[Vision2020] just sarcasm? no!

[Donovan Arnold]

Chas,
   
  My understanding of the riots of 2005 in France were not based on race, but based on foreigners taking their jobs.
   
  My claim is not baseless, she specifically states that White Men benefit from the current social order and thus don't have a right to ask questions or complain about their treatment. I say this is hogwash and counter productive because everyone is in a different place and should not be ruled out because of their race or gender. 
   
  This 1960s mentality of sorting and focusing on everyone's gender, race, religion, creed, orientation, rather than the person as an individual I think is destructive. I think being identified in those terms is wrong and shallow. I also think you know this to be true in your heart.
   
  Best Regards,
   
  Donovan

Chasuk <chasuk at gmail.com> wrote:
  On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 12:03 AM, Donovan Arnold
wrote:

> Ask yourself why all the other Western Modernized Nations, France, Britain,
> Germany, Italy, Sweden, don't have the hang ups that the US does about Race,
> Religion, Gender, Disability etc. They have had women leaders, great ones,
> and women in every position, without having the hostile, negative, nasty,
> self righteous discriminatory and divisive positioning your have.

Other "Western Modernized Nations" don't have hangups about "Race,
Religion, Gender, Disability etc.?" I guess you haven' lived in the
same places that I have. Western Europe doesn't have much problem
with gender (or sexual orientation), or disability, but it has nearly
as much problem with race and religion as we do. What do you think
the 2005 French riots were about? Racism and xenophobia. The riots
affected 274 towns, with thousands arrested. At least 8,973 cars were
overturned and burned in the streets. The problems in Britain and
Germany are lower key, but no less prevalent.

When you baselessly accuse someone of racism, of sexism, of religious
intolerance, it is its own kind of discrimination. Yes, your
accusations are baseless, and especially laughable because you have
numerous time engaged in the very behaviors of which you accuse
others. When Keely and others identify institutional evil -- as they
believe they have in Christ Church -- should they remain silent?
Should Christ Church be given a waiver because its racism and misogyny
are matters of faith? Is it religious intolerance to hold a church
accountable for racism, sexism, or bigotry? I would say not. Of
course, I wish the prosecutors of Christ Church were more morally
consistent. The Roman Catholics and the Mormons are guilty of equal
theological malfeasance. Even the tolerant Baha'i take a repressive
view of homosexuality. But you fight the battles that life has given
you, and you fight them honorably, which is what many on the more
socially minded on the Palouse have done. They deserve respect, not
baseless accusations.

Chas


       
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20080514/b5ac842d/attachment.html