America voted for this (at least, those who voted for Biden-Harrris vote for this). Therefore, the entire nation (by far a majority) suffers the repercussions of that choice. We are reaping what has been sown by others. Much of this is God's allowing the blowback for the intentional murder of at least 62 million precious unbon human person to continue apace.
Please don't bother--those who will--to defend abortion. I will ignore you.
If this blogshot allowed it, I would block you. That is a defect in this site that needs to be corrected. Taking the trash out is a daily necessity in any orderly household.
The 'woke' movement is nothing more than the left attempting to milk the moral high ground they gained as a result of the civil rights movement for a few more years. The civil rights movement won that war decades ago, anyone who lived in the south as recently as the early 70s knows this. There may be a few bad apples when it comes to racial discrimination, no more than for various other social ills. Without woke-ism the left has no reason to exist
It's insane. Free speech? Without God, people make themselves the arbiter of "good and acceptable." Grace is not for all. Forgiveness is only for the "marginalized." Right or left, Satan is enjoying the view. Believers need to start acting like Jesus followers as they live out the great commission. The "good" on earth is still sin based. The silencing of free thought and speech is just the beginning.
No doubt, the Woke Left gave us Donald Trump. But there is a cancel culture on the Right also. When Republican lawmakers vote their conscience and show some level of integrity regarding the insane actions of the former President, they are censured and get death threats by the "woke" Trump mob who have taken over the Party of Reagan. This woke crap works both ways. Everybody just grow up.
Unfortunately I have seen a few too many threats made against Pence, Sasse and others who "voted" their conscience or felt the Constitution should be followed. While I might not agree with what they did, I certainly don't and won't threaten these people. Instead, I choose the ballot box.
Social change is hard and some individuals obviously get hurt by it. But individual trauma is unfortunately a necessary evil for us as a society to improve practices currently perceived as unjust.
OK, I’m a liberal progressive who believes in respectfully engaging in meaningful conversations with those who are different than me. As you do Erick. And that’s why I have chosen to be a paying member of this dialog.
Social change IS hard. But times change, we learn new things. We learn that some groups of people are really hurt by deep systemic values, mores, and institutions. And we as a culture have to decide whether we want to change or not. That’s when meaningful dialogs need to occur – in governments, journalism, and individual conversations. Then when a consensus is reached, then we need to enact, support and enforce laws, regulations AND public conversations to promote that change.
We are in the dialog stage now – you may take one side and I the other - that’s good, necessary and productive. BUT to try to deep six the conversation and inflame the ardor of your constituents by focusing on and expressing outrage of an incident that is intrinsic to the change process does nothing but harm. It is akin to condemning a war against communism by focusing and elaborating on the pain of soldier injured in the process.
Please keep the conversation relevant and meaningful and we will all benefit from it.
Welcome. While I don't "agree" with your analysis, it doesn't mean I can't try to understand your points better. I think Mr. Erickson has an open mind as well. And I don't always agree with him either. I would also look up the Bleiker "theory" on consent vs. consensus.
Let me try this again. It is generally easier to get (build) consent than consensus. With the latter, all parties have to agree on all aspects whereas with consent, people may not agree but acknowledge their differences. Consent means i don't have to agree 100% with everything to move forward in a positive manner. Building consent is easier than consensus.
What you appear to be suggesting is that everyone who doesn't have "victim status" in the social hierarchy of today, should carefully seek to align their beliefs with progressive liberal ideology so that no one with said victim status will have their feelings hurt or be offended by someone else having different values or a different culture.
And that government should act to regulate individual beliefs and speech if those values or beliefs are "offensive" to others.
That is just...completely antithetical to the concept of individual freedom.
Why is the "individual trauma" experienced by someone who becomes an outcast because their values and beliefs are judged wanting by the "cancel culture" crowd, less important than the "trauma" experienced by someone offended by their beliefs? Do you honestly think that it is less "offensive" for someone to be told their cultural/religious beliefs need to "change" because they are no longer politically correct? Are they not equally "harmed" by name calling, accusations of racism and losing their job, merely because they don't feel that (for example) wearing an antebellum costume at a party years ago should condemn someone for life?
Sorry, but the things you say that I appear to be suggesting are not what I am suggesting, but things you infer from what I wrote that apparently gave you the opportunity to express your own opinions, not mine.
If I misunderstood you, I certainly apologize. Please, then, explain what you mean by "we need to enact, support and enforce laws, regulations AND public conversations to promote that change."
Respectfully, who gets to decide what culture wants? If voices are silenced, how can there be dialogue? I understand that people need to be responsive to changes happening now, but this particular case is about something that happened years ago. Part of the comment included recognition that those kinds of events wouldn't fly now BECAUSE the culture at large has recognized the harm they may cause. It seems like an opportunity for respectful dialogue was lost by silencing that voice.
I believe that everyone should participate in the dialogue – and then congressmen decide on what laws to enact. But institutions should be allowed to follow their conscience on what to accept and not accept in their venue and sphere of influence. In the case Chris Harrison, CNN, which obviously has a progressive bent, undoubtedly felt that the hurt inflicted on Chris Harrison was a necessary evil to promote what they believe is more important in the long range big picture. They have that right – just as the right-to-life folks have the right to boycott and inflict financial harm on doctors who perform abortions. But let’s stay out of the sensationalism of wrong being done to someone to affect a greater cause. Who wouldn’t do that if they felt their cause were important enough?
Really all I’m saying is let’s stick to the pros and cons of the issues and have a intelligent, less emotional dialogue to help our elected officials to make the right decisions.
Just makes me want to throw a big ol' Antebellum Ball. They were fun, dress-up affairs and, call me un-woke, but I never saw them as anything more than a fun costume party. Just like Toga Parties and Sadie Hawkins Dances we had back in the day. Where are my green velvet drapes? I need to start making my Scarlett O'Hara gown!
Great points Erick. All this racial bs has actually hurt race relations in America. When I see a black person now my thoughts are, “is this guy or girl another one of those people who believes they are a victim?” Every Atlanta news broadcast has more people of color than whites. Many commercials now disproportionately have more blacks than whites or Hispanics in them, or a mixed couple. Companies are pathetically giving into the left and it is also contributing to our division in America. Hispanic’s out number blacks in America yet they are underrepresented because the squeaky wheel (blacks) get the grease. Sports like NASCAR are breaking its back to get black drivers or owners. All NASCAR drivers spend their early lives doing nothing but racing. Now they are dying to let minorities bypass that long tradition and get a chance without the hard lifetime of work that white families have put into it for their kids. The NFL is 95% black players and growing more black every year. Why don’t we have programs to help increase white and Hispanic involvement at the top level of football? The NFL is a perfect example of social inequality. So if we do what the woke left wants does that mean we end up with an equal numbers of white, black and Hispanic players?
Why is it lemonhead thinks Harrison hasn't learned about racism? lemonhead is full of privilege, but that's ok.
What's happening to Harrison, who live in the Hollywood bubble it what will happen to anyone who plays along with this BS...eventually, they'll take you down also.
This is also why I think polling is not that accurate.
Why speak your mind and risk losing...everything...just for answering a question honestly?
One more time: “Wokeness”, and its parent, Critical Race Theory, or any “Critical” theory for that matter, is an example of Marxist thought at work. It seeks to separate people based on external factors rather than by their humanity for the purpose of fomenting “revolutionary consciousness” among those less powerful. It’s all about power; gaining it, wielding it, and gaining more of it. And those who wield that power do not mean to do well to their perceived enemies.
and how does the saying go.....first they came for the Jews ,but I'm not Jewish. I believe this crap needs to stop. I am not woke. I treat people with respect. I don't care about race, religion, or sexual preference (yes I said preference). I am white, female, and older. I am not apologizing for any of it. God made me.
America voted for this (at least, those who voted for Biden-Harrris vote for this). Therefore, the entire nation (by far a majority) suffers the repercussions of that choice. We are reaping what has been sown by others. Much of this is God's allowing the blowback for the intentional murder of at least 62 million precious unbon human person to continue apace.
Please don't bother--those who will--to defend abortion. I will ignore you.
If this blogshot allowed it, I would block you. That is a defect in this site that needs to be corrected. Taking the trash out is a daily necessity in any orderly household.
The 'woke' movement is nothing more than the left attempting to milk the moral high ground they gained as a result of the civil rights movement for a few more years. The civil rights movement won that war decades ago, anyone who lived in the south as recently as the early 70s knows this. There may be a few bad apples when it comes to racial discrimination, no more than for various other social ills. Without woke-ism the left has no reason to exist
There are no words.....
It's insane. Free speech? Without God, people make themselves the arbiter of "good and acceptable." Grace is not for all. Forgiveness is only for the "marginalized." Right or left, Satan is enjoying the view. Believers need to start acting like Jesus followers as they live out the great commission. The "good" on earth is still sin based. The silencing of free thought and speech is just the beginning.
It will get worse. Personal opinion no longer matters unless it follows the (whatever group) line.
No doubt, the Woke Left gave us Donald Trump. But there is a cancel culture on the Right also. When Republican lawmakers vote their conscience and show some level of integrity regarding the insane actions of the former President, they are censured and get death threats by the "woke" Trump mob who have taken over the Party of Reagan. This woke crap works both ways. Everybody just grow up.
Wrong.
Unfortunately I have seen a few too many threats made against Pence, Sasse and others who "voted" their conscience or felt the Constitution should be followed. While I might not agree with what they did, I certainly don't and won't threaten these people. Instead, I choose the ballot box.
Social change is hard and some individuals obviously get hurt by it. But individual trauma is unfortunately a necessary evil for us as a society to improve practices currently perceived as unjust.
OK, I’m a liberal progressive who believes in respectfully engaging in meaningful conversations with those who are different than me. As you do Erick. And that’s why I have chosen to be a paying member of this dialog.
Social change IS hard. But times change, we learn new things. We learn that some groups of people are really hurt by deep systemic values, mores, and institutions. And we as a culture have to decide whether we want to change or not. That’s when meaningful dialogs need to occur – in governments, journalism, and individual conversations. Then when a consensus is reached, then we need to enact, support and enforce laws, regulations AND public conversations to promote that change.
We are in the dialog stage now – you may take one side and I the other - that’s good, necessary and productive. BUT to try to deep six the conversation and inflame the ardor of your constituents by focusing on and expressing outrage of an incident that is intrinsic to the change process does nothing but harm. It is akin to condemning a war against communism by focusing and elaborating on the pain of soldier injured in the process.
Please keep the conversation relevant and meaningful and we will all benefit from it.
Really? When is the last time you dined? Or had dinner, or invited to spend the night, or? Spare me.
I guess I'm dense enough to not get your point.
Welcome. While I don't "agree" with your analysis, it doesn't mean I can't try to understand your points better. I think Mr. Erickson has an open mind as well. And I don't always agree with him either. I would also look up the Bleiker "theory" on consent vs. consensus.
Thanks Michelle, Why search for Bleikers "theory" on consent vs. consensus was lees than fruitful. Can you elaborate?
Let me try this again. It is generally easier to get (build) consent than consensus. With the latter, all parties have to agree on all aspects whereas with consent, people may not agree but acknowledge their differences. Consent means i don't have to agree 100% with everything to move forward in a positive manner. Building consent is easier than consensus.
Thanks for your response. Absolutely! Consensus is the ideal but seemingly unattainable so consent is the only way to move forward.
What you appear to be suggesting is that everyone who doesn't have "victim status" in the social hierarchy of today, should carefully seek to align their beliefs with progressive liberal ideology so that no one with said victim status will have their feelings hurt or be offended by someone else having different values or a different culture.
And that government should act to regulate individual beliefs and speech if those values or beliefs are "offensive" to others.
That is just...completely antithetical to the concept of individual freedom.
Why is the "individual trauma" experienced by someone who becomes an outcast because their values and beliefs are judged wanting by the "cancel culture" crowd, less important than the "trauma" experienced by someone offended by their beliefs? Do you honestly think that it is less "offensive" for someone to be told their cultural/religious beliefs need to "change" because they are no longer politically correct? Are they not equally "harmed" by name calling, accusations of racism and losing their job, merely because they don't feel that (for example) wearing an antebellum costume at a party years ago should condemn someone for life?
Sorry, but the things you say that I appear to be suggesting are not what I am suggesting, but things you infer from what I wrote that apparently gave you the opportunity to express your own opinions, not mine.
If I misunderstood you, I certainly apologize. Please, then, explain what you mean by "we need to enact, support and enforce laws, regulations AND public conversations to promote that change."
Respectfully, who gets to decide what culture wants? If voices are silenced, how can there be dialogue? I understand that people need to be responsive to changes happening now, but this particular case is about something that happened years ago. Part of the comment included recognition that those kinds of events wouldn't fly now BECAUSE the culture at large has recognized the harm they may cause. It seems like an opportunity for respectful dialogue was lost by silencing that voice.
I believe that everyone should participate in the dialogue – and then congressmen decide on what laws to enact. But institutions should be allowed to follow their conscience on what to accept and not accept in their venue and sphere of influence. In the case Chris Harrison, CNN, which obviously has a progressive bent, undoubtedly felt that the hurt inflicted on Chris Harrison was a necessary evil to promote what they believe is more important in the long range big picture. They have that right – just as the right-to-life folks have the right to boycott and inflict financial harm on doctors who perform abortions. But let’s stay out of the sensationalism of wrong being done to someone to affect a greater cause. Who wouldn’t do that if they felt their cause were important enough?
Really all I’m saying is let’s stick to the pros and cons of the issues and have a intelligent, less emotional dialogue to help our elected officials to make the right decisions.
Just makes me want to throw a big ol' Antebellum Ball. They were fun, dress-up affairs and, call me un-woke, but I never saw them as anything more than a fun costume party. Just like Toga Parties and Sadie Hawkins Dances we had back in the day. Where are my green velvet drapes? I need to start making my Scarlett O'Hara gown!
I didn't vote for Trump (the man), I voted against this insanity.
Great points Erick. All this racial bs has actually hurt race relations in America. When I see a black person now my thoughts are, “is this guy or girl another one of those people who believes they are a victim?” Every Atlanta news broadcast has more people of color than whites. Many commercials now disproportionately have more blacks than whites or Hispanics in them, or a mixed couple. Companies are pathetically giving into the left and it is also contributing to our division in America. Hispanic’s out number blacks in America yet they are underrepresented because the squeaky wheel (blacks) get the grease. Sports like NASCAR are breaking its back to get black drivers or owners. All NASCAR drivers spend their early lives doing nothing but racing. Now they are dying to let minorities bypass that long tradition and get a chance without the hard lifetime of work that white families have put into it for their kids. The NFL is 95% black players and growing more black every year. Why don’t we have programs to help increase white and Hispanic involvement at the top level of football? The NFL is a perfect example of social inequality. So if we do what the woke left wants does that mean we end up with an equal numbers of white, black and Hispanic players?
Utterly absurd
Why is it lemonhead thinks Harrison hasn't learned about racism? lemonhead is full of privilege, but that's ok.
What's happening to Harrison, who live in the Hollywood bubble it what will happen to anyone who plays along with this BS...eventually, they'll take you down also.
This is also why I think polling is not that accurate.
Why speak your mind and risk losing...everything...just for answering a question honestly?
Love the play on words, "Woke-o Haram"
Makes the "woke" Left seem just as extreme in their beliefs as the radical Islamic group Boko Haram is, which, of course, they are.
Couldn’t agree more
One more time: “Wokeness”, and its parent, Critical Race Theory, or any “Critical” theory for that matter, is an example of Marxist thought at work. It seeks to separate people based on external factors rather than by their humanity for the purpose of fomenting “revolutionary consciousness” among those less powerful. It’s all about power; gaining it, wielding it, and gaining more of it. And those who wield that power do not mean to do well to their perceived enemies.
Consider that Black Lives Matter happily admits that it is a Marxist revolutionary organization, and you can reach no other conclusion.
and how does the saying go.....first they came for the Jews ,but I'm not Jewish. I believe this crap needs to stop. I am not woke. I treat people with respect. I don't care about race, religion, or sexual preference (yes I said preference). I am white, female, and older. I am not apologizing for any of it. God made me.