’s party;
• impeding workers’ ability to form trade unions; etc.

You did grasp that my assessment of the oppression against cake-makers was somewhat tongue-in-cheek; ignored that I SUPPORT the cake-makers’ rights, just regard them as of lesser importance to the other freedoms I listed; and then DISMISSED MY QUESTION WITH CONDESCENSION. I’ve frequently said that my quarrel is not with “conservatives”; it’s with the “willfully ignorant.” If you have an informed opinion about why labor unions should be suppressed, fine. But if you COMPLETELY IGNORE the problems I list just to make condescending remarks about cake-maker oppression, what should I conclude?

Well, go ahead and ignore this too, I guess.

I wish you a very pleasant day. And God bless us, every one.

Sorry, Septimus, I should have told you before: as I replied (above) to Monstro, I have been here the last few days as a diversion during breaks between work from home, and caring for my husband.

And each of the items on your list would seem to me to be capable of generating an exchange of essay questions. They would be great and interesting, but won’t work for me. Maybe someday, but not now.

[monstro]

@Euphrosyne

I’m not a “bot.” I have been here the last few days as a diversion during breaks between work from home, and caring for my husband.

It doesn’t seem to be working out all that well.

Maybe because you aren’t talking like a normal person.

[Euphrosyne]

@monstro

Maybe because you aren’t talking like a normal person.

If you don’t like my comments, I suggest you stop reading them.

[running_coach]

@Euphrosyne

If you don’t like my comments, I suggest you stop reading them.

If we don’t read 'em, we won’t know if we don’t like 'em.

[madsircool]

@Darren_Garrison

It isn’t just you. The posts seem to be dripping with condescension.

Examine your contributions to this thread and take the beam out of your eye…

[madsircool]

@monstro

Maybe because you aren’t talking like a normal person.

Maybe English isn’t her first language.

[QuickSilver]

@Euphrosyne

If you don’t like my comments, I suggest you stop reading them.

YOU came here on your own. WE didn’t come to you.

If you don’t like how people are responding, change your attitude or stop posting.

Bye, Felicia.

[madsircool]

@QuickSilver

YOU came here on your own. WE didn’t come to you.

If you don’t like how people are responding, change your attitude or stop posting.

Bye, Felicia.

You are saying that a few belligerent posters can bully another into silence?

[Euphrosyne]

@madsircool

You are saying that a few belligerent posters can bully another into silence?

I think that’s pretty much the idea, madsircall.

And on a thread the one being bullied started, yet.

Takes chutzpah, no?

[raventhief]

@Euphrosyne

Over the last 30 years or so, op-ed articles and television talk shows (“McLaughlin Group;” “To the Contrary;” “McNeill / Lehrer,” etc.) have alluded from time to time to one side or the other of the Progressive / Conservative divide as “demonizing” the other side, particularly around what are called “hot-button” issues - immigration, the economy, entitlement programs, U.S. involvement in foreign affairs, many domestic cultural and social issues.

It’s possible to watch a lampooning of this phenomenon from a 1979 SNL skit.

http://https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c91XUyg9iWM

Obviously, this is way over-the-top, and meant to be funny. However, the “point / counter-point” really does capture the “demonizing” spirit on the part of each side.

From listening to my elders, my impression is that much before the 1960s, it wasn’t usual for people to demonize and criticize each other publicly and across-the-board in this way.

Not that this happens every day everywhere today, either. But it seems to me it’s much more common and typical today.

For example, watch this, . . . (and let the observer take cover, as well! Be especially vigilant about shrapnel, projectiles, and flying glass)

I am a traditional and pro-life Catholic, who assents to everything the Church believes and teaches. And I’ve done volunteer outreach to the homeless and to immigrants.

So you believe that it was unusual for one political side to demonize the other before the 60s?

[Euphrosyne]

@raventhief

So you believe that it was unusual for one political side to demonize the other before the 60s?

Why does it surprise you, raventhief, that you and I may have heard differing accounts of what the political discourse was like in period immediately before the 1960s?

[Spice_Weasel]

General Reminder

Many posts in this thread are skirting close to the ‘‘personal insults’’ rule. Keep it civil and stay on topic.

Personal feelings about Euphrosyne and things she said in other threads belong in the Pit.

Thanks!

[Euphrosyne]

@Spice_Weasel

General Reminder

Many posts in this thread are skirting close to the ‘‘personal insults’’ rule. Keep it civil and stay on topic.

Personal feelings about Euphrosyne and things she said in other threads belong in the Pit.

Thanks!

Thank you so much, Spice Weasel.

[Chefguy]

@Euphrosyne

I’m always happy, Chefguy. Before I read your comment, and afterward, too.

Thanks for asking. I hope you are the same.

Love, Euphrosyne

You invited the comment, but apparently don’t have a response other than a meaningless platitude? Go pat someone else on the head; I’m done with this exercise in banality.

[monstro]

@madsircool

Maybe English isn’t her first language.

Lots of people manage to speak like a normal person without being a native English speaker.

Her spelling and grammar are fine. It’s the tone that’s off-putting.

I don’t have problem with Christians. I don’t even have major problems with Christians who proselytize. I do have a problem with Christians who can’t just have a regular conversation without all the annoying platitudes and sap.

My mother used to talk like this when I’d come to her with problems. So I stopped talking to her. I needed a listening ear, not a Christianbot. Funny, once I told her I wasn’t going to talk to her if she couldn’t try to relate to me differently, her communication style improved greatly. So I refuse to indulge annoying affectations for the sake of being “nice”. Fuck “nice”. If you want me to listen to what you’re saying, talk like a real person.

[Darren_Garrison]

@madsircool

Examine your contributions to this thread and take the beam out of your eye…

Ah, but the tone of my posts is a direct result of seeing that condescension. I don’t have a beam in my eye–I’m poking her with a stick.

[QuickSilver]

@madsircool

You are saying that a few belligerent posters can bully another into silence?

I’m saying, communication is a two way street and the poster you’re white-nighting needs to take responsibility for her passive aggressive driving.

People here aren’t generally stupid and for most this isn’t their first time at the rodeo.