Article View: uw.general
Article #173Re: Female wanted (let me explain myself)
From: peterk
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 18:22
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 18:22
79 lines
4690 bytes
4690 bytes
>I'm afraid that a lot of people have misunderstood what I said above. >It was rather blunt and poorly worded. I'm also afraid I have half >the department thinking I am a homosexual-hating bigot. Also, if I've >offended anyone, I sincerely apologize. My intent was not to offend, >but to make a point. I really shouldn't have singled out any particular >group out in my posting. Anyway, I'd like to clarify what I tried to say >before. I have been watching this thread with interest, because I think it points up a problem we've been having in society in general, college/intellectual communities in particular, and Internet in utter absurdity. Some folks just love to lie in wait and jump on anyone for the slightest deviation from the Absolute Correct Truth. I must admit that when I was a college sophomore, I thought I knew everything, too. But at least I was willing to discuss things rationally, and learned that I really didn't know everything. I think you have a perfect right to choose whoever you want as a babysitter. Folks like the people who jumped down your throat after your first post need to grow up. If they don't, they may turn America into another Yugoslavia within a generation. And that would be a pity: this is one of the few places in the world where ethnicity or ideological purity do not define one's class of citizenship, no less one's right to be alive. Sure some people try to make it so--but it's not anywhere near as much a part of the underlying rules of society as it is in many other places. Bigotry is an awful thing. I ought to know, as six million of my people were sytematically murdered in a particularly virulent outbreak during the 1930s and 40s. Including several close progenitors of mine and my wife's. Ask any nonwhite person what bigotry feels like. Political purity is also pretty destructive--ask anyone who came from the former USSR, or China, or some of the nastier right-wing dictatorships in Central/South America or Asia. The problem comes when people start to use any pretense of an incorrect attitude to do worse unto the offender than the offender ever had intention of doing unto the protected classes. In other words, when the cure is much worse than the disease. On the other hand, answering the Thought Police by juxtoposing "homosexual" with "child molester" created potent flame bait! It may have been an innocent mistake, or a Freudian slip. I have no basis to judge, so I will not. As Rodney King said: "People, can we get along?" >I think we all choose friends that have similar interests and values as >ourselves. I hold traditional, Christian, family-oriented values, and so >do most of my close friends. . . . >I think its normal for a person to choose friends that have >similar moral values. My values may be different from most people's, but >that isn't wrong. . . . Here's a question: do you think that people who aren't traditional Christians really hold different *values* from you? You don't say this, I'm just asking. I'm politically liberal, Jewish and have no children. You might be surprised to learn how many basic values we had in common. Not all our *views* might coincide, but as for basic *values*, I suspect many of them do. My comment to the group in general: just because the Republicans are trying desperately to win an election by painting everyone who isn't a laissez-faire Conservative and totally opposed to abortion as valueless and un-American doesn't make it right. And just because the P.C. crowd is painting everyone who doesn't live in a communal house with at least one member of every ethnic group and sexual preference as a bigot who must be converted, silenced or destroyed before he/she infects others--that doesn't make it right either. Hoping for a little tolerance, and rationality, and donning flame-proof suit :-) --peter -- --Peter (Peter A. Klein) peterk@polari.online.com : -----==3== ___ ___ uunet!polari.online.com!peterk : | | | | | | | | peterk%polari.online.com@uunet.uu.net : @| @| @| @| @| @| @| @|
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1992Aug26.182212.13777@polari>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!nwnexus!jazzie!seanews!eskimo!polari!peterk@polari.online.comReferences:
<1992Aug24.164039.7869@beaver.cs.washington.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: uw.general,seattle.general,uw.announce Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!nwnexus!jazzie!seanews!eskimo!polari!peterk@polari.online.com From: peterk@polari.online.com Subject: Re: Female wanted (let me explain myself) Message-ID: <1992Aug26.182212.13777@polari> Sender: peterk@polari.online.com Organization: Seattle Online Public Access Unix (206) 328-4944 References: <1992Aug24.164039.7869@beaver.cs.washington.edu> Distribution: seattle Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 18:22:12 GMT Lines: 79