Who Is Offended vs. Disagreed With

  • Thread starter Thread starter HagiaSophia
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
H

HagiaSophia

Guest
Dennis Prager comments on the difference between disagreeing and “being offended”…
Blue America: The land of the easily offended

Commentators on our country explain our blue-red division in many ways – liberal-conservative; secular-religious; North-South; coasts-heartland; singles-married with children.

I propose one more explanation: the easily offended-the not so easily offended.

With the acknowledgment that there are many individual exceptions, a major defining characteristic of modern-day liberalism is the ease with which liberals take offense personally and/or on behalf of others. …"

"…Liberals regularly portray as offended women, African Americans, Jews, American Indians, gays and every other group liberals declare a minority, i.e., any group that votes Democrat – no group that votes Republican, such as Mormons, Cuban Americans and Vietnamese Americans, is considered a “minority.” All other groups are constantly warned that almost anything they say that is not patronizing of those groups is offensive (and therefore subject to litigation).

Having given thousands of lectures across the country and on all seven continents (yes, Antarctica, too) over the past 30 years, I can vouch for the personal-offense element. I am continually astounded at how often members of the audience (usually liberal women) will say they are offended by something I said, when what they really mean is that they don’t agree with me.

It is most unlikely that conservative men or women speak that way – saying, “I am offended” – when they hear liberal speakers.

For one thing, conservatives are so used to being labeled as stupid, bigoted, ignorant, racist, homophobic, sexist, insensitive and intolerant that it is almost impossible to offend them. Moreover, the culture does not allow them to feel offended, since they are not an officially designated minority.

For another, liberal positions are far more emotion-based than reason-based.

To cite but one of many examples, take the widely held liberal slogan “War is not the answer.” It is pure irrationality. War has ended more evil than anything the left has ever thought of. In the last 60 years alone, it ended Nazism and the Holocaust; it saved half of Korea from genocide; it kept Israel from national extinction and a second Holocaust; it saved Finland from becoming a Stalinist totalitarian state; and according to most of the people who put “War is not the answer” stickers on their bumpers, it saved Bosnian Muslims from ethnic cleansing.

The list of irrational, feelings-based liberal positions is almost as long as the list of contemporary liberal positions. The relevant point here is that people who take positions based on feelings will of necessity take disagreement more personally and feel offended more often than others.

Liberals’ claims of being offended themselves or on behalf of a selected group are almost endless.

Liberal Jews and non-Jews claim that “Merry Christmas” offends Jews and other non-Christians. That 90 percent of Americans celebrate Christmas is of no importance to the easily offended."

worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=41800
 
I started a thread on this earlier today. Hopefully more people will comment here. I think it’s a great topic!
 
40.png
jlw:
I started a thread on this earlier today. Hopefully more people will comment here. I think it’s a great topic!
jlw, I don’t know what to say that wasn’t said in this excellent column. I get so weary of people who live to be offended. Can’t let the kiddies dress up for Halloween in case some Wiccans are offended. Gotta change the Bible so it’s more “inclusive” even if it means the poetry is destroyed. I work for a group of doctors and in an email to a discussion group, described a patient as “a diabetic.” I was immediately dressed down by the mother of a child with diabetes (this is the proper terminology now!). How dare I refer to a person as a DISEASE! How incredibly insensitive of me!

While I do agree in the past certainly ethnic, racial and sexist terms were used but I think we’ve gone WAY overboard in an attempt to raise victimhood to an art form.
Lisa N
 
Very Good Article! :clapping: <--------- I hope I am not offending hand clappers international union 142.

:blessyou:
Annie
 
40.png
jlw:
I started a thread on this earlier today. Hopefully more people will comment here. I think it’s a great topic!
Sorry - I hate overposting - drives me wild but I do try and look and see if someone else has posted. Must have simply missed it. :hmmm:
 
Lisa N:
jlw, I don’t know what to say that wasn’t said in this excellent column. I get so weary of people who live to be offended. Can’t let the kiddies dress up for Halloween in case some Wiccans are offended. Gotta change the Bible so it’s more “inclusive” even if it means the poetry is destroyed. I work for a group of doctors and in an email to a discussion group, described a patient as “a diabetic.” I was immediately dressed down by the mother of a child with diabetes (this is the proper terminology now!). How dare I refer to a person as a DISEASE! How incredibly insensitive of me!

While I do agree in the past certainly ethnic, racial and sexist terms were used but I think we’ve gone WAY overboard in an attempt to raise victimhood to an art form.
Lisa N
I’m way past tired with the political and social correctness and frankly we have a few “charity police” who always have to jump in with exhortations in threads here too :sleep:
 
40.png
AnnieD:
Very Good Article! :clapping: <--------- I hope I am not offending hand clappers international union 142.

:blessyou:
Annie
They had a speaker at the DNC. Who knows…😃
 
Lisa N:
While I do agree in the past certainly ethnic, racial and sexist terms were used but I think we’ve gone WAY overboard in an attempt to raise victimhood to an art form.
Lisa N
I was in college when all the women’s studies started up. I was in favor of equal pay for equal work, blah, blah,blah. I was a feminist of sorts, but it got out of hand. So here we are now in an era, only 30 years later, where we can’t say a thing to anyone about anything, especially about God or religion. It is pure rhetorical gridlock. No sense talking at all because we will offend someone!

I agree with you Lisa. We now live in the land of victims.
 
So where are all our liberal pals who post on these forums? It would be interesting to hear their response to this article. Well, maybe I should be careful what I ask for. But it is curious that they haven’t responded.
 
From the looks of it their to busy starting anti-Bush, and anti-war threads right now. HagiaSophia, all I can say is bravo, keep up the good fight. My eyes were truely opened this year when I finaly read “The Gender Agenda”, after hearing Dale O’Leary speak at the Women of Grace conference in Orlando, FL. I had no ideal how bad it is at the UN, how much control these people have, and how easly they got their noses out of joint. Poor little dears, I can’t imagine how much money they spend on asprin for all the stress headaches we’re causing them.

Linda H.
 
I think that a typical liberal is probably reading this right now and thinking: “What! LIBERALS offended? What about all the conservatives who get offended by TV all the time?”

Not saying I agree with this, but that’s probably the reaction.

I think that both sides get offended alot, but the question is, to what does each side take offense?

I think if I had to sum it up, most liberals I know are offended by conservative ideas (some to the point that they hate me as a person). I think that conservatives are more offended by actions.
 
A good article…I happen to agree with most of it. But I would disagree with the authors’ point that only conservatives are called names by liberals. It goes both ways.
 
40.png
Peacemonger:
A good article…I happen to agree with most of it. But I would disagree with the authors’ point that only conservatives are called names by liberals. It goes both ways.
Dennis did acknowledge in the article that there are many individual exceptions.
 
There seem to be two things at work here.

One is that people seemed determined to make themselves victims: to claim they have been offended, or disenfranchised, or uncharitably made fun of. I have even heard Republicans claim they have been disenfanchised. I have heard Christians claiming offense–as if taking offense was something that love does or as if Jesus had not explained rather clearly that persecution was to be expected, with joy as our proper response.

The other, though, seems to be that meekness and gentleness have become virtues of convenience, all very well when you are treated as you see fit, but having no place when the alternative is not having your opinion known widely enough or fast enough.

An explosive mixture, that, a bunch of victims who feel entitled to wield clubs in “self-defense.”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top