Tuesday, October 14, 2008

Bristling

Why do I bristle when people post pro-Proposition 8 materials on their blogs? It's not right of me; I've posted plenty of anti-Proposition 8 information on my blog -- granted, I always post in the hopes of enlightened disputes as I thrive on people disagreeing with me; it helps me test my own logic.

But that's besides the point. I should allow others to voice their opinions without me feeling offended. How arrogant of me to have felt otherwise.

12 comments:

  1. Oh come on now, you know you love it. It gives you to chance to call people who disagree with you mindless sheep or blind followers.

    You can rant about the intolerance of others and then issue challenges that are often cleverly written to be impossible to answer.

    You know what I'm talking about, when you ask a series of questions then issue the only answers you will accept. In this way since only the answers you agree with are the ones you will accept you can always justified in whatever you do.

    In this way everyone else is wrong if they disagree with you. This way you will never be wrong and everyone else is ignorant.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Crow, if anyone is ranting here it's you. Chedner has just acknowledged his tendency to take offense at pro-Prop 8 postings, admitted that he is wrong to do so, and stated a desire to do a better job at accepting others' expression of their views.

    Now you've claimed that his desire to be more accepting is insincere and accused him of gross intolerance and fomenting contention.

    When the rational debate of an issue carries over into attacks on a person's character, things have gone a little too far. I suggest that you ask yourself if your comment was made in the spirit of love, or in the spirit of contention.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Andrew, you know that I react the same way, and I don't think it's wrong.

    Is it wrong to be offended when someone says something utter racist or sexist?

    Nor is it wrong to be offended when people are homophobic to the point when they're trying to take away our rights and treat us as second class citizens.

    We have a responsibility to be angry, even.

    Crow, you're an ass.

    You're just angry because neither Andrew nor I won't put up with your bullshit, although Andrew's always so much nicer about it than I will ever be. And I'm not even going to try to address all the things that are wrong with what you said. You're utterly incapable of believing that you might, EVER make a mistake, let alone be fundamentally wrong. Go be a self-hating mindless blind follower somewhere else.

    ReplyDelete
  4. When the rational debate of an issue carries over into attacks on a person's character, things have gone a little too far. I suggest that you ask yourself if your comment was made in the spirit of love, or in the spirit of contention.

    Again, just thought worth repeating.

    Craig: I'm going to leave my 'angry young man' days behind me.

    I don't see any need to get angry and upset anymore. Frankly, I don't want to anymore -- which is why it is wrong for me.

    I don't think it our responsibility to get angry but to act. I am choosing to not act out of anger, but that does not mean I will stop fighting against the attacks on freedom, equality, justice, and so forth.

    Crow: You... issue challenges that are often cleverly written to be impossible to answer.

    Honestly, I take this as a compliment -- because I know my statements and challenges are not made out of conspiracy to befuddle/distort/confuse/etc. but out of logic to be challenged.

    And if my argument is truly impossible to refute, then I know it is surely sound and accurate.

    you ask a series of questions then issue the only answers you will accept

    I was not issuing "the only [acceptable] answers" but providing you the tools you would need if you actually wanted to refute the arguments I was making.

    Such is rather condescending, I know, but I wanted to avoid non sequitur responses to the arguments I was making, so I merely supplied you the logic you would need to use to make a solid argument against what I was saying.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Wow, Crow, your comment seems really inappropriate, defamatory, and combative, not to mention highly presumptuous. Bad show.

    While Mr. Chedner may be one opinionated cuss (which I say out of love and from first-person understanding of the curse of stubbornness), I have found him to be willing to at least listen to opposing arguments (even if logically moth-eaten or describing holes in his own logic) without resorting to attacks or imputing bad motives.

    I suspect he, unlike most people, is interested in testing his ideas against the logic and experience of others. Sometimes, people interpret my invitations to dialog as arrogance or self-assertion, and that often hurts (unless I'm able to step back and see it for what it is) when what I was really doing was inviting feedback and ideas against which to weigh my own.

    Craig, taking offense rarely, if ever, accomplishes anything. It almost always breeds more offense on the part of the offended, which offense is possibly worse, being deliberate and intentional, where the actions and words which caused the original offense may have been out of ignorance. Emotional reactions are understandable but do not justify maltreatment of others, since I can direct and temper my own emotions. I wrote more here, but instead of spouting more uninvited preaching than I've already done or expressing concern which would likely be taken as judgemental pandering, I'll just say bad show to you too.

    So...fess up, Chedner, you just wrote this post as self-aggrandizing bait to lure people into a false sense of your own humility so you can slice them asunder with your convincing arguments once they've let down their guard. And to incite a vicious debate pitting friends and foes against each other. You're a crafty one when you want to be...always stirring that pot.

    *wink*

    ReplyDelete
  6. So...fess up, Chedner, you just wrote this post [to fulfill your evil plot].

    Gwahahaha...

    Actually, in all honesty, the entire reason I made my self-disgust public was incase any of my family members and friends have been following my blog (okay, mostly my brother, Craig) and to tell them, "Don't feel like you cannot express your opinions about Proposition 8 on your own blog just because you're afraid of me being offended... I'm done being offended."

    And, really, I'm not trying to say, "Gee, I'm so humble," but rather, "Man, I can be a selfish prick sometimes!"

    ... uh, I mean...

    "Bask in my humility; reverence me and respect me..."

    [For only then will their minds become my puppets to control with befuddlement and lollipops!]

    GWAHAHAHA...AHAHA..HAHAHA...[EXCLAMATION POINT]

    (yes, I am fully aware that "befuddlement" is qualifying how the verb "control" and, therefore, implying that I would control befuddlementally [sic])

    ReplyDelete
  7. (yes, I am fully aware that "befuddlement" is qualifying how the verb "control" and, therefore, implying that I would control befuddlementally [sic])

    um... actually "with befuddlement and lollipops" is a prepositional phrase ("with" being the preposition), so you would use the noun form of "befuddle", which is "befuddlement", so you had it right to begin with.

    (Don't ask me to diagram the sentence for you... I'm lucky to have remembered that much from middle school English class).

    :D

    ReplyDelete
  8. Also, Crow:

    I know you're a good guy simply and sincerely trying to follow the counsels of the Prophet, and therefore, in your eyes God -- which stance, albeit not the current means being used to uphold this stance, I respect and understand wholeheartedly.

    I will never try to stop you from trying to follow the Prophet.

    I would especially never dream of trying to legally impair your ability to live to the greatest degree according to what the Prophet teaches -- and that includes the current counsel for you to fight to legally impair my ability to live to the greatest degree according to what I believe is godly.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Scott:

    ... yeah, I reread what I wrote... I'm not quite sure what I was thinking or meaning... it was a rough night...

    ReplyDelete
  10. I would especially never dream of trying to legally impair your ability to live to the greatest degree according to what the Prophet teaches -- and that includes the current counsel for you to fight to legally impair my ability to live to the greatest degree according to what I believe is godly.

    Damn it, that comes across as sounding, "See, I'm so much better than you and the Church!" That's not what I meant...

    I'm just saying that I do not hold any sort of grudge against you, Crow, nor do I think you a fool for trying to follow your convictions, even if I believe them affecting my own.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Cheddner, perhaps thats why even while we have not always seen eye-to-eye with each other, I've basicly liked you from day one. I enjoyed talking to you when we used to talk on the phone, I enjoyed our livley and challenging chats and until they became heated and pointed I also enjoyed our debates.

    I stood by you during your whole eunuch phase, and the only reason I ever objected to it was because I felt that God had much more instore for you then the self imposed life of self deprevation that you seemed to have accepted.

    I admire you for knowing the scriptures and for standing by what you believe. I mearly wrote what I did and I realize that most of the people here don't know the back story to try to make a point.

    If the only facts you accept as truth are the ones that you believe in how can any argument ever be refuted? And I realize this works in my direction too. You can say anything you want that may sound logical but if it goes against what I believe to be gospel truth, I'm not going to buy it.

    I will take off my gloves and say I'm sick of Craig always speaking in the plural about you and him. Okay so he thinks I'm an ass, so what. Its not like his blogs are full of tolerance, understanding or love for anyone other then those who agree with him. So if that is the boundary he sets, that if I disagree with him, then I'm an ass, then I'll be an ass. I have given him more then his fair amount of chances.

    But this isn't about him. If I didn't think you had something worth sharing I wouldn't come back so often to read between the lines of your blogs and be inspired.

    ReplyDelete
  12. 'll just say bad show to you too.

    Yeah, I know. I was not in a good mood that night. Nor lately at all for that matter.

    I have given him more then his fair amount of chances.

    I have to say, I am bemused by this.

    Its not like his blogs are full of tolerance, understanding or love for anyone other then those who agree with him.

    That's only half right. It is true that I have no tolerance for heterosexism or discrimination of ANY kind. As such, I have no tolerance for the viewpoints of people that promote such things. I will freely admit that. I see it the same as not tolerating racism or sexism, especially when such negatively affects others, and most especially when it interferes with individuals' exercise of their (god given?) rights.

    But, I do respect the right of any person to have their own beliefs, you included. I just think that some of the actions that are based on some of those beliefs are actively harmful to me, and many others, and thusly not deserving of respect or tolerance, just as society is intolerant of a person who won't hire someone because they're black, or won't pay a woman the same wage as a man for the same quality work, etc.

    I do UNDERSTAND the motivations behind this behaviour and these views, but again that doesn't mean I have to tolerate actions that harm me and threaten my being able to exercise my rights as a human and an equal to everyone else out there.

    ReplyDelete