Ok how about 2 Jewish boys requesting they dont play the pigs with the houses and the wolf blowing at them. Or how about 3, is that enough? Or how about you draw me a line as to how much Jewish boys and girls constitutes a special interest group whos request should be turned down.lowing wrote:
Whether or not a girls plays miss fuckin' piggy or not, is hardly an example of society or the govt. conceding to special interest demands
Any group wanting to remove themselves from an event is not conceding. Conceding is when that group wants the event canceled because it is offensive to them. That is what I am getting at.zeidmaan wrote:
Ok how about 2 Jewish boys requesting they dont play the pigs with the houses and the wolf blowing at them. Or how about 3, is that enough? Or how about you draw me a line as to how much Jewish boys and girls constitutes a special interest group whos request should be turned down.lowing wrote:
Whether or not a girls plays miss fuckin' piggy or not, is hardly an example of society or the govt. conceding to special interest demands
So the question I am trying to get answered by you is, how big or small does that event have to be to warrant cancelation based on special intersts demands. Who decides how important the event is going to be to people before rendering a decision?
Last edited by lowing (2008-03-08 09:56:18)
Unless they already have special treatment. Then we should leave it, right?lowing wrote:
My way or the highway??
My way is everyone is treated equally and fairly. America is too diverse for special treatment. There should be one standard and everyone should know what that standard is. You can not please everyone so the best course of action is to stop trying and have everyone expect the same treatment and that treatment should be fair and balanced.
lowing wrote:
However I would argue that those churches ringing those bells have been there ringing away every Sunday long before any of the inhabitants around them moved in.
Who has special treatment??SenorToenails wrote:
Unless they already have special treatment. Then we should leave it, right?lowing wrote:
My way or the highway??
My way is everyone is treated equally and fairly. America is too diverse for special treatment. There should be one standard and everyone should know what that standard is. You can not please everyone so the best course of action is to stop trying and have everyone expect the same treatment and that treatment should be fair and balanced.lowing wrote:
However I would argue that those churches ringing those bells have been there ringing away every Sunday long before any of the inhabitants around them moved in.
Put the rest of that second sentence into its proper context then comment
Here is something for you lowing:lowing wrote:
Any group wanting to remove themselves from an event is not conceding. Conceding is when that group wants the event canceled because it is offensive to them. That is what I am getting at.zeidmaan wrote:
Ok how about 2 Jewish boys requesting they dont play the pigs with the houses and the wolf blowing at them. Or how about 3, is that enough? Or how about you draw me a line as to how much Jewish boys and girls constitutes a special interest group whos request should be turned down.lowing wrote:
Whether or not a girls plays miss fuckin' piggy or not, is hardly an example of society or the govt. conceding to special interest demands
So the questing I am trying to get answred by you is, how big or small does that event have to be to warrant cancelation based on special intersts demands. Who decides how important the event is going to be to people before renderin g a decision?
You don't believe in special interest groups, right? What is your opinion of the GI Bill? Or special benefits for veterans? If one of my employees gets deployed, am I not barred from terminating him?
Why not bar them from playing the church bells? It disturbs others from their sleep. The church gets special treatment, since it is a public disturbance. But it's OK, since they have been doing it for a while!lowing wrote:
Who has special treatment??
Put the rest of that second sentence into its proper context then comment
The GI Bill is a benefit offered to those that serve. It is offered to ALL those that serve. It is a benefit no different than any other benefit offered by any other employer.SenorToenails wrote:
Here is something for you lowing:lowing wrote:
Any group wanting to remove themselves from an event is not conceding. Conceding is when that group wants the event canceled because it is offensive to them. That is what I am getting at.zeidmaan wrote:
Ok how about 2 Jewish boys requesting they dont play the pigs with the houses and the wolf blowing at them. Or how about 3, is that enough? Or how about you draw me a line as to how much Jewish boys and girls constitutes a special interest group whos request should be turned down.
So the questing I am trying to get answred by you is, how big or small does that event have to be to warrant cancelation based on special intersts demands. Who decides how important the event is going to be to people before renderin g a decision?
You don't believe in special interest groups, right? What is your opinion of the GI Bill? Or special benefits for veterans? If one of my employees gets deployed, am I not barred from terminating him?
Nope his job has to be there when he gets back. It is a circumstance beyond their control and you know it. Only a shit heal would actually contimplate firing their serving employee for missing work due to activation
Church bells that have been ringing for a 1000 years should have been taken into concideration by the person who moved next door to it.SenorToenails wrote:
Why not bar them from playing the church bells? It disturbs others from their sleep. The church gets special treatment, since it is a public disturbance. But it's OK, since they have been doing it for a while!lowing wrote:
Who has special treatment??
Put the rest of that second sentence into its proper context then comment
Why not move the light house to let the ship pass?
Excellent post, covering everything.topal63 wrote:
The actual information speaks for itself. No comment is necessary IMO.Harvard Islamic Society’s Islamic Knowledge Committee officer Ola Aljawhary, a junior, said the women-only hours are being tested on a trial basis. The special gym hours will be analyzed over Spring Break to determine if they will continue, she said.
Aljawhary said that she does not believe that the women-only gym hours discriminate against men.
Though the policy was in part initiated by the school’s Islamic group, Aljawhary said women-only hours are not a case of “minority rights trumping majority preference” and said women of different faiths have showed interest in the hours.
“These hours are necessary because there is a segment of the Harvard female population that is not found in gyms not because they don’t want to work out, but because for them working out in a co-ed gym is uncomfortable, awkward or problematic in some way,” she said.Yes, if Harvard had a reasonable number of "paying" Amish students in the student populous - then maybe they'd consider setting some kind of Amish precedent, or maybe they'd make some concessions to the paying Amish students or even make some Amish cultural/religious appeasements. Pandering to the political correct (P.C.) mindset, trying to be "cultural sensitive" and the like - when you think about it boils down to crass economic realities (i.e. if there's economic pressure to be less P.C. they'd be so, if there's economic pressure to be more P.C. then the converse would be true; and they'll be more P.C. sensitive). If they have paying students it seems to me nothing more than (Harvard) catering to various segments that make up the total student population.FEOS wrote:
Just gives you another place to store the plates...mtb0minime wrote:
If this is the case then I want men-only workout hours at the gym because it's embarrassing when I work out because seeing women's nice asses when they're bending over and stretching or running sometimes gives me an erection. And I don't want that to happen, so there can't be any women present.
I know there are commonly women-only classes in gyms, and some women-only chains (ie, Curves). Don't think it's necessarily a big deal, but the precedent is a bit concerning. Are they going to have a gym with no machines to accommodate the Amish population?
lol@ lowing
Overreaction to this sort of article is a great example of what I outlined in my post in the "IT's the MEDIA!!! Of Course, how silly of me." thread. It's hilarious that you seem complete incapable of seeing that.
If the catholic and protestant churches near me can play their church bells, could the local mosque play the call for prayer?lowing wrote:
Church bells that have been ringing for a 1000 years should have been taken into concideration by the person who moved next door to it.
I'm betting you'll say no, and that would mean that Christians are getting special considerations. Oh no!
I ment those Jewish boys and girls switching parts, meaning they get to play another part in the play just not the pig. Some other kid from the majority group gets assigned the pig role. Anyway it was just a quick example.lowing wrote:
Any group wanting to remove themselves from an event is not conceding. Conceding is when that group wants the event canceled because it is offensive to them. That is what I am getting at.
So the question I am trying to get answered by you is, how big or small does that event have to be to warrant cancelation based on special intersts demands. Who decides how important the event is going to be to people before rendering a decision?
And I dont know how you expect me to quantify the level of intrusion and set a numerical limit What kind of a "line" do you expect me to give you? Every example is different and its decided by different people. If someone request the feet washing thingy at an airport than the owner or the board, for example, can decide whether to put it in or not. If its related to the school than the school board will review the request and decide. They wont pull out a book that has all possible requests anyone can request. They will think about it, figure out the possible cost of it, how much does it affect other people involved etc.
For example (this is a real life example), at the restaurant at my university in Vienna they only make one type of lunch per day. Mondays is pasta, tuesdays is fish etc... One of the days is meat with potatoes and the meat happens to be pork. So some Muslim and Jewish students along with some others who dont eat pork signed a petition and made an official request that they start making 2 menus that day, one with pork one with beef. It was declined but the university representatives didnt say "gtfo adapt to our ways or FU". They met with the student and showed them what would need to be done to accommodate them (expended kitchen, more staff etc) showed them the prices and respectfully declined. Civilized, collegial and fair.
Nope yer wrong. They would have every right to do it. I admit though it would piss me off, not because they shouldn't be able to, but because I simply don't wanna hear all the wailing and moaning. ESPECIALLY, if my subdivision was built in the area before the Mosque was, which I can guarantee would have to be the case for such an occurrence to happen.SenorToenails wrote:
If the catholic and protestant churches near me can play their church bells, could the local mosque play the call for prayer?lowing wrote:
Church bells that have been ringing for a 1000 years should have been taken into consideration by the person who moved next door to it.
I'm betting you'll say no, and that would mean that Christians are getting special considerations. Oh no!
well, if you can not say what the cut off will be for concessions to special interest groups, then the right thing to do is stay consistent with none.zeidmaan wrote:
I ment those Jewish boys and girls switching parts, meaning they get to play another part in the play just not the pig. Some other kid from the majority group gets assigned the pig role. Anyway it was just a quick example.lowing wrote:
Any group wanting to remove themselves from an event is not conceding. Conceding is when that group wants the event canceled because it is offensive to them. That is what I am getting at.
So the question I am trying to get answered by you is, how big or small does that event have to be to warrant cancelation based on special intersts demands. Who decides how important the event is going to be to people before rendering a decision?
And I dont know how you expect me to quantify the level of intrusion and set a numerical limit What kind of a "line" do you expect me to give you? Every example is different and its decided by different people. If someone request the feet washing thingy at an airport than the owner or the board, for example, can decide whether to put it in or not. If its related to the school than the school board will review the request and decide. They wont pull out a book that has all possible requests anyone can request. They will think about it, figure out the possible cost of it, how much does it affect other people involved etc.
For example (this is a real life example), at the restaurant at my university in Vienna they only make one type of lunch per day. Mondays is pasta, tuesdays is fish etc... One of the days is meat with potatoes and the meat happens to be pork. So some Muslim and Jewish students along with some others who dont eat pork signed a petition and made an official request that they start making 2 menus that day, one with pork one with beef. It was declined but the university representatives didnt say "gtfo adapt to our ways or FU". They met with the student and showed them what would need to be done to accommodate them (expended kitchen, more staff etc) showed them the prices and respectfully declined. Civilized, collegial and fair.
You are being unreasonable here. There is no 'line in the sand' to cover all situations. Each situation needs to be considered independently with all of the unique factors involved.lowing wrote:
well, if you can not say what the cut off will be for concessions to special interest groups, then the right thing to do is stay consistent with none.
It is absurd to expect zero compromise.
Last edited by SenorToenails (2008-03-08 11:53:11)
You must be correct because I can not see how NOT reacting to special interest groups demands, is an OVER-reaction.Bertster7 wrote:
Excellent post, covering everything.topal63 wrote:
The actual information speaks for itself. No comment is necessary IMO.Harvard Islamic Society’s Islamic Knowledge Committee officer Ola Aljawhary, a junior, said the women-only hours are being tested on a trial basis. The special gym hours will be analyzed over Spring Break to determine if they will continue, she said.
Aljawhary said that she does not believe that the women-only gym hours discriminate against men.
Though the policy was in part initiated by the school’s Islamic group, Aljawhary said women-only hours are not a case of “minority rights trumping majority preference” and said women of different faiths have showed interest in the hours.
“These hours are necessary because there is a segment of the Harvard female population that is not found in gyms not because they don’t want to work out, but because for them working out in a co-ed gym is uncomfortable, awkward or problematic in some way,” she said.Yes, if Harvard had a reasonable number of "paying" Amish students in the student populous - then maybe they'd consider setting some kind of Amish precedent, or maybe they'd make some concessions to the paying Amish students or even make some Amish cultural/religious appeasements. Pandering to the political correct (P.C.) mindset, trying to be "cultural sensitive" and the like - when you think about it boils down to crass economic realities (i.e. if there's economic pressure to be less P.C. they'd be so, if there's economic pressure to be more P.C. then the converse would be true; and they'll be more P.C. sensitive). If they have paying students it seems to me nothing more than (Harvard) catering to various segments that make up the total student population.FEOS wrote:
Just gives you another place to store the plates...
I know there are commonly women-only classes in gyms, and some women-only chains (ie, Curves). Don't think it's necessarily a big deal, but the precedent is a bit concerning. Are they going to have a gym with no machines to accommodate the Amish population?
lol@ lowing
Overreaction to this sort of article is a great example of what I outlined in my post in the "IT's the MEDIA!!! Of Course, how silly of me." thread. It's hilarious that you seem complete incapable of seeing that.
So again when is enough enough...SenorToenails wrote:
You are being unreasonable here. There is no 'line in the sand' to cover all situations. Each situation needs to be considered independently with all of the unique factors involved.lowing wrote:
well, if you can not say what the cut off will be for concessions to special interest groups, then the right thing to do is stay consistent with none.
Like I said before 1 2 and 3 are small numbers you might say yes to, so where is your cut off when you say nope 20 is too much, when you just allowed 19.
The answer is, you say no to every number
Don't think for a second 20 won't be screaming racism and discrimination when you conceded to 19's demands
Last edited by lowing (2008-03-08 11:56:16)
OK. These students are paying customers, and have a right to expect that the university will consider their opinions. The university is offering a benefit to female students, which is not too different from women getting time off for maternity leave, right? Or do you have a problem with that, too?lowing wrote:
The GI Bill is a benefit offered to those that serve. It is offered to ALL those that serve. It is a benefit no different than any other benefit offered by any other employer.
At the root of this, it's actually a gender issue. You just take exception that the women are muslim.
Preserve the status quo at all costs, right?lowing wrote:
So again when is enough enough...
Like I said before 1 2 and 3 are small numbers you might say yes to, so where is your cut off when you say nope 20 is too much, when you just allowed 19.
The answer is, you say no to every number
Don't think for a second 20 won't be screaming racism and discrimination when you conceded to 19's demands
I already answered your question, but you must not have noticed. There is no line where 'enough is enough'.
You are disguising it as a gender issue becasue as a religious issue you have no argument. The problem is, it IS a religious issue. A specific group of people from a specific religion is asking for concessions for religious reasons. You are only kidding yourself be trying to maintain that this has nothing to do with religion or special interest.SenorToenails wrote:
OK. These students are paying customers, and have a right to expect that the university will consider their opinions. The university is offering a benefit to female students, which is not too different from women getting time off for maternity leave, right? Or do you have a problem with that, too?lowing wrote:
The GI Bill is a benefit offered to those that serve. It is offered to ALL those that serve. It is a benefit no different than any other benefit offered by any other employer.
At the root of this, it's actually a gender issue. You just take exception that the women are muslim.
I see so there is no limit to what you are willing to concede to special interest. FiguresSenorToenails wrote:
Preserve the status quo at all costs, right?lowing wrote:
So again when is enough enough...
Like I said before 1 2 and 3 are small numbers you might say yes to, so where is your cut off when you say nope 20 is too much, when you just allowed 19.
The answer is, you say no to every number
Don't think for a second 20 won't be screaming racism and discrimination when you conceded to 19's demands
I already answered your question, but you must not have noticed. There is no line where 'enough is enough'.
Is that what I said?lowing wrote:
I see so there is no limit to what you are willing to concede to special interest. Figures
No, it isn't. I said that there is no blanket determination of what 'enough is enough' is. You must consider each case individually.
I dont goto harvard
I have said many times that the school did this because some students had concerns regarding their religion, but that the change made to the gym hours has nothing to do with religion. They are not setting the gym aside for only female muslims, but ALL women.lowing wrote:
You are disguising it as a gender issue becasue as a religious issue you have no argument. The problem is, it IS a religious issue. A specific group of people from a specific religion is asking for concessions for religious reasons. You are only kidding yourself be trying to maintain that this has nothing to do with religion or special interest.
I do love how you presume to know my motivations though.
The special interest involved is to make sure that paying customers are happy. Harvard isn't free.
I see, and who makes the decisions on when 19 is allowed and 20 is too much? how does this person not get labeled as racist or bigoted by people like you when his decision is not in your favor?SenorToenails wrote:
Is that what I said?lowing wrote:
I see so there is no limit to what you are willing to concede to special interest. Figures
No, it isn't. I said that there is no blanket determination of what 'enough is enough' is. You must consider each case individually.
People like me? I didn't call anyone racist or bigoted, including you.lowing wrote:
I see, and who makes the decisions on when 19 is allowed and 20 is too much? how does this person not get labeled as racist or bigoted by people like you when his decision is not in your favor?
Decisions are made, people get unhappy. That's life.
In this case, school administrators were the ones to make the decision.