Very special snowflakes: Pence's scheduled speech makes Notre Dame students "feel unsafe"

You get to live your life according to your values. You do not get to live someone else's life according to your values. It is not your right to tell others how to live. It is not your right to harm or hurt others because you want to. It is not persecution to stop you from harming others. To claim such a thing is why you are beneath the bacteria that ate your foot. Those bacteria are better than you, and you might want to fix that.

Agree to disagree.

Then explain what gives you the right to tell other people how to live.

God tells other people how to live. We're just commissioned to pass on the message.

Nope, you have no right to not be offended by what you see others do. Sorry Mr special snowflake, but your triggers are your problem.

That presumes that the message is One Size Fits All. What fallible human has the right to make that decision for someone else and, more importantly, why do people like Dayton believe they have the right to legislate those decisions?

al-Baghdadi agrees!

Invisible man said so.
In a storybook.
That says it's true because it says it's true.
Which is a crappy standard of proof when other story books use it, but this is different.
Because reasons.

I don't know. "...it makes them feel unsafe to have someone..." could be interpreted as being afraid of "having" that someone come to the campus. But if it's more of a general "what he represents makes me unsafe", then that's less eye rollable I guess.

I'm not sure that Snopes link says what you think it says.

It says precisely what I described. Dog whistle. The alternative is that Pence thought federal funds should go into financing sex change operations for minors. Do you believe that's what he meant?

I think he probably meant conversion therapy. But you were like, "It's not just any kind of 'conversion therapy', it's actual deliberate physical torture."

So a specific kind of conversion therapy involving electric shock.

How do you know he was dog whistling about a very specific kind of conversion therapy? A kind that, as your link says,...

How do you know he wasn't talking about trepanation or a lobotomy?

Not that that would have been any better, but he isn't on record as supporting either of those, and it is the electroshock torture that he's been asked about repeatedly since and has been unwilling to distance himself from.

See, a person who opposes torturing gays for being gay, when asked whether he supports such torture, will say, "Of course I don't support torturing gays." He won't have an underling say, "What my boss said on that one occasion could be interpreted several different ways.", and then go silent when journalists ask him outright what the correct interpretation is.

The latter is this admin's dog whistle tactic, see most famously Trump on the KKK.

So let me wrap my brain around this. He has never said he supports electroshock torture (hell, he's never even said he supports conversion therapy as far as I know), but the fact that he is not distancing himself from something he never said, that means he is on record as supporting it?

No, he has been on record advocating for groups that were supporting this treatment at the time -- you just quoted the passage that says so. He then went on record supporting some treatment, and has since been unwilling to say what he meant.

See, all of this sounds vague and uncertain until you refocus on the topic, which is, Should people be tortured for their sexual orientation? That's not a question that should be at all difficult to answer. Once you understand the basic outrage of that very topic, you also understand why wilful ambiguity on such questions makes people feel unsafe.

What groups? I thought the White CARE act was about HIV.

Well, like I said earlier, if it's a general "they feel unsafe no matter where he is, but they certainly don't want him here", then it's more understandable IMHO. If it's more along the lines of "he frightens me and I need to go to the safe room and blow bubbles", then not so much.

Now we are getting into six degrees of Kevin Bacon type shit. "He never said he supported it but he said he supported a ground which supported another group which obscurely referenced it once years ago so... He supports it!"

What she said.

Social conservatives have been on the wrong side of every positive societal change in memory.

What constitutes "positive societal change" is a matter of opinion.

dirka dirka, jihad?

You ever going to answer Post #94?

Would you accept anything I posted?

If you won't accept it then there is no point in my answering.

I don't accept your stalling. If you can't answer the question, just admit it.

Apologize first.

And you have no special right to demand or expect a response. So you can apologize to me for anything you have said to me insulting or demeaning in the past as a sign of good faith.

If you can't remember any you can always apologize for claiming I was "afraid to walk in the rain".

Given that the university staff invited him and still wants him to come I guess the whining minority can chose just not to go if they really are just so SCARED of a ten minute speech.

Anyways, it is absolutely pathetic that these so called college graduates are just so frightened and dismayed that they might encounter someone with a different view. Obviously their education did not prepared them well for the real world and I bet they will have problems in the job market.

Yeah... not seeming to be the case.
Lateral structuring, especially in creative/tech innovation, seems to be the way of the future work environment.

It strikes me that part of what we resent about millennials now that they're in the workforce is that they're attaining what previous generations wanted for themselves.

They aren't "frightened" of Pence. THey're repulsed by him and what he represents.