John Muir is Canceled. Whos's Next?

[Allie1]

They have moved John Muir out of his own club to be politically correct

Yes private clubs can do that

 

[ThinkingSapien]

I’m seeing a lot of repetition without an actual advancement of any position. It’s like this thread is stuck in a loop.

 

[gam197]

gam197:

Should Martin Luther King Jr. also be canceled for his anti-gay slurs

No just like John Muir, Martin Luther King is also honored at a National level

How can we celebrate Martin Luther King Day when the man by standards was clearly anti-gay. If you are going to follow the path, you need to be consistent.

Never mind the excuse that one is a private club.

 

[meltzerboy2]

What MLK is expressing is what many clinical psychologists and psychiatrists thought about homosexuality at that time. This is a combination of the Freudian and behavioral treatments for curing gayness. MLK did not tell the teenager that he would burn in hell or that he must find Jesus to be cured; rather, he is giving him what was thought to be solid scientific advice. Hardly anyone at the time thought of homosexuality as anything but a psychological disorder, including gay people themselves.

 

[gam197]

What MLK is expressing is what many clinical psychologists and psychiatrists thought about homosexuality at that time. This is a combination of the Freudian and behavioral treatments for curing gayness. MLK did not tell the teenager that he would burn in hell or that he must find Jesus to be cured; rather, he is giving him what was thought to be solid scientific advice. Hardly anyone at the time thought of homosexuality as anything but a psychological disorder, including gay people themselve

It does not matter what was felt at the time, the man is expressing clearly strong anti-gay sentiment and should be held to the same standard as every other historical figure and should be banned.

If you are consistent, how can you celebrate a national holiday to a man with such views?

 

[meltzerboy2]

I do not interpret this as “anti-gay sentiment” but instead as offering a means of conversion, which, as stated, was a common form of therapy trusted by clinical psychologists and psychiatrists. MLK is in fact sympathetic toward the youngster by encouraging him to follow a scientifically-based approach toward becoming straight. There is no derision of the boy’s feelings on the part of MLK. On the contrary, MLK is trying, as best he knows how, to help him.

And I am consistent in that I do not support the cancel culture movement with regard to many other historical figures, apart from those who held obvious pro-slavery and secessionist viewpoints such as the leaders of the Confederacy. Even here, however, they should be studied because of the important role they played in the history of the United States.

 

[gam197]

I do not interpret this as “anti-gay sentiment” but instead as offering a means of conversion, which, as stated, was a common form of therapy trusted by clinical psychologists and psychiatrists. MLK is in fact sympathetic toward the youngster by encouraging him to follow a scientifically-based approach toward becoming straight. There is no derision of the boy’s feelings on the part of MLK. On the contrary, MLK is trying, as best he knows how, to help him.

You may not but everyone else does. The man was clearly anti-gay and you cannot defend such a statement.

No his name, all statues, any reference to him in books and especially a national holiday to such a man by these standards in not acceptable.

You want to pick and chose who are kept and you can’t that to be consistent. Martin Luth King Jr. has to go along with John Muir and all the others.

 

[0Scarlett_nidiyilii]

TBF, all the hip cool kids of the time believed in eugenics

 

[ThinkingSapien]

You may not but everyone else does.

Here, you’ve enlisted the unverified support of everyone else to artificially support a position as popular. Aside from not actually knowing everyone’s position on this, this method of supporting an argument is a logical fallacy. See “argument from popularity.”

No his name, all statues, any reference to him in books and especially a national holiday to such a man by these standards in not acceptable.

If you live in the USA then write your congress person.

Martin Luth King Jr. has to go along with John Muir and all the others.

If you want King’s name “to go” in the same sense as Muir, then that has already happened. A group of people voted to rename a street from MLK Jr. to something else. Now that this is satisfied, you can move on…

 

[Allie1]

How can we celebrate Martin Luther King Day when the man by standards was clearly anti-gay. If you are going to follow the path, you need to be consistent.

Whose being inconsistent? And how?. I fully support and honor MLK. I support his having a federal holiday. I support his home and church that he was pastor of is now a National historic park, run by the national park service.

Martin Luther King, Jr. National Historical Park (U.S. National Park Service)

Welcome page

www.nps.gov

I support the MLK memorial, also run by the National Park service

Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial (U.S. National Park Service)

Located in downtown Washington, DC, the memorial honors Martin Luther King, Jr.'s legacy and the struggle for freedom, equality, and justice. A prominent leader in the modern civil rights movement, Dr. King was a tireless advocate for racial equality, working class, and the oppressed around the...

www.nps.gov

MLK is honpred nationally. I fully support that. This honor that he is given, helps to educate the public about his lifestory and his message

 

[Allie1]

Never mind the excuse that one is a private club

Its not a minor detail. I support the first amendment. Which, among other things, gives individuals the freedom of speech. I do not believe that is right for me to dictate to individuals what it is they must publibicly speak. Which means that I do not believe that I can dictate to this private club that they must continue to publicly endorse and associate themselves with John Muir.

He is honored nationally, what private individuals or clubs do is their own business.

 

[JonNC]

Regan just opposed all civil rights legislation and let it go at that.

Well, now that you pulled out your normal attacks, let’s not forget the apparently racially motivated formations of the Great Society programs by LBJ and the Democrats of the mid-sixties. The American black family has never been the same.
We can let it go at that.

 

[27lw]

Time to just throw out all thinkers, writers, composers, etc from the past, right? Don’t we think they all have said certain things that are unacceptable by today’s standards, whether against women, minorities, slaves, aboriginal peoples, Jews, etc?
Can we not look at someone’s legacy, say "this person was very noble and influential in this way, but a “product of his time” in this other way? Not “cancel” his or her existence, but acknowledge the problematic aspect and admire the good that this person brought about? Perhaps in spite of the standard prejudices of the time?

 

[gam197]

gam197:

How can we celebrate Martin Luther King Day when the man by standards was clearly anti-gay. If you are going to follow the path, you need to be consistent.

Whose being inconsistent? And how?. I fully support and honor MLK. I support his having a federal holiday. I support his home and church that he was pastor of is now a National historic park, run by the national park service.

If you are going to be consistent you can not support a Martin Luther King Jr. because he also made what many would consider offensive statements so now you can not have statues. Remember they took John Muir statue down.

I support the MLK memorial, also run by the National Park service
Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial (U.S. National Park Service)

MLK is honpred nationally. I fully support that. This honor that he is given, helps to educate the public about his lifestory and his message

No by the standards sets, you cannot have his name in the schoolbooks or a national holiday in his name. Did they not take Washington birthday holiday and make it Presidents day. Can’t have Martin Luther King Jr. day.

 

[Allie1]

Remember they took John Muir statue down

Did they take down the statue on public land or private land?

If public land…then that was wrong. And I voice my opposition to it, they need to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law

If private land then as a private entity they can landscape their private property however they want

 

[gam197]

TBF, all the hip cool kids of the time believed in eugenics

So did all the pastors like Martin Luther King discriminate against gay people.

 

[gam197]

gam197:

You may not but everyone else does.

Here, you’ve enlisted the unverified support of everyone else to artificially support a position as popular. Aside from not actually knowing everyone’s position on this, this method of supporting an argument is a logical fallacy. See “argument from popularity.”

There is alarge segment of the USA who do not like anti gay speech.

If you live in the USA then write your congress person.

gam197:

Martin Luth King Jr. has to go along with John Muir and all the others.

If you want King’s name “to go” in the same sense as Muir, then that has already happened . A group of people voted to rename a street from MLK Jr. to something else. Now that this is satisfied, you can move on…

I do not want Muir to go but if we are going to be consistent and stay to a standard, then yes Martin Luther King Jr. has also got to go because of his anti-gay rhetoric.

 

[gam197]

Time to just throw out all thinkers, writers, composers, etc from the past, right? Don’t we think they all have said certain things that are unacceptable by today’s standards, whether against women, minorities, slaves, aboriginal peoples, Jews, etc?
Can we not look at someone’s legacy, say "this person was very noble and influential in this way, but a “product of his time” in this other way? Not “cancel” his or her existence, but acknowledge the problematic aspect and admire the good that this person brought about? Perhaps in spite of the standard prejudices of the time?

That is where we are only some people want to selectively chose which thinkers, writers, composers they can keep and which will be throw out.

It is selective cancellation.

 

[gam197]

gam197:

Remember they took John Muir statue down

Did they take down the statue on public land or private land?

If public land…then that was wrong. And I voice my opposition to it

If private land then as a private entity they can landscape their private property however they want

It does not matter where the statue is. Thomas Jefferson came down from a public university as have many, many others. Are all the Martin Luther King Jr. statues on private land and how about the schools named after him, should they not all be canceled. George Washington name is being removed from schools.

 

[Allie1]

It does not matter where the statue is. Thomas Jefferson came down from a public university as have many, many others. Are all the Martin Luther King Jr. statues on private land and how about the schools named after him, should they not all be canceled. George Washington name is being removed from schools.

It most certainly does matter where these statues are located. PUBLIC land belongs to the public. Defacing and vandalism of these statues is an attack on the community to which these statues belong.

Private land belongs to individuals, not the community. People have the right to change out their private yard decorations to whatever they want