I have considered that. And I’ve considered the possibility that Scylla really was nine years old in eighth grade.
I’ve also considered the possibility that Scylla just makes this shit up.
Because the BSA is a non-profit that the Usual Suspects have disagreements with, but is not allowed to solicit funds. Which is what the whole freaking thread is about in the first place (apart from Otto saying he wants little boys to get fucked).
If you don’t read the post, don’t comment on the post.
Regards,
Shodan
Way to build a straw and bullshit man. It’s obvious yours is a weak argument since you didn’t bother to copy the whole post that states why using other non-profits is irrelevent. Your alliteracy and sorting of facts that you think are applicable is tiresome.
What? Where did he say that?
I disagree. Otto seems to feel he can say “Fuck you” with impunity to seven-year-olds across the country, and refuses to modify his statement when called on it. I’d say that’s bullying behavior.
Ah. Gotcha.
Scylla,
Sure, I suppose it’s not a streach to claim that any victim of a crime is “persecuted”, but there is a difference, at least in my mind. I was not robbed solely because I was white, I am sure it factored into it if there was a choice, “Let’s rob that white guy over there rather than the black guy over here”, but these assholes weren’t out looking just for white guys to rob, they robbed plenty of black folks too. They may have talked about my “fucking honkie ass in their neighborhood”, but what they were is thieves. A week after they robbed me they shot and killed a black man while robbing him. When they were caught, they were charged with something like 60 counts of robbery and are currently in the pokey.
The thing is, when I called the police, they showed up with a bunch of men. They took statements and investigated the crime. A few weeks later they finally caught the bastards. They were prosecuted, convicted and jailed. Compair that with some of the stories in the thread I linked earlier about gay people beaten so badly that it requires hospitalization and the police reacting with a shrug, or talk to any black friends or aquaintences that you may have about their experiences being stopped for “driving while black” or being followed by security guards in the mall or the way some white ladies clutch their purses tighter to their sides when they see them. I don’t believe that if you do that honestly you will be able to claim that the “persecution” of being robbed at gunpoint ( I didn’t want to give my wallet over, I was scared juiceless, so sure, I’ll label it persecution for the purpose of this arguement ) isn’t any thing even remotely similar to what we are discussing.
I like you, Sauron. Normally you’re sensible and smart. But you’re being an obtuse ass here, I suspect intentionally. Otto made a hyperbolic comment in a thread on the Straight Dope. He didn’t, and probably wouldn’t, tell your son “Fuck You” in person. Stop acting as if he did.
I gotta agree with the eminently imitable Emmett, “Fuck 'em all.”
So any argument that doesn’t copy the whole post is a strawman?
Fine - I copied your whole post above. Thus, you have been refuted. QED.
Regards,
Shodan
Alliteracy much, Shodan? When come back, bring Hooked on Phonics.
Homebrew: I see. So, when I specifically told Otto that a phrase he used offended me personally, and that I took it personally, due to its inclusion of my stepson, I am supposed to shrug that off?
Bullshit all over that. In polite society, if you offend someone, especially with an intentionally hyperbolic remark, you apologize. You don’t tell the offended party he’s an “obtuse ass.” And you sure as hell don’t continue to use the same epithet, as you’ve just done.
For someone who would ask for tolerance and acceptance, Otto is being damned intolerant and unaccepting. Particularly when you stop to consider I’m on his damn side in the main issue of this discussion.
Explain again to me, as Joe Average middle-class white male, why I should support any cause you or Otto espouse. I sure as hell am not getting anything out of my support at the moment except abuse.
It is one thing to disagree with the concept of having laws against group persecution. It’s quite another to attack a ridiculous straw man, and ignore entirely the thinking that undergirds them. Hint: it’s the same thinking that makes acts of terrorism more severe than simply committing lots of murders at once. That thinking may be unsound, but it is that with which one has to contend, not some simple “you are punishing thoughts” trope.
Since withholding taxes is not what one would call a legal activity, I will not offer suggestions on how to engage in tax resistance.
Would you please stop acting like I walked up to individual children and said “fuck you” to them? Would it make it easier to comprehend that saying “fuck 'em” was strictly in regard to the sweetheart deals the scouts want from governments despite actively demanding they be regarded as a private religious organization? Would it have made it any easier to understand that context had I said “the heck with 'em” instead? Or are you going to go on continuing to pretend that my saying “fuck 'em” was any more of an “attack” directed personally at Sauron’s kid than someone else’s starting a thread called “Fuck you USA” is a personal attack on that child because he is (I assume) an American citizen? Seems like the same righteous indignation should be emanting from him regarding that “attack” yet he seems singularly uninterested in defending the child’s honor in that thread.
I can agree with this. The obtuse part comes in when you continue to assert and act like he said “Fuck you” directly to your son, as you did in the last post I quoted.
Because right is right.
Because they have different standards for admission and employment than the state law allows. While I think that discrimination should be allowed for private groups and businesses (in fact, it seems nonsensical that the Boy Scouts can discriminate, but Walmart cannot), I don’t think they should recieve public support. Why should anyone’s tax dollars be used to support otherwise private groups they are barred, for no reason, from being a part of?
You may not agree with that logic, but it simply cannot be simplified down into groups of pissy hysterics.
Ahem. It is also my cause, and you’ll note that I have been on your side in this.
Rights are recognized on the merits of the cause, not on the sunny personalities of the aggrieved. I daresay that there were some black civil rights activists who were irritating and used over-the-top rhetoric–did their lack of polish mean that they deserved to be treated like inferiors?
However much I or Otto, Homebrew, or any other gay person might annoy you, remember please that your argument is properly with that person, NOT with the group of which that person is a member.
And for the sake of peace, I wish that Otto would just say that he was employing hyperbole and that he meant no personal animus to Sauron’s stepson.
Because being in favor of social justice is the right thing whether you think other people who are in favor of social justice are assholes or not.
Scylla, bubeleh, you gotta have a blog. There simply is no other practical solution! This habit of releasing your autobiography (working title:The Greatest Story Ever Told Recently) in fits and starts simply won’t do! Can you not lend a sympathetic ear to your long-suffering Public, who constantly clamor…nay, beseech and implore…to reveal more of the wondrous depth and complexity contained in that simple, modest noun: Scylla
No, no, such torment is unthinkable, unconscionable! You simply must establish a website and devote the entirety of your free time to your ongoing saga and personal Oddysey. (May I suggest iambic pentameter…?)
Certainly show that silly little bitch Proust a thing or two!
Would you please get it through your thick skull that in my mind, that’s exactly what you did to my stepson?
You’re hiding behind that “I was talking about the sweetheart deals they want to get” BS. Here’s the actual quote: “Fuck 'em. Fuck 'em all from the highest of the highest leader to the littlest Tiger Cub.” Explain to me how that quote a) doesn’t include my stepson, and b) has anything at all to do with the “sweetheart deals.”
I pointed out my stepson was a Tiger Cub, and wanted you to amend the statement. You refused.
Would it have affected your ire at all to keep it levelled at the BSA administration, where it belongs? Or do you feel better including seven-year-olds (who, to my knowledge, do not make policy regarding the BSA’s discriminatory stance) in your idiotic ravings?
Well, here’s the deal: If somebody says “Fuck the USA,” I can safely let that pass without worrying that they’re referring to anyone I know and love too directly. However, if somebody said, for example, “Fuck the USA, and especially those in Alabama,” I’d probably step up to the plate and say something.
Is it this important to you, to hang on to your invective and alienate a supporter?
Homebrew: So if someone says something hateful and hurtful to you about all gay men, you just shrug that off? Or do you say “That remark offended me, amend it”?
You better believe it’s right to support the cause you’re espousing. At the moment, though, I’m not liking the company I’m keeping with my support.
gobear: It is because of people like you that I am as supportive of gay rights as I am. Had I known some of these other folks first, I would be much less inclined to listen to the very valid points they make.
I didn’t do anything to your stepson. I didn’t even know your stepson existed before you mentioned him.
No, here is the actual quote, in full and in context:
(emphasis added)
See how “Fuck 'em” is immediately preceded by “being included on charitable giving forms, sweetheart lease agreements, exlusive land use privileges and so on”? See how immediately following “Tiger Cub” is “Either open your doors or don’t expect handouts”? See how the quote you object to is completely and thoroughly embedded in a discussion of the sweetheart deals, and is therefore to be understood in the context of those sweetheart deals?
Oh it most certainly, now that I know he exists and all, includes your stepson. He in the context of being a Tiger Cub should be barred from benefitting from the public trough because Tiger Cubs is part of an organization which holds itself out as a private religious organization on the one hand then bellies up to the pig barn when there’s public money to be had. I don’t want to have intercourse with your stepson nor do I want to physically attack him. I do want him not to be the beneficiary of public money in the context of his Tiger Cub membership.
Is that crystal clear?
How bizarre. You’ll defend against a (wrongly) perceived attack on an Alabaman because you love people who live in Alabama, but not to a perceived attack on Americans despite loving people who live in America?