Funny Nulldog, here's an unrelated one...
Have to believe that..
Debates regarding changes in law or policy should be predicated on two things.
1. Fear
2. Overgeneralization
Let's examine how that might manifest itself in the discussion we recently had regarding teaching kids about tolerance toward gays in our schools and about the term "hate crimes".
The assumption is that kids are beating up gays in disproportionate numbers than heterosexual kids, kids with glasses, kids who are fat, kids who are ugly, or kids who talk funny.
Regarding fear, I don't trust you to raise your kids in a way which is conducive toward treating people in a cordial manner. I fear your parenting abilities. My fear is reasonable because I can point to some incidents of violence toward gays. We all don't want that right? And it is always we. We fear those other parents, those other kids, that other attitude.
But what about my kids? I teach them tolerance, love and understanding? Well, we know you are a wonderful parent, but other people are not. What other people? I see my neighbors teaching good values, good ways of behavior? Oh, not your neighbors, the other peoples neighbors. But my school is in my neighborhood, and the parents are good and decent people, who believe in love and tolerance? Well, maybe your school is but other schools are not. What other schools? Are there a few schools who disproportionately beat up gays? Oh no, not any school in particularly, just in a general sense.
Fear and overgeneralization. Not based on empirical evidence, but based on feelings and media images of truths. Have we measured the violent acts against fat kids, skinny kids, kids with glasses, kids who are ugly, kids who talk funny, etc. etc?
My assumption is that far more kids are beaten up for being fat than for being gay. But they don't have a political agenda do they, nor a cause?
Michael |
