In fairness, though, both conservatives and liberals have taken turns going after it.
In fairness, liberals who have a problem with Huck Finn usually have enough of a visceral reaction to the idea of book-banning that what they try to do is write out the objectionable word. To my mind, that’s just as bad, but it isn’t by definition, “banning,” so people who have tried to change “nigger” to “negro,” or “slave,” in the text that their local high school uses, can say they have never banned a book.
You can extend that to general segregation. I think that most liberals like the idea of minorities more than they like the reality. I consider myself fairly conservative and I have many different, close minority friends from all different groups but I don’t even think of it that way because they are just people I grew up with or developed an association with through life circumstances. Extreme liberals tend to have trophy minority friends that they couldn’t care less about otherwise.
It is blatantly obvious in the Boston area to this day, one of the supposedly most liberal cities in the country yet also one of the most segregated. The discrimination and subdivisions are completely legal because anyone can move into them technically speaking but not practically because the the desirable ones are insanely expensive and not friendly to any minorities other than Jews and very rich Asians.
Brookline is an enclave and politically independent section of the city that was purposely set up to keep the undesirables out and it does it quite well. Most of the People’s Republic of Cambridge is that way as well. It is all one city in a geographic sense but quite divided politically and socio-economically. The ultra-liberal San Francisco Bay area is the same way. Forgive me if I do not believe that most self-professed liberals are any more kind to outside groups than good conservative ones, It isn’t true in my experience. It is just a more covert approach to discrimination.
Let’s see
I don’t see race mentality. Um yeah, tell me more about that
The idea that non-profit is better. I used to work with a liberal non-profit and it was hell. Disorganized and hellish.
Poor people= good people rich people= the devil.
I laugh at this one. I used to work at a low income school and the amount of abuse from some of the families was just shocking. I saw a mother who threw a temper tantrum because we suspended her son and she was screaming on how she was a single mother and how she was on food stamps and how this was persecution of the poor.
Whoo. Before it was dangerous, I used to do mouth to mouth with no barrier on people who were puking, bleeding, seizing, missing parts, dirty, clean, whatever, they werent breathing ; and at the time was a pretty flaming liberal, Shagnasty. Ideology never entered into any lifesaving actions, other than Code Blue guidelines.
I wanted to be a Boy Scout, and at least our troop met in the Eagle Scout cabin (gender meant I was a Girl Scout). Religion was never mentioned that I remember; I did develop a lifelong aversion to pointless meetings. and freeze-dried camp food.
It’s likely I no long qualify as a liberal. That said, to answer the OP’s question, I’d prefer to not label stupid ideas as liberal or conservative. There are too many stupid shit concepts out there in both camps to waste time picking on a perception of a group’s ideologies- better to work on The Facts, ma’am. Spending time sifting through them is worthwhile, IMO.
I wish nuclear power was more easily made safe. It’s so easy and clean- in theory. (note to self- reread Lucifer’s Hammer).
Good book! And agreement. I was a member of the Union of Concerned Scientists for many years, because of their stance against nuclear weapons. But when they switched to being an anti nuclear power group, I let my membership lapse.
I won’t say it is stupid, exactly, but I’m very sad that liberals have become so down on Israel in recent years. Almost any time you find someone saying anything good about Israel, it’s a conservative. I grew up to my first political awareness during the '67 war, and my liberal politics always had a strong pro-Israel component. It makes me very sad to see this having switched so dramatically around.
So let me get this straight. You Googled until you found a case to back up your story and now because of that one incident, you bash the entire organization? Now of course the Boy Scouts are a radical, right wing extremist hate group similar to another but no white sheets?
Are you personally connected to that story? Are you getting the whole truth?
Because of that story your willing to throw out an orginization that for 100 years has been a leader in developing young men and teaching them morals and values along with essential life skills?
I dont get why liberals cannot weigh the good with the bad? Especially since they cannot offer anything better.
Because sometimes the bad outweighs the good. And I would imagine that being told that how that the person you love makes you a bad role model, and a sinner, makes you kind of biased against that organization. But that’s just my observation, YMMV. :dubious:
Seriously, though, I don’t get why conservatives cannot understand WHY anyone who’s homosexual would be offended by discrimination. Especially since this isn’t an isolated incident. WTF? Being told that being gay prevents you from being a “good role model”? What, like you can somehow “catch the gay?” You honestly can’t see how a person would find that a wee bit hostile?
I was in Girl Scouts, which do NOT discriminate, BTW. (Interesting “six degrees” thing: Sue Corbett, wife of the Pennsylvania governor Tom Corbett, was one of my troop leaders)
Yeah, racial issues are interesting. They tend to tiptoe around minorities and wont hold them to the same standards as whites. They sometimes go out of their way to be nice.
On kids they get mad when I point out they send their own kids to majority white schools.
Now not all. I knew this one woman who both lived in and put her daughter in a majority black urban school. That woman truly didnt have a prejudiced bone and her body and lived the walk.
Okay, those are good points.
But I have to ask, knowing that gays are not welcome, why would a gay leader WANT to join?
I mean seriously. I wouldnt expect to walk into a gay group and to be able to join up because I know my views wouldnt be compatible with the group. I wouldnt expect the gay group to change to my views.
So in the case of the Boy Scouts, if you know the group has certain views which you dont agree with, why would you want to be a part of it? To me, you would be totally in your right to not join, to not give them money, to not let your kid join up, and to start a rivel organization like the Spiral Scouts. But why would you want to join and expect them to change?
Those Gay scout leaders mentioned in the case - were they openly gay when they first got involved or did they come out later on?
BTW, while the Girl Scouts do not discriminate, they also dont do the intense campouts, cool activities, and are not perceived as “fun” as the Boy Scouts. In our area you will find more teenage girls in the Venture Scouts programs than in Girl Scouts at that same age. You also see alot of girls involved in Cub and Boy scouts “under the table”.
Because they don’t want being gay to determine what they are and aren’t allowed to do in terms of interacting with society. Not wanting society to be segregated is not actually a hard concept to understand.
For me,there are two acceptable outcomes to the Boy Scouts issue. One is that the BSA fully repents and changes all of its anti-gay policies. The other, which I don’t like as much but like more than having the BSA stay around as a discriminatory institution, is that others turn it into a social pariah. I think a more open society is more important than the continuation of public good will the Boy Scouts of America organization, and I’d rather see its destruction than the continuation of its current hate policies. If a Boy Scouts uniform becomes as socially acceptable as a white hood, so be it.
They don’t? That’s news to me. Of course, maybe it varies from troop to troop.
Where, in my post, did I bash the entire organization? You might have noticed that there were two groups of Scouts mentioned in that story: the church group in Seattle, and the suits in Irvine. I’m not a big fan of the suits in Irvine, who appear to be a bunch of prejudiced assholes. If you read my post carefully, you might have noticed that I’m actually in favor of the church group in Seattle. Who are (or at least, were) Boy Scouts. So, right there, we can see that I’m not bashing the entire organization - I’m “bashing” (note that I did not, in my previous post, call anyone names or insult anyone) the people in the organization who make stupid, prejudiced rules, and force them on troops that have no use for them.
And really, here’s the bottom line: every time someone complains about the Boy Scouts homophobic policies, they’re standing up for a Scout. I’m 38. I don’t plan on having kids. The internal policies of the Boy Scouts have zero impact on my life. But I’ve known a lot of people who used to be Scouts, to know that being an Eagle Scout really says something about a person’s character. And when I hear about an Eagle Scout getting kicked out of an organization that they’ve given years of their lives to, just because some asshole in Texas has a hate on for the gays? That makes me mad. It should make you mad, too. If it doesn’t, I have to think you weren’t much of a Boy Scout.
Or, you know what? Fuck it. Don’t listen to me about the issue. Listen to these guys.
In other words conform to others values or die. What the hell happened to being open minded and free speech?
Whats the next group you’ll go after?
Pretty typical for liberals.
Well, yes. Some values deserve to die. It’s some kind of True Neutral bullshit to pretend all values/points of view have equal merit. They don’t.
Oh, wait…yes, I have “It’s bigoted to hate bigots” in my chart. Bigot Bingo!
What you got?
Sure, conservatives never try and suppress or act against groups they don’t like.:rolleyes:
Out of respect I went to that site. It says they have 229 former Eagle scouts returning their badges.
Now I hope you would check out some of mine.
For example, according tothis site there have been over 2.9 million Eagle scouts over the years and over 56,000 issued in 2013 alone. Those include 28 current members of congress and 4 current governors. My sons troop here in Kansas has more Eagle scouts than 229.
Now I dont know if you know just how a boy earns his Eagle but it is more than just merit badges. They must also show leadership skills in their troop and by do a service project. Those service projects add up to millions of hours every year doing things like helping the poor, conservation projects, and helping in community events.
According to this site those required merit badges include such KKK, and hate group activities such as First aid, Camping, Cooking, Citizenship in the nation, Citizenship in the community, Citizenship in the world, Family Life, Personal Fitness, and Environmental Science.
This study shows that Eagle Scouts as adults are more involved in their communities, give more to charity, have closer relations with family and the community, and have higher planning and preparation skills than other men who were not in Scouting.
So point is, those 229 are not a big factor to me. Not in the numbers (those 229 represent less that .04 % of the 56,000 issued in 2013 alone) or looking at the positive impact the Boy Scouts and the Eagle Scout program which has PROVEN benefits to our society. To you of course it is and your willing to bash and undermine a group that has been around for 100 years because of those 229.
Not to mention the fact that a quick check on ebay shows over 2,000 Eagle scout badges for sale so I would wonder how many of those 229 are fakes.
Yes it comes down to the troop. But you will find one big criticism of the Girl Scouts is they dont do near the level of camping and other cool activities the Boy Scouts do.
For an interesting comparison look the the “store” pages for the Boy Scouts and the Girl Scouts. Notice all the cool camping gear for the boys? Now check out the girls and its mostly clothes.
Also my son is going to H. Roe Bartle camp. I dont know of any Girl Scout camp that has near the activities as it has. Most of which just offer crafts, horseback riding, and some sports. Now some Girl Scout groups do use Bartle and other Boy Scout camps including Philmont.
I’ve never figured out why Girl Scouts do not do the Pinewood Derby - a major feature of the Cub Scouts along with the other cool “derbies” such as Raingutter, Space, and Cubmobile.
I suspect they were scouts before they knew they were gay, and scouts played a huge role in their childhood and shaped them into men and now they want to continue in this organization. Scouts is DESIGNED around this idea: it’s a lifetime thing, moving from one role to the next in a natural sort of progression. There are tons of scouting families out there–three and four generations of Eagle scouts who grew into troop leaders and then, when they sort of aged out of that, worked for the local Council in various roles.
Look, I am a huge fan of Scouts and desperately hope they will continue to pull their heads out of their asses. You yourself seem to agree that they shape and mold the character of young men in fantastic ways. So surely you can see that when those young men become adults, it’s not easy to accept you aren’t allowed to associate with the organization anymore?
The OP wants “stupid ideas,” not Philosophical & Political Beliefs I Disagree With[sup]TM[/sup]. I am thus assuming the OP is referring to beliefs that have proven to be woo/pseudoscience. Like
“Organic food is healthier, is better for the environment, etc.”
"Nuclear power is dangerous.”
“GMO foods are dangerous, will make you sick, are bad for the environment, etc.”
“MSG makes me ill.”
“Gluten makes me ill.”
“Tap water is dangerous to drink.”
“Homeopathic cures work, but they’re suppressed by Big Pharma.”
“Natural childbirth is better than a hospital birth.”
“Vaccines are dangerous.”
Interestingly, many have to do with food.
I think some liberals are attracted to Eastern religions because they seem less judgmental and less oppressive than Christianity. But Hinduism and Buddhism aren’t immune from the same ills that infect Christianity. You really can’t get any more judgmental than the notion of kharma and “bad energy”. And Buddhism in the wrong hands becomes an convenient rationale for being passive and apathetic in the face of oppression.
I think some liberals have a kneejerk reflex to everything that kinda-sorta resembles “cultural appropriation”. Like white people wearing dreadlocks or non-Native Americans hanging dreamcatchers on their walls. I totally agree that ethnicity isn’t a fashion statement. There is a fine line between respectfully paying homage to a culture and creating a caricature of it for your own benefit. But culture doesn’t belong to anyone person, and thus it can’t be stolen by any one person. If a white person wants to sport cornrows or dreadlocks, why shouldn’t they? They aren’t “stealing” anything, not anymore than a black person steals white culture by getting their hair relaxed. And the minority culture benefits when the mainstream culture embraces its parts. Maybe if more white people wore braids, it would be an acceptable hairstyle in corporate America.