CommentsDisplaying HappyStretchedThin's 10 most recent comments.

• Obama Justice Department Threatens University With Lawsuit Because Transgendered Man Can‘t Use Women’s Bathrooms

  May 25, 2012 at 1:45am

  In reply to rebelwuf.

  @RangerP
  You know what? You’re right about that. Sorry. Sometimes I get wrapped up in theory language when thinking in theoretical terms, but the concepts don’t require jargon. Can I have a mulligan?
  There’s no question that social norms influence gender roles. There’s no NATURAL reason little boys should wear pants not skirts–it’s their parents that teach them that, their school peers who reinforce the markers that distinguish gender, etc. The problem is liberal theorists STOP there. They CAN’T admit that even though the MARKS are arbitrary, the FACT of MARKING IS natural. IT doesn’t ALL belong in the realm of SOCIAL norm either–society is composed of INDIVIDUALS and their ideas about gender are housed inside their BRAINS NOT JUST in the rules society “forces” on them. Put little Suzy and little Lulu in a room with nothing but GI Joes and toy cars, and they STILL will play “house” with them–they won’t become BOYS.
  One theorist in general, Judith Butler, tries to make the case for more than two SEXes (because in super rare cases some people are born with an XXY instead of an XY, for example), and therefore more than 2 genders, but this is faulty logic because a biological oddity shouldn’t be included in the sample.
  Finally, there’s lots of models of maleness that people see in society from which they can choose their OWN masculinity (are you more a Rocky or more a Father Knows Best kind of man?…) so norms don’t impose.
  Better?

• University Study Determines Fox News Has Least-Informed National Audience Based on These Questions

  May 25, 2012 at 1:31am

  In reply to wewantchillywilly.

  @JZS of May23
  It’s rare, but I actually agree with you on this one: the news end of FOX has a much bigger audience than its competition because its audience contains more people who go to get informed in a way that affirms their ideological leanings.
  Where we’ll still disagree is that the conservative ideology that is affirmed is more concerned with neutral facts in their context–so the affirmation of ideology in FOX is actually a good thing. CNN, and NPR which each pretend to objectivity both twist fact, and elide context in order to make the liberal ideologues in their audience and reporter/editor corps happy. That’s liberalism in a nutshell–can’t come at us straight.

• Obama Justice Department Threatens University With Lawsuit Because Transgendered Man Can‘t Use Women’s Bathrooms

  May 24, 2012 at 6:02pm

  In reply to rebelwuf.

  Gender IS a social construct. But it’s also a cognitive construct and, I believe, part of one’s spiritual essence–and there’s only two of them (the other three mentioned can be easily explained as variations on confusion between two genders). Sex on the other hand is biologically binary, and the triple chromosome cases are exceptions, not proof that the rule isn’t valid (which is Judith Butler’s big mistake).
  But even if all it were was a social construct, it’s a good one! It allows for two complementary halves to humanity. It allows for two different kinds of strengths to be made one when joined in marriage (which means joined in purpose). And there’s no single stereotypical role either gender is forced to conform to, since all gender roles are negotiable, heteronormativity is only oppressive in the feelings of those outside the norm.
  We should affirm good norms, and avoid the potential dangers of allowing the chemistry between biologically different sexes to mix in public restrooms.

• University Study Determines Fox News Has Least-Informed National Audience Based on These Questions

  May 24, 2012 at 3:04pm

  In reply to wewantchillywilly.

  @firebrand
  Thanks for the rigorous critique. I couldn’t articulate what I sensed was wrong, so I was glad to see someone with the chops could demonstrate and articulate what was mathematically disturbing about the study.
  Although I left the social science end of my discipline back at the master’s level, my reading skill also allows me to see another design flaw here. Did you notice in the methodology section (here: http://publicmind.fdu.edu/2012/confirmed/) that they mention all participants were called on the phone at the same time of day over a stretch including 3 weekdays and 2 weekend days? They do NOT mention WHAT time that was. My guess is they’re hiding the fact that they called when they were likely to catch someone home, and that the someone they caught was more likely to be the household member more interested in the home than in politics. By no means do I intend to stereotype here, and so I’ll leave it at that. I just think traditionally there’s likely to be more republicans at home who care about values more than being informed, because the values don’t change much, and the news is unfiltered sensationalist trash most of the time. And that makes them smart and rational, not stupid and uneducated.
  In any case, the lead researcher contradicts himself when he claims Fox news is less informative: that’s not what his study is designed to show or not show.

• 50+ Professors & Staff Resign From Christian University After Refusing to Sign Homosexuality Pledge

  May 16, 2012 at 5:44pm

  In reply to ThePostman.

  @ RangerP,
  I’d send my kids to take your classes! From the posts I’ve read of yours, you’ve got your head screwed on straighter than just about all my professors combined.

• Caption that photo!: Ron Paul

  May 11, 2012 at 11:41pm

  So that’s when, after 20+ years in Congress, and 481 failed attempts to convince anyone to vote for the bills I sponsored, I got my first bill passed. YAY ME! It felt so good it made me want to do something crazy, but completely constitutional, so I turned my hat around like so…

• Caption that photo!: Ron Paul

  May 11, 2012 at 11:35pm

  See, when you put it on like this, the people behind you can see who it is that’s beating them…What’s that you say? There’s no one behind me?

• The Blaze Invites You to Ask Prominent Atheist Your Most Burning Questions

  May 11, 2012 at 11:36am

  In reply to Lesbian Packing Hollow Points.

  @ LPHP
  Love your attitude and schtick, so it pains me a little that I have to turn to serious argument here (not as witty as you, sorry).
  There are 3 problems with you asking for my evidence of the existence of God:
  1. You don’t really want to know, hence are immune to my evidence.
  2. Even as you ask for evidence, you limit what kind of evidence you’ll accept. Not everything that’s rationally true is reproducible, falsifiable, and “human observable”. I’m not going to submit to your rules for evidence, but rather it‘s those very rules I’m calling into question. Even what science now claims as truth was once not within those rules of evidence. I‘m claiming the existence of a thing we don’t have power to observe directly yet, but to say there are therefore no signs of its existence fails the same way an argument against the existence of gravity fails. Thus: immune to evidence.
  3. You don’t understand the process of evidentiary proof. The theory that my version of God exists predicts: 1.order in the universe, 2. the presence of life with a mapping of design to function, and 3. beings of intelligence with moral agency. You may have a competing theory that uses all the same things as evidence, but neither of our theories disproves the other. You just won’t let me claim those 3 things because you think they belong to your theory alone. Therefore, your own theory is an exclusionary belief system immune to evidence.

• The Blaze Invites You to Ask Prominent Atheist Your Most Burning Questions

  May 11, 2012 at 8:23am

  In reply to staggerlee32.

  @Skeptic71
  Come at us straight on. No twisting. I don’t go around claiming atheists only believe in material and secular powers so therefore they are obey laws only out of fear of prison.
  Christians do good things because they‘re inspired to do better than their natural inclinations by the prospect of a reward they know they’ll never get during this life. As selfish as you’re trying to make that sound, it translates into an objective self-sacrificing attitude animating all their behaviors during this life. How is that not doing things because it’s the right thing to do?
  @DeathtoEli
  Point 1: You‘re cherry picking one of 4 scenarios contained in Pascal’s wager. Covering all the bases is only an ATHEIST’S best motivation for choosing faith in God. Believers don’t need to take the wager, silly, they already believe for PURE reasons.
  Point 2: Show me how living a clean, honest, motivated, altruistic and philanthropic life–principled by principles whose natural consequences are deep and lasting happiness and moral satisfaction–is a waste of a life.

• The Blaze Invites You to Ask Prominent Atheist Your Most Burning Questions

  May 11, 2012 at 8:08am

  In reply to Lesbian Packing Hollow Points.

  @Endthemindless…
  LPHP can’t see the Muslim push for public religiosity, and sometimes even violent proselytism for the same reason she can’t see the existence of God: She’s immune to evidence. She claims a higher rationality, but won’t play rationally.