Something from the Facebook

[SivartM]

"I'm not being "politically correct", I'm being polite. You know, that thing where you think about other people?"

Why do some people have such an aversion to politeness? It used to be that not saying everything that came into your mind was a virtue, but it seems that it's the opposite now. If you don't want to offend people, that somehow makes you a PC sissy and/or liberal fascist. Yes, let's all be politically incorrect (or "un-politically correct", as the grammar-challenged say it) and call black people n******* and gay people f******* and Muslims Mooslims. Let us free ourselves from liberal tyranny and swear like sailors and not get along with anyone.

What a wonderful Christian example for their children to follow...

[phkrause]

Very interesting post Sivart. I have no idea what your talking about. LOL

[SivartM]

Aw. Nobody ever gets my rants for some reason. :\

[phkrause]

Aw. Nobody ever gets my rants for some reason. :\

Sorry! LOL

[GreatLakesGramma]

I know exactly what you're talking about, Sivart.

[Woody]

so do the Moo slims.

[SivartM]

Being serious here... this really irks me. But you're right, Muslims are probably aware that people are often rude to them.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

Ahem.. so what's the difference between writing "Moo slims" and writing "Sadventists"?????? It's okay to write or say something derogatory if it's within one's own group?? As in black people who call other blacks "n******"??

Frankly, one can get so hung up on possibly "offending" someone that your language becomes garbled or cloaked, and no one knows what you mean if you are always afraid of stepping on someone's toes.

dear, dear, dear..... whatever shall I do now, Toto? We aren't in Kansas anymore.

[Woody]

Quote:

dear, dear, dear

Wow. Three dears in a row. That must be a record. Even Maria doesn't do that.

[Dottie]

It's not just in name calling. My son came home from school last week with a note from the teacher that he had an "issue" with one of the other students during lunch. She included a letter that she had written to all of the parents, telling them that she was working with the children to teach then about not showing disrespect, etc., to others.

I answered her note saying that if I didn't know what the "issue" was about, my son has difficulty with his factual recall (lying), and we would not be able to deal with his behavior at home.

If there is a problem (issue) at school, I am never told exactly what happened. If he gets a check on his behavior sheet indicating that he touched another child (never told whether a boy or girl) "inappropriately" we aren't told what he did, if he hit someone or touched someone in a private area. They are so worried about privacy that no real facts aver come out.

(Just another of my little rants)

[Bravus]

I thought conservatives were all about conserving the best features of the past. And that courtesy was one of those features.

[John317]

My personal experience, and my reading of history, tells me that what you are talking about-- lack of courtesy and politeness-- has nothing to do with political spectrum. No political viewpoint, party affiliation or religion has a monopoly on treating people badly or talking bad to other people. Believe it or not, this is a human problem, not a political one.

[Bravus]

Oh, agreed: I don't think I was claiming otherwise. I do think, though, that on this forum it has tended to be those toward the right end of the spectrum who have seen courtesy as a weakness and rudeness as a virtue. They seem (in general, and with exceptions) to be the main ones who laud combativeness and attacking language and disparage courtesy.

[Bravus]

Anyway, I'm definitely not keen to sidetrack the thread into political brawling.

Leave aside the political spectrum. And stipulate that everyone is rude sometimes.

The interesting distinction, IMO, is between those who recognise that as a failing and apologise for it, and those who valorise it as the only appropriate way to be.

[John317]

Here's the thing, though:

I've never experienced that kind of treatment from anyone on the Forum who's on the Right, but I have quite a few times from those who claim to be "liberal" or "progressive."

Now if they were to say those things outside the Forum, it wouldn't bother me in the least. But I bring it up here as an example of what happens.

On a thread a while back, pk made the observation that the only people who were having a "problem" with me were those who disagreed with me. I think that's what it comes down to.

When people who we agree with talk discourteously to others, we tend to ignore it or rationalize it; whereas if we disagree with them, especially in major ways, we tend to go the other way and even exaggerate their offending language or behavior.

This kind of thing comes out when you watch members of various parties bicker back and forth about who has done the worst things to each other. They criticize the other party for doing the same things they themselves have either done or defended before.

We see the same characteristics in every culture of the world and apparently during every age, a fact that leads me to conclude it has to do with the way humans are constituted rather than the evil in a political party or religion.

[John317]

...The interesting distinction, IMO, is between those who recognise that as a failing and apologise for it, and those who valorise it as the only appropriate way to be.

I agree with you here. It's never the appropriate way for anyone to be, but especially for people who profess to follow Christ.

People are tempted to think that if someone is impolite or discourteous to them, they have a right to do the same thing back. That's where our Christianity is tested. Do we strike back or do we do as Christ did and as He commands His disciples to do?

And there are those who will test it on purpose to watch for an unChristlike response, particularly from those who talk or write about the power of God to save. If I take the position that no one really obeys God anyway and I confess that I'm constantly sinning, even when we are asleep, it is no big thing for me to say a few discourteous things to other people. It is then expected and really can't be any other way, and the offended party is portrayed as a self-righteous hypocrite for objecting to something that they themselves do all the time.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

This reminds me of when I'm driving in heavy traffic and someone needs to change lanes. I've noticed that if *I* let someone in ahead of me, the driver behind me will do the same for the next car needing to get in that lane. Kind of a sociological domino effect.