Socialist School Speech?

[rlrose328]

And your point is?

That you need to get over your false dichotomy.  Not all "right-leaning" or even conservative people are religious.  And since when is a parent deciding what their child should and should not be exposed to and *SHOCK* disagreeing with the president an infringement on your rights?  Get over yourself.

I don't see a false dichotomy there.  When I disagreed outloud with anything Bush did or said, I was accused of being unAmerican, a non-patriot.  I've watched while the religious, the right, the conservatives, and all overlapping labels curtail the rights of those I love, and if I speak out, I'm the one being intolerant of their beliefs.  It is the right-leaning groups in this country who wish to suppress any freedoms we have in the name of safety and morality and propriety, which I see it as destroying the underlying reason country was founded in the first place.

I don't recall saying anything about anyone disagreeing with the president as being an infringement of my rights.  You are reading something into my words that just isn't there.

[Ultima22689]

Andrew, you're accusing rlrose of things he never said, you he has constantly made the separation of the religious right and conservative. Regardless of the fact that they are not the same it doesn't matter much because they share near identical political views save for probably separation of church and state and a couple of other things.

[andrewclunn]

Get this.  I didn't like Bush either.  And that whole unpatriotic thing?  Your telling me you didn't see the BS that liberal media outlets pulled during the health care debacle, calling anti-reformers "unpatriotic." And guess what, this:

It is the right-leaning groups in this country who wish to suppress any freedoms we have in the name of safety and morality and propriety, which I see it as destroying the underlying reason country was founded in the first place.

... is exactly what indoctrinated right-wingers think, just replace the word right with the word left.

I don't recall saying anything about anyone disagreeing with the president as being an infringement of my rights.  You are reading something into my words that just isn't there.

Then I misunderstood your initial rant (your words) that started this thread.

[andrewclunn]

Andrew, you're accusing rlrose of things he never said, you he has constantly made the separation of the religious right and conservative. Regardless of the fact that they are not the same it doesn't matter much because they share near identical political views save for probably separation of church and state and a couple of other things.

If you really believe that then I encourage you to check out this site http://www.secularconservative.net/

[rlrose328]

I was stating (As I have been, consistently throughout) that when seeing that lesson plan, that parents had a right to want to see the text of the speech before having their child hear it. I am also saying that the first line there smacks of nationalism, while the second is fairly clearly (in my mind) progressive community based language.  The implications not being that the lesson plan on it's own may have been bad, but that it could be an indication of what the speech would be.  So parents demanded to see transcript first, the white house took a few days (maybe to ensure that the speech wouldn't offend anyone's views or ideologies) and the resulting Presidential address to our kids was very inspiring and well done.  The problem is that the media sensationalized it (as it always does) and you bought it hook line and sinker, that anyone who wanted to see the text of the speech first must be a right-wing wacko out to destroy your freedom.

Parent's wanting to see the text didn't make me think that my freedoms were being destroyed.  Just stop being so sensationalistic.  MY POINT IS THAT THEY ARE OVER-REACTING TO WHAT THEY HEARD IN THE MEDIA PRIOR TO THIS EVENT THAT MADE THEM GO BALLISTIC ABOUT OBAMA EVEN SPEAKING TO THEIR CHILDREN, REGARDLESS OF WHAT HE HAD TO SAY, coupled with the fact that no matter how many times they were reassured that he wasn't mentioning anything political, they still did not want him to speak to their kids and that so many parents threatened to pull their children from school JUST BECAUSE Obama was speaking to them.  

THAT is my point.  Not that their need to see the text threatens me.  More power to them for wanting to know what was being said.  Forgive me for putting a modicum of trust in the President to not do a political speech to kids.  I never once thought to question his motivation because I know it would be really stupid of him to speak politically to kids, and he's not stupid.  As a parent, I'm embarrassed if nothing else that the people of this country are so distrusting of this president when he did nothing more than be elected after Bush.  That is ONLY MY OPINION so don't go crediting all liberals, democrats, or atheists with that feeling.

[curiosityandthecat]

Andrew, you're accusing rlrose of things he never said

She.  

[iNow]

Just as an observation which is somewhat on-topic, I am seeing a lot of parallels between the population who is railing against Obama's speech to children this week and the population who rails against teachers "exposing" their children to evolution.

I now return you to the session of troll feeding which has been taking place.    

[andrewclunn]

I was stating (As I have been, consistently throughout) that when seeing that lesson plan, that parents had a right to want to see the text of the speech before having their child hear it. I am also saying that the first line there smacks of nationalism, while the second is fairly clearly (in my mind) progressive community based language.  The implications not being that the lesson plan on it's own may have been bad, but that it could be an indication of what the speech would be.  So parents demanded to see transcript first, the white house took a few days (maybe to ensure that the speech wouldn't offend anyone's views or ideologies) and the resulting Presidential address to our kids was very inspiring and well done.  The problem is that the media sensationalized it (as it always does) and you bought it hook line and sinker, that anyone who wanted to see the text of the speech first must be a right-wing wacko out to destroy your freedom.

Parent's wanting to see the text didn't make me think that my freedoms were being destroyed.  Just stop being so sensationalistic.  MY POINT IS THAT THEY ARE OVER-REACTING TO WHAT THEY HEARD IN THE MEDIA PRIOR TO THIS EVENT THAT MADE THEM GO BALLISTIC ABOUT OBAMA EVEN SPEAKING TO THEIR CHILDREN, REGARDLESS OF WHAT HE HAD TO SAY, coupled with the fact that no matter how many times they were reassured that he wasn't mentioning anything political, they still did not want him to speak to their kids and that so many parents threatened to pull their children from school JUST BECAUSE Obama was speaking to them.  

THAT is my point.  Not that their need to see the text threatens me.  More power to them for wanting to know what was being said.  Forgive me for putting a modicum of trust in the President to not do a political speech to kids.  I never once thought to question his motivation because I know it would be really stupid of him to speak politically to kids, and he's not stupid.  As a parent, I'm embarrassed if nothing else that the people of this country are so distrusting of this president when he did nothing more than be elected after Bush.  That is ONLY MY OPINION so don't go crediting all liberals, democrats, or atheists with that feeling.

Okay, I'm probably off here, but when people write in all caps and use a lot of exclamation points I take it as the equivalent of shouting.  your posts just came off (to me) as hateful rant criticizing other people of their hateful rants.  but like I said, I'm probably off base and I already apologize for apparently misinterpreting your initial post.

Here's to hoping we can try to reclaim the Happy Atheist attitude here  

[Ultima22689]

My apologies Rlrose, didn't mean to insinuate you were a guy

So I just read the link by Andrew, and I don't see your point, their touting the same thing crying socialism at every thing and how it's the root of all evil. I said there were some differences between the phrases conservative and religious right however most of the same things are said. I'm sure I never said America should become a socialist country and I still don't think so. Any of those forms of government eventually collapse in on themselves however capitalism is no different, the free market hasn't been working well for the past 8 years. I think if we adopted things like universal health care we would hardly be turning into a socialist country, maybe adopting some traits but nothing that every other 1st world country doesn't have in some similar form and last I checked people aren't losing all of their freedoms in the UK because they have socialist elements. In fact most of the countries seem to have a very, very happy population compared to America.

[andrewclunn]

My apologies Rlrose, didn't mean to insinuate you were a guy

So I just read the link by Andrew, and I don't see your point, their touting the same thing crying socialism at every thing and how it's the root of all evil. I said there were some differences between the phrases conservative and religious right however most of the same things are said. I'm sure I never said America should become a socialist country and I still don't think so. Any of those forms of government eventually collapse in on themselves however capitalism is no different, the free market hasn't been working well for the past 8 years. I think if we adopted things like universal health care we would hardly be turning into a socialist country, maybe adopting some traits but nothing that every other 1st world country doesn't have in some similar form and last I checked people aren't losing all of their freedoms in the UK because they have socialist elements. In fact most of the countries seem to have a very, very happy population compared to America.

Hahahaha.  Yeah, that's not the most left-friendly post I've seen (haven't read that one yet) but if you look to his posts on things like gay marriage and the various forms of conservatism, you'll find that we're actually a rather diverse group.  I mean I wouldn't even pretend that people from Pita and the ACLU are of the same political sphere.  Nor would I claim that the NAACP represents the same form of 'liberalism' as the United Nations.  However, these are all groups that we consider (in the states) to be 'liberal.'  I was raised in a liberal environment and as a result have come to notice and identify the diverse positions and (often opposing) opinions that fall under the banner of 'liberalism.'  I am saying that the same holds true for conservatives.  Give that site a chance.  Not because you agree with it, but because you'll learn more from exposing youself to the opinions of people who disagree with you than those who simply reinforce what you already 'know.'

[Ultima22689]

My apologies Rlrose, didn't mean to insinuate you were a guy

So I just read the link by Andrew, and I don't see your point, their touting the same thing crying socialism at every thing and how it's the root of all evil. I said there were some differences between the phrases conservative and religious right however most of the same things are said. I'm sure I never said America should become a socialist country and I still don't think so. Any of those forms of government eventually collapse in on themselves however capitalism is no different, the free market hasn't been working well for the past 8 years. I think if we adopted things like universal health care we would hardly be turning into a socialist country, maybe adopting some traits but nothing that every other 1st world country doesn't have in some similar form and last I checked people aren't losing all of their freedoms in the UK because they have socialist elements. In fact most of the countries seem to have a very, very happy population compared to America.

Hahahaha.  Yeah, that's not the most left-friendly post I've seen (haven't read that one yet) but if you look to his posts on things like gay marriage and the various forms of conservatism, you'll find that we're actually a rather diverse group.  I mean I wouldn't even pretend that people from Pita and the ACLU are of the same political sphere.  Nor would I claim that the NAACP represents the same form of 'liberalism' as the United Nations.  However, these are all groups that we consider (in the states) to be 'liberal.'  I was raised in a liberal environment and as a result have come to notice and identify the diverse positions and (often opposing) opinions that fall under the banner of 'liberalism.'  I am saying that the same holds true for conservatives.  Give that site a chance.  Not because you agree with it, but because you'll learn more from exposing youself to the opinions of people who disagree with you than those who simply reinforce what you already 'know.'

Indeed, I shall do so. It'll be nice to find some conservatives out there who aren't droned out by the fringes that appear to have besieged the conservative image along with the republican party.

[rlrose328]

Okay, I'm probably off here, but when people write in all caps and use a lot of exclamation points I take it as the equivalent of shouting.  your posts just came off (to me) as hateful rant criticizing other people of their hateful rants.  but like I said, I'm probably off base and I already apologize for apparently misinterpreting your initial post.

Here's to hoping we can try to reclaim the Happy Atheist attitude here  :bananacolor:

[rlrose328]

My apologies Rlrose, didn't mean to insinuate you were a guy lol  

[rlrose328]

I now return you to the session of troll feeding which has been taking place.    

If we can't occasionally  :shake: , we'll soon be reduced to  :yay: