Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : The Boxing Ring Revived -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (2704)	2/21/2002 4:29:56 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7720

Should we cease all public expression of the majority culture because someone might feel marginalized? Of course not. My concerns apply only to scenarios when there's a captive audience or air of authority over the audience and the expressions have a content or tone that is dismissive of the minority. To be welcoming to immigrants and visitors, we need not cease to be ourselves. There are traditions and then there are traditions. Certainly newcomers can watch the parade and eat corn on the cob for the Fourth of July. There's no exclusion message in that. Our Fourth is their Fourth, or will be as soon as they take the oath. A message that says "only Christians need apply" is entirely different. Those who plan events need to be sensitive to their message. Anything else is arrogant and rude, IMO. I don't trust people who loudly insist that it's a Christian nation to be sensitive in their messages. The argument simply is that children are impressionable, and respond to symbols of cultural authority. I agree, at least when they're little. And we should take advantage of that opportunity. The point is that the symbol of cultural authority doesn't have to be the Commandments. It can just as well be the ten widgets proclaimed by the Education Department or the school principal or the town council. If it is possible to accomplish an objective in a way that doesn't alienate anyone, then choosing a path that is bound to alienate is, at best, churlish. I was a shy and sensitive child. I was fortunate enough to have been both very smart and very pretty, which protected me from bullying and isolation. I don't know that I would have tolerated the religious, ethnic, and gender marginalization of my youth so well otherwise and I worry for those who don't have that leg up. I also worry about the effect on esprit de corps in a democracy. Karen P.S. Did it ever occur to you that all those ACLU lawyers that you so despise may have gotten into their line of work because they were alienated or bullied as children? Or does such a consideration smack too much of "root causes?" There are consequences to how we treat children.