The title of this post does not signal my intent to quit The Swash Zone or retreat from Cyberspace. These are my last words in a comment thread posted yesterday at Conservative Convictions, or as Captain Fogg likes to jest, Conservative Convicts.
It started with this post, “The Call to Dunkirk” Launches Mass Exodus From Public Schools. According to a video, it equates public education and “liberals” with fascism and Nazis. I responded to this post with the following comment:
(O)CT(O)PUS: Gayle, if you don’t want to send your offspring to public school, that is your business; but to imply that those of us whose support of public education is akin to National Socialism, your attitude is disrespectful of other religious denominations and persons of conscience who hold different views.A reasonable reply, I thought, but not according to Robert. Having known him for some time, he has … shall we say … a head for illogic thicker than a stone crab. He obfuscates, perambulates, or simply ignores any point deemed inconvenient. Here are examples:
ROBERT: First, the suggestion that the First Amendment bars religion from public schools is absurd and I think it sad [Note Appeal to Emotion fallacy] that people consider this worthy of debate …Robert, however, is not the subject of this post. This is:
The framers had no problems with simply stating that troops quartered in private homes was forbidden, but the left suggests that they "meant" that religion was to be only a private matter [Note Analogical Argument fallacy] …
This intenet [sic] is supposed to have come from delegates to the Constitutional Convention where many were required to be a member of a church to be a delegate [Note Non Causa Pro Causa fallacy] …
I did not find this offensive at all [Note Subjective Argument fallacy].
Public education, as a general rule, has deteriorated to the point of spending an entire year teaching to pass a single test [Note Projective Identification fallacy that blames liberals for a program authored by conservatives] …
I knew more about history, geography, science, and humanities by the 5th grade than my children who are in high school have been taught [Note Questionable Authority fallacy] ….
There is tight local involvement, and because we are a red state and red county, our system is mostly rid of the liberal infestation of Al Gore movies and absurd anti-religious views [Note Appeal to Ridicule fallacy] …
Nowhere does it say that we are to humble ourselves before other religions, nor to place them on a level field with Christianity [Note Special Pleading fallacy].
GAYLE: Wow! I didn't realize liberals were so against people deciding how they want their own children to be educated … I'm an American, and we still have freedom of choice in this country whether liberals like it or not. Public school, private school or homeschool [sic]. It's up to the parents, period.Fine, fine, fine, except that is NOT what I said. If you are reading this, Gayle, please write on the blackboard 100 times: This is not what 8pus said. In fact, your faithful 8pus is himself a graduate of the Sargasso Academy, a posh and exclusive preparatory school for snooty cephalopods.
If you are re-reading my first comment, Gayle, I objected to your use of Godwin’s Reductio ad Hitlerum fallacy that equates liberals with Nazis:
(O)CT(O)PUS: Do you mean to imply that Jewish Americans, whose ancestors were killed in the Holocaust, are now consorting with Nazis just because they send their kids to public school?There is more to Gayle’s post that I found objectionable. I referenced the website, ExodusMandate.org, and found this:
"Christians have already become numb to the moral relativism that is taught in all public schools today. Now children will be told that their sexual orientation and gender are relative, too. No longer will children raised in these schools understand that God made us male and female with different, but complementary roles. Instead, children will be taught that sexual orientation and gender are merely a matter of personal choice … The likely consequences of this for children, the institution of the family, our churches, and our culture are horrendous."In other words, The Exodus Mandate is not about reading, writing, and arithmetic, or about a better education, or even about a religious education. The hidden message is all too obvious (my paraphrase): “Since those fascist liberals will not allow discrimination against homosexuals in public, we choose to separate ourselves and practice discrimination in private.” Thus, the covert mission of the Exodus Mandate is DISCRIMINATION and HOMOPHOBIA. I am just shocked to discover Christians engaging in stealth and guile; I thought this was Satan’s work.
I cannot, will not countenance discrimination in any form whatsoever based on ethnicity, gender, national origin, race, religion, or sexual orientation. And I refuse to be associated with any forum that does. With a heavy heart, I have decided to remove Conservative Convictions from our link list and shall return there no more.
Any objections?
Let 'em stew.
ReplyDeletePublic schools should not spend time (and therefore money) promoting a divisive social agenda. The whole point of public schooling is to create an educated, diverse society that GETS ALONG WITH ITSELF.
Oh, I don’t know, Octo – I’m not sure there’s a need to take anybody off the reading roll on the basis of one or two interactions. I get along well with Robert even though we have different views. But it’s your choice since it’s your blog.
ReplyDeleteI’ll reserve comment on what others have said about the education issue except to second Matt's comment, but in general, it seems to me that public education’s justification is straightforward: if you don’t provide a good system of that sort, you’re likely to end up with a hidebound society that divides itself steeply and perpetually along class lines. Public education is supposed to provide a measure of social mobility for those not fortunate enough to be born with access to the good things in life. Education should be treated as a fundamental right, not as a privilege: that is the spirit in which one can support excellent, open-access education quite aside from the whole liberal/conservative divide. It is easily forgotten just how fragile civilization is – it takes work and close attention to maintain a civilized society. If we fail to pass on to the next generation the opportunities and civic values (fairness, humaneness, decency, etc.) that make a good life possible, we risk losing everything. We should insist that public education be as good as possible, not demand that it be dismantled or diminished in any way or always hide behind bogus “standardized tests” to measure what’s going on. I would certainly agree that public education’s quality isn’t anywhere near where it ought to be, but that is an argument for improving the system, not dismantling it.
Anyhow, I went to public primary and secondary schools, and I found that the main problem wasn’t teachers trying to stuff my mind full of notions (political, religious, or otherwise) but rather teachers who were either overworked or who sat around filing their nails or cracking jokes during class. There were some excellent and dedicated instructors along the way, and there were some hacks and time-servers, too. But I seldom came across anyone who seemed to have a particular ideology to push, at least not to a degree that I considered overbearing or obnoxious.
But it’s your choice since it’s your blog.
ReplyDeleteI feel that this is your blog too … that I should be less preemptive or unilateral. If I were to disappear for a month, for example, you can assume Octo was eaten by a shark … and I would hope you and Squid and Fogg and the others would simply take over. An 8pus has a shorter life span than a Dino.
Don’t get me wrong. I am not happy about this. Robert and I go back almost two years, and we’ve had spirited arguments before. I just feel it is important to take a moral stand and say: “I don’t approve of discrimination and homophobia,” and that is what I saw in Gayle’s post. If there were a better reason to support private, parochial, or a home school education, I would not disagree. But the underlying rationale in Gayle’s post was to privatize discrimination. I also object to the Godwin fallacy, of which Robert is also guilty.
Robert is resolute in his absolute views, and I am resolute in my sense of social justice. If he will not respect my viewpoint, then why should I respect his?
As I mentioned in my above post, I did receive a privileged education but I am ever mindful of my grandparents’ poverty in the Great Depression and how scholarships in the public system allowed my parents to get an education and advance themselves. I support public education for all these reasons, yet I do not pass judgment on those who choose otherwise … unless motivated by stealth and guile.
Bloggingdino, I read your words and softened my heart. If Robert is reading this, I say unto him:
ReplyDeleteFollow the "Porpoise Driven Life" and head the words of the Almighty Cod: Do not bash or trash your fellow Homo sapiens.
Dear 8pus, your passion is evident but do allow a cooling off period.
ReplyDelete" Robert is resolute in his absolute views, and I am resolute in my sense of social justice. If he will not respect my viewpoint, then why should I respect his?"
Does this not suggest that while you both disagree, Robert still respects your right to have a differing opinion?
You can't beat people over the head; you must remain calm, rational and state your case one point at a time. And even then you won't change others' way of thinking, just as they won't change yours but isn't it better to have an exchange of ideas for all to consider than to slam the door, turn the lock and throw away the key?
I find the rationale behind this "call to Dunkirk" a bit overbearing and histronic, but if people want to home school or send their kids to "Christian" school, so what? The Catholics have been doing it for ages; it is hardly a new concept.
But, personally, I pay taxes to have schools that educate children and I think we taxpayers should ensure we are getting our money's worth and if not, then we should hold the board of ed accountable.
I just never found the hide your "head in the sand" ideology very practical.
Come on out of the seaweed and blow some bubbles, it really isn't that bad out here...
Rocky, if Robert respected my opinion, he would have disavowed language and inferences that equate liberals and fascists. This is very insulting.
ReplyDeleteWith respect to discrimination and gay-bashing, I am not making this up, nor is this a matter that can be tossed aside. In the above post, I provided a link to the page where the quotation appears, and the mission and purpose of the Exodus Mandate is clear and unmistakable:
Since those fascist liberals will not allow us to discriminate against homosexuals in public, we choose to separate ourselves and practice discrimination in private.
Rocky, if you were to swap the words "homosexual" with "Jew" or "Black," would the meaning of what I am trying to say be any clearer?
I agree with much that has been said. Parents of course have the right to educate their children as they see fit. And yes, Rocky, there isn't anything we can do about it & the catholics have been doing so for years. However - I think Octopus is exactly right to raise the alarm The children raised by such an ideological mindset either in private school or home school will be living in the world with the rest of our children raised in public schools. They are the future & a force to be reckoned with. Also - let's not be naive. This ideological push is bringing pressure to bear on the public school system as well. Remember Kansas & creationism?
ReplyDeleteAs for the whole Nazi etc thing. We have been allowing the overuse & misuse of this "adjective" to creep into our colloquial speak for quite some time. How many of us have heard the phrase "parking nazi" to refer to an overzealous writer of parking tickets? or - my personal fav - feminazi? All such uses of this phrase are insulting to those that actually did suffer under Nazism. Apparently the writer of the post in question is also prone to such insulting & reductive overstatement.
OK - Squid has had her say . . .
As at least one of you knows, I caused a bit of unpleasantness locally by replying to a published opinion that Atheists were of the same tribe as Pol Pot, Stalin, Mao, Hitler and a few others and therefore should not be able to comment on the doings of true Christian Americans or Christmas.
ReplyDeleteTo say I'm fed up with these jihadists; those who pretend objectivity and reason and those who simply rage and lie and spew hate, isn't sufficient. Bitterness is driving me to guns and nihilism.
They have nothing good or constructive or true to say, they are too demented to reason with; too dishonest, too limited by genetics and experience as your analysis shows. They cannot be made compatible with civilized society and they are and always have been a danger to it. To call them conservative is to play their game and to play their game is to lose. They are barbarians and their pretense to good will is no more sincere than any of the lies and distortions their entire mentality is based on. They are a disease and should be quarantined.
Rocky, I want to share with you a comment thread from over a year ago that took place in a galaxy far, far away:
ReplyDelete- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Comity and cooperation, this is a very important subject and one that occupies my thoughts all the time. But let me ask you this, not just you, Echidne, but everyone who drops by: Is comity and cooperation just about the candidates or about ourselves as well?
As bloggers and commenters, we witness much enmity between political extremes, and some of us even add fuel to that enmity. Do any of you visit conservative blogs? Have conservative friends within your social circle? Find shared values or common cause?
I am interesting in hearing from anyone/everyone on this subject because I think we can agree that political polarity is causing a policy paralysis that is harmful to us all.
I have had successful and constructive conversations within my circle of friends that I have rarely found in the blogosphere. Would you consider this worthy of discussion here?
swampcracker | Homepage | 12.17.07 - 10:33 pm
swampcracker - I have family members and some fairly close friends who are conservative - two of whom I met on-line and whose blogs I do frequent. However, any kind of political discussion has to be approached extremely gingerly, and points of contention veered away from or the rancor gets thick very quickly.
On the opposite side, I occassionally will engage with a conservative on-line without diluting my opinions down to practically nothing. The results have never been pretty. The first called me (direct quotes) "a raddled old harridan" while the second was even more charming: "you secretly want someone to point out what a slothful, disgusting, odiferous, bloblike caricature of a human being you have allowed yourself to become". Both in response to quite mild comments that happened to disagree with their views.
Tapetum | Homepage | 12.18.07 - 12:01 am
I have noticed that too, but I have a very close friend with whom I discuss politics and have found more areas of agreement than we thought possible. We agree on goals and objectives but differ on implementation.
There is one, and only one, conservative bloggist thus far with whom I have developed a rapport. We agreed in advance not to try convert each other; all discourse has been mutually respectful to date. We have sometimes made concessions to each other because we have been intellectually honest and open and frame our POVs with a high degree of precision.
swampcracker | Homepage | 12.18.07 - 12:26 am
I am not interested in having a "dialogue" with people whose political philosophy includes the axiom "bipartisanship is date rape," for much the same reason I'm not interested in having a pleasant social evening with someone who thinks rape is a relaxing way to spend a night off.
Up to and until people on the right start demonstrating that they're capable of behaving -- which means everything from not calling people "raddled old harridans" or "twats" to not using eliminationist rhetoric (seen those Liberal Hunting Licenses?) to not pulling stunts like going after non-anonymous liberal political bloggers to try to halt their cancer treatments because they think the person either doesn't really exist or is scamming (google Andy Stephenson, who is dead now), to not publishing "enemies lists" of people they don't happen to like and encouraging their followers to go after the folks on the list (which has been common as dirt on the right since Nixon and Governor Reagan), to not endorsing flagrant lawbreaking as long as it's one of "theirs" who does it. I'm not interested in comity, amity, or a night at the movies. Show me you can behave like polite company, and I might invite you to dinner. I don't hate these people, but I do think they're extremely misguided and I won't lie about how much they terrify me, either. (Which is exactly the point. A few Barnett Slepians, Andy Stephensons, and nameless anti-war activists, and the message of You're next. Soon becomes all too clear...)
Interrobang | 12.18.07 - 2:12 pm
Interrobang, I am not suggesting that we tolerate antisocial behavior, or sociopathy, in any form, but if every house on the block were labeled either red or blue and treated accordingly, there would be no more basis for neighborliness or community. There is a point where we need to say “hello” when we retrieve our mail and take the trash to the curb.
swampcracker | Homepage | 12.18.07 - 3:51 pm
I AM interested in real comity, but it has to be mutual. It must start from acknowledging that the other person is a human being, that he or she belongs to the same web of life, that he or she has feelings and ability to think and so on.
I am also very sad with the "othering" that goes on all the time in politics. The problem with stopping it is that it doesn't work unless both sides stop, and if you stop all alone then you are going to be roadkill.
Echidne | Homepage | 12.18.07 - 3:55 pm
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Rockync, the next contributer to this thread was Robert. One would think he read these comments and would make at least a token attempt to stop the liberal-bashing.
Please understand, Rocky, after more than a year of trying, there is no-one more disappointed and heartbroken about this than your faithful 8pus.
8pus, forgive me for my rather lazy inattention to the whole thread of that post; I guess there were so many issues being generated my brain became a little addled.
ReplyDeleteViewing the video once again, I tried to just focus on the message and I did indeed pick up on the underlying subliminal message of hate and intolerance (aside from the OBVIOUS Nazi references). Of course, my first reaction which is my usual reaction when dealing with any spew coming from the right wing nuttery that TRY to pass themselves off as "Christians" is to write off their histronics and hysteria as attention mongering. And then, of course, there were those who simply thought the discussion should be about "Christians" pulling their children out of the public school system.
This was the comment that I had left over there:
"Having raised four children to adulthood, all with a public school education, I have found out some simple truths.
Young people are not sponges, nor are they stupid or that naive.
You will raise your children instilling your beliefs in them and they will gather further information from TV, school, their friends, etc. In the end, if you have done a good job of raising your children to be free thinking adults capable of making their own decisions and conducting their own lives, they will form their own opinions and beliefs that will aggravate you to no end!
The key to a good education is to be involved. By all means,look at your childrens' papers, ask them about their classes, if you have doubts, request to monitor a class. (I'm sure most of you do these things already.)
I had one child (the phycisist) who had English in 7th grade with a female teacher and went from an A to an F in one semester. Upon questioning my child and then talking to a few other parents I discovered this teacher did not like boys and was rather abusive to them.
I made an appointment with the principal, presented my case and demanded my son's removal from the class. I also informed him that doing an investigation of her teaching methods would be in his best interest as I would be filing a formal complaint with the school board and the state board of ed. And that is what I did.
I guess I could have pulled him out of that school but then he would have lost his social network. I think my son learned something far more important; that there are ways to work within the system and don't piss off Mom! :)
That was not the first or last incident in which I intervened. But my sons were made VERY aware that if I thought their actions just or their treatment by another unfair, I would be right up front defending them, but if I found out they had put a toe over the line...
It isn't a perfect world and as much as we want to protect our children,they will grow up and leave our protection.
If you really want to home school, I think you should. But be aware of not only what your children will gain but what they will lose.
Personally, I didn't have too much trouble with the cirriculum until it came to science. When my children were learning about dinosaurs and evolution, etc I made a point of explaining that this was a THEORY and then I made sure they understood the meaning of THEORY. I pointed out theories that later turned out to be wrong (like the world is flat) and those that turned out to be correct (like the theory of relativity). My sons are wonderful men, solid citizens, honest and compassionate.
My conclusion is that much more important to a child's education is YOUR actions and words - it is YOU from whom they are taking their cues. Watch your child and you will see a mirror of the way YOU act and react to situations.
Many religions DO have their own schools so this is not a new idea. And home schooling isn't a walk in the park either.
A mass exodus from public school will NOT solve this country's social ills and I hope you will take time to consider whether your desire to home school or go to a "Christian" school is just a knee jerk reaction or truly in your child's best interest."
But I must agree after reading over the comments once again that there is a level of disrespect and intolerance bleeding through and that is rather disappointing.
I'm cross-posting this comment on CC, as I think there's been some serious failure of communication (a reason why conservative/liberal back and forths go so very off the rails most times). Perhaps it will clear the air and hopefully lead to everyone getting a big virtual hug a-goin' and you might :
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, I finally watched the whole video (as opposed to just enough to get the gist (I do this often)).
My simple comment to the entire argument was that we should just take back the schools. However, I could see myself butting heads with this bunch of "Faith Nazis" just as fast as the "liberal fascist menace" that they seem to so violently fear will suck the country to at least Heck's reception area, if not Hell's lake of fire (where they have to have metal playing 204/7!).
But as usual, the lines were drawn between those who believed liberalism was turning children into little brown shirts worshiping Holy Mother State, and those who think the Christians are trying to break out with Inquisition 2.0.
But the problem is, as usual, more complex.
Yes, Christianity has left government school system, but a civic morality (which is simply the Golden Rule w/o God attached) went away with it. And far too many people forgot that the purpose of school was to educate, not conduct social experiments. And as education became less personal and more institutional, we started having the bottom of the barrel crawling into the profession of teacher.
So now, because no one has figured out what the real problem with education really is (as in, it's not about education anymore), we fight over ashattery such as this.
Gayle, Robert, it's this embrace of the religion-is-everything crowd that drives away people that could be swayed to conservative viewpoints, because I've found far too many Christians that are more intolerant than the intolerant any time their line of beliefs is crossed. And their supposed well-understood comments that resonate among the faithful hit a wall (like a certain excreted substance) the moment they leave the church. The danger of video is that it is easy to splatter imagery and anger people. In that vid, they lost my kind interest when they started with the Columbine footage (which is where I initially stopped and assumed). So you really need to look at some of these vids from another angle before you use them to spread conservatism. Converting people to a conservative worldview means not pissing them off.
8pus, as the angered party, you probably need to realize that many things that were understood as parts of civil society (as a general consensus on faith (as opposed to specific dogma) in America was) have been swept away in the rush to our modern world. And when have you ever seen someone react well when their ingrained faith is challenged? The excesses of the Christians today is in response to everything we have learned over my lifetime alone (and I'm not that old). But getting pissed and running away means you lose a battle, and perhaps a chance to convince the angry to embrace something better. It's something that has made the angriest liberal have problems arguing with me.
So.
Now that I've got my thoughts out (and burned a bridge or two), let's all get on that hug:
*hug*
Patrick, please accept my thanks for your visit and comments.
ReplyDeleteFor lack of a better term, what I see is a "Culture of Ridicule" among conservatives that scapegoats liberals for every ill and frustration of the modern world, real or imagined. This constant barrage of derision and scorn is not my idea of a "Kumbaya" moment.
8: That's why you have to make them.
ReplyDelete