Comments on: College Republicans

By: Revenge is not Justice « Political Cartel

Revenge is not Justice « Political Cartel — Thu, 09 Apr 2009 01:54:41 +0000

[...] Harding University’s student publication, recently addressed the death penalty. The writer, Pete Davidson, attempts to argue for the death penalty from the Christian [...]

By: randy

randy — Wed, 12 Sep 2007 17:03:00 +0000

Shannon – one important difference between Peter and the CR is that the Jews were actually shouting, “Crucify Him” and giving hearty approval to the death of Christ. I don’t know any Democrats running for office who have a campaign slogan like, “Abort Them All!” The abortion debate is about the legality of a medical procedure that ends the life of an unborn child. Personally, I am pro-life and believe that the government should protect those unborn lives. However, those who disagree with me are not usually murderers. They are people who disagree with me about the legality of a certain action. The flier might have been appropriate if the Democrats were fielding a group of candidates all of whom were abortion doctors.

By: TheChrisBerry

TheChrisBerry — Sun, 09 Sep 2007 06:38:00 +0000

David, thanks for posting the link to this post on my Facebook note. I enjoyed reading this and the comments that folloewd.

By: S.C. Denney

S.C. Denney — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 03:08:00 +0000

More reasons why I loath labels.

By: S.C. Denney

S.C. Denney — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 03:07:00 +0000

It's called idiosyncrasy or a way of thinking that is peculiar to an individual or group, especially an odd or unusual one. This would be the ultra-conservative, who might I add, are as bad as a ultra-liberal. The fact that one side will willing isolate another side, pairing them with one peculiar subject and holding them accountable to every little quirk and nuance is very close-minded and anti-intellectual.

To say that voting democrats is comparable to killing babies is a parallel that being a Christian and a democrat is dichotomous. It is plain dogma and quite offensive.

@Shannon: I am not "tak[ing]shots at other groups of people without looking at [myself] or taking a second to acknowledge the redeeming values and value of the other schools of thought."

So, unless this other school of thought consists of portentous dispositions and eminent victory argumentations, then I am open to other structured and intellectual opinions. But this isn't either. This is a "zero-sum" statement; this is a very unintelligent statement; and I find no worthiness and substance in its scope.

So, I ask again, what does this have to do with voting democrat?

By: David M Manes

David M Manes — Thu, 06 Sep 2007 18:49:00 +0000

You guys really do amaze me sometimes with what issues become controversial and highly-commented on.

I realize that the original post probably came across as relatively partisan, but I really thought that most partisans out there on both sides would join me in saying that it isn't ideal or healthy to reduce complex issues to bumper stickers that stymie further dialogue.

But that's okay. It shows that I am constantly learning more through this whole blogging thing.

By: Kyle

Kyle — Thu, 06 Sep 2007 17:23:00 +0000

I am insulting their actions and the way they handle themselves in discussion. I would love nothing more than to engage these people in an intelligent discussion on the issues. It doesn’t happen though because they subscribe to a philosophy of anti-intellectualism. That’s not name calling. The manner in which the College Republicans comport themselves is reminiscent of a petulant child; I was not saying that they were petulant children, just that their actions resembled those of children. That’s not name calling. If I think a woman should be able to decide for herself whether or not to get an abortion, I have taken no act that should be characterized by any reasonable person as murder. If I was a doctor performing an abortion, it becomes a more reasonable thing to say, but not all Democrats are abortionists. I would even venture as far as to say that the overwhelming majority of people identifying themselves as Democrats are not abortionists. I am not calling anyone names. I simply describing the way their behavior looks to me. If you want to over-simplify that to name calling, then so be it.

By: jkkuwitzky

jkkuwitzky — Thu, 06 Sep 2007 16:28:00 +0000

There really is nothing better for the pro-choice crowd than abortion opponents using the “abortion is murder” line of argument. The overwhelming majority of Americans disagree with them, and harsh language like that is not going to change that. A more nuanced discussion might be better in your ivory towers of the liberal academy, but out here in the real America its just bad politics.

By: shannon

shannon — Thu, 06 Sep 2007 16:09:00 +0000

It’s not name calling when you do it, but only when they do it. Now I understand.

By: Kyle

Kyle — Thu, 06 Sep 2007 15:49:00 +0000

Calling a person’s point of view as anti-intellectual when they use clear language denigrating intellectualism is not name calling. Saying that the approach being used by the College Republicans is dragging down the level of discourse is not name calling. It is clear that the College Republicans do not want to have an intellectual debate, not on the morality of abortion, but on the role of government in regulating it. I could as easily call Republicans murderers because of their support for the death penalty and their dogged insistence on staying in Iraq. I don’t. It is far more productive to debate these issues on the merits. When the College Republicans turn the issue into a shouting match, they behave as idiots. They may be intelligent people, but when it comes to discussion and debate, they prefer to put their fingers in their ears and hurl insults at the other side. This behavior may be expected from a petulant 3 year old, but not from undergraduates. The other side won’t consider any other arguments and deride us for doing so. Such behavior can only be classified as idiocy.