[MD] Final Thoughts on Political Correctness

[markhsmit]

Hi Arlo,

I sent my last post to you before reading this one.

If you wish to draw me into a polarizing discussion on women and
the supreme court, that is your right.  If you mean to use such
a polarizing discussion to promote your notion of PC, then it is
very self serving, and no different from that evil PC you talk about.
Keep the notion of Quality in mind.

Are you suggesting that the fact that there are few women on the 
supreme court is a conspiracy to keep women out?  Believe me,
for every man on the supreme court there is probably a woman
behind him.  (I don't think any are gay.)  At the same time we discuss
women, shall we discuss why there are not any gay justices.
How about justices under the age of 30, what is up with that!
I don't see any mute justices either, get to work!  What about
justices that have no legal background, talk about discrimination!

I believe the supreme court composition in terms of gender, is a
result of careful thinking and choosing of the right person for the
position.  Not, as you may retort, an example of discrimination.
I realize that you may think this is naive of me, but it is so only
because you think differently, more in terms of evil, than good.
If the decision to staff the supreme court becomes one of PC,
we are letting emotions take the place of legal thought.

I find more teachers to be women.  Is this a conspiracy between
women?  What about the nursing profession, is this also a 
conspiracy?  Should we force a change in such situations in the
name of social justice?  Many football players are huge tough guys,
many black.  Should we change the rules so that this doesn't happen?
Lower the basketball nets so that it doesn't favor tall people.
How's that for the use of hyperbole?  Am I learning?

Cheers,
Willblake2


On May 7, 2009, at 11:24:15 AM, "Arlo Bensinger" <ajb102 at psu.edu> wrote:
[WillBlake]
I'm still confused about this right wing left wing notion. I am 
neither. We have agreed that there is good PC and bad PC. Let's 
leave it at that.

[Arlo]
Fair enough. I noticed today that when I post from home via my 
webmail account "line breaks" appear to go missing, resulting in a 
large paragraph on unbroken text. Sorry for that, if that's how it 
appears to you as well.

Regarding "right wing left wing", all I can say is that the key is to 
rise above the ideological pandering and apply the critiques of our 
reason evenly. If the treatment Miss California received is unfair 
(it is, IMO), then the treatment Bill Maher received is also unfair. 
If "Christians" are the target of ridicule unfairly, then perhaps 
they should consider that they too target other groups unfairly 
themselves. For the record, a "good" example of right-wing PC is 
efforts made to promote tolerance and respect for our servicemen. Our 
fellow citizens serving in our military should be afforded respect, 
and pressure put upon those who demonize them is valid and just. 
However, all forms of PC can go too far, and that is something we 
should be aware of. Affording our armed forces personnel with respect 
should not be used to demonize anyone who takes issue with the "war" 
or actions of the American government. When those who raise valid 
concerns are assaulted with political rhetoric like "they want to see 
dead American soldiers", or telling our armed forces that the "left 
wants them to lose", then we have an example of when PC goes evil.

As I said, on specific topics like "affirmative action", both sides 
pander immorally to the xenophobia of certain groups. The left 
overreaches, the right condemns, and all hope of any reasonable 
dialogue is off the table.

I do want to also say here that the answer to the question "why are 
women, who make more than half of our country's population, 
under-represented on the Bench?" is a question that MUST be brought 
into any dialogue condemning or justifying the placement of a woman 
to that seat on the basis of her gender. While that question remained 
unanswered in this particular dialgoue, it is an important aspect in 
discussing that one particular example of "PC". You say you don't 
want a Justice chosen by a specific body part, but the historical 
reality is that that is precisely what HAS been happening since Day 
One. So before we can condemn or support whether or not a woman 
should be chosen for the next seat, we would need to address the 
historical reality of these appointments. As I said, context always matters.



Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/