Rockin' in the free world since 2005.

[Total: 20    Average: 2.6/5]
33 Comments - View/Add
Hits: 9738
Rating: 2.6
Category:
Date: 11/08/11 02:09 PM

33 Responses to Michigan Declares Bullying OK Afterall

  1. Profile photo of emAeye
    emAeye Female 18-29
    27 posts
    November 7, 2011 at 2:31 pm
    Link: Michigan Declares Bullying OK Afterall - Time to whip out the Prof. Farnsworth images.
  2. Profile photo of lyonartime
    lyonartime Male 18-29
    260 posts
    November 8, 2011 at 2:22 pm
    Agreed.
  3. Profile photo of jtrebowski
    jtrebowski Male 40-49
    3348 posts
    November 8, 2011 at 2:36 pm
    This doesn`t make sense. Since most conservatives who makes hating gays a big part of their life are closet-gays themselves, why would they do this? So much for "love the neighbor".
  4. Profile photo of Justin9235
    Justin9235 Male 18-29
    1582 posts
    November 8, 2011 at 2:38 pm
    That`s my state for you =D
  5. Profile photo of wolladude
    wolladude Male 30-39
    361 posts
    November 8, 2011 at 2:42 pm
    This means that anyone not christian is entitled to bully christians too, as long it`s a moral conviction. Open season!
  6. Profile photo of LazyMe484
    LazyMe484 Male 18-29
    10443 posts
    November 8, 2011 at 2:42 pm
    I thought that bill would be thrown out because of the change.

    I was wrong.

    Voted down by every democrat, yet still passes 26 to 11. Interesting.

    How backward can you get? Apparently, completely backward. This really does look like a 180 degree, perfect step in reverse for social development.

    Not to bash all of America here, as that is what 50% of the posts on this site seem to be doing, but don`t move to Michigan, for it is an intolerant sh*thole akin to the middle east.
  7. Profile photo of wolladude
    wolladude Male 30-39
    361 posts
    November 8, 2011 at 3:01 pm
    This means that anyone not christian is entitled to bully christians too, as long it`s a moral conviction. Open season!
  8. Profile photo of ctobin34
    ctobin34 Male 18-29
    66 posts
    November 8, 2011 at 3:51 pm
    lol, whats really funny is that everyone posting about this is sounding like their taking "The Wonkette" to be a legitimate news source. Bahh Bahh
  9. Profile photo of WeePee
    WeePee Male 18-29
    612 posts
    November 8, 2011 at 3:52 pm
    thank god.
    my freedom of speech should allow me to call someone who is obviously overweight "fat"
  10. Profile photo of ctobin34
    ctobin34 Male 18-29
    66 posts
    November 8, 2011 at 3:58 pm
    Wonkette has as much credibility as The Onion.
  11. Profile photo of cobrakiller
    cobrakiller Male 18-29
    7423 posts
    November 8, 2011 at 4:00 pm
    I f*cking hate the idiots in my state.
  12. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36173 posts
    November 8, 2011 at 4:07 pm

    I have a deeply held religious belief...that all christians should be pummeled.
    Give`m the gift of Martyrdom.
  13. Profile photo of Draculya
    Draculya Male 40-49
    14544 posts
    November 8, 2011 at 5:07 pm
    We can now beat Christians in Michigan! Allah be braised.
  14. Profile photo of elkingo
    elkingo Male 30-39
    5385 posts
    November 8, 2011 at 5:33 pm
    Ah yes.. Democrats misrepresenting the intent of Republicans.

    "exempt kids with a “sincerely held religious belief or moral conviction”"

    Which means.. praying in school is NOT bullying others. The law is not necessarily saying that saying "being gay is morally wrong because Jesus says so" is right.
  15. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36173 posts
    November 8, 2011 at 5:36 pm

    "praying in school is NOT bullying others."
    No one said it was. That`s just a smoke screen arguement to distract from the actual issue. That gay-bashing would not carry as stiff a penalty as bullying anyone else. It`s morally okay to gay-bash.

    Anyone who cannot comprehend why that is wrong should not be allowed to breed. They can`t be trusted around impressionable children.
  16. Profile photo of reidcook1000
    reidcook1000 Male 18-29
    382 posts
    November 8, 2011 at 5:38 pm

  17. Profile photo of emAeye
    emAeye Female 18-29
    27 posts
    November 8, 2011 at 5:49 pm
    @ctobin34 "Wonkette has as much credibility as The Onion."

    This leads me to believe that you`re inferring that the article posted is somehow not factual...

    So, here, from the Michigan Daily:
    No Excuses for Bullying
  18. Profile photo of bophus
    bophus Male 30-39
    472 posts
    November 8, 2011 at 6:30 pm
    @elkingo

    So would that mean since they will allow christians to pray, they will also allow muslims, satanists, jews, etc. the same time to pray without fear of being bullied?

    i dont think giving everyone those same rights was the intention here.
  19. Profile photo of M_Archer
    M_Archer Male 18-29
    525 posts
    November 8, 2011 at 6:55 pm
    There must be some context that we`re missing here; I have a hard time the people voting said "kids have a right to bully others"--there must be a real reason.

    When it comes to any bullying that is not physical or that has the plausible threat of physical violence, it`s completely subjective; anyone can say that they`re a victim of any kind of bullying. Hell, "hurting someone`s feelings" is a kind of bullying.

    I guess that if "bullying" was made illegal, the burden of proof would be on the defendant to prove that he didn`t hurt the person`s feelings.

    And I don`t buy the "they caused him to commit suicide argument". If you`ve seen the "I can`t get the cap off" scene from that TV movie, you know what I mean.

    Hurting someone`s feelings shouldn`t be a crime and I think this is what the guys at Michigan are thinking too. Could be wrong, though.
  20. Profile photo of M_Archer
    M_Archer Male 18-29
    525 posts
    November 8, 2011 at 7:01 pm
    I read the article again, and that paragraph and the end confirms conclusively that there`s MASSIVE context dropping going on here.

    Don`t take for granted everything you read, folks.
  21. Profile photo of elkingo
    elkingo Male 30-39
    5385 posts
    November 8, 2011 at 7:46 pm
    Gerry -- You may find this hard to believe, but I am a Christian, and a Republican.

    I have no problem with gay people, at all. In fact, one of my closest assistants is a lesbian. She is also one of my close friends.

    I am a strong proponent for anti-bullying as well. The problem is that our elected idiots do not know how to use word effectively.

    I say, prayer (of any religion, bophus, not just MY faith) is not bullying in the schools; or public for that matter.

    I also say, that making someone feel inferior is bullying.

    At the same time, voicing your opinion is a constitutional right. I may not agree with the idiots that condemn homosexuality, but I defend their right to condemn it vocally.

    When that right goes beyond vocalizing your opinion, to making someone feel like less of a human being, you are nothing more than a bully; and religion has nothing to do with it.


    I hope that clears things up a bit.
  22. Profile photo of elkingo
    elkingo Male 30-39
    5385 posts
    November 8, 2011 at 7:49 pm
    "That gay-bashing would not carry as stiff a penalty as bullying anyone else."

    Why do you have to designate it as "gay-bashing"? Why can`t it be simply: making anyone feel inferior deserves the same punishment?

    I think what people who voted for this law felt, was that it made it an ultimatum. You are either allowed to bash gays or the religious. I say you shouldn`t be allowed to bully anyone; for any reason.
  23. Profile photo of elkingo
    elkingo Male 30-39
    5385 posts
    November 8, 2011 at 7:54 pm
    I see what is going on here...

    If a Christian says to someone, "I believe being gay will send you to Hell." That is within their rights as an American -- which is what the people who voted were trying to say.

    It is not the same thing as a Christian saying, "You stupid faggot, your going to burn in hell with all the other faggots." That is bullying.

    I think what we are talking about here is semantics.

    In other words, if my religious beliefs offend you, authorities should react the same way towards your beliefs on sexuality. We simply have so bonafide morons deciding how to implement interpretations.
  24. Profile photo of connor53
    connor53 Male 13-17
    207 posts
    November 8, 2011 at 9:13 pm
    Stop the world. I want to get off.
  25. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36173 posts
    November 8, 2011 at 10:04 pm

    elkingo - "Why do you have to designate it as "gay-bashing"? Why can`t it be simply: making anyone feel inferior deserves the same punishment?"
    Agreed, it `should` be making anyone feel like that, but Matt`s law makes it a smaller crime to do it to gays. I didn`t single out gays, the conservative republitards did. They didn`t say it`s okay if you hit women, or people of other colors, just the ones they have a religioius agenda against i.e. sinful gays.

    I`m a gay republican and I endorse this message.
  26. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36173 posts
    November 8, 2011 at 10:05 pm

    P.S. I`m not a proponant of anti-bullying legislation. Assault is already illegal, we don`t need these laws. But if you are going to have one, you can`t slip in a clause making it okay to single out one group for bullying.
  27. Profile photo of elkingo
    elkingo Male 30-39
    5385 posts
    November 9, 2011 at 2:50 am
    Gerry -- I work in a elementary school in Kentucky. What I see is there needs to be regulations and laws regarding bullying. The whole point of this law was to try to protect religious groups, not try to protect religious groups from when they bully.

  28. Profile photo of Webz
    Webz Male 18-29
    542 posts
    November 9, 2011 at 6:23 am
    Anyone who `sincerely held religious belief or moral conviction` as the article says would know the bible in no way encourages the bullying of anyone. Jesus showed compassion towards "sinners" while bashing the hell out of religious nutjobs like the pharisees. That`s what these right-wing fundamentalist republicans essentially are; self-righteous, narrow-minded pharisees.
  29. Profile photo of almightybob1
    almightybob1 Male 18-29
    4290 posts
    November 9, 2011 at 7:31 am
    Also note that this exempts neonazi children who sincerely believe Jews to be an inferior race, or white supremacist children who are morally convinced that black people are subhuman.
  30. Profile photo of jinxiejae
    jinxiejae Female 30-39
    2928 posts
    November 9, 2011 at 12:57 pm
    i predict a few columbine incidents to happen in their near future.
  31. Profile photo of ivoryjak
    ivoryjak Female 18-29
    7 posts
    November 9, 2011 at 1:18 pm
    Elkingo has a point. GOP is probably concerned that bullying laws will be used to suppress students who aren`t bullying. Like the five kids in california, who were sent home for wearing an american flag. Would he be punishable under the bullying laws? Is he victimizing someone by expressing his beliefs? One judge with a pet special interest could use this law to punish almost any behavior.
  32. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36173 posts
    November 10, 2011 at 8:16 am

    Bullying laws are not needed.
    Herassing, hitting people is already condemned behavior. All that was needed was for schools to stop tolerating it. In my day, the Coach turned his back and "didn`t see" when the guys would pick on the sissy kid. It would toughen the kid up! All the Coach has to do is turn around and stop the bullies. We don`t need Gov`ment to waste time and money on bad behavior that is already against law and school policies.

Leave a Reply