Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > 14yr olds told to sign Confidentiality Agreement / Gay/Straight Alliance

14yr olds told to sign Confidentiality Agreement / Gay/Straight Alliance
Thread Tools
Orion27
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Safe House
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 14, 2007, 05:05 PM
 
14yr old freshmen students at Deerfield High School in Michigan were ordered to a attend a seminar held by the Gay/Straight/ Alliance after having the students sign a confidentiality agreement promising not to tell their parents. Not only was the subject matter disturbing but the idea of the school district promoting secrecy and deception like the commies they are is equally disturbing. Where do officials get off manipulating young children like this. How big a red flag is there: " don't tell your parents". Some people should hang.

WorldNetDaily: District gags 14-year-olds after 'gay' indoctrination
     
itistoday
Professional Poster
Join Date: Oct 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 14, 2007, 06:03 PM
 
lol, that's retarded. I swear, sometimes I feel like I'm backstage on the Jerry Springer show, I never see the sh*t go down first hand, but I hear such ridiculous stories from the other side of the curtain.
     
OldManMac
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 14, 2007, 06:03 PM
 
If it's true, you have a point. What's interesting is that not one news outlet (I've just checked several dozen) other than WND, which is about as reactionary as they get, has reported anything on this. More to come? It was also, allegedly, in Illinois, not Michigan.
     
Orion27  (op)
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Safe House
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 14, 2007, 07:55 PM
 
Originally Posted by KarlG View Post
If it's true, you have a point. What's interesting is that not one news outlet (I've just checked several dozen) other than WND, which is about as reactionary as they get, has reported anything on this. More to come? It was also, allegedly, in Illinois, not Michigan.
Here's an interview. Apparently parents can't even get class materials to review. They have gone as far as filing
Freedom of Information requests which were denied.

http://americansfortruth.com/news/li...agreement.html
     
Jawbone54
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Louisiana
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 14, 2007, 08:16 PM
 
Not surprising. That's all.
     
ooninay
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 14, 2007, 08:22 PM
 
The interview that Orion mentions later on is on a website called Americans for Truth, "a newly reorganized national organization devoted exclusively to exposing and countering the homosexual activist agenda." As for the the original story, the person quoted most often is a member of "Concerned Women of America", whose web page says the group is devoted to "bring Biblical principles into all levels of public policy," and here are their six "core issues": Concerned Women for America - About CWA. The fact that no other reputable news agency has reported this yet says a lot about the likely authenticity of this story, and the vociferous anti-gay tone of the article should be enough of a warning flag on its own to make a reasonable person question whether this really happened the way the writer says it did.
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 14, 2007, 08:26 PM
 
Isn't fourteen a little late to be indoctrinating them into the bum fun?

They're planning to tell gayed-up fairy tales to our four-year-olds.
Homosexual Penguins in the Curriculum: Gay Fairy Tales for British Pupils - International - SPIEGEL ONLINE - News
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
     
Orion27  (op)
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Safe House
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 14, 2007, 08:30 PM
 
Originally Posted by ooninay View Post
The interview that Orion mentions later on is on a website called Americans for Truth, "a newly reorganized national organization devoted exclusively to exposing and countering the homosexual activist agenda." As for the the original story, the person quoted most often is a member of "Concerned Women of America", whose web page says the group is devoted to "bring Biblical principles into all levels of public policy," and here are their six "core issues": Concerned Women for America - About CWA. The fact that no other reputable news agency has reported this yet says a lot about the likely authenticity of this story, and the vociferous anti-gay tone of the article should be enough of a warning flag on its own to make a reasonable person question whether this really happened the way the writer says it did.
The source page of the Interview is unfortunate. The fact that the mainstream media has not picked it up says more about the mainstream media than anything. This story will be flushed out. I would aassume this story must be commented on by the District itself. A few simple phone calls to Dearborn would confirm or deny.
     
Orion27  (op)
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Safe House
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 14, 2007, 08:39 PM
 
Pretty balanced video report here on FOX, but does not address the confidentiality agreement issue nor denying parents access to materials.

http://www.myfoxchicago.com/myfox/pa...Y&pageId=3.8.1
     
OldManMac
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 14, 2007, 08:42 PM
 
Well, I listened to the interview. I call BS! "Americans for Truth" wouldn't know the truth if it bit them in the ass! Homosexuals equal somewhere around 5% to 10 percent of the population, and this "Americans for Truth" is going to tell me that, even at the upper end, 10% of the population controls the other 90 percent? Hogwash. This is nothing but sensationalism brought out by some homophobes, who have some serious issues regarding their own sexual insecurities! On the WND link you first posted, it said that the administration of this school was forcing students to sign these documents. On the second link, it said some teachers were forcing the signatures. You're not really going to tell me that all students are simply going to sign these documents, are you? If this is an issue that's been going on for years, as the interviewee clearly states, then I have to congratulate this particular school, as they've managed to keep this out of the eye of the entire media empire, which includes newspapers, TV, the web, magazines, etc., except of course, World Net Daily. Somehow they've managed to find the "truth," when no one else can or could! They're also going to try to tell me that the entire legal system can stonewall their efforts to keep their children from being controlled by a miniscule fraction of the population? There are so many holes in this story that I could drive a division of tanks through it!

The "Americans for Truth" organization should be thankful, for the no doubt small number of people who send them money, so they can carry out their exercises in fantasy building, to support their delusional fears.

The American public should be saddened that some people actually are so afraid of homosexuals that they'll go to such lengths to look ridiculous.

Apparently, it can be never said enough: P. T. Barnum was right!
     
- - e r i k - -
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 14, 2007, 08:50 PM
 
Tip to Orion27: If you want to maintain a shred of credibility, please refrain from sourcing WorldNetDaily.


Heh. Got to love their ads though:

[ fb ] [ flickr ] [] [scl] [ last ] [ plaxo ]
     
OldManMac
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 14, 2007, 09:24 PM
 
Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - View Post
Tip to Orion27: If you want to maintain a shred of credibility, please refrain from sourcing WorldNetDaily.


Heh. Got to love their ads though:
If you go to their homepage, under the World Net Daily logo (upper right side), you'll see link to something, and it's obviously correctly titled "Hysteria."

If you link the image you posted, it will take you to an ad for a book by a Charl vanWyck, who supposedly makes a biblical argument for arming yourself, just in case you might get attacked by a group of bandits while you're in church, which I know happens all the time in America. They take an incident which happened in South Africa, where violence is much more rampant than America, and extrapolate it out to America, simply to instill fear in people, so Joe Farrah can laugh all the way to the bank.

When I taught Sunday School, for four years, I don't remember telling the children that Jesus carried an AK-47, to dispatch his enemies, and when my wife and I led a teen youth group, for two years, I don't think we told the kids to arm themselves in case there was an attack at church. I vaguely remember telling them that Jesus said to turn the other cheek, but, because I'm a sad little old man, maybe my memory is foggy!

Not only do I now have to check under my bed for terrorists, I have to look for bandits and criminals as well. I guess I'd better start getting ready for bed a half hour earlier from now on.
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 14, 2007, 09:40 PM
 
Originally Posted by KarlG View Post
If you link the image you posted, it will take you to an ad for a book by a Charl vanWyck, who supposedly makes a biblical argument for arming yourself, just in case you might get attacked by a group of bandits while you're in church, which I know happens all the time in America. They take an incident which happened in South Africa, where violence is much more rampant than America, and extrapolate it out to America, simply to instill fear in people, so Joe Farrah can laugh all the way to the bank.

When I taught Sunday School, for four years, I don't remember telling the children that Jesus carried an AK-47, to dispatch his enemies, and when my wife and I led a teen youth group, for two years, I don't think we told the kids to arm themselves in case there was an attack at church. I vaguely remember telling them that Jesus said to turn the other cheek, but, because I'm a sad little old man, maybe my memory is foggy!

Not only do I now have to check under my bed for terrorists, I have to look for bandits and criminals as well. I guess I'd better start getting ready for bed a half hour earlier from now on.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/6451681.stm
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
     
OldManMac
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 14, 2007, 10:06 PM
 
Originally Posted by Doofy View Post
And your point is?
     
Millennium
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 14, 2007, 10:19 PM
 
Um... that's illegal. At least in the US, minors can't sign binding contracts. There's no penalty for it, except for the fact that the contract is void, but if the Gay/Straight Alliance is resorting to illegal means to spread their word it's got to make a person think.

Then again, is it? I was under the impression that WND was nothing more than a tabloid, so there's a high likelihood that the whole thing is fabricated.
You are in Soviet Russia. It is dark. Grue is likely to be eaten by YOU!
     
nonhuman
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Baltimore, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 14, 2007, 10:43 PM
 
Originally Posted by Millennium View Post
Um... that's illegal. At least in the US, minors can't sign binding contracts. There's no penalty for it, except for the fact that the contract is void, but if the Gay/Straight Alliance is resorting to illegal means to spread their word it's got to make a person think.

Then again, is it? I was under the impression that WND was nothing more than a tabloid, so there's a high likelihood that the whole thing is fabricated.
Yeah, you beat me to it. They can have the kids sign whatever they want, but if they're under 18 the contracts are void (except, I think, in a few specific cases of which NDAs are not one).
     
Orion27  (op)
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Safe House
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2007, 08:07 AM
 
Originally Posted by nonhuman View Post
Yeah, you beat me to it. They can have the kids sign whatever they want, but if they're under 18 the contracts are void (except, I think, in a few specific cases of which NDAs are not one).
Of course one could not hold a 14yr old to a contract. The waivers are used to
bully and pressure if the student shows and indication of resistance to the program.
     
Orion27  (op)
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Safe House
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2007, 08:14 AM
 
Originally Posted by nonhuman View Post
Yeah, you beat me to it. They can have the kids sign whatever they want, but if they're under 18 the contracts are void (except, I think, in a few specific cases of which NDAs are not one).
Of course one could not hold a 14yr old to a contract. The waivers are used to
bully and pressure if the student shows an indication of resistance to the program.
     
Wiskedjak
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2007, 08:21 AM
 
Originally Posted by Orion27 View Post
Of course one could not hold a 14yr old to a contract. The waivers are used to
bully and pressure if the student shows and indication of resistance to the program.
Very true ... if this story has any truth to it. But, it must, because it's on the intarweb.
     
Wiskedjak
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2007, 09:08 AM
 
This is an interesting story:

If true, it serves as an example of how people take advantage of children
If untrue, it serves as an example of how people take advantage of children
     
- - e r i k - -
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2007, 09:10 AM
 
If untrue, it serves as an example how idiots swallow anything that's posted on the intarweb.

[ fb ] [ flickr ] [] [scl] [ last ] [ plaxo ]
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2007, 09:15 AM
 
Originally Posted by KarlG View Post
And your point is?
You just posted a sarcastic post going on about how people don't need to defend themselves from bandits in church. I simply posted evidence that people do obviously need to be ready to defend themselves in church, the same way that they need to be ready to defend themselves anywhere. Thus proving your post wrong.
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
     
Orion27  (op)
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Safe House
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2007, 09:30 AM
 
Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - View Post
If untrue, it serves as an example how idiots swallow anything that's posted on the intarweb.
What idiots here have absolutely swallowed anything? The subject of this particular thread is troubling. I for one would like to know more. I was hoping more source material would come to light in this thread.
     
OldManMac
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2007, 09:54 AM
 
Originally Posted by Doofy View Post
You just posted a sarcastic post going on about how people don't need to defend themselves from bandits in church. I simply posted evidence that people do obviously need to be ready to defend themselves in church, the same way that they need to be ready to defend themselves anywhere. Thus proving your post wrong.
That's what I thought you were going to reply with. So, we have two instances of people being attacked in a church, and you could probably find more. That, however, doesn't change the fact that millions upon millions upon millions of people go to church on Sundays, not having to worry about being attacked in church. It also proves my point that you will go to any length, no matter how ridiculous it is, to attempt to "prove" your point, which is pointless. The vast, vast, vast, majority of people get along just fine as they go through their daily lives, without having to arm themselves. Apparently, you're an excellent example of people who buy into hysteria, just because they heard it on the news, when the facts speak otherwise. You haven't proven anything, other than that it appears you've bought into a lot of this nonsensical paranoia. It must suck to be so insecure that you can't trust anyone.
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2007, 10:14 AM
 
Originally Posted by KarlG View Post
That's what I thought you were going to reply with. So, we have two instances of people being attacked in a church, and you could probably find more. That, however, doesn't change the fact that millions upon millions upon millions of people go to church on Sundays, not having to worry about being attacked in church. It also proves my point that you will go to any length, no matter how ridiculous it is, to attempt to "prove" your point, which is pointless. The vast, vast, vast, majority of people get along just fine as they go through their daily lives, without having to arm themselves. Apparently, you're an excellent example of people who buy into hysteria, just because they heard it on the news, when the facts speak otherwise. You haven't proven anything, other than that it appears you've bought into a lot of this nonsensical paranoia. It must suck to be so insecure that you can't trust anyone.
Only an idiot is unprepared for things.

I'm betting you ain't checked your spare tyre on your car for a while either. I mean, millions upon millions of people drive around every day without getting a flat, so why bother taking precautions against it?

Nobody is hysterical or paranoid except you. Stop projecting.
( Last edited by Doofy; Mar 15, 2007 at 10:24 AM. )
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
     
OldManMac
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2007, 10:15 AM
 
Originally Posted by Orion27 View Post
What idiots here have absolutely swallowed anything? The subject of this particular thread is troubling. I for one would like to know more. I was hoping more source material would come to light in this thread.
14yr old freshmen students at Deerfield High School in Michigan were ordered to a attend a seminar held by the Gay/Straight/ Alliance after having the students sign a confidentiality agreement promising not to tell their parents. Not only was the subject matter disturbing but the idea of the school district promoting secrecy and deception like the commies they are is equally disturbing. Where do officials get off manipulating young children like this. How big a red flag is there: " don't tell your parents". Some people should hang.
You're not doing such a good job at hiding the fact that you bought into this. Let me give you a hint; you shouldn't reply like that when you started the thread saying the inflammatory things you did, which quite handily show you did in fact buy into this nonsensical "news" fabrication. Never try to spin your way of something when the evidence is right in front of your face. Wow!
     
- - e r i k - -
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2007, 07:28 PM
 
Originally Posted by Doofy View Post
Only an idiot is unprepared for things.

I'm betting you ain't checked your spare tyre on your car for a while either. I mean, millions upon millions of people drive around every day without getting a flat, so why bother taking precautions against it?

Nobody is hysterical or paranoid except you. Stop projecting.
Indeed! We should all be prepared for the worst!

Let's see. I got my gun. Better bring two in case one jams up or something. Make one a semi-automatic just in case. Hmm. I might fall into a hole, better bring my grappling hook. First aid kit. Obviously. Snakes are abundant down here, so I might bring a set of anti-venom around. Bullet-proof vest. Check. Whistle. Check. Mace. Check. Knives. Check. Gasmask. Check. Life-vest. Check. Canned food. Check…

****. What am I to do if the earth is hit by an asteroid? Aaaaaaaaah!

[ fb ] [ flickr ] [] [scl] [ last ] [ plaxo ]
     
- - e r i k - -
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2007, 07:32 PM
 
The biggest problem of this thread is lack of critical thinking.

Not only in an incredible (used in its original literal way) news source, but in believing that sexual orientation can somehow be forced upon children - demonstrating not only a complete failure to understand the physical principles of the world, but also a lack of faith that children might not be able to think (critically) for themselves.
( Last edited by - - e r i k - -; Mar 15, 2007 at 07:42 PM. )

[ fb ] [ flickr ] [] [scl] [ last ] [ plaxo ]
     
Orion27  (op)
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Safe House
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2007, 07:37 PM
 
Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - View Post
The biggest problem of this thread is lack of critical thinking.

Not only in an [b[in[/b]credible (used in its original literal way) news source, but in believing that sexual orientation can somehow be forced upon children - demonstrating not only a complete failure to understand the physical principles of the world, but also a lack of faith that children might not be able to think (critically) for themselves.
We protect children up until the age of 18 and sometimes 21 precisely because we give them the benefit of the doubt of not being able to think critically. You would be the first one not try someone under 18 as an adult. Tell me differently.
     
- - e r i k - -
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2007, 07:42 PM
 
"benefit of the doubt not to think critically"??

14-year olds here are tried as adults and I would have it no other way.

[ fb ] [ flickr ] [] [scl] [ last ] [ plaxo ]
     
Orion27  (op)
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Safe House
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2007, 07:50 PM
 
Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - View Post
"benefit of the doubt not to think critically"??

14-year olds here are tried as adults and I would have it no other way.
Very very rare and I hope you're not an attorney
     
OldManMac
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2007, 07:55 PM
 
Originally Posted by Doofy View Post
Only an idiot is unprepared for things.

I'm betting you ain't checked your spare tyre on your car for a while either. I mean, millions upon millions of people drive around every day without getting a flat, so why bother taking precautions against it?

Nobody is hysterical or paranoid except you. Stop projecting.
Man, can you twist things around to suit your perspective, or what? There's a huge difference between checking your tires and overly worrying about being attacked when the chances of that happening are infinitessimily small! As a matter of fact, you're infinitely more likely to have a flat tire than you are of being shot by someone. Talk about projecting; you don't even know what that means. So, you're saying that, because I don't go to church with a gun, I'm the idiot, and the hysterical and paranoid one. You need to brush up on some psychology basics, as you obviously bandy terms around that you know nothing about. Booo!
( Last edited by OldManMac; Mar 15, 2007 at 08:03 PM. )
     
OldManMac
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2007, 07:57 PM
 
Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - View Post
Indeed! We should all be prepared for the worst!

Let's see. I got my gun. Better bring two in case one jams up or something. Make one a semi-automatic just in case. Hmm. I might fall into a hole, better bring my grappling hook. First aid kit. Obviously. Snakes are abundant down here, so I might bring a set of anti-venom around. Bullet-proof vest. Check. Whistle. Check. Mace. Check. Knives. Check. Gasmask. Check. Life-vest. Check. Canned food. Check…

****. What am I to do if the earth is hit by an asteroid? Aaaaaaaaah!
Stop being so paranoid and hysterical, and stop projecting.
     
- - e r i k - -
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2007, 08:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by Orion27 View Post
Very very rare and I hope you're not an attorney
Sorry. I meant 15 years old, and there's no exceptions. That would be for Norway. Finding information about Australia isn't as easy, but it seems it's common with UK where there is no age limit on who can be tried.

[ fb ] [ flickr ] [] [scl] [ last ] [ plaxo ]
     
Orion27  (op)
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Safe House
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2007, 08:06 PM
 
Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - View Post
Sorry. I meant 15 years old, and there's no exceptions. That would be for Norway. Finding information about Australia isn't as easy, but it seems it's common with UK where there is no age limit on who can be tried.
I'm calling from the United States and it's very different here.
     
- - e r i k - -
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2007, 08:08 PM
 
Originally Posted by Orion27 View Post
I'm calling from the United States and it's very different here.
Yes. You can all be tried as adults if needed. Which is a good thing. Age is no criteria for thinking critical. I mean, you don't.

[ fb ] [ flickr ] [] [scl] [ last ] [ plaxo ]
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2007, 08:56 PM
 
Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - View Post
Indeed! We should all be prepared for the worst!

Let's see. I got my gun. Better bring two in case one jams up or something. Make one a semi-automatic just in case. Hmm. I might fall into a hole, better bring my grappling hook. First aid kit. Obviously. Snakes are abundant down here, so I might bring a set of anti-venom around. Bullet-proof vest. Check. Whistle. Check. Mace. Check. Knives. Check. Gasmask. Check. Life-vest. Check. Canned food. Check…
You forgot the ear-muffs, just in case your fiancé's keyboard player decides to play.
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2007, 09:07 PM
 
Originally Posted by KarlG View Post
Man, can you twist things around to suit your perspective, or what? There's a huge difference between checking your tires and overly worrying about being attacked when the chances of that happening are infinitessimily small! As a matter of fact, you're infinitely more likely to have a flat tire than you are of being shot by someone. Talk about projecting; you don't even know what that means. So, you're saying that, because I don't go to church with a gun, I'm the idiot, and the hysterical and paranoid one. You need to brush up on some psychology basics, as you obviously bandy terms around that you know nothing about. Booo!
See what you did there? You mutated "being prepared" into "overly worrying". That's projecting, right there. Just because you're "overly worried" about something or other it doesn't mean anyone else is "overly worried" about whatever it is that they prepare for.
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
     
OldManMac
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2007, 09:33 PM
 
And you missed the whole point. I posted links to a book about some people in a church in S. Africa getting killed and injured. That link was on a web site that was quite obviously trying to sell this book with fear tactics, as if people needed to arm themselves so they would be ready to face a hostile world. You then posted a link to an article of a clergyman who was killed, intending clearly to justify the position that people should be afraid to go out into the world and, as you disingenuously state it, "be prepared." By posting that article, it is quite clear that your intent was justify the book's position, which was to encourage citizens to arm themselves for the coming takeover by criminal elements. I didn't mutate anything; you did. I also, correctly, pointed out that there is absolutely no need whatsoever to arm yourself to make your way through the day; the vast majority of the world's population doesn't walk the streets worrying about whether they're going to be attacked by criminals, except in rare circumstances, S. Africa being one of those, and the United States and Britain not being one of those. You attempted to justify your position that people should "be prepared" by sensationalizing one unfortunate incident, and attempting to extrapolate it out to an entire population of people, clearly intimating that we should arm ourselves against some sort of presupposed probability of attack, which is simply not statistically imminent. You spun the argument, and then attempted to twist it against me. You can't deny it, although you no doubt will. I'm quite confident that I'm not the only one who sees it that way.
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2007, 09:43 PM
 
Originally Posted by KarlG View Post
intending clearly to justify the position that people should be afraid to go out into the world
See, that's where you got it wrong. I posted merely to remind you that even in civilised parts of the world, a case for protecting oneself against "bandits" was a valid thing. No fear involved.

You appear to be labouring under the strange illusion that "right wingers" are afraid of everything. I can assure you that this isn't the case and that it's nothing more than BS propaganda you've picked up from the hive mind.
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
     
OldManMac
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2007, 10:12 PM
 
People don't arm themselves unless they have what they think is a reasonable concern that they might be attacked. That's a fear that something may happen to them. The vast majority of people don't even think about that, because they don't make it a point to live their lives with the constant need to worry about something that is statistically insignificant; it's just not a concern. If you arm yourself, it's because you have a concern/fear that you may become a victim of attack, plain and simple; otherwise there's no reason to consider arming yourself.

There was a big stink in Michigan a few years back, when a group was proposing that MI should become a "shall issue" state, which basically means that, unless you have a criminal record, or a history of mental issues, the state must issue you a Concealed Weapons Permit, if you want one. Prior this becoming law, which it did, people were running around like chickens with their heads cut off, on both sides of the issue. A large faction on one side, which was for the proposal to allow concealed weapons, was screaming about how this was going to deter criminals robbing people in their homes, businesses, etc., because they might think twice if they considered that their victim might be armed. Some on that side also said, correctly IMO, that there was no legitimate reason to deny someone the right to own a weapon. People against the proposal were screaming that it was going to turn Michigan into a state where gun nuts would shoot everybody and everything in sight, and that there was no reason for anyone to own a gun, and they predicted, incorrectly, that everybody would rush out to buy a gun (except themselves of course, the irony of which obviously escaped them). The proposal passed by vote of the people, but gun ownership didn't increase significantly, because, quite simply, people really didn't have any fear of being attacked. Those who carry large amounts of money, and jewelry dealers, etc., have almost always been able to get a permit anyway, so the whole exercise was almost fruitless, except you now don't have to have any reason to carry a concealed weapon. In other words, the level of irrational fear didn't increase after all. People don't worry about "being prepared" because there is statistically, as opposed to anecdotally, no reason to "be prepared."

However, if you want, you can win the argument. I've said my peace about it.
     
- - e r i k - -
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2007, 10:40 PM
 
I'm sorry. Doofy lost at the moment he made a personal attack. Duly reported.

[ fb ] [ flickr ] [] [scl] [ last ] [ plaxo ]
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 16, 2007, 12:24 AM
 
Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - View Post
I'm sorry. Doofy lost at the moment he made a personal attack. Duly reported.
Lack of humour. Check.
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
     
- - e r i k - -
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 16, 2007, 12:31 AM
 
Originally Posted by Doofy View Post
Lack of humour. Check.
Personal attack against me = fine.
Personal attack involving fiancé = not fine.

Yo momma!

[ fb ] [ flickr ] [] [scl] [ last ] [ plaxo ]
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 16, 2007, 12:48 AM
 
Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - View Post
Personal attack against me = fine.
Personal attack involving fiancé = not fine.

Yo momma!
You so sure that it was an attack? That's assuming a lot and getting needlessly hysterical, no? Why don't you try asking me what the smiley was for instead of just proving my point that the only people getting hysterical and projecting are you guys?
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
     
- - e r i k - -
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 16, 2007, 12:52 AM
 
Nice try backpedal-boy.

[ fb ] [ flickr ] [] [scl] [ last ] [ plaxo ]
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 16, 2007, 01:07 AM
 
Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - View Post
Nice try backpedal-boy.
Ahh.. ...not much confidence in the loved one's band, eh?

What was I going on about before you deemed fit to pile in? Yep, that's right, lefties getting hysterical and assuming things. You came along and assumed things, so I decided to set that little trap for you, deliberately making it ambiguous. You fell for it hook, line and sinker, thus proving my point.

Of course, if you'd only asked what I'd meant I'd have told you: That I listened to the first song a couple of days back and still can't get that ridiculously catchy organ riff out of my head. Thus, people require protection from the player.

Here's a tip: Don't get involved with other people's arguments by interjecting with snappy little comebacks if you're only going to prove the opponent right by doing exactly what he accuses your side of.
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
     
- - e r i k - -
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 16, 2007, 01:16 AM
 
Originally Posted by Doofy View Post
Ahh.. ...not much confidence in the loved one's band, eh?
Oh, I have more than confidence in them. They are doing very well thank you

Originally Posted by Doofy View Post
What was I going on about before you deemed fit to pile in? Yep, that's right, lefties getting hysterical and assuming things. You came along and assumed things, so I decided to set that little trap for you, deliberately making it ambiguous. You fell for it hook, line and sinker, thus proving my point.
Personal attacks as traps? You have much to learn. Especially about assuming that I'm a "leftie".

Originally Posted by Doofy View Post
Of course, if you'd only asked what I'd meant I'd have told you: That I listened to the first song a couple of days back and still can't get that ridiculously catchy organ riff out of my head. Thus, people require protection from the player.
While flattering indeed make for a sweeter smelling back pedal, it is still back-pedaling.

Originally Posted by Doofy View Post
Here's a tip: Don't get involved with other people's arguments by interjecting with snappy little comebacks if you're only going to prove the opponent right by doing exactly what he accuses your side of.
I see that I hit a sore spot. Nice

[ fb ] [ flickr ] [] [scl] [ last ] [ plaxo ]
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 16, 2007, 01:35 AM
 
It's not back-pedalling if that was the intention all along. See, you're carrying on with your little illusion because your mind is made up based on your initial hysteria and fear. Standard leftie trait.

Leftie? You show all the signs. And let's just say I bet you're not cheering John Howard on.
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
     
- - e r i k - -
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 16, 2007, 01:39 AM
 
No I am not. But that's because he's a dolt, not because I'm a leftie.

[ fb ] [ flickr ] [] [scl] [ last ] [ plaxo ]
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:48 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,