Back to threaded view Full conversation · 27 posts

Preferred Pronoun Lawsuit Dismissed

MAS 22801 posts Original UHND Member

Posted8:05 pm on Feb 20, 2020

No word yet if it was literally thrown down the memory hole.

Remember kids: this is all just "right-wing alrmism." Nothing to see here. Move along.

Link: https://thehill.com/changing-america/respect/diversity-inclusion/483467-judge-dismisses-professors-lawsuit-over

Level 1
The anti-science movement is strong. Very strange.

NedoftheHill 47378 posts 8:56 pm on Feb 20, 2020

Not sure how you can legally compel a university not to teach falsehoods, though.
Evil preaches tolerance until it is dominant, then it tries to silence good.

View Single #567933
- Level 2
  He claimed using a certain pronoun was against his religious beliefs.
  
  Chris94 39149 posts 10:23 pm on Feb 20, 2020
  
  How is exactly is science involved here?
  
  This guy thinks pronouns are a hill to die on. MAS sees it as a sign of surrender to PC culture or some crap.
  
  The rest yawn.
  
  View Single #567945
  - Level 3
    University wants to pretend that someone is not the biological sex they are. That is anti-science.
    
    NedoftheHill 47378 posts 11:01 pm on Feb 20, 2020
    
    Science tells us the genes which determine sex. Science tells us the physical characteristics that determine sex. That is how science is involved.
    
    They want us to pretend that science is wrong. That is anti-science.
    
    Let me know if you need me to explain anything else.
    
    Evil preaches tolerance until it is dominant, then it tries to silence good.
    
    View Single #567955
    - Level 4
      The prof’s religious beliefs motivate him, not science.
      
      Chris94 39149 posts 11:42 pm on Feb 20, 2020
      
      This has fuck-all to do with science.
      
      View Single #567967
      - Level 5
        Re-read my posts. I'm talking about the motivations of the University.
        
        NedoftheHill 47378 posts 10:04 am on Feb 21, 2020
        
        In this case, religion and science align against the Leftist Cult of Nonsense. You keep pointing to the religion; I'll keep pointing to science...and either way, you will be on the wrong side of science if you defend the University.
        Evil preaches tolerance until it is dominant, then it tries to silence good.
        
        View Single #567992
      - Level 5
        it’s clear where you come down on religious freedom and conscientious objection(and science because
        
        BaronVonZemo 64187 posts 8:07 am on Feb 21, 2020
        
        while you try once again to hide behind a technicality of the teachers defense strategy to avoid the larger issue, the question of the underlying fact that the teacher is scientifically accurate while the college is not goes unanswered)
        
        View Single #567975
        
        Level 6
        Pronouns can be “scientifically accurate”? Just stop.
        
        Chris94 39149 posts 8:17 am on Feb 21, 2020
        
        This is less a case about gender identity and more a case of just basic respect.
        
        The pronoun controversies bore me. I stay neutral.
        
        View Single #567978
        
        Level 7
        Has to be difficult to remember a bunch of individual preferred pronouns.
        
        iairishcheeks 30434 posts 5:37 pm on Feb 21, 2020
        
        (no message)
        
        View Single #568098
        
        Level 7
        You're a sophist. As you know and as everyone knows, the pronoun issue is inextricably tied to...
        
        MAS OP22801 posts 4:40 pm on Feb 21, 2020
        
        the transgender issue and the belief that people can be "born into the wrong bodies." Your university and many others happily propagate these anti-scientific notions when it comes to gender.
        
        View Single #568075
        
        Level 7
        What pronoun should we use for you?
        
        NedoftheHill 47378 posts 10:06 am on Feb 21, 2020
        
        I've been using "he" because I thought you were a biological male, and thus the pronoun was "scientifically accurate."
        Evil preaches tolerance until it is dominant, then it tries to silence good.
        
        View Single #567993
        
        Level 8
        What about people that refer to their boats with feminine pronouns?
        
        ND_in_DRO 3958 posts 4:19 pm on Feb 21, 2020
        
        Are they anti-science?
        
        I think you are conflating linguistics and biology...2 different fields.
        
        View Single #568071
        
        Level 9
        Interesting point. Is that why we use "gender" for humans now, instead of "sex"
        
        NedoftheHill 47378 posts 12:47 am on Feb 23, 2020
        
        We used to refer to biological sex as exactly that: sex. And gender only referred to linguistics. Nouns in many languages (and boats and hurricanes and the like in English) were a particular gender; but, animals (and humans) were a particular sex.
        
        G. Gordon Liddy (of all people) had a radio show back in the 90's, and I remember him saying we should not bow to the liberals, who were seeking to replace the word "sex" with "gender" with regard to biology. He thought they had some agenda behind that. I thought he was crazy. Little did I know, he was 100% correct. By conflating biology and linguistics, here we are.
        
        Now, back to my point: If you are a biological male, and I can be fired for calling you a pronoun which correctly indicates you are a biological male, then you are anti-science, or anti-truth, or anti-reality...call it what you will.
        
        Evil preaches tolerance until it is dominant, then it tries to silence good.
        
        View Single #568399
        
        Level 9
        Depends on the boat's gender identity of course.
        
        iairishcheeks 30434 posts 5:32 pm on Feb 21, 2020
        
        We should ask it.
        
        View Single #568097
      - Level 5
        Does,the larger issue of gender pronouns have anything to do with science?
        
        MAS OP22801 posts 12:57 am on Feb 21, 2020
        
        Ned didn't address the First Amendment aspect. He addressed the larger question of why universities are perpetuating anti-scientific, demonstrably false, damaging, balderdash woo-woo. Your university's Office for Gender and Sexual Diversity does just that, enabled by the administrators above them. How could any academic who takes himself or herself seriously and has any integrity allow this nonsense to happen without offering a peep of objection? What other anti-scientific dogma would you abide that is given a blessing by campus administrators, taught in courses, and incorporated into everything from registration and identification, to campus health services?
        
        View Single #567968
    - Level 4
      What, you think Chris hesitates to boldly call out this imbecilic nonsense, just as he would...
      
      MAS OP22801 posts 11:13 pm on Feb 20, 2020
      
      lampoon a creationist? Bite your tongue.
      
      Nothing to see here!
      
      View Single #567960
  - Level 3
    White supremacists.
    
    MAS OP22801 posts 10:48 pm on Feb 20, 2020
    
    Trump praised them, you know.
    
    Certainly the Green Wave have had no campus-wide initiatives along these lines, right?
    
    Nothing to see here!
    
    Through at least the 1950s, our universities were bastions of conservatism. I certainly think if political orthodoxy on the order of what we might see at Bob Jones or Liberty Universities were foisted upon our universities in the future, after the worm inevtiably turns, you and others within the belly of the beast would be intellectually consistent and label any concerns about it to be overwrought and hyperbolic. Yes, I can definitely see that.
    
    View Single #567951
    - Level 4
      You love to overreact about fringe nonsense. Who am I to rain on your parade.
      
      Chris94 39149 posts 11:01 pm on Feb 20, 2020
      
      (no message)
      
      View Single #567954
      - Level 5
        Consciously fringe but unconsciously fundamental
        
        Curly1918 18357 posts 5:36 am on Feb 21, 2020
        
        The Dems will lose themselves down this academic rabbit hole.
        
        View Single #567970
      - Level 5
        White supremacists.
        
        MAS OP22801 posts 11:10 pm on Feb 20, 2020
        
        Charlottesvile.
        
        Young homosexuals committing suicide due to"hate speech."
        
        Oppressed groups.
        
        Decolonization.
        
        White privilege.
        
        Trump.
        
        State Department gutted.
        
        Danger! Danger! Sky is falling!
        
        The good thing is that the folks seem to have caught on that continued declarations that this is merely "fringe nonsense" that has no effects on insitutions nor public polcy is untrue. You should hear much of Generation Z. It's tough to be the schoolmarm scold and be a hit with the kids. Danger! Danger!
        
        View Single #567959
- Level 2
  No, but a public institution mandating speech in this regard is patently Orwellian.
  
  MAS OP22801 posts 9:11 pm on Feb 20, 2020
  
  If you're above a certain age, the idea of college professors going along with something this (with the exception of this guy), is unthinkable. Correction: was unthinkable. Many believe in this garbage. Most just sheepishly go along with it without a word of protest. Mind you, many of the sheep are tenured, yet still can't muster up the cajones to speak out against it. Ultimately, it's not the dumb kids following some fad and exercising power trips who are responsible, it's the alleged adults.
  
  View Single #567939
  - Level 3
    Agreed.
    
    NedoftheHill 47378 posts 10:22 pm on Feb 20, 2020
    
    (no message)
    Evil preaches tolerance until it is dominant, then it tries to silence good.
    
    View Single #567944
  - Level 3
    This case highlights the problem of liberal judges and further convinces me to vote conservatively.
    
    BaronVonZemo 64187 posts 10:10 pm on Feb 20, 2020
    
    (no message)
    
    View Single #567941
    - Level 4
      I usually vote for Democrats. However, for state and local judges, I will not vote for liberals.
      
      MAS OP22801 posts 10:30 pm on Feb 20, 2020
      
      This has become a cliche, but is nonetheless valid: it's not their job to legislate. Right-wing judges certainly legislate at times, but not to the degree that liberal judges generally do.
      
      Nevermind the natural inclination of liberal judges to be too lenient in sentencing.
      
      I do have to say, though, that the single-worst bill Trump has signed is deals with criminal justice reform. It was obvious pandering at its worst, and it is placing people in danger. It appeals to naive, dopey people who do not have to live next to the dangerous convicts they are releasing, from spousal abusers to dope dealers, and worse. Shameful, yet predictable.
      
      View Single #567948
      - Level 5
        The higher up a judge who believes Constitution is a “living, breathing document”,the more dangerous
        
        BaronVonZemo 64187 posts 10:59 pm on Feb 20, 2020
        
        Thus, I do not agree in cutting off the use of common sense in voting beyond the state and local levels.
        
        Regarding Trump’s criminal justice reform, I agree that it is politically motivated. It also appears that it is working.
        
        View Single #567953
        
        Level 6
        Working at what???
        
        MAS OP22801 posts 11:19 pm on Feb 20, 2020
        
        Yeah, we all know it works at releasing people from prison. You'll have to tell me at what else it is working. Trump had the power to emancipate prisoners who received disproportionally long sentences before all this. You probably recognize a couple of the canards that pushed all this along: "We can't arrest our way out of crime" and "We can't afford to keep locking people up with 'mass incarceration!'"
        
        We actually did arrest and sentence our way out of a great deal of crime, starting in the 1990s, when we consequently saw drops in violent and property crime. And of course we can afford "mass incarceration." Ever notice that many of the same people who say we can afford "Medicare for all" tell us we can't afford all these prisons?
        
        View Single #567962
        
        Level 7
        It’s working at improving his % of votes from non-traditional GOP demographics
        
        BaronVonZemo 64187 posts 11:23 pm on Feb 20, 2020
        
        Which I believe is his goal. Maybe he believes in this since he is not a strict conservative, but I doubt it.
        
        View Single #567964

End of conversation