|
Post by SpringSummers on May 18, 2011 21:46:17 GMT -5
No, I LOVE this. But I was in Chicago at the time and couldn't post much. Not (sadly) all that surprised about Arnold but sorry for Maria. Very sorry for Maria...but somehow she is being slammed for not knowing about it 10 years ago, because she is a journalist and just 'should have known'. (Rush Limbaugh) Why is the victim often blamed for a man's indiscretions? //rhetorical// And if she did know, then that's her business. And now she can move on and do great things. Rush is ridiculous. He can't ever, ever, ever, get past his partisan thinking, no matter what the topic. I hope the separation goes completely through to divorce and Maria leaves Arnold in the dust. Don't know if Arnold truly had her snowed, if she buried her own head in the snow drift, or if she knew but made a conscious decision to live with his behavior, in the past. But the past is the past, and she has her whole life ahead of her. So onward and upward, Maria!
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on May 18, 2011 21:53:51 GMT -5
I don't think they are making any secret of their purpose - if they were playing "bait and switch" here, I would feel differently about it. I mean, if they were advertising themselves as a place where you would be exposed to all sorts of diverse thought, a place full of academic freedom and what not . . . and then you get there, and all your profs are pushing a very particular religious and political agenda, then that would worry me. But they could not be more upfront. I guess you could call it "indoctrination," but honestly . . . who goes there, and stays there, except the already converted? I know these are young people, but by college age, they've either made up their own minds to espouse this type of belief, or they've been thoroughly indoctrinated through their childhood and are still buying in. Anyhow - I'm not sure if you're trying to suggest this college is on some kind of crusade to make everyone like them, but if they are, they are sure aren't taking a very effective approach. Not quite. I guess it depends on what the purpose of a college education is whether it is to broaden one's intellectual horizon or if it's to get the appropriate credentials to get a good job. (Or, of course, any number of reasons in between.) But, even on the latter, if someone decides to go to study "science" at a place like Liberty, they may have already made up their minds as to what they believe, but I can imagine it would be a rude awakening when they enter the job market and attempt to get a job in a more mainstream lab/university setting that, you know, uses the scientific method and is strangely addicted to facts. Yes, this is what makes me wonder if they have accredited science programs, and do offer science degrees. If they do, it's the accrediting agency I truly have a beef with. And yes, Liberty students are likely in for more rude awakenings in various ways, than other students who leave college, but - well, life is full of rude awakenings for us all, and we take them at whatever pace we take them. I think what attracts people to Liberty is the whole idea of "staying in the womb" a bit longer. Maybe some people need that. I'm not here to tell them they don't.
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on May 18, 2011 21:58:08 GMT -5
No one is forcing anyone to go to Liberty, and they aren't misrepresenting themselves, so I have zero problem with their existence - and I don't they are any kind of danger to our society. But, I do agree that they should not be getting public funds. Unless you draw the line as "zero public funds to any private institutions" -it all gets pretty tricky though - I mean, it gets tricky, figuring out where to draw the line. True, and I do wonder if, in fact, the level of public funding for, say, Notre Dame, versus someplace like Liberty. Then again, Notre Dame doesn't require its professors be Catholic to be hired, and Liberty clearly states that they do engage in preferential hiring based on religion, which seems, dodgy, if they receive public funds. Agree - but I can just imagine who quickly things can head into gray, gelatinous type areas. Still - it's worth it, trying to make some distinctions, imperfect though they may be. The idea of a school who engages in preferential hiring based on religion or politics or . . . . well, anything other than the applicant's credentials to teach the subject . . . getting public funds, is repugnant.
|
|
|
Post by Karen on May 19, 2011 13:39:14 GMT -5
I don't think they are making any secret of their purpose - if they were playing "bait and switch" here, I would feel differently about it. I mean, if they were advertising themselves as a place where you would be exposed to all sorts of diverse thought, a place full of academic freedom and what not . . . and then you get there, and all your profs are pushing a very particular religious and political agenda, then that would worry me. But they could not be more upfront. I guess you could call it "indoctrination," but honestly . . . who goes there, and stays there, except the already converted? I know these are young people, but by college age, they've either made up their own minds to espouse this type of belief, or they've been thoroughly indoctrinated through their childhood and are still buying in. Anyhow - I'm not sure if you're trying to suggest this college is on some kind of crusade to make everyone like them, but if they are, they are sure aren't taking a very effective approach. Not quite. I guess it depends on what the purpose of a college education is whether it is to broaden one's intellectual horizon or if it's to get the appropriate credentials to get a good job. (Or, of course, any number of reasons in between.) But, even on the latter, if someone decides to go to study "science" at a place like Liber ty, they may have already made up their minds as to what they believe, but I can imagine it would be a rude awakening when they enter the job market and attempt to get a job in a more mainstream lab/university setting that, you know, uses the scientific method and is strangely addicted to facts. Libert y had G le n B e*ck as their 2010 commence ment speaker and kids were bussed to his rally last September .... who knows what kind of revisionist histroy is being taught at the school. I'd shy away from a place that makes their teachers goos e step to their music. Although I bet most of the graduates from their law department are guaranteed good jobs. Get rid of pub lic schools (which is happening slowly in WI and MI), and you'll have this kind of stuff happening in grade school levels. bleh
|
|
|
Post by Queen E on May 25, 2011 17:25:04 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Karen on Jun 2, 2011 9:23:02 GMT -5
Right there with you. Where was the demand for tax hikes or spending cuts when Bush was spending all our money in Iraq? Do they think the American people are really that stupid or clueless? Also? [sarcasm]Let's jail all the marijuana smokers and let the Banksters get away with their mortgage shell games and pension thefts of millions and millions of our savings.[/sarcasm] Yeah. Anger. It's why I can't eat in the lunchroom here at the office anymore.
|
|
|
Post by Anne, Old S'cubie Cat on Jun 2, 2011 13:02:52 GMT -5
Right there with you. Where was the demand for tax hikes or spending cuts when Bush was spending all our money in Iraq? Do they think the American people are really that stupid or clueless?Also? Let's jail all the marijuana smokers and let the Banksters get away with their mortgage shell games and pension thefts of millions and millions of our savings. Yeah. Anger. It's why I can't eat in the lunchroom here at the office anymore. Yes.I'm with you - legalize pot, regulate it, let the scientists study the medicinal applications, and tax the hell out of the recreational stuff.
|
|
|
Post by Karen on Jun 2, 2011 13:35:41 GMT -5
Right there with you. Where was the demand for tax hikes or spending cuts when Bush was spending all our money in Iraq? Do they think the American people are really that stupid or clueless?Also? Let's jail all the marijuana smokers and let the Banksters get away with their mortgage shell games and pension thefts of millions and millions of our savings. Yeah. Anger. It's why I can't eat in the lunchroom here at the office anymore. Yes.I'm with you - legalize pot, regulate it, let the scientists study the medicinal applications, and tax the hell out of the recreational stuff. Whew. Glad you heard the sarcasm.
|
|
|
Post by Sue on Jun 4, 2011 11:45:01 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Jun 4, 2011 12:55:25 GMT -5
Wow, that is reasoned. Nicely done, Mr Katz.
|
|
|
Post by Queen E on Jun 4, 2011 13:26:12 GMT -5
That was pretty much exactly how I feel about it. Bravo, Dr. Katz. I think the argument that really makes me mad is this persistent canard that abortion is used as a form of birth control. I have known exactly one person for whom that was true, and it was someone who entered into a relationship with an older man (she was 12, he was 18) who completely controlled her (as is often the case with that kind of age disparity). So even that case isn't black and white, and I'm more inclined to wonder why the girl's parents didn't make more of an effort to stop the relationship then to fault her, since a six-year age difference at that time of life is a recipe for trouble on all kinds of levels.
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Jun 4, 2011 21:23:46 GMT -5
That was pretty much exactly how I feel about it. Bravo, Dr. Katz. I think the argument that really makes me mad is this persistent canard that abortion is used as a form of birth control. I have known exactly one person for whom that was true, and it was someone who entered into a relationship with an older man (she was 12, he was 18) who completely controlled her (as is often the case with that kind of age disparity). So even that case isn't black and white, and I'm more inclined to wonder why the girl's parents didn't make more of an effort to stop the relationship then to fault her, since a six-year age difference at that time of life is a recipe for trouble on all kinds of levels. I don't doubt that there are those who misuse the ability to get a legal abortion . . . whether they misuse it as a form of birth control, or simply use it in a astoundingly capricious manner (I am reminded of a girl I knew who was thinking of getting an abortion because her wedding was coming up, and she wanted to look prettier in her wedding dress. I was dumbfounded.). But the argument just doesn't hold water. I mean, since when is "this might be misused" a good reason to outlaw everyone's access?
|
|
|
Post by Rachael on Jun 5, 2011 18:09:14 GMT -5
That was pretty much exactly how I feel about it. Bravo, Dr. Katz. I think the argument that really makes me mad is this persistent canard that abortion is used as a form of birth control. I have known exactly one person for whom that was true, and it was someone who entered into a relationship with an older man (she was 12, he was 18) who completely controlled her (as is often the case with that kind of age disparity). So even that case isn't black and white, and I'm more inclined to wonder why the girl's parents didn't make more of an effort to stop the relationship then to fault her, since a six-year age difference at that time of life is a recipe for trouble on all kinds of levels. I have an aunt who totally used it that way, until she finally got a tubal ligation in her 40's. She has three children and five abortions under her belt. She claims "birth control doesn't work for me". Which should read, "It's hard to use birth control properly when stoned out of your mind." BUT, even so, Spring is correct. The occasional example of misuse doesn't add up to "total ban". Otherwise, handguns should have been completely banned generations ago.
|
|
|
Post by Queen E on Jun 5, 2011 18:36:00 GMT -5
That was pretty much exactly how I feel about it. Bravo, Dr. Katz. I think the argument that really makes me mad is this persistent canard that abortion is used as a form of birth control. I have known exactly one person for whom that was true, and it was someone who entered into a relationship with an older man (she was 12, he was 18) who completely controlled her (as is often the case with that kind of age disparity). So even that case isn't black and white, and I'm more inclined to wonder why the girl's parents didn't make more of an effort to stop the relationship then to fault her, since a six-year age difference at that time of life is a recipe for trouble on all kinds of levels. I have an aunt who totally used it that way, until she finally got a tubal ligation in her 40's. She has three children and five abortions under her belt. She claims "birth control doesn't work for me". Which should read, "It's hard to use birth control properly when stoned out of your mind." BUT, even so, Spring is correct. The occasional example of misuse doesn't add up to "total ban". Otherwise, handguns should have been completely banned generations ago. Because it all comes down to the idea that women are not able to decide for themselves. That somehow we are not capable of being fully enfranchised and able to decide for ourselves, because we're unreasonable and hormonal. <sarcasm>You know, 'cause men are so together.</sarcasm>
|
|
|
Post by Queen E on Jun 5, 2011 18:40:00 GMT -5
Let me add to that: I am not implying that the majority of men think this way, or want to tell anyone what to do. I can't imagine that the pressure of being the captain of your own destiny and thinking that you had to be the captain of someone else's as well.
Unless, you know, you're responsible for actually bringing that person into the world, then, of course, yeah, you are responsible for them until they are capable of being responsible for themselves. But an adult woman (or even near-adult woman) is not a child, and should not be treated like one, whether you like her decisions or not. She certainly shouldn't be subjected to what amounts to a lecture and a time-out (as some of these state regulations suggest).
|
|