Islamophobia meets a new Lowe

[Symmetry]

Let's make this less personal. Faced with one, and only one, of the two options, which country is in more desperate need of reform vis a vis the treatment of its citizens as regards oathtaking?

Circumstance 1 - Country X has violently transitioned from a monarchy to a republic. Every day for several hundred years the new regime now requests schoolchildren publicly pledge their agreement with the revolution and the political philosophy of republicanism. While schoolchildren can choose not to, they may be subject to peer pressure from other school children to participate. This might, in the most serious cases, include dirty looks or name calling. A state-sanctioned cult of personality exists around a powerful general who died in 1799; his portrait is placed in every classroom and schools are closed down on his birthday. Schoolchildren are annually required to stage elaborate pageants in his honour. Even the most mundane moments in his life are declared heroic (e.g. children are required to write reports about a time this deceased general cleared some dead trees from an empty lot when he was 6). The year is 2011.

Circumstance 2 - Country Y has violently transitioned from a republic to a monarchy. For several hundred years the new regime demands members of the parliament pledge personal loyalty to the King - a billionaire industrialist. If they fail to do so they will be ejected from parliament and their voting rights stripped. Residents of the neighborhoods from where those members of parliament live will be collectively punished by being denied the opportunity to elect replacements, thereby suffering complete political disenfranchisement. The King's son, an alleged homosexual rapist who has lifetime immunity from prosecution for any crime, is given the authority to veto laws passed by the remaining members of the parliament who haven't been expelled for failing to pledge loyalty to his father. In school, children are required to learn the correct methods to grovel before the King if they happen to see her one day. They are required to learn the lyrics to a song calling on God to use magic tricks to transform the King into an immortal being. The year is 2011.

Number 1 is weird, bizarre and a little loopy. Number 2 is a shocking horror that demands intervention of United Nations troops under an injunction from the European Court of Human Rights. IMO.

Ah well, as it seems like this topic is well off, and that Saxi is unwilling to invite criticism of his points by actually discussing them in a relevant thread where people can view them under the auspice of a relevant conversation.

Tie this back in to the thread, or start a new one, basically.

Obviously the US Pledge of Allegiance has nothing to do with Lowe's Home Improvement stores but you decided to introduce it into the thread, at which point you transitioned the topic of the thread from Lowe's Home Improvement to oathmaking.

Clearly it's unreasonable for a person to change the topic of their thread mid-stream and then - when someone presents a contrary opinion to the new topic - demand that discussion abruptly cease and all talk immediately revert to the original topic. Don't you agree? I'm sure you do.

Now if you'd like to clarify what you mean by "no one really feels bothered" by the disenfranchisement of ethnically Irish people in the UK it would be appreciated.

I disagree, from the point of view of someone who would like to offer an opinion on a given topic, thread titles are pretty much the guideline. Do you want a discussion with me, or would you like a discussion of your points?

If you want to talk to me, then PM's are the correct option. If you want a wider discussion, perhaps burying them in a discussion of another topic is not the best option. You can start your own, and perhaps people will talk to you.

So, anyway, you have a couple of options that might get the response you want.

[saxitoxin]

I disagree, from the point of view of someone who would like to offer an opinion on a given topic, thread titles are pretty much the guideline.

what's your take on the pledge of allegiance in schools in the US?

So, anyway ...

[Symmetry]

I disagree, from the point of view of someone who would like to offer an opinion on a given topic, thread titles are pretty much the guideline.

what's your take on the pledge of allegiance in schools in the US?

So, anyway ...

Fair criticism, that.

Are we back on topic?

[saxitoxin]

I disagree, from the point of view of someone who would like to offer an opinion on a given topic, thread titles are pretty much the guideline.

what's your take on the pledge of allegiance in schools in the US?

So, anyway ...

Fair criticism, that.

Are we back on topic?

Right after you clarify what you mean by "no one really feels bothered" by the disenfranchisement of ethnically Irish people in the UK.

[Symmetry]

I disagree, from the point of view of someone who would like to offer an opinion on a given topic, thread titles are pretty much the guideline.

what's your take on the pledge of allegiance in schools in the US?

So, anyway ...

Fair criticism, that.

Are we back on topic?

Right after you clarify what you mean by "no one really feels bothered" by the disenfranchisement of ethnically Irish people in the UK.

You don't usually throw me a softball like this, so I suspect that you're not being honest with me here, and I'll have to fulfill another requirement if I want to get you back on topic.

Still, here it is, ethnic Irishness is not a bar to the electoral franchise in the UK. Ethnically Irish people are not disenfranchised.

[saxitoxin]

Ethnically Irish people are not disenfranchised.

This didn't clarify your statement.

Duly elected MPs from West Tyrone, South Tyrone, Mid-Ulster, Armagh and West Belfast are banned from taking their seats in parliament. They are all ethnically Irish. Therefore, ethnically Irish people are disenfranchised.

You said no one is bothered by it. By "no one" do you literally mean "no one" - including them and their constituents - or "no one" as in members of the English ethnic ruling caste?

[Symmetry]

Ethnically Irish people are not disenfranchised.

Duly elected MPs from West Tyrone, South Tyrone, Mid-Ulster, Armagh and West Belfast are banned from taking their seats in parliament. They are all ethnically Irish. Therefore, ethnically Irish people are disenfranchised.

You said no one is bothered by it. By "no one" do you literally mean "no one" - including them and their constituents - or "no one" as in members of the English ethnic ruling caste?

Kid, you don't understand, but to be fair you have made yourself the master of whataboutery in this forum. In any given topic your posts are about why another conversation should be discussed.

Child, I've just done Christmas with a ten year old. He was the centre of attention among a lot of adults, but he demanded attention.

Back in the day, a Saxi thread would be interesting. Now you're just coasting. Back in the day, a Saxi thread would inject life into the forum, now a post by Saxi is more than likely an attempt to derail a thread, or discourage a new poster.

The only question I can ask is:

Are you bored by our questions?

[saxitoxin]

a post by Saxi is more than likely an attempt to derail a thread

what's your take on the pledge of allegiance in schools in the US?

So, anyway ...

[Symmetry]

a post by Saxi is more than likely an attempt to derail a thread

what's your take on the pledge of allegiance in schools in the US?

So, anyway ...

Apology accepted, and to be fair, I was a bit out of order too.

[saxitoxin]

a post by Saxi is more than likely an attempt to derail a thread

what's your take on the pledge of allegiance in schools in the US?

So, anyway ...

Apology accepted, and to be fair, I was a bit out of order too.

One can't realistically expect to ramble on about something and then, in parenthesis, write "dirty Jews!" and not expect people will ask for clarification as to one's intent in that statement.

When you out-of-the-blue said - in a topic about Lowe's hardware stores - that no one was bothered by the political disenfranchisement of Irish people you were either trying to provoke the response you received, or you were suffering from a gap of reality as to how people might react. Either way you need to feel empowered to take ownership for your statements and not attempt to dodge them by blustering about the National Forensic League's topicality rules.

[Symmetry]

One can't realistically expect to ramble on about something and then, in parenthesis, scribe "dirty Jews!" and not expect people will ask for clarification as to one's intent in that statement.

When you out-of-the-blue said - in a topic about Lowe's hardware stores - that no one was bothered by the political disenfranchisement of Irish people you were either trying to provoke the response you received, or you were suffering from a gap of reality as to how people might react. Either way you need to feel empowered to take ownership for your statements and not attempt to dodge them by blustering about the National Forensic League's topicality rules.

Are we done?

[saxitoxin]

One can't realistically expect to ramble on about something and then, in parenthesis, scribe "dirty Jews!" and not expect people will ask for clarification as to one's intent in that statement.

When you out-of-the-blue said - in a topic about Lowe's hardware stores - that no one was bothered by the political disenfranchisement of Irish people you were either trying to provoke the response you received, or you were suffering from a gap of reality as to how people might react. Either way you need to feel empowered to take ownership for your statements and not attempt to dodge them by blustering about the National Forensic League's topicality rules.

Are we done?

Right after you clarify what you mean by "no one really feels bothered" by the disenfranchisement of ethnically Irish people in the UK.

[Symmetry]

One can't realistically expect to ramble on about something and then, in parenthesis, scribe "dirty Jews!" and not expect people will ask for clarification as to one's intent in that statement.

When you out-of-the-blue said - in a topic about Lowe's hardware stores - that no one was bothered by the political disenfranchisement of Irish people you were either trying to provoke the response you received, or you were suffering from a gap of reality as to how people might react. Either way you need to feel empowered to take ownership for your statements and not attempt to dodge them by blustering about the National Forensic League's topicality rules.

Are we done?

Right after you clarify what you mean by "no one really feels bothered" by the disenfranchisement of ethnically Irish people in the UK.

Did that, a few posts ago. We done?

[saxitoxin]

One can't realistically expect to ramble on about something and then, in parenthesis, scribe "dirty Jews!" and not expect people will ask for clarification as to one's intent in that statement.

When you out-of-the-blue said - in a topic about Lowe's hardware stores - that no one was bothered by the political disenfranchisement of Irish people you were either trying to provoke the response you received, or you were suffering from a gap of reality as to how people might react. Either way you need to feel empowered to take ownership for your statements and not attempt to dodge them by blustering about the National Forensic League's topicality rules.

Are we done?

Right after you clarify what you mean by "no one really feels bothered" by the disenfranchisement of ethnically Irish people in the UK.

Did that, a few posts ago. We done?

You pounded out several angry paragraphs of ad hominem attacks a few posts ago but I didn't see any clarification or apology for your racist statement.

[Symmetry]

One can't realistically expect to ramble on about something and then, in parenthesis, scribe "dirty Jews!" and not expect people will ask for clarification as to one's intent in that statement.

When you out-of-the-blue said - in a topic about Lowe's hardware stores - that no one was bothered by the political disenfranchisement of Irish people you were either trying to provoke the response you received, or you were suffering from a gap of reality as to how people might react. Either way you need to feel empowered to take ownership for your statements and not attempt to dodge them by blustering about the National Forensic League's topicality rules.

Are we done?

Right after you clarify what you mean by "no one really feels bothered" by the disenfranchisement of ethnically Irish people in the UK.

Did that, a few posts ago. We done?

No, you pounded out several angry paragraphs of ad hominem attacks a few posts ago.

Sorry about that, we done yet?

[saxitoxin]

Sorry about that, we done yet?

Right after you clarify what you mean by "no one really feels bothered" by the disenfranchisement of ethnically Irish people in the UK.

[john9blue]

i literally keep thinking my browser is automatically scrolling me back up every time i read this page

[Symmetry]

Sorry about that, we done yet?

Right after you clarify what you mean by "no one really feels bothered" by the disenfranchisement of ethnically Irish people in the UK.

Done a few posts ago. Can we get back on topic? this isn't the first time you've done this.

[saxitoxin]

Sorry about that, we done yet?

Right after you clarify what you mean by "no one really feels bothered" by the disenfranchisement of ethnically Irish people in the UK.

Done a few posts ago.

You pounded out several angry paragraphs of ad hominem attacks a few posts ago but I didn't see any clarification or apology for your racist statement.

Can we get back on topic? this isn't the first time you've done this.

This topic --->

what's your take on the pledge of allegiance in schools in the US?

<--- or one of the other topics you decorated this thread with before you decided you wanted a redo?

[Symmetry]

Sorry about that, we done yet?

Right after you clarify what you mean by "no one really feels bothered" by the disenfranchisement of ethnically Irish people in the UK.

Done a few posts ago.

You pounded out several angry paragraphs of ad hominem attacks a few posts ago but I didn't see any clarification or apology for your racist statement.

Can we get back on topic? this isn't the first time you've done this.

This topic --->

what's your take on the pledge of allegiance in schools in the US?

<--- or one of the other topics you decorated this thread with before you decided you wanted a redo?

Kid, your quotes don't say what you want them to say.

[saxitoxin]

Sorry about that, we done yet?

Right after you clarify what you mean by "no one really feels bothered" by the disenfranchisement of ethnically Irish people in the UK.

Done a few posts ago.

You pounded out several angry paragraphs of ad hominem attacks a few posts ago but I didn't see any clarification or apology for your racist statement.

Can we get back on topic? this isn't the first time you've done this.

This topic --->

what's your take on the pledge of allegiance in schools in the US?

<--- or one of the other topics you decorated this thread with before you decided you wanted a redo?

Kid, your quotes don't say what you want them to say.

Those are your quotes, not mine, I'm afraid. I could never say something so ghastly, even in jest.

[Symmetry]

Those are your quotes, not mine, I'm afraid. I could never say something so ghastly, even in jest.

So, are we done? Can we get back on topic?

[saxitoxin]

Those are your quotes, not mine, I'm afraid. I could never say something so ghastly, even in jest.

So, are we done? Can we get back on topic?

Again, which one? This topic --->

what's your take on the pledge of allegiance in schools in the US?

<--- or one of the other topics you decorated this thread with before you decided some of the tangents you'd brought up were indefensible and you'd rebrand yourself as the Topicality Ombudsman to avoid having to take ownership for them? This seems to be your M.O. in the Club.

[everywhere116]

I wonder how a Muslims feel about this, I also wonder how Muslims feel about Liberals always taking up their business and speaking for all Muslims.

Meanwhile, in the Fortress of Solitude: Dearborn Chapter...

[john9blue]

honestly symmetry, i thought you were above calling people "kid" online