The Anti-Bully Speaker is a Bully

[Deleted]

I wonder if it would be the same "non story" if he were beating up some other Holy book.

[Green Eyed Lady]

What transpired during that "lecture" does not meet the definition of "bullying" by any stretch. Insulting? Distasteful? Absolutely! Bullying? No, not even close.

There is a very specific definition for bullying. This doesn't meet that definition.

I would agree that what this.....man said wasn't bullying by it's definition. It was more just hatred, anger and a whole lot of fear. I don't want to sit and listen to that either.

[Green Eyed Lady]

Apr 30, 2012 5:30:47 GMT -5 cereb said:

"Once again, I have to question why this poster is allowed to attack others with impunity. This is the second time I have seen it and the second time I have spoken up about it."

"Its quite another to basically call someone a "coward" because they do not agree with your beliefs. It's a personal attack and should not be tolerated here - regardess of who you are and who you associate with. "


Once again, I haven't attacked anyone. I didn't call anyone anything as I was addressing the content of the post, the "idea" if you will. I respect Virgil, always have, and we really don't have any issues between us. He knows where I'm at, I know where he's at. As a moderator, had Virgil felt that my remark was a violation of the COC I am pretty sure he could have done something about it.

I respectfully ask that you discontinue these accusations.

In my interactions with you and my observance of your posts, you have never done anything respectfully unless it is with someone who agrees with your every word. You belittle people, you call them names and you get downright nasty. You can't seem to enter a discussion without some what-you-see-as-clever sarcastic and angry remark.

I will continue to point out your personal attacks as that isn't a violation of the CoC here. That is, unless some new rule is suddenly created that says "Cereb can be disrespectful but nobody is to say a thing about it."

I do not wish animosity with anyone. You are a fairly intelligent woman with whom I think I could have good debate with should you ever be able to stifle your anger and insults. However, I will not sit by and let your personal attacks go unnoticed. And in my opinion, that is what they are. Personal attacks. If you are somehow "protected", then so be it. That won't stop me from respectfully questioning why your behavior is allowed.

[Green Eyed Lady]

Apr 30, 2012 8:16:13 GMT -5 @shooby said:

I wonder if it would be the same "non story" if he were beating up some other Holy book.

I think I can sort of answer that, shooby. Haven't I seen a bunch of stories in the news lately about people disrespecting the Koran? I don't think that is right, either. We all have a right to worship (or not worship) as we please, as long as nobody is being hurt by it. If we wish that right to be extended to us, we must extend it to others.

[EVT1]

They beat up on the Koran and Muslims daily in this country- it happens so often it isn't newsworthy anymore- well except for that crazy woman in Michigan- that caught headlines.

[EVT1]

Apr 30, 2012 8:09:36 GMT -5 jkapp said:

So if it's ok to bash Christians, then it MUST be ok to bash gays? Interesting...I'm totally for free speech as long as it applies to ALL. So the next tkme someone bashes gay people, I would expect to not hear shit from the left about it being wrong...

Free speech aside- it is not 'OK' to bash gays, it is not 'OK' to bash Christians.

But I see no problem with bashing Christians for bashing gays and hiding behind the book. If they didn't point their fingers maybe people wouldn't point back- and we know who threw the first punch on this.

[Phoenix84]

Yes, i agree with Virgil and find the trend disturbing. Bullying is okay as long as the right people get bullied, rights should only be protected when it's the right people's rights.

Most Christians don't "bully" gays.

I probably would have walked out too.

"I wonder if it would be the same "non story" if he were beating up some other Holy book."

Yes, another irony. It's okay to rip/burn some holy texts but not others

[Green Eyed Lady]

Most Christians don't "bully" gays.

No Christians bully gays. Someone can't be a bully and a Christian, too.

[swamp]

Apr 30, 2012 8:19:33 GMT -5 Green Eyed Lady said:

What transpired during that "lecture" does not meet the definition of "bullying" by any stretch. Insulting? Distasteful? Absolutely! Bullying? No, not even close.

There is a very specific definition for bullying. This doesn't meet that definition.

I would agree that what this.....man said wasn't bullying by it's definition. It was more just hatred, anger and a whole lot of fear. I don't want to sit and listen to that either.

Just because you're being a dickhead doesn't mean you're being a bully.

[EVT1]

Apr 30, 2012 9:24:17 GMT -5 Green Eyed Lady said:

Most Christians don't "bully" gays.

No Christians bully gays. Someone can't be a bully and a Christian, too.

That is true- there are a lot of people that self identify as Christian that do not walk the walk. CINO's ;D

[Green Eyed Lady]

That is true- there are a lot of people that self identify as Christian that do not walk the walk. CINO's ;D

Thank Heavens!! Somebody else here gets it!!

[djAdvocate]

Apr 30, 2012 8:09:36 GMT -5 jkapp said:

Apr 28, 2012 19:41:41 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

“You can tell the Bible guys in the hall they can come back now because I’m done beating up the Bible,” Savage said as other students hollered and cheered. “It’s funny as someone who is on the receiving end of beatings that are justified by the Bible how pansy-assed people react when you push back.”

Touché.

Five percent of the audience found his words offensive. Probably the same type of folks who in private and in public club gay kids over the head with their biblical quotes of how they're going to hell.

Funny how the 'Sticks and stone may break my bones, but names will never hurt me' folks suddenly are hurt and offended when it happens to them.

Meh.

ETA: " Rick Tuttle, the journalism advisor for Sutter Union High School in California, was among several thousand people in the audience."

So if it's ok to bash Christians, then it MUST be ok to bash gays?

false premise, false conclusion.

nobody said that it was "OK", only that it didn't constitute bullying. try again.

[formerroomate99]

Apr 29, 2012 15:37:31 GMT -5 weltschmerz said:

Virgil, a gay activist will surely bring up the Biblical opposition to homosexuality. It's the root cause for much of the gay-bashing in schools and elsewhere.

What a steaming pile of bullshyt. Plenty of kids who have never set foot in a church will pick on a boy for being too effiminant or a girl for being too butch. Teenagers aren't exactly known for being tolerant of anyone who deviates from the norm, no matter what their religious leanings are. As a girl who went through a butch phase, I can tell you that it wasn't the holy rollers that gave me the most trouble.

[djAdvocate]

Apr 30, 2012 8:19:33 GMT -5 Green Eyed Lady said:

What transpired during that "lecture" does not meet the definition of "bullying" by any stretch. Insulting? Distasteful? Absolutely! Bullying? No, not even close.

There is a very specific definition for bullying. This doesn't meet that definition.

I would agree that what this.....man said wasn't bullying by it's definition. It was more just hatred, anger and a whole lot of fear. I don't want to sit and listen to that either.

very few do. but he is within his rights to say so. and, after listening to it in context, it may have been an aside, but it wasn't irrelevant to the discussion- at least from his perspective. i think where he got in trouble was using bullshit and the bible in the same sentence. if we can't tolerate that, then we should probably just repeal the first amendment, because that is what it is ALL ABOUT.

[Green Eyed Lady]

I have to agree with DJ here, even though it's no secret that I am Christian. I don't think it was bullying. It was just stupidity. And when stupid people keep getting all this attention, more stupid people are going to seek the same.

[djAdvocate]

Apr 30, 2012 9:18:19 GMT -5 Phoenix84 said:

Yes, i agree with Virgil and find the trend disturbing. Bullying is okay as long as the right people get bullied, rights should only be protected when it's the right people's rights.

Most Christians don't "bully" gays.

and most gays, including the one in the OP, don't bully Christians. Virgil agreed with that. don't you?

[djAdvocate]

Apr 30, 2012 9:26:47 GMT -5 swamp said:

Apr 30, 2012 8:19:33 GMT -5 Green Eyed Lady said:

I would agree that what this.....man said wasn't bullying by it's definition. It was more just hatred, anger and a whole lot of fear. I don't want to sit and listen to that either.

Just because you're being a dickhead doesn't mean you're being a bully.

precisely. bullying implies a use or threat of force. i see none here.

[djAdvocate]

Apr 30, 2012 9:51:00 GMT -5 Green Eyed Lady said:

That is true- there are a lot of people that self identify as Christian that do not walk the walk. CINO's ;D

Thank Heavens!! Somebody else here gets it!!

as the old song says, it's much easier to be a part-time-Christian......

[Green Eyed Lady]

Easier? Most definitely!!! Then I wouldn't have to apologize and ask forgiveness so dang often for my failures at it!

[mmhmm]

Dh is absolutely correct. Nobody has said what was done was "OK". It was not, however, bullying. Those who were offended left. That was the right thing to do. I don't know if the speaker was to be paid for this appearance but, if he was, I would not have paid him if it had been my decision. He didn't give the speech he was paid to give.

From my point of view (and I think others share it), it's not right to disrespect anyone's Holy Book. I don't care if it's the Bible, or the Qur'an, the Tipitaka, or the Vedas. There is nothing to be gained by showing disdain for the beliefs of another. Nothing. This thread is a perfect example of why we don't allow any religious discussion in P&M. It's turned in that direction and the fights begin, as usual. While there have been NO personal insults thrown, there have certainly been general insults thrown in all directions.

This thread is not about politics, or the market, so I'm going to move it to religious discussions. That doesn't mean you're free to continue with the fighting. That thread makes it perfectly clear that your conversations are to remain civil. It's a darned shame that seems to be so bloody difficult.

mmhmm, exasperated P&M Moderator

[djAdvocate]

Apr 29, 2012 17:33:35 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

Apr 29, 2012 16:49:54 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

why?

She didn't. I didn't expect her to.

me neither. which is why i asked.

[Phoenix84]

"No Christians bully gays. Someone can't be a bully and a Christian, too."

Yes, anyone who harasses and bully's gays, especially doing physical harm to them, is no Christian and not following the bible's teachings. Good point.

"and most gays, including the one in the OP, don't bully Christians. Virgil agreed with that. don't you?"

I suppose it depends on how you define bullying. But I do think the vast majority of gays don't engage in regular christian bashing and typically want to keep to themselves and live their lives. I don't think the guy in the OP could fit that bill.

[Green Eyed Lady]

But I do think the vast majority of gays don't engage in regular christian bashing and typically want to keep to themselves and live their lives. I don't think the guy in the OP could fit that bill.

Agreed.

However, it's also my opinion that you can't bully a true Christian. At least you can't bully this one. My faith is stronger than any amount of hate, anger and ignorance. It just can't be done.

[skweet]

Dear Right:
In the matters of ageism, sexism, racism, and religion you continue to try to take tiny issues then use stretched logic and hyperbole to create a firestorm. This divides us as a nation and causes animosity between groups of citizens that have no other reason to disagree. Please stop trying to be the victim of crimes that are innocuous and often don't actually exist except in your own warped sensitivities. It is very offensive to us as we declared "Dibbs" on the "victim" thingy long ago. Quit trying to steal our tactics.
Sincerely,
The Left

[Green Eyed Lady]

And please note I am not saying all non-believers are hateful, angry or ignorant. Just some of them. I have a number of atheist acquaintences, as stated in another thread, and they are all good people.

ETA: With the exception of one!

[jkapp]

Apr 30, 2012 10:09:05 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Apr 30, 2012 9:26:47 GMT -5 swamp said:

Just because you're being a dickhead doesn't mean you're being a bully.

precisely. bullying implies a use or threat of force. i see none here.

So all of that Facebook posting, texting, etc against others (making fun of them, ostracizing them, et al) isn't bullying anymore?

[formerroomate99]

But I see no problem with bashing Christians for bashing gays and hiding behind the book. If they didn't point their fingers maybe people wouldn't point back- and we know who threw the first punch on this.

People who want to bully will use anything they can to justify their behavior. The fact that someone uses the Bible to justify bad behavior does not mean that person is a Christian, especially since this behavior is not compatable with Christianity. In my experience, as someone who did not fit the mold of traditional feminity, the the really devout folks are the ones who are least likely to engage in this sort of behavior. You're blaming one group for the actions of another.

[Green Eyed Lady]

People who want to bully will use anything they can to justify their behavior. The fact that someone uses the Bible to justify bad behavior does not mean that person is a Christian, especially since this behavior is not compatable with Christianity. In my experience, as someone who did not fit the mold of traditional feminity, the the really devout folks are the ones who are least likely to engage in this sort of behavior. You're blaming one group for the actions of another.

Exactly. In addition, it sounds like a version of "well he did it firrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrst". Whatever a person's beliefs are, they had to have learned at a young age that two wrongs don't make a right.

[mmhmm]

Apr 30, 2012 10:48:54 GMT -5 jkapp said:

Apr 30, 2012 10:09:05 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

precisely. bullying implies a use or threat of force. i see none here.

So all of that Facebook posting, texting, etc against others (making fun of them, ostracizing them, et al) isn't bullying anymore?

The problems that have arisen from FaceBook are more incitement to bullying than actual bullying. They also occur, mostly, amongst young people still in school. A group of kids decides to heckle another kid(s) on FaceBook. The problems arise, however, when the heckling is taken off FaceBook and brought into the "real world". They attack the victim at school, by telephone at home, etc. When it becomes a "real world" issue, complete with stalking, following, and violence ... that's bullying.

Most adults realize relief from online heckling lies a mouse-click away. The choice to use it, or not use it, is theirs. Amongst adults, stalking and bullying come into play when an individual targets another in their home, or at their place of work, through telephone calls, emails, etc. Just because someone calls you a name on the internet, that doesn't mean you're being bullied.

[Green Eyed Lady]

I suppose if you ask 10 different people their definition of a "bully", you will probably get 10 different answers. I'll use the definition I found in the dictionary:

bul·ly1    /ˈbʊli/ Show Spelled [bool-ee] Show IPA noun, plural bul·lies, verb, bul·lied, bul·ly·ing, adjective, interjection
noun
1. a blustering, quarrelsome, overbearing person who habitually badgers and intimidates smaller or weaker people.

This definition does not state there has to be any type of violence at all for it to be considered bullying. It also doesn't state that there is a particular venue that makes it bullying, nor does it exclude any type of venue. I would assume then that it includes the telephone, the mail, the internet and any other venue a bully wishes to employ.

To me, the kicker here, in relation to the subject of this thread is "smaller or weaker" people. I have no doubt the speaker is larger than I am. My dog is bigger than I am. I also have no doubt that he is weaker than I since he feels the need to rant and rave and pump his fists to get his point across. Therefore? By definition, he can't bully me!

It's not bullying, IMO.