Protestantism

» Brian Tubbs - Labels

In response to Labels posted by paper_turtle:

I generally agree with what you say here, PT. Don't really think we differ much on these points, except that I think my labeling of SOME of the stronger voices in the current anti-war movement is on target. Cindy Sheehan, for example, is NO moderate. Anyone who calls Iraqi insurgents "freedom fighters" - and this including those blowing up troops like her own son - well, such a person can hardly be called "moderate." Her remarks have defined her as a radical.

» paper_turtle - Labels

Brian,
.
Your original statement, which prompted my response, was:
I categorically and passionately reject **all** the cynical, anti-US, leftist conspiracy theories and accusations paraded by the anti-war movement. And paraded here.
.
Now, Sheehan may have been what started this particular line of discussion relating to anti-war protest, but your statement did not mention her by name, and in fact **implied** a blanket condemnation of ALL anti-war protest.
.
I responded:
With all due respect, Brian, I wish you would stop labeling everything as leftist, or Marxist, or radical, or traitorous or whatever simply because you disagree, however strongly, with the opinions expressed.
.
IMHO that's intellectually lazy, and it seeks to persuade with emotion, not logic.
.
My protest was general, pertaining *not only* to this particular discussion but *any* discussion in which you have (forgive me) flung labels instead of really stating your case.
.
you responded:
I understand the problem with labels. But is it a coincidence that the most hardline anti-war voices - the ones saying that the US is corrupt, unjust, etc. - are all sitting in the left hand political bleachers?
.
Some labels DO fit, PT.
. . .
.
I would submit to you that those whose answers reveal them to be Left or Far Left are also - almost universally - strongly opposed to George W. Bush and the war in Iraq.
.
You said you understood, and yet your response is only further justification for labeling, and *further* labeling.
.
I responded
But it seems to me that using *certain* labels amounts to loaded language, with the implication being that people of sense, or people with strong morals, or people who are patriotic, would NOT be such-and-such. This is unfair, and may not necessarily be true.
.
. . . as I see it, assigning the label "liberal" or "conservative" to someone might NOT enhance my ability to understand,and/or appreciate what they have to say. . . . What does it ultimately prove?
.
And does that label really help me understand the other person? I think it does just the opposite. Once the label is in place we Don't have to listen, because we already know what they will say.
.
. . . I find labels do not improve my opinion about whether or not the writer is credible. In fact, the moment I spot loaded language I'm apt to completely tune out--because it seems to me the writer is incapable of being objective.
.
you responded:
I generally agree with what you say here, PT. Don't really think we differ much on these points, except that I think my labeling of SOME of the stronger voices in the current anti-war movement is on target. Cindy Sheehan, for example, is NO moderate. Anyone who calls Iraqi insurgents "freedom fighters" - and this including those blowing up troops like her own son - well, such a person can hardly be called "moderate." Her remarks have defined her as a radical.
.
Brian, I'm really not picking on you, but all I see here is more justification and a return to "rant" about Sheehan. Perhaps you're familiar with a line from Shakespeare: "Me thinks the lady doth protest too much." I have to wonder just why you feel you have to keep hammering about Sheehan, when the real point is the use of labels and how they detract from the message and cloud one's credibility.
.
If you really agreed with what I said, you would not have responded as you did.
.
peace and love,
Paper Turtle

-- posted by paper_turtle

» pink101 - Confusing but Interesting

In response to Labels posted by paper_turtle:
.
This talk about labels is confusing but interesting.
.
Using labels to settle questions about any particular issue acts to do away with any further questions, eg., "YOU are a conservative so there's no for additional talk--we know where YOU hang your hat. That's it, any discussion is ended."
.
That seems to be the role of laws like the Patriot Act. Its existence settles any and all questions about who is and who is not patriotic, or, worthy of American citizenship. Due Process is out the window and the Fourteenth Amendment is silent. If you could be indicted under it, well you are not only dispensable but are an undesirable person and so you have no Civil Rights. Further talk is a waste of time. Rotting in some dark and cold cell is too good for you. Anyone who cares about you is a fellow traveler and deserves the same treatment.
.
Whereas, the important issues are set aside and never get to be discovered.
.

-- posted by pink101

» paper_turtle - Confusing but Interesting

In response to Confusing but Interesting posted by pink101:

Phil wrote:
This talk about labels is confusing but interesting.
.
How so?
.
Using labels to settle questions about any particular issue acts to do away with any further questions, eg., "YOU are a conservative so there's no for additional talk--we know where YOU hang your hat. That's it, any discussion is ended."
.
Exactly--and I just don't understand the need for labels. Why can't we simply approach each other as *human beings?* Why can't we look at ideas as "different" rather than good/bad (or dengerous or whatever)?
.
And why on earth must everything be either/or? Why can't we think about things as both/and?
.
That seems to be the role of laws like the Patriot Act. Its existence settles any and all questions about who is and who is not patriotic, or, worthy of American citizenship. Due Process is out the window and the Fourteenth Amendment is silent.
.
Yes. The same process was at work with the McCarthy Witch hunts. The reporting of the witch hunts on TV had a very profound influence on me. I still remember how some people became so wrapped up in paranoia that they were willing to ruin the lives of people they had known since childhood--and all because of a label which very often was based on total lies.
.
And we saw the same thing in the 60's when every anti-war protester (especially a student) was viewed as a traitor. People hit me and spat in my face. They made accusations about me I can't even repeat here. Simply because I opposed the war.
.
But you know me--I'm that trouble-making liberal hippie. What do I know? (big wink)
.
peace and love,
Paper Turtle

-- posted by paper_turtle

» _Boanerges_ - 911 stupidity

http://infowars.com/articles/sept11/vide...

-- posted by _Boanerges_

» Migisi - Confusing but Interesting

In response to Confusing but Interesting posted by paper_turtle:

.
But you know me--I'm that trouble-making liberal hippie. What do I know? (big wink)
.
I was proud of the hard-hat's "hippy pinko commy" (add "longhair" for the guys) label back then. Now, we anti-war folks are called 'liberals' or 'leftists'. Sigh. Somehow, those just don't have the same creative flair.

-- posted by Migisi

» Migisi - 911 stupidity

In response to 911 stupidity posted by _Boanerges_:

.
Oh my god!! They ALL ought to be wearing a 'stupid' sign (apologies to comedian Bill Engvall).

-- posted by Migisi

» pink101 - June 14th--Flag Day USA

.
Today is Flag Day in the United States--June 14th.
.
And, it is going to be a blinger in Kalamazoo, Michigan.
.

-- posted by pink101

» _Boanerges_ - 911 stupidity

In response to 911 stupidity posted by Migisi:
they ALL ought to be wearing a 'stupid' sign (apologies to comedian Bill Engvall).
what a sad reality.... (yawn, sigh, eye roll...)

-- posted by _Boanerges_

» Brian Tubbs - Back to Memorial Day

A sad commentary about a Memorial Day parade in Falls Church, Virginia. Used to live near Falls Church - even worked there briefly. I know what this author is speaking of. Truly a shame.

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/RichT...