Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 23 24 [25] 26 27 ... 759

Author Topic: Calm and Cool Progressive Discussion Thread  (Read 1291133 times)

Reelya

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: PoH's Calm and Cool Progressive Expression Thread
« Reply #360 on: March 11, 2012, 01:16:34 am »

First off, no. That is a statement of what he has heard, not as statement of fact.

Secondly the very next sentence was saying he does not believe what he heard.

He used the whole thing as a point contradicting what I said, and since he say's it's true then not true, i want to know specifically how that contradicts what i said.

Or is it just a babbling non-sequiter then?

Criptfeind

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: PoH's Calm and Cool Progressive Expression Thread
« Reply #361 on: March 11, 2012, 01:20:46 am »

Or is it just a babbling non-sequiter then?

Seems likely.

That or a confession to ignorance in a plead to learn? Which is most likely chasing a pipe dream.
Logged

Capntastic

  • Bay Watcher
  • Greetings, mortals!
    • View Profile
    • A review and literature weblog I never update
Re: PoH's Calm and Cool Progressive Expression Thread
« Reply #362 on: March 11, 2012, 01:22:56 am »

I suggest we avoid a dogpile while GGamer gathers his thoughts.  I mean, he's admitted already he doesn't really know what he's talking about-- we should have the aim of guiding him to a better understanding. 

Either go through his points and bring him up to speed or stop tag-teaming him over how wrong he is.  Keep the thread helpful and fun!
Logged

Criptfeind

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: PoH's Calm and Cool Progressive Expression Thread
« Reply #363 on: March 11, 2012, 01:25:57 am »

What do you want?

"Hey GG! You made no sense there! What the heck did you mean?"
Logged

Truean

  • Bay Watcher
  • Ok.... [sigh] It froze over....
    • View Profile
Re: PoH's Calm and Cool Progressive Expression Thread
« Reply #364 on: March 11, 2012, 03:57:09 am »

Making policy for others, based on what you personally believe makes them deal with your beliefs. Problem: if they don't share your beliefs, you've forced your belief's restrictions on them. Also if there are secondary consequences of such policy, you've also forced that on them too. This is even moreso when the other people involved have effectively no choice and will pay the immediate and long term costs where the decision maker will not.

Health insurance polices aren't often bought individually. Numerous people pay for them as a group and one person makes the decision. Employees (as part of compensation) or students (as part of tuition) pay for health insurance policies, but do not make the decisions about them. That decision maker doesn't have to pay any of the personal costs concerning the policy: financial or otherwise, but makes the decisions (with none of their own skin in the game).

This is about those decision makers, making decisions the people effected by them don't like. They make those decisions based upon reasons, religious ones sometimes, that the people effected by those decisions, don't share.

Just because the person who administers my insurance plan doesn't like contraceptives, doesn't mean I should be denied them. I have no problem with them. The only reason that administrator has a problem with them is due to his or her religion, which I don't share. By making a decision which effects me based upon their religion, they're forcing a part of that religion upon me.

Forgetting entirely the very valid non-sexual medical reasons birth control is prescribed, People banning contraceptives don't want to and won't pay for the unwanted or unable to be cared for children that will result from sex without contraceptives. Abstaining doesn't work.... People are simply going to have sex, no matter what. If history has proven anything, then it's that.

As for what Ms. Fluke did, she testified in Congress about why she thought it would be a good idea to have a law saying people can't be denied birth control pills in their health insurance coverage. This was largely due Congress recently having a laughably all male panel testify about womens' issues..... It's simple, she spoke her mind in front of Congress and Mr. Limbaugh assassinated her character and slandered her for his radio ratings.
Logged
The kinda human wreckage that you love

Current Spare Time Fiction Project: (C) 2010 http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=63660.0
Disclaimer: I never take cases online for ethical reasons. If you require an attorney; you need to find one licensed to practice in your jurisdiction. Never take anything online as legal advice, because each case is different and one size does not fit all. Wants nothing at all to do with law.

Please don't quote me.

Reelya

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: PoH's Calm and Cool Progressive Expression Thread
« Reply #365 on: March 11, 2012, 04:23:36 am »

Truean, great summation there. There's also sexism evident in how Rush mocks her for her youth ("college coed"), then later the conservative bloggers mock her for her age ("omg she's 30!"). Thus proving females can't win against sexist reporting, you're either too young or too old to be credible (youthful "bimbo" or "old hag", no in-between).

We can call this a "goldilocks" phenomena :D

except there's no "just right" age, since Sandra Fluke shows that you can be BOTH too young and too old at the same time :D

Ever heard a male attacked over their age? It's rare. Unless you're under 18 or over 70. I've certainly never seen a male attacked for BOTH being too old and too young at the same time.
« Last Edit: March 11, 2012, 04:27:11 am by Reelya »
Logged

Frumple

  • Bay Watcher
  • The Prettiest Kyuuki
    • View Profile
Re: PoH's Calm and Cool Progressive Expression Thread
« Reply #366 on: March 11, 2012, 07:43:47 am »

Hey, I can contribute... sorta'. I actually asked about the contraception thing a bit back in the American Election Megathread, and got a response by RedKing, one of our more politically aware forumgoers. Here* and here**. It's genuinely somewhat depressing, because of how the media has been portraying things and how the message is being disseminated to those who are strongly for religious expression. There's basically, in a quite literal sense, no actual issue of religious expression whatsoever; no religious persecution, nothing stopping religiously funded organizations from simply purchasing health insurance that doesn't cover contraceptives, etc., so forth. The whole reason it's got as loud as it has is because someone politically motivated decided to spin up a wedge issue where none exists :-\

There's a progressive issue to be had with the subject, but one involving politics and media, not so much religion.

Spoiler: * (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: ** (click to show/hide)
Logged
Ask not!
What your country can hump for you.
Ask!
What you can hump for your country.

justinlee999

  • Bay Watcher
  • Unflappably FABULOUS
    • View Profile
Re: PoH's Calm and Cool Progressive Expression Thread
« Reply #367 on: March 11, 2012, 09:22:36 am »

Basically it's like people turning "banning of public school prayers" to "you can't pray in schools" and screaming how their rights are violated?
Logged

Truean

  • Bay Watcher
  • Ok.... [sigh] It froze over....
    • View Profile
Re: PoH's Calm and Cool Progressive Expression Thread
« Reply #368 on: March 11, 2012, 01:42:52 pm »

Basically it's like people turning "banning of public school prayers" to "you can't pray in schools" and screaming how their rights are violated?

Only in the sense that it's totally blown out of proportion like that yeah.

It's basically a "The religious people in charge want to tell everyone what to do but don't you dare tell them what to do," issue.

It's all a bullshit right wing spin campaign to drum up election year opposition to Obama. Look at the wording. "Contraceptives," can mean a lot of different things that traditionally you pay for yourself. "Birth control," means those little pills to everyone. See how the second one is a narrower category (which happens to be more accurate)? Fewer people are opposed to "birth control" (pills is implied) than "contraceptives" in the US and the people who tried to run this spin campaign knew this.

Rush Limbaugh was part of this spin campaign but he grossly miscalculated. He really fucked up when he called her a "slut" and "prostitute" and tried to make the undertone that all "womens' rights activists" were also sluts and prostitutes.
Because his logic went that if she wanted the government to pay for a part of her having sex, then that made her a prostitute and he called for her to post a sex tape online "if we were paying for it; we should get something."

This is all part of a wider right wing spin campaign in support of the "War on Women." Bans or restrictions on abortion, forced ultrasounds, lack of funding and support for domestic violence prevention and remedy programs, saying being a single mom is a form of child abuse (they say dads prevent it and they don't say shit about single fatherhood being abuse), and also it seems they don't even like any form of contraceptive now.... It's a puppet show designed to distract you from long, pointless wars where we sink in $Trillions of dollars to accomplish very little while screaming there's no money for anything, eroding civil rights, a dismal economy, rich people and corporations paying lesser tax percentages than you, our crumbling infrastructure, the cost of college and lack of opportunity to rise in society through hard work, and every other thing they don't want you to focus on.

They know it's an election year, and they don't want you focused on that stuff. Instead, focus on some stupid little thing that gets people's attention, and let's have it be about sex, kinda, cause that'll keep their focus. Can you see the fucking strings?

And, once they started to realize just how incredibly badly Rush Limbaugh had fucked up and that it was going to cost them money, they immediately started blaming everyone but him. It couldn't possibly be that he's a right wing hate machine who randomly took a vocal blow torch to some innocent woman just for expressing her opinion. Rather, Ms. Fluke is a "liberal plant" (her fault), and this was all a trap set up and faked by "the left" (their fault). The advertisers that pulled out, "they're saying they don't want your [his listeners'] business." (their fault). "The drive by media" is also blowing this way out of proportion. (their fault). Because apparently Mr. Limbaugh can do no wrong and certainly not something completely despicable, like this.... Nobody believes his apologies, because they are forced and he also says things that void them right after he gives them.

Now that I see all the spin Limbaugh's been doing, I'm just dizzy. It fits right into his usual crap about how "liberals hate America" because we don't like his version of it. Naturally, he sees his version as the only legitimate one. Anything else is "Un-America." His way is the only right way and he can do no wrong, says he and his supporters. This was all a vast conspiracy to get Limbaugh, set him up and knock him down a peg? Or did he finally get shown for what he is?
« Last Edit: March 11, 2012, 02:13:55 pm by Truean »
Logged
The kinda human wreckage that you love

Current Spare Time Fiction Project: (C) 2010 http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=63660.0
Disclaimer: I never take cases online for ethical reasons. If you require an attorney; you need to find one licensed to practice in your jurisdiction. Never take anything online as legal advice, because each case is different and one size does not fit all. Wants nothing at all to do with law.

Please don't quote me.

Frumple

  • Bay Watcher
  • The Prettiest Kyuuki
    • View Profile
Re: PoH's Calm and Cool Progressive Expression Thread
« Reply #369 on: March 11, 2012, 02:29:11 pm »

It's not even so much that things are being blown out of proportion (though it is) as the issue's being/been invented wholecloth. There isn't even something happening like mandated prayer in public schools being deemed impermissible. There's just... nothing there. No government mandate that religious institutions must fund insurance covering contraception, no new (emphasis on new, of course) push for government funded birth control, just... nothing.

The entire dialectic on the subject is just strange, at least from what I've been seeing. The conservative media is making this great hullabaloo over something that doesn't exist and the left is just... looking at them funny, I guess. Trying to defend themselves against allegations of behavior that doesn't exist. I don't pay terrible much attention to the news, honestly.

Even though it's a mostly unrelated subject, I'm being reminded of the Amendment Two propaganda that was being spread around in Florida, coached as a protection of marriage (read: Anti-homosexual marriage) law. The media coverage for the subject was just... completely divorced from the reality of the matter. Before A2, there were already two statues in the Florida lawbook deeming homosexual marriage illegal, one of which that explicitly stated that marriage was to be heterosexual. The only thing that A2 added was stripping some rights from unmarried couples. But the media machine didn't portray it as that, and people wondering what the blazes the point of A2 was were attacked as being pro-homosexual marriage (And hell, I knew people that weren't for homosexual marriage and still opposed A2. It took more from heterosexual couples than homosexual couples :-\).

With the contraceptive thing, it's being propagandized as anti-religious freedom, but... it's not. The accusation of curtailing religious expression is being made against imaginary acts. Y'can probably safely take away from that that the whole reason it's become an issue isn't the issue itself; someone's either trying to slip something in alongside a popularly supported subject, or it's just being used to polarize or energize a voting base. Same as with A2, really. Get 'em in the polling booth for one issue, expect 'em they vote partisan even if they don't really care about the rest of what's on the ballot, I guess...

I'unno. Guess just saying this highly polarized media feels stranger and stranger day in and day out. It's not a strictly conservative or strictly liberal issues, it's just entertainment media in general, I suppose. Big media's a g'damn mess these days.
Logged
Ask not!
What your country can hump for you.
Ask!
What you can hump for your country.

Truean

  • Bay Watcher
  • Ok.... [sigh] It froze over....
    • View Profile
Re: PoH's Calm and Cool Progressive Expression Thread
« Reply #370 on: March 11, 2012, 02:38:42 pm »

Big media's a g'damn mess these days.

Yes. Used to be, when Walter Cronkite said something, it was true and pretty much unbiased. You could take that shit to the bank. He has long since left the building.

Now everything is "entertainment," including the news. <-----WTF?

What the hell happened to just reporting factually? Journalistic Integrity? People used to be glued to the news and watch it religiously every night, so it didn't used to be a ratings issue. Now? How the hell do you even describe the situation?

Now, the news is always biased one way or the other and the networks cater to this bias rather than have any attempt to avoid it. We need the damn news back....

They sold the media and the media sold out....
Logged
The kinda human wreckage that you love

Current Spare Time Fiction Project: (C) 2010 http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=63660.0
Disclaimer: I never take cases online for ethical reasons. If you require an attorney; you need to find one licensed to practice in your jurisdiction. Never take anything online as legal advice, because each case is different and one size does not fit all. Wants nothing at all to do with law.

Please don't quote me.

MonkeyHead

  • Bay Watcher
  • Yma o hyd...
    • View Profile
Re: PoH's Calm and Cool Progressive Expression Thread
« Reply #371 on: March 11, 2012, 03:17:25 pm »

You need the BBC and its news section. A highly pleasing beacon of credability and integrity in an industry full of backstabbing, deviousness and corruption. You can be sure if they say its a spade, then its a spade. They legally HAVE to be politically neutral, which makes for some good reading/viewing. Thier current run on the Conservatives NHS reform is quite enlightening, and highlights the spin bullshit Cameron is spouting over it.

alway

  • Bay Watcher
  • 🏳️‍⚧️
    • View Profile
Re: PoH's Calm and Cool Progressive Expression Thread
« Reply #372 on: March 11, 2012, 03:30:32 pm »

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/us-soldier-detained-after-opening-fire-on-afghans/2012/03/11/gIQAFFlW4R_story_1.html
Quote
A U.S. service member walked out of his base in southern Afghanistan before dawn Sunday and started shooting Afghan civilians, Afghan and NATO officials said. There were widely varying reports of casualties.
Logged

kaijyuu

  • Bay Watcher
  • Hrm...
    • View Profile
Re: PoH's Calm and Cool Progressive Expression Thread
« Reply #373 on: March 11, 2012, 04:01:50 pm »

what in the hell
Logged
Quote from: Chesterton
For, in order that men should resist injustice, something more is necessary than that they should think injustice unpleasant. They must think injustice absurd; above all, they must think it startling. They must retain the violence of a virgin astonishment. When the pessimist looks at any infamy, it is to him, after all, only a repetition of the infamy of existence. But the optimist sees injustice as something discordant and unexpected, and it stings him into action.

Reelya

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: PoH's Calm and Cool Progressive Expression Thread
« Reply #374 on: March 11, 2012, 05:01:47 pm »

You need the BBC and its news section. A highly pleasing beacon of credability and integrity in an industry full of backstabbing, deviousness and corruption. You can be sure if they say its a spade, then its a spade. They legally HAVE to be politically neutral, which makes for some good reading/viewing. Thier current run on the Conservatives NHS reform is quite enlightening, and highlights the spin bullshit Cameron is spouting over it.
ABC and SBS in Australia fill the BBC role here, SBS is especially good for in-depth world news.

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/

Lol, i just discovered the Daily Mail UK, consults long dead people for comments on new book releases :-

Quote
The Smurfs creator, Belgian artist Peyo, told a Flemish paper: 'I disagree with his interpretation. It is between the grotesque and the not serious.'

EDIT: Ahh i checked other sources, and the quote was from Peyo's son, NOT Peyo himself, so this is a simple "mistake" from Daily Mail.
« Last Edit: March 11, 2012, 05:52:04 pm by Reelya »
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 23 24 [25] 26 27 ... 759