An Extremely Politically Incorrect Blog Post

[Scott Lloyd]

I'm sincerely having a hard time seeing anything you might have interpreted as hyperbole.

Well, as I said, I reflected on it and thought to myself, "Gee, this really isn't hyperbole after all; the guy is pretty much describing things as they are."

 

But I have to admit this comparison struck me as exaggeration for effect (the definition of hyperbole):

 

Even a fundamentalist Iranian Muslim would flinch if he came face to face with a western liberal’s rigid dogmatism. I imagine that even a Saudi Arabian Islamic cleric would take one look at how American left wingers react when anyone deviates ever so slightly from their established orthodoxy, and say to himself, “man, these people REALLY need to chill.”

Read more at http://themattwalshblog.com/2014/07/22/want-prove-dont-hate-gays-all-you-have-to-do-is-worship-at-their-feet/#qfS2Ib63mA9wOlpI.99

 

 

[BCSpace]

But I have to admit this comparison struck me as exaggeration for effect (the definition of hyperbole):

 

 

Ironically, the two groups being described are essentially one and the same in modus operandi.

[Scott Lloyd]

Ironically, the two groups being described are essentially one and the same in modus operandi.

Both of them do "really need to chill," if that's what you mean.

[mormonnewb]

Ironically, the two groups being described are essentially one and the same in modus operandi.

 

Gay activists have been issuing fatwas and offering bounties for the murder of those who oppose SSM or gay civil rights?  How did I miss this in the media?  I must be spending too much time on this board.

 

For the record, withdrawing one's financial support from persons who advocate against your basic human rights (e.g., Chick-Fil-A, Duck Dynasty, etc.) is NOT the same modus operandi as those who called for the death of Salman Rushdie.  Not even close. 

[Senator]

With all the vitriol, hyperbole, sarcasm and characterization, I would rate the blog as a rant as much as it was informative.

[Scott Lloyd]

With all the vitriol, hyperbole, sarcasm and characterization, I would rate the blog as a rant as much as it was informative.

I've already acknowledged the hyperbole in the opening salvo.

 

But as a whole, the blog post makes far too much sense to be dismissed as a rant.

[Senator]

I've already acknowledged the hyperbole in the opening salvo.

 

But as a whole, the blog post makes far too much sense to be dismissed as a rant.

 

I would give it about a 5 out of 10 in the extractability of "sense" from the vitriol.

[Hamba Tuhan]

But I have to admit this comparison struck me as exaggeration for effect (the definition of hyperbole):

 

Yes, good point. I'll admit that this comparison is over the top. Though I find it interesting in these parts how mutually supportive the 'progressives' and the Islamists are. On the surface, their agendas seem disparate, but they appear to have found common cause in their attacks on both classic Western liberalism and Christianity. The left-wing media (almost a complete redundancy in these parts) are the first to defend things like 'honour killings' and forced marriages, for example. And just a few years ago one of the socialist-dominated student unions was discovered to have been funneling student funds to the PLO.

[Hamba Tuhan]

I would give it about a 5 out of 10 in the extractability of "sense" from the vitriol.

 

Minus the hyperbolic comparison noted above, I would give it a 9 out of 10 for matching my lived experience.

Edited July 24, 2014 by Hamba Tuhan

[Calm]

The left-wing media (almost a complete redundancy in these parts) are the first to defend things like 'honour killings' and forced marriages, for example.

Colour me shocked, completely shocked.

The PLO thing doesn't surprise me...aren't they socialist? Or am I out of date?

Edited July 24, 2014 by calmoriah

[Pahoran]

Gay activists have been issuing fatwas and offering bounties for the murder of those who oppose SSM or gay civil rights?  How did I miss this in the media?  I must be spending too much time on this board.

 

For the record, withdrawing one's financial support from persons who advocate against your basic human rights (e.g., Chick-Fil-A, Duck Dynasty, etc.) is NOT the same modus operandi as those who called for the death of Salman Rushdie.  Not even close.

FYI: advocating for "traditional marriage" (a tautology) in preference to "same sex marriage" (an oxymoron) is not advocating against anyone's "basic human rights."

That is exactly the kind of manipulative propaganda that Walsh protests.

For myself, I don't so much protest it as despise it.

Regards,

Pahoran

[sethpayne]

I've already acknowledged the hyperbole in the opening salvo.

 

But as a whole, the blog post makes far too much sense to be dismissed as a rant.

 

I found the post to be hyperbolic, sure, but I too don't think it should be dismissed as a rant.  The author brings up some good points.

 

I will admit that as one who tends to lean liberal/libertarian on social issues I get very frustrated when my fellow supporters of SSM or gay rights bring out the "bigot" or "hate" card at there mere suggestion that -- *gasp* -- someone may dare hold a different opinion.  

 

If we call what Tony Dungy said "hate", we have made it, the word "hate", absolutely meaningless. Dungy was right.  Sam's sexuality *will be a media distraction* as is clear by the coverage Dungy's remarks are receiving!!

 

Could Dungy have stated this view more delicately given our hyper-sensitive outrage culture fueled by FB and Twitter?  Absolutely.  Is Dungy a hate-filled bigot who would not draft Sam because he is gay?  Absolutely not.  I don't see how an intelligent person could read Dungy any differently.

 

The problem is that if we get hysterical over remarks that perhaps could or should have been stated more clearly or delicately (and even this drive me nuts.... it seems that no one can simply just state their views these days without getting killed by the mob of public opinion and its seemingly faux outrage) we cheapen the experiences of those who have been the victims of true hate and true prejudice.  And then, as the blog author points out, we get to see real hate on display.  Bringing up the suicide of Dungy's son and suggesting that it was due to Dungy's views?  Absolutely disgusting.

 

I support SSM because I desire the maximum liberty and freedom for *all.*  Not just those who conform to some notion of social orthodoxy.

Edited July 24, 2014 by sethpayne

[guerreiro9]

For the record, withdrawing one's financial support from persons who advocate against your basic human rights (e.g., Chick-Fil-A, Duck Dynasty, etc.) is NOT the same modus operandi as those who called for the death of Salman Rushdie. Not even close.

For the record voting not to extend tax benefits and favored status to promote one's preferred sexual proclivities (while still allowing those activities without tax advantage) is not the same as denying basic human rights to people of a specific lineage. Not even close.

-guerreiro9

[The Nehor]

I've already acknowledged the hyperbole in the opening salvo.

 

But as a whole, the blog post makes far too much sense to be dismissed as a rant.

 

So I ask again, should we start killing them or wait for them to start killing us?

 

If that blog post is accurate our options are to flee, fight, or die yet no one actually does any of them.

 

Yet I am going to go to work tomorrow, get my mail, say my prayers, eat my lunch, and go for a walk. This kind of hyperbole is toxic because it creates a world that doesn't exist and one which the writer does not act in their daily life as if it exists.

 

As a comparison when people scream about the ACA creating death panels it is downright shocking that they still use medical care. The old people who die alone in their homes out of fear of the medical establishment are the true believers. When people say abortion is equivalent to the murder of children those who do nothing but talk about it are either lying or are amoral. The ones out there physically trying to stop it are the believers.

 

If people honestly believe the "progressive agenda" is really going to start rounding everyone up they should be joining militia groups or preparing for martyrdom. Instead they go about their lives and increase their blog viewership and try to convince others to do what they could not.

 

There is a sickness in the western world and it is a kind of desperation for a crusade or some kind of excitement. We make mountains out of molehills because we have been safe and secure for so long that we seem almost desperate for something to shatter our complacency and find something to live for. We have many among the most powerful nation on earth who have never seriously known the threat of starvation or violence jumping at shadows as if there are cabals and villains out there thirsting for their blood. Sounds like the kind of prophecy that fulfills itself. At least we may get to live in interesting times.

[mormonnewb]

For the record voting not to extend tax benefits and favored status to promote one's preferred sexual proclivities (while still allowing those activities without tax advantage) is not the same as denying basic human rights to people of a specific lineage. Not even close.

-guerreiro9

Well, since YOUR sexual proclivities get tax-favored treatment, on what grounds do you object? Because God likes YOUR proclivities better?

By the way, I find it amazing that the sum total of gay marriage comes down to sex for you. Is that how you view heterosexual couples ... through the lens of whether you think they have the "right" sexual proclivities?

I must confess that I have yet to give a single thought to what my bishop and his wife do (or don't do) in the bedroom. I bet that F&T meeting must take on a whole new tenor when looking at things through your prism. I'm ALMOST jealous.

[guerreiro9]

Well, since YOUR sexual proclivities get tax-favored treatment, on what grounds do you object? Because God likes YOUR proclivities better?

By the way, I find it amazing that the sum total of gay marriage comes down to sex for you. Is that how you view heterosexual couples ... through the lens of whether you think they have the "right" sexual proclivities?

I must confess that I have yet to give a single thought to what my bishop and his wife do (or don't do) in the bedroom. I bet that F&T meeting must take on a whole new tenor when looking at things through your prism. I'm ALMOST jealous.

I don't view any tax benefits as an unalienable civil right. If the people of the country I live in decide that my chosen form of marriage does not provide a net positive and should not be promoted they may vote to discontinue these benefits.

I hope you don't teach physics mormonnewb, because your reactive posts are never in proportion to what was originally written (Mr Newton would object). It is entertaining though. It's like watching someone throw a knuckleball. You may strike the batter out, or you may hit the kid in the 3rd row in the head.

-guerreiro9

Edited July 24, 2014 by guerreiro9

[Hamba Tuhan]

So I ask again, should we start killing them or wait for them to start killing us?

 

The Book of Mormon makes it perfectly clear that the righteous choice is to wait for them to start 'killing' us. But we should be wise enough to recognise the pending threat and do our best to prepare defences, clean up our own lives, preach truth, and warn others, no? Such preparation always seems to have benefitted the Nephites.

Edited July 24, 2014 by Hamba Tuhan

[The Nehor]

The Book of Mormon makes it perfectly clear that the righteous choice is to wait for them to start 'killing' us. But we should be wise enough to recognise the pending threat and do our best to prepare defences, clean up our own lives, preach truth, and warn others, no? Such preparation always seems to have benefitted the Nephites.

 

You left out writing histrionic blog posts vilifying the enemy on the internet, a time-tested Nephite tactic.

[Hamba Tuhan]

You left out writing histrionic blog posts vilifying the enemy on the internet, a time-tested Nephite tactic.

 

You mean like this?

 

And now it came to pass that when Moroni, who was the chief commander of the armies of the Nephites, had heard of these dissensions, he was angry with Amalickiah.

And it came to pass that he rent his coat; and he took a piece thereof, and wrote upon it—In memory of our God, our religion, and freedom, and our peace, our wives, and our children—and he fastened it upon the end of a pole.

 

And he fastened on his head-plate, and his breastplate, and his shields, and girded on his armor about his loins; and he took the pole, which had on the end thereof his rent coat, (and he called it the title of liberty) and he bowed himself to the earth, and he prayed mightily unto his God for the blessings of liberty to rest upon his brethren, so long as there should a band of Christians remain to possess the land—

…

And when Moroni had said these words, he went forth among the people, waving the rent part of his garment in the air, that all might see the writing which he had written upon the rent part, and crying with a loud voice, saying:

 

Behold, whosoever will maintain this title upon the land, let them come forth in the strength of the Lord, and enter into a covenant that they will maintain their rights, and their religion, that the Lord God may bless them.

 

And it came to pass that when Moroni had proclaimed these words, behold, the people came running together with their armor girded about their loins, rending their garments in token, or as a covenant, that they would not forsake the Lord their God; or, in other words, if they should transgress the commandments of God, or fall into transgression, and be ashamed to take upon them the name of Christ, the Lord should rend them even as they had rent their garments.

Edited July 24, 2014 by Hamba Tuhan

[The Nehor]

You mean like this?

 

Moroni blogged that?

 

I thought it was the official head of the military rallying the militia to deal with a political insurgent bent on destroying the government?

 

Either way I don't see it as analogous to the blog in the OP.

[Hamba Tuhan]

Or maybe more like this?

 

‘Further, we warn that the disintegration of the family will bring upon individuals, communities, and nations the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets’.

 

I am one who joined in that warning. As one of the watchmen on the tower, I am responsible to ‘blow the trumpet, and warn the people’. This evening I have been bold and raised the warning voice. I do so because I love you and want you to understand we must face the Lord and keep His commandments. That is my duty.

…

The Lord invites you to get involved and use the social media platforms you prefer to share the gospel and stand as modern sons and daughters of Helaman in the great battles of the last days. He wants you to become the modern stripling warriors who stand strong and united to defend the truth. He wants you to be courageous and stalwart in the face of the enemy’s advances. We know that in the end the Lord will win the day and Satan will be defeated.

…

I know some of you worry about being misjudged, ridiculed, and even harassed if you stand up for Heavenly Father and the Lord Jesus Christ and the Church. I understand your concerns.

…

May the Lord bless you with wisdom beyond your years, that you will wisely realize that we are in this battle and we must stand together, young and old.

Edited July 24, 2014 by Hamba Tuhan

[The Nehor]

Or maybe more like this?

 

Very relevant to us because it deals with actual dangers and the real climate. Still not analogous to the blog in the OP with its hints of death camps and being rounded up and silenced. Especially when it warns that you will be misjudged, ridiculed, or harassed......surely if the end was nigh and the forces of liberal darkness were about to rise up with a "final solution" for us the prophets in the watchtowers would use stronger language.

[Hamba Tuhan]

Very relevant to us because it deals with actual dangers and the real climate. Still not analogous to the blog in the OP with its hints of death camps and being rounded up and silenced. Especially when it warns that you will be misjudged, ridiculed, or harassed......surely if the end was nigh and the forces of liberal darkness were about to rise up with a "final solution" for us the prophets in the watchtowers would use stronger language.

 

It doesn't take 'death camps' or a 'final solution' to effectively silence people ... which I think is the very point of the blog post that you seem to have missed. That and that passive silence is no longer enough anyway, a la Elder Ballard's call for Saints who will actually speak up.

Edited July 24, 2014 by Hamba Tuhan

[The Nehor]

It doesn't take 'death camps' or a 'final solution' to effectively silence people ... which I think is the very point of the blog post that you seem to have missed.

 

The blog writer says that his opponents have a "You are for us or against us" strategy and the blog writer agrees that you have to choose a side.

 

I deny this. When Shiz and Coriantumr call up the troops I am going to get my popcorn and watch. When God and Satan line up I will take a more active role.

[Hamba Tuhan]

The blog writer says that his opponents have a "You are for us or against us" strategy and the blog writer agrees that you have to choose a side.

 

I deny this. When Shiz and Coriantumr call up the troops I am going to get my popcorn and watch. When God and Satan line up I will take a more active role.

 

Your call, of course.

 

From Elder Ballard's clarion call: 'Satan ... also wants you to stand on the sidelines in today’s important and crucial battles'.

 

I guess we each have to decide which battles are 'important and crucial'.

Edited July 24, 2014 by Hamba Tuhan