An Open Letter To Suzy Favor Hamilton

i know im a dick, the original wrote:

so the one thing we can be sure of regarding this thread is that the op is 'a duck'?

I would say it's Ward Churchill.

i know im a dick, the original wrote:

so the one thing we can be sure of regarding this thread is that the op is 'a duck'?

I always find it funny when some of you lugnuts don't get LRC's forum...numerous posters here have declared that they use different handles, all the time, based on topics -- the Duck is no different.

Now what I won't tell you is the names of the other 3 colleges I went to before and after 4 years at Oregon...lol.

(College for hs and post-grad.)

seriously, friend--

if you are Gabe Jennings

its time, now, to admit as much

we, here, mostly all, are empathetic with mr. Gabe

But, if not, its also time to absolutley disassociate yourself from such scurvy imbroglios

pony up

Hey Former "Elite" who started this thread:

Get a Life!

Reader of things wrote:

Former Elite From Your Era wrote:

Listen, I didn't want to write a novel covering every single culture and country in the world.

So I didn't say something like "Suzy was born into one of the more shaming societies in the anglosphere / Western world when it comes to female sexual expression."

-- Your argument is weakened by the fact that you had to resort to absurd reductionism.

What you said:

"Unfortunately you were born into a society that is one of the most shaming and judgmental about sexuality and especially women's sexuality. "

is wrong. Doesn't matter why you said it, sensationlism, but it is flat out wrong.

Saying it is sensationalism and proving it is sensationalism are different things.

Give me 5 solid, referenced reasons why it is wrong.

Sagarin wrote:

i know im a dick, the original wrote:

so the one thing we can be sure of regarding this thread is that the op is 'a duck'?

I would say it's Ward Churchill.

Sagarin, as much as you tick me off sometimes, you're one of my favorites and I luv ya.

Someday we gotta get a beer.

Danno wrote:

Hey Former "Elite" who started this thread:

Get a Life!

Dude, I hear you. I also can think at 300 words a minute and type at 160wpm. So it is no sweat really.

But you make a good point, many of us could us a new years resolution to leave this site...

dmb wrote:

Blythe Masters wrote:

I fed my grasshoppers naked credit default swaps and they prospered.

+1

I'm currently working on getting publishing secured for "Shorting THE BIBLE... A Wall Street Translation by The Seven Masters of The Universe". Can we gets some buzz going on the street.

yesstiles wrote:

webfoot wrote:Centuries ago the Christians thought the Earth was flat and the planets and stars revolved around the Earth. I suppose you believe this also.

Ummm...are you forgetting that it was the Bible itself which first posited that the world was round?

Isaiah 40:22 "He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers."

They thought it was round like a Pizza though, not a sphere.

Former Elite From Your Era wrote:

Sagarin wrote:

I would say it's Ward Churchill.

Sagarin, as much as you tick me off sometimes, you're one of my favorites and I luv ya.

Someday we gotta get a beer.

What fun would it be if we didn't all rub each other the wrong way from time to time? Would love to have a beer. Gluten-free of course. It's better than you think.

As for SFH, it's not my place to judge. She deserves mercy and forgiveness, if she seeks it, but she will have to own up to any of the consequences of her actions on her family, particularly her daughter. Say what you want about female sexual repression, but I sincerely doubt that when she took her oath with her husband, it had a caveat about being an escort.

Sagarin wrote:

As for SFH, it's not my place to judge. She deserves mercy and forgiveness, if she seeks it, but she will have to own up to any of the consequences of her actions on her family, particularly her daughter. .

Earlier you also wrote:

"I actually feel sorry for her. It's going to be hard for her to come back from this, and the ramifications for the husband and the child... She needs mercy, not vindictiveness."

It struck me, because all in all, you seem to have pity for her rather than taking her to task (though yes you've said she needs to own up to what she has done).

However, in the past you don't seem so forgiving of all the poor people who make poor choices in eating, or lack of exercise, etc. Now I don't entirely disagree with you on that point, but it seems a little inconsistent to have you seen you railing against Americans who take no responsibility for their health so often in the past, but now see you taking such a "let's pity SFH, not criticize her" stance.

At what point does someone's bad choices deserve pity and not condemnation? You've certainly condemned others' choices before. SFH has hurt people and herself. Is it only violent criminals that really deserve condemnation? Where do you really draw the line?