CYBER BULLIES AND THE BLOGGERS WHO ENABLE THEM

By (O)CT(O)PUS

If you happen to be the wrong gender, in the wrong neighborhood, or on the wrong side of the Tea Party, criminal acts now have a partisan bias. Not all partisans! Most conservatives, liberals and libertarians – with their moral compass fully intact – condemn sadistic acts of malice. Yet, there appears to be a radical fringe that rejects all standards of common decency. When I first learned of this incident …

Sexual harassment and threats of sexual violence

prompted Shaw Kenawe to suspend her web log

... I posted a quick announcement on this web log, Who’s Your Daddy - a forum frequented by the same predators who tormented Shaw. The proprietress of subject blog issued an immediate denial:

Lisa: “Nobody here has ever made any direct threats” [Deleted]. 

In a follow-up post, I described these malicious acts (source):

"Hate messages, threats of sexual violence, allusions to smearing

victims in excrement – illustrated with vile pornography."

Hardly free speech, threats of physical violence meet the legal definition of “attempted assault.” Threats of sexual violence meet the legal definition of ‘predation.’  Any distribution of unsolicited and unwanted pornography is a violation of state and Federal laws. ALL ARE CRIMINAL OFFENSES!

In response to my article cross-posted at Progressive Eruptions, the proprietress of Who’s Your Daddy commandeered a discussion thread with blanket denials:

Lisa “Being you are all about free speech … Don't blame me for something others do” (September 30, 2014 at 9:59 PM).

Lisa: “I had nothing to do with any of whatever it is you claim happened” (September 30, 2014 at 10:04 PM).

Lisa: “Nobody ever threatened you on my blog” (September 30, 2014 at 10:32 PM). Lisa “Hey Octo … or shithead” (October 1, 2014 at 4:37 PM).

Lisa “Like I stated before and this is the last time, I am not responsible for what others post on your blog” (October 1, 2014 at 4:42 PM) 

The argument is not over comments posted on Shaw’s blog, but over comments posted on Lisa’s blog by her patrons. In essence, the argument is about hosting and enabling predators.

Apparently, Teflon Lisa has now decided to play the victim card. Consider the irony: My original post was NOT ABOUT LISA but about malice in Cyberspace. Yet, reactive and combative, Lisa turned the focus of attention to herself by denying the offenses and defending the offenders.

Given this turn of events, I am now compelled to show actual examples. By no means trivial, these examples demonstrate the kinds of harassment, humiliation, and torment endured by Shaw, not just in Cyberspace but sent to her private email account.

THE GOODS ON TEFLON LISA

Radical Redneck posted this comment on Lisa’s web log:

Radical Redneck: “Shaw will hide her fornicator’s head in unprecedented shame by ANY MEANS NECESSARY!” (March 12, 2012 at 11:12 AM). 

Embedded in Radical Redneck’s comment is a live link that brings you to a website containing offensive pornography. WARNING: Reader discretion advised.

Here is a direct exchange between Lisa and Radical Redneck:

Lisa [speaking directly to Radical Redneck]: “Hey RR the link doesn't work” (August 26, 2011 at 9:21 PM)

Radical Redneck: “http://img31.imagevenue.com/img.php?loc=loc49&image=44132_14833499.jpg” (August 27, 2011 at 11:46 AM).

If you copy the URL string in Radical Redneck’s comment and paste it into your browser, it brings you to a website containing offensive pornography. WARNING: Reader discretion advised.

Here is another comment posted by Radical Redneck on Lisa’s web log:

Radical Redneck: “Shaw and her “Life Partner” celebrate Ogabe’s *Spit* victory!” (February 18, 2011 at 7:14 PM).

Embedded in Radical Redneck’s comment is a live link that brings you to a website containing offensive pornography. WARNING: Reader discretion advised.

Yet another comment by Radical Redneck posted on Lisa’s web log:

Radical Redneck: “Chaw is sucking worthless … pick up a thug gaggle and resemble a negroe [sic] porcupine with the countless pricks going in you” (August 29, 2014 at 9:00 AM).

Radical Redneck: “Poor, simple, stupid pest Chaw. Devastated that she's far too contrived and annoying to ever get a black guy, and much to hideous to ever dream of a white guy, must compensate with banal trolling while consuming her default daddy's latest Cleveland Steamer (he always gives her a big one for Kwaanza) out of old Ben & Jerry's containers” (July 16, 2011 at 12:14 PM).

[From the Urban Dictionary: ‘Cleveland Steamer’ is defined as a crude fetishistic sex act whereupon one person – the ‘cacaphile’ - defecates on the chest of another person and smears excrement by rocking back and forth like a steam roller.]

Clearly, Lisa’s offal of denial does not pass the sniff test.  Not merely isolated examples, there are dozens of lurid comments, links to disturbing images, and threatening email messages sent to private email accounts - clearly a persistent and pervasive pattern of Cyber-Bullying.

Radical Redneck: “Shaw has never looked better!” (August 22, 2011 at 11:26 PM).

Embedded in Radical Redneck’s comment is a live link that brings you to a website containing offensive pornography. WARNING: Reader discretion advised.

The above comment originally appeared under this post. Yesterday, it disappeared from Cyberspace along with this comment:

Rusty Shackelford: “Shaw, the FCFB* (Fat Cunt From Boston) .... chief Obama jock sniffer .....” (July 15, 2014 at 8:01 PM)

No doubt, Teflon Lisa will scour her archives clean of all comments referenced herein. No matter. Posts and comments removed from Cyberspace never completely disappear without a trace. There will always be saved texts with embedded links, screen snapshots, copies of menacing email, IP addresses, and digital records stored on computer servers … diligently documented for prosecutors and process servers. Notwithstanding, there will also be shadows of the indignant desert birds reeling in self-righteous anger grasping for self-validation:

Kenosha Marge, Liberated Conservative Women: “I'm in total agreement with all of these comments that side with you against those obnoxious liberals” (October 1, 2014 at 1:57 PM).

Exposing the Hypocrisy of the Liberal Left: “… pure ignorance and extreme bull-shit …” (October 4, 2014 at 1:14 PM).

Duckys here: “Lisa, did Rotweiler post the rape and porn material?” (October 2, 2014 at 9:31 PM).

Lisa: “Ducky get lost” (October 3, 2014 at 7:40 AM).

Postscript: Honestly! I never understood nor will I ever understand why some men … and the women who enable them … harass, humiliate, debase, defile, stalk, and torment the women of this world. Women are the mothers of all humanity! Thankfully, there are far more GOOD MEN who respect and protect their partners in life and often refer to them - lovingly - as their “better half.”

FREE SPEECH, HATE SPEECH, AND THE COMPANY WE KEEP

By (O)CT(O)PUS

Our country is unique in practicing the most liberal form of free speech among Western democracies. Yet even in America, the right to free speech is by no means absolute. All rights have limitations; freedom imposes requisite responsibilities; civil and criminal laws govern our conduct. The right to free speech does not include:

Defamation, fraud, imminent incitement of lawless actions, perjury, pornography, sedition, theft of intellectual property, or violations of national security, as examples.

Our European counterparts across the pond enjoy similar freedoms. All member nations of the European Union are signatories to a convention on human rights that guarantees free speech, freedom of the press, freedom to associate, to assemble, and to demonstrate. Yet, here too are notable exceptions:

Free access to information does not abrogate a personal right to privacy. Hate speech, the propagation of hate groups, the denigration of any nation or any race or any ethnic group, any attempt to infringe upon the civil rights of any group, any promoter of genocide or any denial of a history of genocide … these are examples of prohibited speech punishable by law.

Our country does not impose such restrictions. In America, hate speech – no matter how abhorrent - is legal. Hate groups are free to associate, assemble and demonstrate in the streets. A rabid rabble may denigrate any nation or any race or any ethnic group at will. Holocaust denial - no matter how repugnant - is legal. There is no statutory right to privacy in our Constitution.

Political speech removes many restraints normally imposed under civil law. Defamation is legal. Deception, fraudulent attack ads, demagoguery, fear mongering, opponents demonizing opponents with half-truths and outright lies … these have become standard operating procedure. Money has become the currency of political speech; wealthy donors now wield more power and influence than voters; and ‘pay for play’ – formerly known as ‘graft’ – masquerades under cover of Super PACS. Yet, even political speech has limits: An informal code of community standards – and public disapproval - serves as a check on intemperate political speech.

As a medium of free speech, the Internet is the most uninhibited and unregulated of all - where anything goes. Trolls hiding beneath anonymous monikers will hijack and commandeer your discussion threads. Scammers will spam your email box with cons and malware; hackers will compromise your privacy; and cyber criminals will steal your identity. Schoolyard bullies have tormented vulnerable teenagers – driving some to suicide. Everywhere in Cyberspace, there are predators and stalkers, sadists and sociopaths. Without doubt, the Internet has devolved into a lawless and savage place. Which brings me to the subject of this post …

Sexual harassment and threats of sexual violence prompted Shaw Kenawe, author of Progressive Eruptions and long time member of this community, to suspend her web log.

This is not the first time sexual harassment has driven a woman off the Internet. Years ago, there was a well-publicized account of Kathy Sierra, a highly successful author of books on computer programming. The "Mean Kids" - men in the computer industry who were jealous of her success - threatened her with gang rape, gang violence, even death threats. Intimidated and terrorized, Kathy Sierra canceled all public appearances and removed her web log from the Internet.

Sadly, the same kind of criminal behavior that terrorized Kathy Sierra prompted Shaw’s decision. Her perpetrators originate from the far rightwing fringes of Cyberspace and use the pseudonymous monikers of Radical Redneck and Texas Stomp, among others. These email assaults on Shaw are NOT FIT FOR PUBLIC CONSUMPTION. Having seen them myself, I shall describe them only in brief: Hate messages, threats of sexual violence, allusions to smearing victims in excrement – illustrated with vile pornography.

Almost immediately, the far rightwing fringe noticed the absence of Progressive Eruptions from Cyberspace:

FreeThinke: “Chalk up another victory for censorious, cowardly, smug, closed, self-congratulatory minds … It's like MASTURBATION … How pathetically paranoid could you get?” (Deleted by blog administrator) 

There is nothing paranoid about Cyber-Bullying and threats of sexual violence. Incendiary partisan hate speech is just as contemptible as other forms of hate speech – especially when coercion and intimidation deprive victims of their safety and human dignity. Another rightwing fringe blogger issued a blanket denial:

Lisa: “Nobody here has ever made any direct threats” (Deleted by blog administrator).

Here is my reply of Friday, September 26, 2014 (edited for brevity):

Octopus: “Denial, denial, denial will score NO points under God or under Law. Since my last comment, I have received [Shaw’s] file of hate messages … Lisa, that makes not ONE or TWO but THREE followers of your blog who have menaced Shaw” (Deleted by blog administrator).

As you can surmise from the deletions noted in parenthesis, Lisa unceremoniously removed the entire post along with all 79 comments from the Internet. I will never know her thoughts or reasons; yet I wonder: Has Lisa ever experienced bullying or gender bias or sexual harassment in her lifetime? Fortunately, I was able to rescue one comment before it disappeared from Cyberspace:

FreeThinke: “The ever-present assumption of moral superiority on the part of leftists -- or any other identifiable faction like Jews and Fundamentalist Christians -- is not only DEPRESSING, it's NAUSEATING and INFURIATING  ...  If you can't take it, DON'T DISH IT OUT” (Deleted by blog administrator).

What is missing here? No word of empathy or support for the victim! No appeals to common decency! A dismissive attitude devoid of conscience! Please note the reference to ‘leftists … Jews, and Fundamentalist Christians.’ How odd, yet revealing.

Anyone who visits the far rightwing blogosphere enters an Anti-Universe where the conventions of civil discourse and logic no longer apply:

Never concede an argument (no matter how specious); always debunk opposing viewpoints (even when factual); always keep a strawman by your side (to paint your opponent in preposterously extreme terms verging on caricature); turn up the volume of tone-deafness; deny; play the victim card; attack, attack; and repeat often.

In far rightwing Cyberspace, let Projection be your ally:

Distort, misquote, harp, carp, nitpick, accuse, slander, insult, heckle, taunt, and get angry – all while accusing your opponent of behaving in precisely the same manner.

Hence, the impression of a friend who visits these faraway reaches of Space-Time:

Dave Miller: “I personally am sick and tired of being referred to by conservatives as a libturd, a socialist, a commie and whatever assorted names people can dream up to annoy” (September 17, 2013 at 11:43 PM).

Dave Miller: “I know it's off point, but seeing so many of the typical right-wing talking points, without any evidence to support their claims, pushed me to the edge …” (September 19, 2014 at 1:47 PM).

Which brings me to an obvious question: Why go there? Why subject yourself to bad faith arguments, sleazy ad hominem personal attacks, falsehoods, and never-ending verbal abuse! Why give them the satisfaction of skinning your goat! Sometimes I wonder … 

FreeThinke (August 3, 2014 at 9:36 AM):

When'er the Brits are driven away

Black tyrants often come to prey.

When White Men let their burden down

Savages will take the crown

Place it on their nappy heads […] 

How much blood might have been saved

If they'd stayed happily enslaved!

Waylon: “I don't accept at face value the official version of the 9/11 World Trade Center attacks … “Veterans Today” enumerates several points of the story which contradict the official version, including the mysterious "Dancing Israelis" …” (September 11, 2014 at 4:03 PM).

FreeThinke: “This country was conceived, designed and developed by WHITE, PROTESTANT CHRISTIAN MEN (…) As long as we stuck to THEIR concepts and abided by THER ideals, we did very well. Once the "Progressives" won a large share of public confidence, we've been plunged into incessant turmoil […] Coincidentally, the national IQ has been dropping like a stone ever since” (October 15, 2013 at 8:39:00 AM EDT).

Bizarre conspiracy theories, anti-Semitism, virulent racism: Do you read the same words on screen that I read? There are times when my conservative and libertarian friends – unburdened by a bleeding heart and starry-eyed naiveté - rise to the occasion with a keener sense of moral clarity than fellow liberals:

DMarks: “Your attempt to blame Jews is an echo of the old Nazi-touted "Protocols of the Elders of Zion” …" (September 12, 2014 at 7:54 AM).

Waylon: "… it's funny how "the chosen tribe" react when the topic is raised ...” (September 12, 2014 at 8:21 AM).

DMarks: “Waylon proved my point of his Nazi sympathies when he discussed the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion” (September 13, 2014 at 10:55 AM).

Dmarks, a conservative friend of this forum, deserves kudos for confronting anti-Semitism. Rational Nation USA, a libertarian friend of this forum, challenged the hypocritical projections of a writer whose nom de plume trades on the very idea of free thought - but turns all mirrors to the wall. The notorious FreeThinke bullies all comers alike:

“GET OUT and STAY OUT. I DON'T WANT YOU HERE. GOT THAT? NOW MOVE ALONG” (September 10, 2014 at 5:31 PM).

Dmarks: “FreeThinke: Reading your comment to RN, I can see that free thinking is not so welcome here” (September 12, 2014 at 8:05 AM).

Free speech and freedom to associate are fundamental human rights ensconced in our Constitution. Yet, four years ago, a far rightwing rabble assailed a conservative writer for committing the unpardonable sin of befriending liberals. In defense of a friend, your intrepid cephalopod wrote:

“Rightwing critics disparage the term political correctness as a Marxist plot whose aim is to undermine conservative values and impose social conformity … Yet, the same rightwing critics employ a far more sinister version of political correctness. They make use of litmus tests to enforce ideological orthodoxy in thought, speech, and personal associations. They will not hesitate to browbeat fellow conservatives into submission with condemnation and excommunication. How ironic! The rightwing accuses the left of using political correctness to impose social conformity; yet, the same rightwingers use coercive means to enforce groupthink within their ranks” (A Blessed Kristallnacht to All - January 6, 2010).

The Cringe Fringe. In my opinion, far rightwing radicals are not truly representative of a political movement. More reminiscent of a cult, they are a collective of Angry Birds, malcontents, misfits and soulless people in search of ritual scapegoats to blame for their misery. Their word salad of epithets – “libtard” and “libturd” for liberals and “”traitor” and “turncoat” for conservatives – is merely another form of projection. They shun any democratic exchange of ideas through the use of suppression, condemnation, ostracism, and elimination. Sometimes a Godwin Fallacy is not a fallacy. The Cringe Fringe is the Internet analogue of henchmen and street thugs - the adulators and adherents of demagogues and lunatic ideologues - that marked the final days of the Weimar Republic. What is their appeal? For an adrenaline rush, at least Hannibal Lector was a fictional character.

In yet another account of bullying, blackmail, and misogyny in Cyberspace, Katie McDonough reports:

“[Anyone] familiar with abuser dynamics will recognize those threats for what they were: Manipulation. Domination. More abuse [my bold] ...  But then I have this other question, a question about the abuser. How do we get him help, or whatever the word is here since “help” doesn’t seem quite right” (Monday, Sep 29, 2014 02:59 PM).”

No doubt, we encounter predators and stalkers, narcissists and sociopaths everywhere in Cyberspace, and they are VERY DISTURBED PERSONS! Yet, we must tread carefully. The nexus between behavioral science and partisan politics is dangerous because psychobabble is yet another overly-used and often-abused form of ad hominem abuse. Please recall the former Soviet Union and the use of ‘psychiatry’ as an instrument of oppression.

The Internet is NOT an appropriate medium for psychotherapy; yet we are well within our rights to demand accountability. To borrow a quote from Rational Nation USA: “Shine a bright spotlight into a dirty corner and it will get cleaned up.” Here is what ALL OF US can do:

Discuss Cyber-Bullying openly and honestly.

Condemn abusive and offensive conduct.

Report unsolicited pornography to your Internet provider.

Report Cyber-Bullying to law enforcement.

And consult this website.

I ask all men on behalf of the women in their lives - mothers, sisters, wives, daughters, family and friends inclusive – to condemn these acts of misogyny and sexism in Cyberspace. Although we play a very small part in this global Internet community, we have a mutually shared responsibility to raise the standard of discourse and keep it clean. 

Incidentally, we can also choose better friends.

Twilight of the Godwins

I have to credit the rhetorical craftiness of self-anointed conservatives who often get away with dismissing inevitable and even necessary comparisons by invoking Godwin's Law. Yes, it's inevitable that when discussing sudden transitions from civilized societies, the implosion of modern, liberal democratic, constitutional governments into to absolutist and racist tyrannies and the techniques employed, Hitler will come up. It's just as likely that Albert Einstein will come up in discussions of relativity or Tomas de Torquemada in studying the Inquisition. Just try to study the Bush administration and not think of Orwell. Try it, I dare you. Invoking Godwin as though it were more than a humorous observation is simply a tactical diversion and it seems to work by embarrassing the one who brought it up.

Barack Obama is hardly the first President to be accused absurdly of tyranny, fascism or of being a socialist, for that matter. Lincoln's assassin called him a tyrant, both Roosevelts were accused of being socialists long before the current president was born and in my day, anyone who didn't think it worth millions of lives to keep Vietnam from holding free elections was simply a Commie. Remember when Ho Chi Min wanted Humphrey to win so Happy Hubert was a Communist?

Hell, anybody who Joe McCarty didn't like for quoting the Constitution or really any reason at all was carrying that invisible card and his name was on the invisible list. Too bad there wasn't an easily produced "law" telling us that the longer a right wing apologia goes on, the more likely that Stalin or Mao will come up. Too bad there still isn't one, since people likely to make such transcendentally hyperbolic comparisons between the pragmatic, cautious Mr. Obama and absolute tyrants who caused tens of millions of deaths aren't likely to listen to arguments that are factual or too long to fit on a hand lettered cardboard sign. It would be nice to shut them off with Fogg's Law, wouldn't it?

As of late, discussions of the president begin with or are preceded by the rather airborne assumption that he's Mao Zedong, Joe Stalin, Adolph Hitler and Pol Pot rolled into some bearded bin Laden burrito, but then his father was black. Bill Clinton's father was only a white drinker and perhaps a philanderer so one usually had to wait for a sentence or two before the comparisons were dredged up -- and dredged up they always were. Yes, Bill was not only a murderer, not only going to "force health care down our throats" but going to give control of our armed forces to the UN. Bill, who murdered Vince Foster and ran a Coke smuggling operation out of Little Rock was planting nuclear weapons underneath our cities while indulging in Communist free love and of course his socialist tax increase was going to bankrupt our economy within months and destroy capitalism forever!

But no, it was terribly wrong to bring up fascism when his successor made that office the most powerful it had ever been, with the power to override congress and the courts and the Constitution. Terribly wrong when his propaganda machine began to scapegoat real and invented enemies, terribly wrong when he demanded and got special emergency powers by invoking threats that were substantially imaginary if not fraudulent. Smile and say Godwin and we're done.

Obama? Of course he's Communist and Fascist and never mind the contradiction. Of course he's a tyrant for the same reason Lincoln was a tyrant, the same reason Teddy Roosevelt was and FDR and don't you dare bring up Godwin this time!

WE RETURN TO OUR REGULARLY SCHEDULED FREE-FOR-ALL

On Sunday evening, when I first posted this article , I asked for a moratorium on new posts to keep the healthcare debate in the forefront. The response has been informative, surprising in some instances, and engaging overall. I am breaking my own moratorium because the subject has run its course, other voices need to be heard, and another subject has reared an ugly head. Our esteemed colleague, Bloggingdino, brought this to our attention:



We can laugh at the refreshing candor of Barney Frank, but this is no longer funny:



We read about Ernest Hancock, an online radio host who interviewed an assault rifle-wielding associate at a recent Obama rally. Hancock, armed with a 9 millimeter pistol that he himself brought to the rally, is a vocal supporter of a right-wing anti-government militia group convicted of conspiracy and weapons charges in the 90s … plotting to blow up federal buildings.

Chants of “Heil Hitler" and the appearance of guns at meetings and rallies are meant to intimidate and silence people. It also exposes a disturbing fact: Freedom to dissemble appeals to the lowest scum ... anti-Semites, bigots, racists, white supremacists, and violence-prone militias. The GOP exploits the emotional fervor of malcontents and misfits for political leverage. In doing so, they have alienated Blacks, Hispanics, the LGBT community, academicians, artists, intellectuals, scientists, Muslims ... and now ... Jews.

As the saying goes, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend." Our so-called conservative friends might agree. They seem to prefer the company of bigots for allies. In bashing "Libtards," they act more like a lynch mob massing at the jailhouse door intent on stringing up scapegoats. In failing to condemn this rabble, they approve of them with their silence; and such so-called 'friends' are no longer deserving of our trust.

Democracy is not well served when hooligans take over. There are times when a Godwin Fallacy is no longer a fallacy ... and these are such times.

“DONE, FINISHED, OUT’A HERE …”

When one lives among sharks and barracuda, one acquires a healthy respect for … shall we say … diversity.  To eat or be eaten is not a lifestyle to be taken lightly.  It is the way of the reef. Nothing personal.  In contrast, (O)CT(O)PUS thinks of human beings as rapacious without purpose and fractious beyond reason.  Not unlike cannibals, humans predate their own kind.

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 …

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].

Robert, however, is not the subject of this post.  This is:

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?