Boycott Ender's Game?

[Just_A_Guy]

It reminds me of when dash was posting. If there was a post about breasts or male anatomy you knew he'd be there.

Oh, the memories . . .

[Soulsearcher]

Oh, the memories . . .

I never know if it's fond memories or trauma

[LittleWyvern]

That means the those who are mourning the lost of civility and middle ground in the discourse need to make their voices louder... As long as the extreme ends of your own group are the loudest and most visible they are going to define you for everyone else. As long as their extremely distasteful (and frankly wrong) tactics are not loudly, and prolongly denounce by their own middle ground they will define you. Both sides need to do some through house cleaning if this is to be recovered.

Well, yeah, but it's equally important for people to take at least more than a lazy cursory effort to find out what a group actually stands for and what kind of people are in it. It's the same thing we ask of investigators of the Church.

[Windseeker]

That means the those who are mourning the lost of civility and middle ground in the discourse need to make their voices louder... As long as the extreme ends of your own group are the loudest and most visible they are going to define you for everyone else. As long as their extremely distasteful (and frankly wrong) tactics are not loudly, and prolongly denounce by their own middle ground they will define you. Both sides need to do some through house cleaning if this is to be recovered.

I must disagree here. From my own personal experience the right does not give voice to the extreme elements. The media and the left focus on painting the entire right as extremist and out of touch but it couldn't be further than the truth. A matter of fact without the media's agenda the extreme right elements wouldn't have voice at all because they are so small as to be laughable. The right is much better at ignoring those on the fringes. I do think the right needs some house cleaning, and that's to get rid of the rhinos and country clubbers. Can anyone name any extreme measures proposed by the right?

The left on the other hand is completely controlled by the most extreme ends of their group. I've seen this first hand and frankly we all have with this congress and this President. They promised fundamental change and we got it in spades. I find nothing about their agenda that is moderate. It's all radical.

[Soulsearcher]

I must disagree here. From my own personal experience the right does not give voice to the extreme elements. The media and the left focus on painting the entire right as extremist and out of touch but it couldn't be further than the truth. A matter of fact without the media's agenda the extreme right elements wouldn't have voice at all because they are so small as to be laughable. The right is much better at ignoring those on the fringes. I do think the right needs some house cleaning, and that's to get rid of the rhinos and country clubbers. Can anyone name any extreme measures proposed by the right?

The left on the other hand is completely controlled by the most extreme ends of their group. I've seen this first hand and frankly we all have with this congress and this President. They promised fundamental change and we got it in spades. I find nothing about their agenda that is moderate. It's all radical.

I think this might be a matter of perspective as well. I hear constantly from so many groups and individuals that are so fringe and extreme from the right. NARTH, NOM, Rick Santorum, Brian Fisher and the list goes on. The entire marriage contract the religious right tried to get all the candidates to sign for the last election was seen as extreme by the left. The number of preachers who have suggested gay only islands or fenced off areas so the will just all die with out breeding, or the preacher who suggested beating gay children might turn them straight. Another federal marriage amendment was just introduced. The fact the right still find it acceptable to fire or evict gays just because they are gay seems a little extreme as well. Heck even the LDS church has a few issues agreeing with that last one.

[prisonchaplain]

The middle ground is not a set of policy positions, but a demeanor. How do you find a middle ground on abortion? Let me ask that again, and presume you are an active Catholic who does not even agree with artificial means of birth control? How does a conservative Christian-Jew-Muslim find a middle ground on same-sex attraction as a matter of public policy? Likewise for pro-choice, and for those who believe same sex attraction is equivalent to race? The answer is engagement and to believe that the image of God is in each human. Soul must see hope for more understanding, so he continues to engage here. Likewise with many of us. Hey, an a Pentecostal preacher, and I've been on an LDS site since 2006! Did we find a middle ground theologically or doctrinally? I never imagined we would. Jesus was right--the middle ground is to love God and our neighbor.

[Soulsearcher]

The middle ground is not a set of policy positions, but a demeanor. How do you find a middle ground on abortion? Let me ask that again, and presume you are an active Catholic who does not even agree with artificial means of birth control? How does a conservative Christian-Jew-Muslim find a middle ground on same-sex attraction as a matter of public policy? Likewise for pro-choice, and for those who believe same sex attraction is equivalent to race? The answer is engagement and to believe that the image of God is in each human. Soul must see hope for more understanding, so he continues to engage here. Likewise with many of us. Hey, an a Pentecostal preacher, and I've been on an LDS site since 2006! Did we find a middle ground theologically or doctrinally? I never imagined we would. Jesus was right--the middle ground is to love God and our neighbor.

Again PC says it just in the right way. It's how you approach, speak and listen. There doesn't even have to be a solid agreement, just a willingness to be open and show the respect you'd like. Golden rule approaches from both sides of a conflict tends to lead to a much better resolution than strong arming from either side and has much better chances of both sides living a bit more peacefully after what ever out come arises. LOL now if only we could get the big players to act like me and PC :)

[estradling75]

I must disagree here. From my own personal experience the right does not give voice to the extreme elements. The media and the left focus on painting the entire right as extremist and out of touch but it couldn't be further than the truth. A matter of fact without the media's agenda the extreme right elements wouldn't have voice at all because they are so small as to be laughable. The right is much better at ignoring those on the fringes. I do think the right needs some house cleaning, and that's to get rid of the rhinos and country clubbers. Can anyone name any extreme measures proposed by the right?

The left on the other hand is completely controlled by the most extreme ends of their group. I've seen this first hand and frankly we all have with this congress and this President. They promised fundamental change and we got it in spades. I find nothing about their agenda that is moderate. It's all radical.

You missed my point...

As evidenced in this thread both sides are able to get their message out (love the information age) painting their opposition in the blackest of black dye when they do some thing wrong. The preacher who told he congregation to attack and the preacher who was assaulted were the opposite examples given. Both stories were findable by a simple google search... Both stories are out there, both sides are making their case. The idea that only one side can be heard is simply not supported.

While there might not be a middle ground to be had there was an expression of regret about the lost of the loyal opposition status. I believe this is a result of the appearance of both sides abandoning a principled stance.

When one side is using its resources to condemn attacks on its members and writing a moving piece against the use of violence as a means to an end, and then remains silent as people associated with it cause use or threaten violence against the other side. That gives the appearance that you will do anything to win verses really standing on principle.

Now the complaint is that people should be looking more closely if so they would see it. But how can they see it if the side isn't really talking about it? How can it be seen if the rebuke of their own extremist does not sit side by side with the rebuke of their opponent?

Lets run an case using the examples given... Have a site for one of the side run both articles... In the one it rebukes it opposites and in the other it make it clear the actions done by the more extremest associated with them are wrong in tactic, methods, is simply not the way forward, and that you would support all legal and lawful methods to hold them accountable.

Then let take an individual who is leaning in the opposite direction does a google search and find both stories written by the same side on the same webpage and reads them both. While they might not change their minds but if they notice that the opposing group is actively holding it own members to the same standard and give erring members of its own group the same treatment as they do to the opposing side. Then it becomes much harder for that individual to leave that site feeling that their opposition 'hates them' and it becomes much more believable when they make the claim that they are only against certain things rather then everything about them.

[Windseeker]

I understand your point.

I'm simply stating that the movement itself is absolutely radical and led by extremists. I wouldn't even call the opposition conservative. It's moderate. There is no need for conservatives to paint progressives as anything. Their open agenda is turning on its head the wisdom of ages. Even the Romans upheld marriage as only between man and women despite ramped homosexuality. Calling the opposition to gay marriage extreme is silly beyond belief. You can compare stories of hate filled preachers and bully activists all you want, at its roots it's an outright lie to label the right as extreme.

Some preacher trying to get his 15 minutes of fame by stating some stupid thing about putting gays on an island is pathetic. It goes against every conservative principle in existence not to mention the gospel of Jesus Christ, it will never happen, with no help from the left.

I do value Soulsearcher and Prisonchaplains tone. I think it’s much easier for Soulsearcher he’s winning and will win. PC is losing and knows like other faithful followers of Christ that we are simply fighting for a delay of the inevitable out of love and charity for our fellowmen and progeny.

[carlimac]

What seems extreme to one is simple common sense or truth to another. As I read the NARTH webpage I'm filled with a warmth that I believe is the confirmation of the Holy Ghost of truth. I feel that same warmth as I read whatever the LDS church has to say about homosexuality. Gays in or pursuing a relationship with their same gender don't seem to get that same warmth.

So who's right? Could it be that I'm being completely schnookered by satan?

Edited July 10, 2013 by carlimac

[annewandering]

it will never happen, with no help from the left.

.

Oh for heaven's sake.

[Windseeker]

You really think the Left is preventing the Conservatives from rounding up Gays and putting them on an island? For heaven's sake indeed.

What I'm saying Anne is I don't believe that handwringing over comments like this is based in reason. I've seen first hand how those on the right self-police. I don't see this on the left. A matter of fact I've seen troublemakers join a rally and be asked to leave simply becuase of the language they were using and I watched these same individuals walk around and join the protest on the other side where their language and violent nature was ignored.

[carlimac]

The middle ground is not a set of policy positions, but a demeanor. How do you find a middle ground on abortion? Let me ask that again, and presume you are an active Catholic who does not even agree with artificial means of birth control? How does a conservative Christian-Jew-Muslim find a middle ground on same-sex attraction as a matter of public policy? Likewise for pro-choice, and for those who believe same sex attraction is equivalent to race? The answer is engagement and to believe that the image of God is in each human. Soul must see hope for more understanding, so he continues to engage here. Likewise with many of us. Hey, an a Pentecostal preacher, and I've been on an LDS site since 2006! Did we find a middle ground theologically or doctrinally? I never imagined we would. Jesus was right--the middle ground is to love God and our neighbor.

My opinion- ( I just know you've all been waiting!)

Legislative policy-wise-

Abortion: there should be no middle ground except in cases of the mother's very life being in danger. Extremely rare.

Abuse: No middle ground

Murder: No middle ground

Porn: No middle ground.

Drugs and alcohol: Depends on your convictions be they religious or merely related to bodily health. I don't see any middle ground for myself but others do for them. I've been to dinner many times where folks in my party are drinking and we get on just fine. They are always more chipper than I am.

Homosexuality: The LDS church has the best middle ground policy I've seen anywhere.

According to the Gospel of Jesus Christ-

The middle ground is always to recognize that each individual is a beloved son or daughter of God and that we MUST treat them that way and respect that piece of divinity in them no matter what they do. (Except in cases of self defense.) But recognizing that divinity doesn't have to equate to accepting what they do. I guess it really comes down to...drum roll..."Love the sinner but not the sin!"

[estradling75]

You really think the Left is preventing the Conservatives from rounding up Gays and putting them on an island? For heaven's sake indeed.

And if you think this is a battle of reality... Instead of a battle of perception.. you will lose because you aren't even on the right playing field. If you don't control how you appear to others... Your opponent will

[Windseeker]

And if you think this is a battle of reality... Instead of a battle of perception.. you will lose because you aren't even on the right playing field. If you don't control how you appear to others... Your opponent will

I agree but please consider how we appear is more important to the emotional Left then the rational Right who are more concerned about facts and reality. It's a battle we can't win.

Reality simply doesn't matter. The fact that I shared a condo in Manhatten with 8 homosexuals for several years after my mission, commuted 6 years with a much loved lesbian couple, support my daughter in her friendships with several kids that identify as homosexual and attended the South Florida Pride Wind Ensemble last week with my wife supporting a gay friend of ours in the band means little. The minute I idenitfy as a conservative or a tea partier (I've never given them a cent but like their ideas) the assumption from many on the left is that I'm filled with hate. (I should say on this forum. I certainly don't get that kind of reaction face to face with those I come in contact with..wonder if it's because LDS liberals are less tolerant)

So you are right, it's a perceptions problem. Look at how conservative African Americans are treated, I know Gay and Lesbians that are in the closet about their conservative ideas and religion..pretty sad right?

It's not fair

Edited July 10, 2013 by Windseeker

[LittleWyvern]

You really think the Left is preventing the Conservatives from rounding up Gays and putting them on an island?

Are you poking fun at Jon McNaughton?

[Windseeker]

Are you poking fun at Jon McNaughton?

So glad I wasn't driking anything when I clicked that link. Hilarious!

[LittleWyvern]

So glad I wasn't driking anything when I clicked that link. Hilarious!

Unfortunately, that's not a parody: the artist seriously thinks that what you typed out in jest is a good idea and seriously wants to do it.

...of course, in my mind, that makes the picture that much more hilarious.

[Windseeker]

Unfortunately, that's not a parody: the artist seriously thinks that what you typed out in jest is a good idea and seriously wants to do it.

...of course, in my mind, that makes the picture that much more hilarious.

"Liberalism is a Disease" and then showing prominant left-wingers quarantined on an island is not parody?

I think most people take this as a witticism but since it's irreverent to some of your icons it's normal that you find it offensive.

I'm certain that modern day U.S. conservatives would find the literal act of banishing an individual because we don't agree with their speech antithesis to our values of freedom and liberty.

Obama has Prosecuted More Whistleblowers than All Other Presidents COMBINED | Washington's Blog

The New York Times reported last year:

In President Obama’s 26 months in office, civilian and military prosecutors have charged five people in cases involving leaking information, more than all previous presidents combined.

Andrew Kreig notes:

[Government Accountability Project's] Homeland Security and Human Rights Director Jesselyn Radack, a well-credential ethics advisor in 2001 at the Bush Department of Justice [said] “Obama … has brought more prosecutions against whistleblowers under the Espionage Act than any previous president and all presidents combined.”

The former head of the National Security Agency’s global digital data gathering program – William Binney – confirmed to Democracy Now’s Amy Goodman:

AMY GOODMAN: [T]he number of people who have been indicted are more than all presidents combined in the past.

WILLIAM BINNEY: Right. And I think it’s to silence what’s going on.

Hasn't Edward Snowden in a sense been banished to an island?

[prisonchaplain]

There are agitators and loud-equals-right ranters on both sides. However, one tool has been used almost exclusively by the LEFT to destroy opponents--political correctness. Declare that someone's speech is racist, homophobic or intolerant, and that person ceases to be human, and can be eliminated (well...not literally). The closest the RIGHT has come to this is to question someone's patriotism because of foreign policy stances or lack of support for military spending. I would argue pc destroys 10 for every one that unpatriotic does.

[LittleWyvern]

"Liberalism is a Disease" and then showing prominant left-wingers quarantined on an island is not parody?

Well, it's not fake, if that's what you're asking.

I think most people take this as a witticism but since it's irreverent to some of your icons it's normal that you find it offensive.

Two things:

First, since when are people in this painting "[my] icons?" Heck, since when do I have "icons" to begin with (I'm fairly certain I don't have any problems with idol worship)?

Second, I don't find this offensive. I find this hilarious, especially since you just joked about it as if nobody would ever think of such a thing. I think they call it situational irony?

I'm certain that modern day U.S. conservatives would find the literal act of banishing an individual because we don't agree with their speech antithesis to our values of freedom and liberty.

I'd sure hope so, but don't underestimate the loyalty of Jon McNaughton fans.

[jerome1232]

I am an extremist and blind to the other side...

Said no one, ever.

I'm rational...

Said everybody.

Really though, this thread has some great examples of polarization, I fear it is spreading.

[Windseeker]

Well, it's not fake, if that's what you're asking.

That's a real painting of an actual event that happened in reality? I think we know it's not.

I also think we both agree that it's hilarious.

[LittleWyvern]

That's a real painting of an actual event that happened in reality? I think we know it's not.

Oh, I get the confusion now. I was referring to the painting itself, not the event depicted (which gladly only exists as a dream in McNaughton's head). I was anticipating claims of "Photoshop!" or "Group X made that up to make Group Y look bad!", etc.

[Windseeker]

Well it was fun exercise in futility,, comparing apples and oranges. At least I got a lol out of it.