Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Social change has to be slow?

AGBF

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 26, 2003
Messages
21,534
Healthcare IS accessible ... that is the ‘human right’; not ’free healthcare for life with a guarantee of debt- & death-avoidance’.
I asked for proof that this was so in the form of a clay tablet that she had received on which this was engraved. She referred me to this:

"Article 25.

(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control."

My response is that what is written in article 25 is NOT what she said.The UN statement implies that people actually get health care. I knew she didn't have a clay tablet with her definition on it. She was interpreting. And her interpretation was mean spirited, certainly not what the United Nations intended! Always ask for proof!
 

Musia

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Mar 28, 2020
Messages
568
+1 to everything that you said in the post.

I myself am not pro open borders or pro the redistribution of wealth. Resources are finite. If you give away things for free, the cost will come from somewhere else. There is nothing truly free.

I am against social revolution, so I'm adamantly against Bernie Sanders and what he stands for.

I sympathize with liberals against discrimination based on gender or race. I don't think this should be conflated with the more "out there" ideas of open borders.

The social change I would support is celebrating diversity, whether in the form of experiences of women or trans or people of color, not a social revolution. It can be a swift mild change, not sweeping broad change like a social revolution would be.

There is nothing inherent about social change that says it HAS to be slow. Some of you believe it has to be slow, but that's opinion because the rate of social change is not something that can be scientifically measured, objectively determined.
Thank you! I have 2 children born in 1985 and 1987. The older, the boy, is as smart as you are. The girl is a smart person but you are definitely smarter and wiser. Happy Independence Day!
 

the_mother_thing

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
6,202
I asked for proof that this was so in the form of a clay tablet that she had received on which this was engraved. She referred me to this:

"Article 25.

(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control."

My response is that what is written in article 25 is NOT what she said.The UN statement implies that people actually get health care. I knew she didn't have a clay tablet with her definition on it. She was interpreting. And her interpretation was mean spirited, certainly not what the United Nations intended! Always ask for proof!
Yep, I summarized something ... for brevity sake ... sue me! :roll:

Maybe now you can dig into your own stack of clay tablets and show us all where it says “everyone gets a bunch of free stuff for life” because ‘basic human rights’.
 

AGBF

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 26, 2003
Messages
21,534
Yep, I summarized something ... for brevity sake ... sue me! :roll:

Maybe now you can dig into your own stack of clay tablets and show us all where it says “everyone gets a bunch of free stuff for life” because ‘basic human rights’.
I don't believe one can sue someone else for twisting a thought then calling it "summarizing", but if one could, I would sue you and I would win.
 

the_mother_thing

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
6,202
Sorry for the confusion, this earlier comment that you made denies systemic racism which is in itself a racist act. Note your use of underline and italics to really emphasize that point.

“There has never been a time in our country where there is more opportunity to succeed; the only thing holding people back is personal choice, and decades of academic & elite snobs telling others they cannot improve their circumstances, what they cannot do, that something is not possible, making excuses for them to not succeed ... blaming society, the ‘system‘, their skin color/ethnicity, their family, their gender, their address, etc. Is that how people should raise kids?”
No, that statement doesn’t ‘deny systemic racism’. :roll: You cannot (or will not) answer my very simple, specific question to you. Or you know I am right.

Whatever ... not my bandwagon begging for riders.

@the_mother_thing Thank you so much for all the time you devoted to posting in this thread. I will continue to read everything, every word. Happy Independence Day to you!
Thank you; and thank you for your civil, respectful participation as well. If only everyone could be so kind & play nice in the sandbox. :wavey:
 

the_mother_thing

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
6,202
Yes, I do. I have something to add right now. It is interesting that you found Musia so respectful and polite, so unlike many other posters. Perhaps it was because she told you how wonderful she found you and that she would read every word you wrote in the future. I have no problem with that. She can enjoy your postings. But you do seem to complain a lot about the other posters here. Maybe you should think about why you have trouble with so many of us.
You requested ‘clay tablets’ earlier; seems you might benefit from this one & this one. Some of us enjoy the ability to engage in respectful dialogue and exchange ideas with others, and would hate to see the privilege removed simply because a few continually cannot respect the forum rules and choose to engage in personal attacks.
 

chemgirl

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Sep 16, 2009
Messages
2,091
No, that statement doesn’t ‘deny systemic racism’. :roll: You cannot (or will not) answer my very simple, specific question to you. Or you know I am right.

Whatever ... not my bandwagon begging for riders.



Thank you; and thank you for your civil, respectful participation as well. If only everyone could be so kind & play nice in the sandbox. :wavey:
Actually it does. You said the only thing holding people back is personal choice. You underlined the word only.

The original post in this thread is discussing social change and references BLM. In this context, your statement denies systemic racism.

I don’t see the point of discussing anything else with you when racism is at the forefront of the conversation.
 
Last edited:

the_mother_thing

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
6,202
Actually it does. You said the only thing holding people back is personal choice. You underlined the word only (which is incredibly passive aggressive by the way).

Your statement denies systemic racism.
This thread is not (solely) about POC or systemic racism; neither was your first post in this thread (reposted below) to which I responded; and neither was my post.

I think that’s where you’re mistaken and assuming every human rights issue is centered on race/ethnicity; it’s not. Human rights exist despite any discriminatory factor.

You said:
The USA is an anomaly when it comes to basic human rights.

Why can’t healthcare and quality education be accessible to everyone? The system is set up in a way that exacerbates generational poverty. There is a segment of the population who are treated like their lives, their futures, are worth less.

There can be positive change without full blown socialism.
You referenced ‘generational poverty’; that along with healthcare and education access are not issues isolated to only POC; therefore, to attribute the lack of those things as ‘systemic racism’ is inaccurate.

PS - underlining something doesn’t make it passive aggressive; it’s for emphasis. If you’re not sure what someone means by something, asking them to explain it further is far more cordial & constructive (and less passive aggressive) than accusing them.
 

chemgirl

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Sep 16, 2009
Messages
2,091
This thread is not (solely) about POC or systemic racism; neither was your first post in this thread (reposted below) to which I responded; and neither was my post.

I think that’s where you’re mistaken and assuming every human rights issue is centered on race/ethnicity; it’s not. Human rights exist despite any discriminatory factor.

You said:


You referenced ‘generational poverty’; that along with healthcare and education access are not issues isolated to only POC; therefore, to attribute the lack of those things as ‘systemic racism’ is inaccurate.

PS - underlining something doesn’t make it passive aggressive; it’s for emphasis. If you’re not sure what someone means by something, asking them to explain it further is far more cordial & constructive (and less passive aggressive) than accusing them.
So you’re saying systemic racism exists? That the system is set up in such a way that BIPOC are denied opportunities enjoyed by others? Now it’s not only personal choice, but a combination of social issues?

PS: underlining, using italics, caps, or bolding words is often used to set a tone. It’s something we were taught in school to avoid because it can be viewed as combative.
 
Last edited:

voce

Ideal_Rock
Joined
May 13, 2018
Messages
3,737
@the_mother_thing
I'm sure you won't really care what I think, since you value your own opinion so highly.

Underlining, italics, caps, bold words are used as emphasis, no doubt. They're not really an indication of passive-aggressiveness; however, REPETITION of these things does set a rather pedantic tone, as though not trusting the intended audience to be able to latch on to what you'd want to emphasize. The use of such visual tricks can be interpreted as condescending because overuse of these effects presumes that the audience needs you to emphasize the main points, instead of being able to pick up the main points on its own.

You remind me a lot of my father, actually. He's good at debate but insists I filter out his tone of voice whenever we have an argument. He says to mind his words no matter if he utters them calmly at 40 dB or at the top of his lungs at 90 dB. His words may be fine, but excuse me if I happen to be affected by the manner and tone the words are communicated. My father is completely deaf to how his tone of voice sounds to others and affects others. He actually can come across as quite pedantic, in a "I know better and I'm going to school you" kind of way.

I don't mean to disrespect you. Merely to point out that the way you are making your points is rubbing quite a lot of people in the wrong way. I myself sometimes agree with what you say, but don't care for the way that you say it. If you just care about airing your own opinions without the intent to "enlighten" anyone to your own viewpoint, carry on as you are. If you hope to change anyone's mind, you should take into consideration the impact of your tone when communicating.
 

OboeGal

Brilliant_Rock
Premium
Joined
Mar 22, 2017
Messages
687
This is completely false. It’s negating systemic racism.
Amen. And it's also negating: systemic sexism; systemic discrimination over LGBTQ status; the complete and utter gaming of the system, especially politically, by the wealthy for their own ever-growing power and advantage; the way that chronic illness can destroy lives; the effect mental illness, and the lack of proper resources for treating it, have on lives; the way that people are affected for the rest of their lives by the environment in which they were raised, even with the best efforts at healing and growth; the lifelong effects of simply being less gifted in terms of intelligence, creativity, talent, or the various other qualities that are prized by employers these days; etc., etc., etc. It's a level of cluelessness about the reality of most people's lives, at least here in the US, that is absolutely breathtaking.
 
Last edited:

the_mother_thing

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
6,202
We were taught to never underline, use italics, capitalize, or bold a word unless we were including the time of a meeting or location. This is because it is often viewed as passive aggressive or combative. This was high school, university communications class, and my workplace.

So you’re saying systemic racism exists? That the system is set up in such a way that BIPOC are denied opportunities enjoyed by others? Now it’s not only personal choice, but a combination of social issues?
Interesting; in what country was your education/workplace? Underlining (for emphasis) & italics (in lieu of normally-verbalized ‘exaggerated’ speech) are commonly used in casual online conversation in both my professional & personal circles to minimize misunderstandings or convey intent since it is often difficult to discern meaning in writing, especially across our multiple cultures. YMMV, but I (and most in my circles) don’t believe in judging or making petty assumptions based on informal online communications. Instead, I/we respect that people have different dialects or ways of communicating even if not considered “proper” nor part of my language or education.

As for “systemic racism“ & “the system”, when used in such general terms as you presented, I cannot (and will not) blindly agree nor disagree with your blanket statements, especially when non-POC experience many of the same things. I asked you earlier to explain how non-POC experiences could be attributed to “systemic racism” so we could parse this out for discussion, but you declined. What system/s? What opportunities? Who are the “others”? If you cannot or will not answer these questions, we really have nothing left to discuss, as such sensitive topics deserve more than being reduced to such generalities.

The 1994 Crime Bill is an example I believe disproportionately and negatively affected/s some POC in wide-reaching ways, and I’m glad to see some of those wrong’s finally being remedied via the recently-enacted First Step Act. Many would probably consider the 1994 Crime Bill as a form of “systemic racism”; I would agree with that. The 1994 Crime Bill is also an example that supports my earlier stated position - to the original question in this thread - about why “social changes“ cannot and sometimes should not be enacted with haste - especially when they are largely politically-motivated. That’s just begging for another potential set of problems we’ll need to solve down the road. My preference is enacting right solutions; not right now solutions.
 

sunseeker101

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Sep 27, 2009
Messages
416
Hello folks. I haven’t intended to add anything to the thread, but :) I’d like to say that since I’m from a typical social democracy-type place, it’s easy for me to identify the issues driving the left-leaning viewpoints here. As I see it, undereducated and poor people are helped, but not in such a way that could enable them to up their game, as it were.

To add to my ramble, high-standard, uniform, and free primary and college education is one of the best tickets I’ve seen to enabling mobility and removing the potential for related bitterness and resentment. I can say the same for ‘free’ healthcare — it seems to take a lot of psychic load off the average person.

To wobble into another gear :) I’m in the south, and it seems that while slavery was ended by right-thinking people, the thinking around here just went into hiding. I think the black community does need an exceptionally emotionally intelligent, compassionate and constructive response from the average person. I’m hoping the millennials will solve this disaster, and that the tide turns towards greater self-awareness, imagination, kindness, and perspicacity.

To answer Jaaron’s query: I think humans are wary of quick changes, and that like the development of perspective in drawing, we can live in the naff results of our collective dimness without connecting our habits of mind and attitude to end results... until we’re ready to face it, and brave out the consequences of accepting change. Anyway, that’s my $0.03 :)
 

the_mother_thing

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
6,202
@the_mother_thing
I'm sure you won't really care what I think, since you value your own opinion so highly.

Underlining, italics, caps, bold words are used as emphasis, no doubt. They're not really an indication of passive-aggressiveness; however, REPETITION of these things does set a rather pedantic tone, as though not trusting the intended audience to be able to latch on to what you'd want to emphasize. The use of such visual tricks can be interpreted as condescending because overuse of these effects presumes that the audience needs you to emphasize the main points, instead of being able to pick up the main points on its own.

You remind me a lot of my father, actually. He's good at debate but insists I filter out his tone of voice whenever we have an argument. He says to mind his words no matter if he utters them calmly at 40 dB or at the top of his lungs at 90 dB. His words may be fine, but excuse me if I happen to be affected by the manner and tone the words are communicated. My father is completely deaf to how his tone of voice sounds to others and affects others. He actually can come across as quite pedantic, in a "I know better and I'm going to school you" kind of way.

I don't mean to disrespect you. Merely to point out that the way you are making your points is rubbing quite a lot of people in the wrong way. I myself sometimes agree with what you say, but don't care for the way that you say it. If you just care about airing your own opinions without the intent to "enlighten" anyone to your own viewpoint, carry on as you are. If you hope to change anyone's mind, you should take into consideration the impact of your tone when communicating.
It’s rather disingenuous to say you “don’t mean to disrespect“ me after suggesting I “value my own opinion so highly“ as if I’m arrogant - I’m not. Assuming everyone must think/believe/perceive the same as me, have a certain education level and practice the same communication style is arrogant. Putting that aside, and giving you the benefit of the doubt, I touched on this in my reply to Chemgirl just now.

Further, make no mistake, it’s not merely “the tone of my posts that rubs certain people the wrong way”; it’s mainly my politics, beliefs, refusal to blindly accept the majority mainstream group-think, and my willingness to challenge hypocrisy; and I know this is fact because it’s been plainly stated on PS. Despite the abundant virtue signaling, some simply refuse to accept others who actually do think differently or have a different perspective or experience. And they will continually pick apart anything when called out in a attempt to deflect & silence non-Walker conservative types like me.
 

chemgirl

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Sep 16, 2009
Messages
2,091
Interesting; in what country was your education/workplace? Underlining (for emphasis) & italics (in lieu of normally-verbalized ‘exaggerated’ speech) are commonly used in casual online conversation in both my professional & personal circles to minimize misunderstandings or convey intent since it is often difficult to discern meaning in writing, especially across our multiple cultures. YMMV, but I (and most in my circles) don’t believe in judging or making petty assumptions based on informal online communications. Instead, I/we respect that people have different dialects or ways of communicating even if not considered “proper” nor part of my language or education.
The lesson about tone in writing was part of a communications course in United States. It was also part of my training before becoming a teaching assistant in Pittsburg and working for the hospital system in Toronto.

My mistake, I thought it was common knowledge in North America and that you were doing it intentionally.
 

jaaron

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Jan 1, 2016
Messages
675
@jaaron You are conflating “social change” and “basic human rights”, but those terms and their meaning are not synonymous.
No, I'm not, and you saying I am doesn't make it so.

For many people to acquire basic human rights-- for two men to marry each other, for example--has required gradual social change like pushing a rock uphill. You have not been limited in your ability to marry a man. Why should someone else have to wait for society to accept their right to do the same?
 

jaaron

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Jan 1, 2016
Messages
675
@jaaron


Now back to the thread topic:

Social change cannot and should not just ‘happen’ overnight. It takes time because it must be thoughtfully and thoroughly researched, studied, vetted, and where possible/necessary, voted on to ensure the proposed change does not create an unintended consequence or negative impact on others, nor strips them of their rights. T
Why? So, non-whites in America should wait and wait and wait to not be afraid they'll be killed by police when out buying an iced tea until some larger societal body has determined that them exercising that right has been researched, studied and vetted enough to suit... who, exactly?
 

jaaron

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Jan 1, 2016
Messages
675
@jaaron

Now back to the thread topic:

Social change cannot and should not just ‘happen’ overnight. It takes time because it must be thoughtfully and thoroughly researched, studied, vetted, and where possible/necessary, voted on to ensure the proposed change does not create an unintended consequence or negative impact on others, nor strips them of their rights. That is what we HAVE learned from history; and failing to do so leads to rushed policy ineffectively enacted with negative consequences. Case in point: CHAZ/CHOP.

Those deaths are but one example and directly related to this “social change” idea of defunding the police. Those protestors wanted a cop-free zone, and they got one in six small blocks of Seattle ... and two families got two dead men with no justice/answers in less than 3 weeks, not to mention the residents & business owners who were also impacted and intimidated into submission against their will. It may not be possible to prevent every murder, but it is entirely possible and critical to ensure justice is served when it happens. That scores the ‘defund’ movement a major FAIL in my book because it IS also a basic human right to feel safe & secure in one’s community, but ‘defunding’ removes that right.

People who advocate for that kind of “social change” are but one reason people like me own firearms ... to preserve MY basic human right to safety & security when extreme radical ideologists want to strip it away - either intentionally or unintentionally.
Ah, so social change was responsible for those deaths?

Because, interestingly, in the case of the Montreal mosque shooting, you specifically blame only the individual responsible, not larger societal forces. I guess a lot can change in two years.

Screenshot 2020-07-05 at 11.56.24.png
 

jaaron

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Jan 1, 2016
Messages
675
Healthcare and education are accessible to everyone in the U.S. We have a right to equal opportunity, not a right to equal quality.

“Quality” is subjective, and varies from person/community to person/community. If one does not like the quality of the options available to them where they live (or in their budget), it is incumbent on them to either demand better (e.g., from their elected local leaders who manage budgets, educators or health care professionals), or effect change in their personal circumstances to facilitate other/better options.

I was going to attach several articles and studies on healthcare and insurance rates among non-white groups in the US, but have decided to not bother. Nothing is going to get through to you. If you're interested, google.
 

jaaron

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Jan 1, 2016
Messages
675
Further, make no mistake, it’s not merely “the tone of my posts that rubs certain people the wrong way”; it’s mainly my politics, beliefs, refusal to blindly accept the majority mainstream group-think, and my willingness to challenge hypocrisy; and I know this is fact because it’s been plainly stated on PS. Despite the abundant virtue signaling, some simply refuse to accept others who actually do think differently or have a different perspective or experience. And they will continually pick apart anything when called out in a attempt to deflect & silence non-Walker conservative types like me.
No. It's your constant stating of opinion as fact with nothing except your own overblown certainty as backup, your whataboutism, your red herrings, logical fallacy and constant accusations of hypocrisy, hysteria, virtue-signalling and faux outrage. No one's attempting to silence you.

You could ... or you could constructively contribute to the thread topic and respectfully explain why you think I am wrong instead of playing ‘social change’ buzzword bingo. Just a suggestion.
Ok, so why don't you do the same? And respond to Chemgirl respectfully explaining why you think she's wrong instead of playing 'Fox News', 'Breitbart' buzzword bingo. Just a suggestion.

And just saying, systemic racism doesn't exist, white people also struggle with these issues doesn't even come close to accomplishing that.

Healthcare IS accessible ... that is the ‘human right’; not ’free healthcare for life with a guarantee of debt- & death-avoidance’.

We’ve been throwing money and resources at these same issues for decades, yet we still have the same problems; just a new generation (or three) of ‘victims‘. There has never been a time in our country where there is more opportunity to succeed; the only thing holding people back is personal choice,
Can you back this up with anything other than right-wing opinion? And employment numbers aren't of much use here, as they don't give any information about anything other than numbers of jobs-- i.e. benefits, possibility of advancement, health insurance, etc.

the only thing holding people back is personal choice, and decades of academic & elite snobs telling others they cannot improve their circumstances, what they cannot do, that something is not possible, making excuses for them to not succeed ... blaming society, the ‘system‘, their skin color/ethnicity, their family, their gender, their address, etc. Is that how people should raise kids? Telling them they can’t do/go/be something better/different if they want to, that they cannot choose differently? I’d call that bad parenting. So why treat fellow Americans that way?
Um, no. In large part it's inequality and systemic racism holding them back. I mean, I read just yesterday that Trump has set a record in federal judge appointments with 53 and not one of them is black. I guess there's not a single, qualified black candidate out there?

And what about people raised in cycles of addiction, poverty and unemployment. Should they provide their own good parenting to teach them they can succeed?

Let me guess, there’s a study ... I’m sure that’s what they want to hear next, that they are also a statistic. :roll:
https://www.businessinsider.com/us-...opportunities-remain-starkly-split-by-race-13

No, I totally agree. Things said by Hannity are much more valuable than statistics. I mean, we're all statistics in some way. Maybe what they want to hear is that society is interested in helping them join our column?

Further, make no mistake, it’s not merely “the tone of my posts that rubs certain people the wrong way”; it’s mainly my politics, beliefs, refusal to blindly accept the majority mainstream group-think, and my willingness to challenge hypocrisy; and I know this is fact because it’s been plainly stated on PS. Despite the abundant virtue signaling, some simply refuse to accept others who actually do think differently or have a different perspective or experience. And they will continually pick apart anything when called out in a attempt to deflect & silence non-Walker conservative types like me.
And, yes, it's also the tone. You seem to believe that constant overuse of bolding, scare quotes, italics and underlining (often on the same word) gives your posts an air of gravity and wisdom. It doesn't. It comes across as aggressive, undermining, bloviating and condescending.

A couple of tips from business email etiquette sites

Screenshot 2020-07-05 at 12.37.01.png

Screenshot 2020-07-05 at 12.40.24.png
 
Last edited:

jaaron

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Jan 1, 2016
Messages
675
Thank you; and thank you for your civil, respectful participation as well. If only everyone could be so kind & play nice in the sandbox. :wavey:
So, seriously, is your definition of civil, respectful participation, kindness and playing nice, agreeing with whatever you say? I think you somehow often seem to not see the nastiness and provocation in your own responses. Do you honestly believe your posts fit your own definition of respectful participation?

I've said this to you before, and it does go to the tone issue. You constantly call all different opinions faux-outrage and virtue-signalling, tell people that you know better because others are blindly following mainstream group-think, and that you, and you alone, are capable of picking apart hypocrisy. None of that encourages others, except the handful that agree with you, to respond the way you seem to want.

If you engaged differently, I doubt you'd find the intellectual boot-licking you seem to want, but you might find more civil debate.
 

Ella

Brilliant_Rock
Staff member
Trade
Joined
Jan 18, 2010
Messages
1,333
Folks I have removed some posts in this thread again. If your post was removed and it wasn’t one quoting a removed post, consider yourself on your last warning. Being nasty is not accepted here. That includes name calling and anything else we believe has a nasty or rude tone to others.

We’ve been giving time outs all over the place this week and will continue to do so until you push us to a breaking point. Then we will remove politics.
 

voce

Ideal_Rock
Joined
May 13, 2018
Messages
3,737
It’s rather disingenuous to say you “don’t mean to disrespect“ me after suggesting I “value my own opinion so highly“ as if I’m arrogant - I’m not. Assuming everyone must think/believe/perceive the same as me, have a certain education level and practice the same communication style is arrogant. Putting that aside, and giving you the benefit of the doubt, I touched on this in my reply to Chemgirl just now.

Further, make no mistake, it’s not merely “the tone of my posts that rubs certain people the wrong way”; it’s mainly my politics, beliefs, refusal to blindly accept the majority mainstream group-think, and my willingness to challenge hypocrisy; and I know this is fact because it’s been plainly stated on PS. Despite the abundant virtue signaling, some simply refuse to accept others who actually do think differently or have a different perspective or experience. And they will continually pick apart anything when called out in a attempt to deflect & silence non-Walker conservative types like me.
I wasn't thinking arrogance. By valuing your opinions, I meant you are quick to pick apart the other opinions that don't agree with yours, and there is very little if any acknowledgement of common ground, which in my opinion marks a respectful discourse, so you do come across as not respectful of other opinions that don't happen to be conservative.

I don't consider it arrogant to expect etiquette and respect on an online forum. Your last statement reveals a vehement belief about others, that they are combative. I applaud your willingness to challenge groupthink, but why does it have to be a liberals vs conservatives, us vs them mentality? I find that kind of attitude in itself a kind of groupthink.
 
Last edited:

Matata

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Sep 10, 2003
Messages
7,141
We just saw what a cop-free community looks like - it’s called CHAZ/CHOP, where 2 people were murdered with no justice for their families. We CAN and should deal with bad cops while ensuring the good cops are supported by communities and community leaders. Defunding the police is a dangerous, politically-motivated, ignorant ‘utopian’ idea that will result in increased crime returning especially to communities formerly plagued by it (the most vulnerable and in need of security), as well as likely injured or dead social workers and counselors who - while “educationally” capable of dealing with a mentally ill person in their office - are not physically capable of managing that situation on their own if/when it goes south. It’s quite a different environment to confront someone “on the street” vs. the couch in their clinic office. Let me guess, a cop escorts them to the scene? Not likely because there won’t be enough cops once the effects of “defunding” are realized through cuts to jobs & resources, and many are retiring in large numbers now.

There's one other town that was profiled a few weeks ago that did something similar. Note that the article states that other cities and towns with larger populations are asking the CAHOOTS team to advise them on adapting the system to serve the needs of larger populations.
 

AGBF

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 26, 2003
Messages
21,534

There's one other town that was profiled a few weeks ago that did something similar. Note that the article states that other cities and towns with larger populations are asking the CAHOOTS team to advise them on adapting the system to serve the needs of larger populations.
At least 30 years ago while I was working for a municipality in Connecticut part of the county had a similar team. It did not replace any of the police departments.(Each town has its own; the State police are associated more with highways.)

This Crisis Team was called out whenever it seemed possible someone might need psychiatric hospitalization. For a while, only the crisis team could commit someone in our area to a psychiatric hospital because he was a danger to himself or others. That was a departure from the norm, where any physician could do it, subject to probate court review, for two days. The crisis team even had its own, small, secure facility with mental health beds.

Matata's posting reminded me of it, although it was never meant to replace the police. The crisis team was staffed with mental health professionals, administered by a psychiatrist.
 
Be a part of the community It's free, join today!
    Celebratory Engagement Ring Upgrade And Bracelet
    Celebratory Engagement Ring Upgrade And Bracelet
    Chiguys's Cushion Cut Engagement Ring
    Chiguys's Cushion Cut Engagement Ring
    Archduchess Eleonore von Habsburg and Jérôme d’Ambrosio Royal Wedding
    Archduchess Eleonore von Habsburg and Jérôme d’Ambrosio Royal Wedding

Need Something Special?

Get a quote from multiple trusted and vetted jewelers.

Holloway Cut Advisor



Diamond Eye Candy

Click to view full-size image.
Top