Anti-bully bullies christian students...

[billc]

Yes, the same guy who advocates not bullying one type of person turns and bullies another type of person...hmmm...the point would be that people shouldn't bully other people...period, not change who gets bullied...

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog...with_obscenity-laced_anti-christian_rant.html

Part of the hypocrisy of the "anti-bullying" movement is that the concept of bullying is never defined in a meaningful way. Evidently, bullying is one of those things that is defined by the "victim."
Hence, we have the spectacle of the man who created the video "It Gets Better" can speak against the bullying of gay kids, but then turn around and bully kids with Christian beliefs - and get away with it.
Fox News:

As many as 100 high school students walked out of a national journalism conference after an anti-bullying speaker began cursing, attacked the Bible and reportedly called those who refused to listen to his rant "pansy asses."
The speaker was Dan Savage, founder of the "It Gets Better" project, an anti-bullying campaign that has reached more than 40 million viewers with contributors ranging from President Obama to Hollywood stars. Savage also writes a sex advice column called "Savage Love."
Savage, and his husband, were also guests at the White House for President Obama's 2011 LGBT Pride Month reception. He was also invited to a White House anti-bullying conference.
[...]
Rick Tuttle, the journalism advisor for Sutter Union High School in California, was among several thousand people in the audience. He said they thought the speech was one thing - but it turned into something else.
"I thought this would be about anti-bullying," Tuttle told Fox news. "It turned into a pointed attack on Christian beliefs."
Tuttle said a number of his students were offended by Savage's remarks - and some decided to leave the auditorium.
"It became hostile," he said. "It felt hostile as we were sitting in the audience - especially towards Christians who espouse beliefs that he was literally taking on."
Tuttle said the speech was laced with vulgarities and "sexual innuendo not appropriate for this age group." At one point, he said Savage told the teenagers about how good his partner looked in a speedo.
​

Referring to people as "pansey asses" for leaving in the middle of his speech is not the way to win friends and influence people. But that was not the point of his rant. He was not there to educate, but to chastize those who disagree with him. And the conference organizers helped out by issuing this vacuous statement about the controversy:

 

[granfire]

"and his husband"

:lfao:

Ok, I give him that, I am sure he has heard massive amounts of bible based reasons why he is going to rot in hell.

But hey, seems the students have gotten the message: You don't have to stick around and listen to a bully.

 

[Tez3]

There's a difference between bullying and haranguing people, this was ranting and haranguing them, wrong but not bullying.

 

[Big Don]

There's a difference between bullying and haranguing people, this was ranting and haranguing them, wrong but not bullying.

You certainly can't call it tolerant. Those who screech so shrilly for tolerance rarely exhibit it.

 

[Sukerkin]

I'm not sure I agree there, Don. Well, not in so far as it is possible to feel speak out about something in strong terms whilst still being tolerant of it.

Multi-culturalism is one such thing for me, for example. I tolerate it having been a very misguided policy of the Blair labour government but you won't hear me say very much about it. If people ask me directly I shall tell them that I think it was one of the worst mistakes a government has made since the Second World War and that it is storing up troubles for later on down the line. It is possible to have a multi-racial society, it is possible to have a multi-racial society in which elements of other cultures become part of the norm. But it is not possible to have a cohesive society where sections of that society hold themselves apart from the rest and seek to force or coerce the rest to conform to them.

That applies equally well to religion too, now I think on it :angel:

 

[Tez3]

You certainly can't call it tolerant. Those who screech so shrilly for tolerance rarely exhibit it.

Certainly it's not tolerant but it's not bullying either. I would have walked out too even though it's not my religion but I wouldn't have felt bullied more disgusted at the rant.

 

[billc]

Not surprised that this guy also hates republicans...he does have an interesting debate point...

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/04/29/Savage-Republicans-Dead

[h=2]“I wish the Republicans were all ********** dead.”[/h]

Hmmm...that does tend to go against the notion that this guy really wants tolerance for others...

 

[MA-Caver]

Bullying is nothing more than the manifestation of one's bias in violent form.
I was bullied by kids in my age group or older as I was growing up. They came in all colors and all socioeconomic backgrounds.
I just learned to deal with it, fight back when I could and ignored/ran from the rest.
What I learned most was fighting back reduces the chances of being bullied by the same person twice. Win or lose after fighting back, I wasn't bothered by that person again. Others stepped up to the plate and I dealt with them.

Hypocrisy is everywhere. If this guy wanted to speak out against bullying then he wouldn't have chosen a specific group(s) to defend. He should've known that there are no lines when it comes to bullying.

 

[billc]

He also has this interesting debate point...

In 2006, Savage said that Green Party Senate candidate Carl Romanelli, who was running against Democrat Bob Casey (the eventual winner), “should be dragged behind a pickup truck until there’s nothing left but the rope.” Casey was so offended he refused Savage’s campaign donations.

Why am I not surprised that he seems to have ties to the Obama campaign...

Hmmm...I wonder if someone on the republican side of the political spectrum who said things like this would get to pal around with top administration officials...

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/04/29/Savage-Visit-White-House

While at the White House, Savage and Miller hung out with top-ranking Obama administration officials. Here’s Terry Miller having a grand old time with Jill Biden, wife of Joe:

 

[billc]

And here is another account of the mature debate technique that this guy has also used in the past...

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/04/29/Savage-Bully-Gary-Bauer

Back in 2000, the White House’s favorite bully, Dan Savage, was hired by Salon.com to infiltrate the Gary Bauer presidential campaign. He became so frustrated with Bauer’s religiosity that after contracting the flu, he decided to go around the office licking doorknobs in order to infect the other staffers, including Bauer.

In my Sudafed-induced delirium I decided that if it's terrorism Bauer wants, then it's terrorism Bauer is going get -- and I'm just the man to terrorize him. Naked, feverish and higher than a kite on codeine aspirin, I called the Bauer campaign and volunteered. My plan? Get close enough to Bauer to give him the flu, which, if I am successful, will lay him flat just before the New Hampshire primary. I would go to Bauer's campaign office and cough on everything -- phones and pens, staplers and staffers. I even hatched a plan to infect the candidate himself. I would keep the pen in my mouth until Bauer dropped by his offices to rally the troops. And when he did, I would approach him and ask for his autograph, handing him the pen from my flu-virus incubating mouth.

It is good to hear that the Obama administration has ties to this guy...

 

[punisher73]

There's a difference between bullying and haranguing people, this was ranting and haranguing them, wrong but not bullying.

Out of curiousity, how do you define the difference between bullying and haranguing people? Most of the definitions I see on bullying and what this guy teaches/preaches what he did fit his definition of bullying.

 

[cdunn]

Out of curiousity, how do you define the difference between bullying and haranguing people? Most of the definitions I see on bullying and what this guy teaches/preaches what he did fit his definition of bullying.

A bully's victim is generally trapped, and at the end of a power gradient that often involves long term social isolation and violence.

Savage is a little out there, but he DID get the redefinition of Santorum right, at least.

 

[Sukerkin]

I was going to say much the same, Chris. In a moment of madness, I've taken BillC back off ignore to see if he's gotten over his obsession with that barmy site he quotes so much ... sadly he hasn't.

For goodness sake, Bill, read some other stuff about politics than lowest common denominator bottom feeders. They'll twist your mind into a one dimensional loop and you'll start thinking all kinds of nonsense are important.

 

[punisher73]

A bully's victim is generally trapped, and at the end of a power gradient that often involves long term social isolation and violence.

That is one definition of it, but most of the legal definitions don't require long term social isolation and/or violence. So define "trapped", and define what you mean by a "power gradient". Here is another definition of bullying...

Bullying is generally defined as an intentional act that causes harm to others, and may involve verbal harassment, verbal or non-verbal threats, physical assault, stalking, or other methods of coercion such as manipulation, blackmail, or extortion. It is aggressive behavior that intends to hurt, threaten or frighten another person. An imbalance of power between the aggressor and the victim is often involved. Bullying occurs in a variety of contexts, such as schools, workplaces, political or military settings, and others.

So again, how does this definition differ between what Savage did and "haranguing people"? Or it appears that if I just say what I want to once then it's not bullying, it's the repeated offenses that make it bullying.

 

[Sukerkin]

Easy:

Trapped = Can't get away

Power Gradient = one side has the power and the other has none, leading to greater imposition of dominance over the victim

Aren't you a policeman, Punisher? Or am I getting mixed up? It's just that I would've expected such concepts to be especially clear to one whose profession involves the socially sanctioned execution of such as part of their duty (I don't mean that to sound insulting, tho it does read that way ).

 

[Tez3]

You could say this man was epousing his freedom of speech rights and equally the students were exercising their right not to listen and to walk away. Many people rant, it's often intolerant, insulting and unacceptable to right thinking people but it isn't bullying. If you can walk away, if you are forced to listen or to take part, if you cannot 'free' yourself when you wish from that person then it's bullying or harrassment to give it it's legal description here.
http://www.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/education/parents/welfare/Bullying/whatisbullying.htm

"Definition

The Office of Children and Young People’s Services’ Anti-Bullying Strategy defines bullying as a persistent, deliberate attempt to hurt or humiliate someone.

There may sometimes be misunderstanding about the meaning of the term ‘bullying’: one-off incidents, whilst they may be very serious and must always be dealt with, do not fall within the definition of ‘bullying’.

Types of bullying

There are various types of bullying, but most have three things in common:
1. It is deliberately hurtful behaviour.
2. It is repeated over time.
3. There is an imbalance of power, which makes it hard for those being bullied to defend themselves."

 

[cdunn]

They had the opportunity to get up and run away.

Calling them 'pansy-assed' for doing so was enough over a line of decent conduct that Savage has apologized for it. The rest of his speech basically pointed out that using the bible to justify beating gay kids to a pulp in the bathroom isn't okay if you're willing to eat shrimp and wear cotton-poly clothes. Finding out that someone doesn't respect your beliefs does not constitute a session of bullying.

 

[Empty Hands]

Yes, the same guy who advocates not bullying one type of person turns and bullies another type of person...

It takes a special kind of reasoning to conclude that those who espouse tolerance must be hypocritical and themselves abusive if they do not accept or "tolerate" abusive and mean-spirited conduct from others.

Much like castigating someone who preaches against violence for defending themselves from an attack.

It's pretty transparent what's going on. These are not arguments made in good faith, and they are not only directed against the Savages of the world.

 

[WC_lun]

Savage indeed goes over the line quite a lot. However, his core message that bullying is not an acceptable form of behaviour is true, no matter what ever else he says. Sure, critisize the man when he says stupid crap, but linking his message of anti-bullying to that behaviour just seems like sour grapes and negates any point you are trying to make. Bullying still equates to bad, mmmkay?

 

[ballen0351]

Someone that cant control himself infront of a group of kids prob shouldnt be invtied back to speak to kids anymore. Hes a jack hole always has been always will be. Just because 10 % or what he says is good does not mean hes a good guy.