Don’t forget:
So, to sum up: America should be a theocracy run by a sort of Christian version of the Taliban, high school girls should dress like nuns (and, presumably, be taught by them), and instead of being treated as humans with actual rights, gays should be stoned to death for “sexual perversion”, just like it says in the Bible.
And eating lobster is right out!!
Because it’s pretty much spelled out right there in the first line of the First Amendment. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion…”
Translation…“I hate fags”.
Because he looked like a fag.
Like making Black people drink out of separate water fountains or beating your wife when she mouths off.
Or, more accurately, celebrated in the name of “trying to get laid”.
No you’re right. America was a much better place when women dressed like Stepford wives and were economically and socially bound to their husbands. We should all pray to the Big Man in the Sky and hope he makes all the problems we caused go away.
Not quite, on the parenthesis: them nuns tend to be Catholic, at least in the US. Everybody knows that Catholics all get the runs if the Pope eats a bad pie; this is a Christian country and we don’t want no Catholics here.
I’ve reported this post for personal insults. It is EXTREMELY offensive that you would put hate-filled words in my mouth.
I’m not the author of that post, but I just want to say that I think you need to look back and reflect on what you wrote and why it prompted the responses you got. ISTM that there are whole classes of people who would be very offended by it, and it’s more than a little ironic that you’re the one who claims to be insulted. Don’t you think that members of the LGBT community would find it “extremely offensive” to be called sexual perverts? Because that’s what you called them.
This is a group that has historically suffered social and legal discrimination and has been deprived of basic civil rights. What else might you have been referring to when you condemned “many people who celebrate and promote sexual perversion in the name of ‘equality’.”? I don’t know anyone who promotes “sexual perversion”, in the name of equality or anything else. I do know lots of people who want to see decent blameless human beings treated with the same dignity and accorded the same civil rights as everyone else.
And then you go on to suggest that a kid with long hair was quite properly thrown out of school, and that his parents should be demonized, before you go on to celebrate the wonderful 50s. This part is interesting because you acknowledge the racism, but then go on to celebrate the fact that there were “standards of decorum, and standards of at least outward morality”. IOW, you think it’s a worthwhile tradeoff that life was wonderful for just one specific demographic, even though it was an ongoing hell for everyone else. Life was just fine as long as you were a heterosexual white male, even though misogyny and racism and homophobia were so rampant that pretty much everyone else suffered brutal discrimination, whether black, hispanic, gay, or just different in any way. And by reference to “at least outward morality” you seem to tacitly approve of the fact that those white men who were the powers of society and imposing this oppression on everyone else were churchgoing hypocrites.
If you meant something different than this straightforward reading of what you wrote, perhaps you’d care to explain it. Meanwhile I note that you made this contribution in a thread about Trump and presumably those points are in support of him – a man with a history of racism and repeatedly refusing to rent to blacks in his housing developments, and now with transparent support for white supremacists and hateful policies against Mexicans, Muslims, and virtually all minorities. At the moment Haitian refugees who have been in the US for years are terrified about their future because of these policies, for example.
This post goes well over the line by attributing slurs to another poster. You’re receiving a warning for personal insults. Please don’t do this again.
This slogan is essentially a Rorschach blot for idiots. It’s a bumper sticker slogan for people who feel uncomfortable thinking for more than 10 seconds at a time. Its designed to lure in all the people that can’t stop thinking about that one night stand they had 30 years ago, but can’t seem to remember that was when they picked up a lifetime of herpes. Just break it down:
“Make”: There is some action that can be done to accomplish our goal. Implies we haven’t been doing it yet, or that we were doing it and we stopped.
“America”: Wild card. Does this mean American military, culture, economy, society or something else? Unclear, so choose your own adventure here.
“Great”: So subjective as to be meaningless. Greater than all 195+ other countries? Better than some metric has ever been in American history? Just an improvement on current conditions?
“Again”: The only word whose meaning can be nailed down. At some point in the past we achieved whatever goal we should now be working towards (again). But still plenty vague so that you choose any time you would like.
Mostly it seems like you can break “America” into 3 broad categories.
Military Power: The US is unquestionably the largest spender, has the broadest force projection, more than adequate nuclear deterrence and still maintains an overwhelming technological edge on all other nations. Where we have become weaker is that we are great at winning battles while still losing or at best stalemating the war. Overwhelming force leads to persistent asymmetric/guerrilla warfare, and our reliance on technology has the potential to be an Achilles heel for hackers and foreign powers to exploit.
Economic Power: Still the wealthiest nation by GDP, so not much room for improved greatness there. As others have said, most of the economic problems people are feeling have to do with functional capitalism maximizing profits without regard for people. ‘Fixing’ the economic conditions of the little people would require a huge injection of government controls and regulations and have a risk of either not working or actively backfiring. But if you remember that corporations are people too (my friend) then maybe we can all feel okay about things. After all, record highs on the Dow must mean something is great, right?
Society/Culture: The most subjective section of all 3 and no surprise, where there is the least consensus. Most Trumpettes have ideas similar to Flyer; America was greater when women stayed in the kitchen, blacks kept to the back of the bus, gays remained hidden because they rightfully feared for their lives and when somebody smacked some goddamn sense into that long haired boy.
I suppose that if your moral code allows the ends to justify the means then you might be happy having the government telling you who you can love & marry, what lunch counter to use, what you can do with your body and what you can believe, as long as the government says the default/correct option is white, straight, male and christian. But don’t act all surprised when people who don’t fit that mold don’t consider your changes all that ‘great’.
Excellent analysis, Backcountry Medic.
So “fags” is where you draw the line but “sexual perverts” is A-OK and not “hate-filled” at all. Got it.
Agree your whole analysis was spot-on. But special applause for this pithy intro. Beautiful.
Since this is a current events-related assertion, could I trouble you for a cite?
It’s my understanding that in the absence of the Bill of Rights (which can arguably be credited, by dint of the First Amendment, to have created “Separation of Church and State”), the Constitution’s adoption and ratification was in doubt.
Any howls of protest, at the time of Franklin’s proposal would have been a bit anachronistic.
Agreed. The only improvement I can think of would be to put it at the end of the post, behind the rubric: “TLDR version.”
I would be curious to hear Flyer’s response as well.
Me too, but I’m not holding my breath.
So what was up with this guy?
The words are just a succint sumnary of the hate-filled thoughts you seem to be spewing.
Cite that the word “sinful” has any real-world meaning in a pluralistic society.
Cite that your scripture is authoritative in addressing the issue of how Americans present themselves. Or relevant.
