This thread was far more interesting before it became a referendum on Godwin’s Law.
Thanks, Trion.
Anyway, to return to the original topic.
Pat Robertson. Cancer. Good.
Uh, that’s not even close to the original topic.
Closer than remedial vocabulary and FAQ 101
Nope, no repression here. “Sorry” I don’t flame to your liking.
I meant screenname. Sorry, I thought you were grounded with casual lingo; you sure seem to draw this Godwin’s law like a gun. And I still suggest what I said earlier, under the same conditions.
The rest I won’t bother hijacking further about, as I find it rather complimentary.
For a look at what this thread was originally actually about, please refer not to Mykeru’s post but the actual OP. I think the only person who’s advocating that cancer in Pat Robertson is a good thing is you, Mykeru. And one is an awfully lonely number indeed…
Hi.
Just popping back in briefly to let people know that the good Reverend now has how own Pith Thread:
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=163185
Perhaps this will help get the thread back to it’s original topic.
If we’ve made our way past the second idiotic hijack, I think I’ve done my part to damage-control the first.
Reverend Mykeru, you are such a fucking tool.
Although I see that mhendo has given the degeneration of this thread his blessing, I thought the OP was interesting, and since we already had one thread about what an asshole Pat Robertson is, it doesn’t seem like we need another. Especially since nobody’s debating that point but the knucklehead Reverend. Reverend Mykeru, you are of that most dangerous breed of complete idiot: you know just enough about how to argue coherently to be dangerous.
mhendo, I agree with you. I’ve seen oversensitivity ruin many a good debate. Seems like there should be able to be a discussion about a sensitive topic without someone with a tangential, or even direct, connection to the topic getting their feelings hurt. I guess it doesn’t always work out that way.
Beat me to my own punch Trion. I’m hoping it will.
It’s not even such a bad thing if somebody does have a deep personal experience to contribute but is willing to wait a bit. I’m thinking of a thread on another board. It was something to do with non-standard sexual practices, and looked to be a juicy one, with lots of personal stories and good natured ribbing. Transgendered people were mentioned in the OP. The second post was about a page of summaries of cases where transgendered folk had been brutally murdered, brought to us by our only know female-to-male TG member.
Kinda killed the thread. Nobody wanted to call him on it, not only because he’s a respected poster but because there’s not much to argue about, those things happened and they were terrible. Had the post come well into the discussion, it could have been worked into the flow and a lot of other stuff could have been talked about.
Thanks for pulling things back on track, WL.
It wasn’t so much that i had given the degeneration my blessing, as the fact that it had all the appearances of a runaway train that i couldn’t stop if i wanted to.
Also, i’ve never really been of the belief that the person who starts a thread somehow “owns” it and has the right to determine the course of all subsequent discussion.
As an aside, i think the Reverend might have set some sort of record for fastest ever Pit thread devoted to a new member (although some, with allegations of “sock puppet”, have questioned whether he is a new member at all).
In this whole thread not one word of sympathy has been expressed for the poor little cancer cells who, in a world of potential hosts to choose from, had to live their short active lives in Pat Robertson’s asshole. Yet where for them are the tears that shed for the Fundie? They could have been destroying the liver of a beautiful tropic bird over sundrenched Belize, savaging the lungs of a gracefully faded star of yesteryear in sumptious Palm Springs, or getting back to nature by dissolving the esophagos of an Apache shaman in Arizona, but nope- Fundie ass is it’s one reality. Poor little cancer cells.
(FTR: cancer bad, had it in my own near and dear beloved, no sympathy for Pat and I dislike his son Gordon even more than I do him.)
mhendo, you seem to have an interesting perspective, and an ability to make appropriate distinctions even in controversial situations.
I would ask you if I could have your baby, but I already have your baby. Give me 100,000$… or else!
You’re very kind, Apos.
Unfortunately you picked the wrong mark - we grad students don’t see $100,000 over the whole six years or so of our Ph.D., so i’m afraid i can’t succumb to your threats.
Also, i’ve never wanted children anyway, so you’re welcome to keep it. 
So, does anybody else want to ignore everything between here and the OP (except for Apos’ post above, which I quite enjoy) and actually discuss the subject?
Happy to.
Although i’ll need to wait for others to join in, because i made my feelings known in the OP, and don’t have to much to add until someone presents a contrasting viewpoint that i can analyze and argue with.
If the thread can be resuscitated, i’ll be part of the discussion.
Actually, in response to 2trew’s earlier post:
I didn’t see that thread on transgender issues, but IMO it would not have been unreasonable to express sorrow and sympathy for the person you mention, and then get back to the issue at hand.
While we’re all human here and we can empathize or sympathize with what others are going through, i don’t think people should ever expect to close down debate on a subject just because of a personal experience they might have had. Sure, the experience might add to the debate, but it shouldn’t stop it.
To be fair, i think that, in general, the person who brings their own experience to the debate does not intend to bring things to a halt - the “fault,” if that is the right word, often lies with others who feel uncomfortable going on. This seemed to be the case in the example you gave. Well, i think we need to put aside our squeamishness in such cases, express the appropriate sympathy, and carry on.
Just my 2c.
mhendo, you probably didn’t see it 'cuz it’s on another board. Heh, it’s fun being a newbie again. Sorry if I didn’t make that clear.
I agree with you in principle regarding putting aside squeamishness, and I can see how it could be done. With a couple of appropriate posts that probably could have been returned to the bubbly bouncy fun it was meant to be with nobody feeling bad about it. It could also, with the wrong followup, have degenerated into a vast internecine flame war, but hey, that can happen if you post an opinion that the sky is blue.
There is another area of personal experience, though, that I’ve found rather chilling, and that’s probably best described as theory versus practice, or “I was there”.
My Dad knows a guy. They work at the same company. He was an American special forces soldier in Vietnam, until his second chest wound convinced him that there was a better way to make a living and his subsequent experiences in Louisiana convinced him that Canada would be a good place to live. Nice enough guy, straightforward and mellow, but so sure of himself that he could make any cop who pulled him over doubt what the radar gun had said.
He’s fought in a war, been shot, gone back, been shot again, been stabbed a few times during and after the war, and had a man’s head come off in his hand.
I realize, intellectually, that this doesn’t give him any special insight into the war as seen through the lense of a couple of decades of historical analysis, but I’d be hard pressed to quote historical analysis of strategic decisions to contradict the opinion of a guy who was an NCO whose job it was to make sure those orders were carried out.
There is an understanding that is available to the people who were at the point where the policy is meant to be applied and an understanding that is available to the people who make the policy, and having been a drone and a policy designer I know that the twain simply do not meet.
It seems to me that the role of personal experience can be debated along with other points among intelligent people of good will who come to reason, with the result being a general consensus with reservations or an agreement to disagree, but it’s more likely than not to set up lines of dispute which will harden and themselves become the point of argument, if it is used as an argument in itself or as a fulcrum to add force to an argument.
It should be a spice, not an ingredient. In a lot of cases, the spice is habanero and tends to become the only thing you can taste, no matter what else is in there.
I see I’m resorting to cooking metaphors. That means my post is too long.