Got diversity?

[Dancelittleewok]

Recently, my school hosted a Diversity Forum in which minority students how well the college approaches diversity. I did not go, but read the story in the college paper.

I, unfortunately, cannot find the article in the paper online, so I apologize for this second hand information. Here are some paraphrased snipets:

“It’s hard to argue about gay marriage when you are the only gay person in the classroom.”

“Some people seemed to be raised racist.”

“The college can allow an ex convict to speak on campus, but will not host a drag party. A drag party is art in my culture…”

“Religious people should have flexible beliefs and practice tolerance.”

“God is love. Muhammed is love. All is love. Religions preach love, so religious people should practice tolerance and acceptance of others.”

Most comments about religious beliefs and tolerance seemed to centered around Christianity. One student remarked that Nietzeche said that there’s no absolute truth, so there should be no absolute intolerant belief system. He also said that Christians in his World Civ class were “frustrated” when discussing Nietzche. The main point was that religious people should not be set in their belief system, be open to other’s beliefs, practice tolerance and accept towards others.

My critique:

1. In my opinion, this article seems to be poisoning the well towards religious people.
2. How come they cannot practice tolerance and accept towards religious people? If one idea is as a good as another, then why condemn the beliefs of people whom don’t agree with you?
3. It seems that tolerance is limited to what one believes should be tolerated.

What are your thoughts?

 

[mcliffor]

You hit the nail on the head. Cultural relativism, which is really the driving force behind these kind of diversity forums which old minorities in higher esteem than Christians, falls in on itself. Surely, if there is no truth, than who are they to campaign for anything different than the status quo? If all moral systems carry the same weight, why is a world without gay marriage any worse than a world with gay marriage?

The truth is, there is a hierarchy of values and morals. There is a natural law, and like it or not, culture is not something men are free to remold everytime they want something new. There is a right and wrong when it comes to culture. They aren’t all equally as good.

Why are there cultures to begin with? Societies need to share values in common in order to deal with one another. There needs to be a common way of living, eating and speaking in order for people to operate on a societal level. What these liberals want, is a society where all cultures are held in equally high esteem, except, of course, those that disagree with that idea. But they can’t do this unless they impose values, a new standard, that includes tolerance, diversity, and multiculturalism and shun people who disagree. I think you’d agree that Catholics are a lot closer to victims in popular culture than gays, but “victimization,” means power in todays society, which is why the gay person in the article not only wants to, but needs to be the victim if he wants to be heard. Everything gets reduced to its bear minimum, what they have in common, and only what cultures have in common that permits them to operate side by side. Religion becomes “love,” though we all know it is so much more than that. But “celebrating diversity” is making ethnic and sexual categories irrelevant to social and economic function, and so is identical to imposition of rationalized uniformity. Anyone who believes there is a hierarchy of values, which includes Christians, has to say “no,” to this. A homosexual lifestyle is not as valid as a married family lifestyle.

To uderstand why their voices make the paper and yours don’t, take a look at this site:

turnabout.ath.cx:8000/node/5/#6

The author is Catholic and provides an interesting critique of the values that dominate our schools and society.

 

[setter]

Recently, my school hosted a Diversity Forum in which minority students how well the college approaches diversity. I did not go, but read the story in the college paper.

These Diversity discussion groups are the not so well disguised Trojan horse of gaining acceptance for the gay agenda and diversity of perverted sexual lifestyles. Period.

My critique:

1. In my opinion, this article seems to be poisoning the well towards religious people.
2. How come they cannot practice tolerance and accept towards religious people? If one idea is as a good as another, then why condemn the beliefs of people whom don’t agree with you?
3. It seems that tolerance is limited to what one believes should be tolerated.

What are your thoughts?

The self contradictory and untenable position of relativism.

 

[Transformer]

“Religious people should have flexible beliefs and practice tolerance.”

What do you know, the person telling us to be tolerant actually tolerates no belief about tolerance except his own! What an intolerant person. He says we should accept all religious beliefs, but rejects my belief that Christianity is objectively true and contradictions of it are objectively false.

Tolerance is a joke; those who claim to have it for all religious beliefs in reality reject all beliefs except their own relativistic ones.

Don’t be frightened, just love.

God bless.

 

[Wolseley]

Well, as G.K. Chesterton once said (and someone here has this as their sig), “Tolerance is the virtue of a man with no convictions.”

 

[HoppityRedux]

Well, as G.K. Chesterton once said (and someone here has this as their sig), “Tolerance is the virtue of a man with no convictions.”

Now, that’s a conviction I doubt he exercised much.

 

[dafalax]

The comment that people’s religious beliefs should be flexible is a paradox. How can you profess belief in something you are willing to say is wrong tomorrow? People who argue about how intolerant Christians are are engaging in an act of intolerance. This has its roots in anti-Christianity. Case in point: remember all the outcry by our media over the Danish cartoons of the prophet Mohammed? Remember how they were similarly offended by Madonna’s crucifixion act in her latest concert tour? Neither do I.

 

[Dancelittleewok]

Follow up question:

Do you think because we are not allowed to discriminate due to religion, do you think religious people should be allowed on diversity forums? If so, how can a college whom has people with radically different views accomodate both?

 

[mommyof4]

My critique:

1. In my opinion, this article seems to be poisoning the well towards religious people.
2. How come they cannot practice tolerance and accept towards religious people? If one idea is as a good as another, then why condemn the beliefs of people whom don’t agree with you?
3. It seems that tolerance is limited to what one believes should be tolerated.

What are your thoughts?

I really agree with your assessments.