Posted on 01/09/2016 1:32:04 PM PST by Lorianne
I was supposed to take part in a debate about abortion at Christ Church, Oxford. I was invited by the Oxford Students for Life to put the pro-choice argument against the journalist Timothy Stanley, who is pro-life. But apparently it is forbidden for men to talk about abortion. A mob of furious feministic Oxford students, all robotically uttering the same stuff about feeling offended, set up a Facebook page littered with expletives and demands for the debate to be called off. They said it was outrageous that two human beings ‘who do not have uteruses’ should get to hold forth on abortion — identity politics at its most basely biological — and claimed the debate would threaten the ‘mental safety’ of Oxford students. Three hundred promised to turn up to the debate with ‘instruments’ — heaven knows what — that would allow them to disrupt proceedings.
Incredibly, Christ Church capitulated, the college’s censors living up to the modern meaning of their name by announcing that they would refuse to host the debate on the basis that it now raised ‘security and welfare issues’. So at one of the highest seats of learning on Earth, the democratic principle of free and open debate, of allowing differing opinions to slog it out in full view of discerning citizens, has been violated, and students have been rebranded as fragile creatures, overgrown children who need to be guarded against any idea that might prick their souls or challenge their prejudices. One of the censorious students actually boasted about her role in shutting down the debate, wearing her intolerance like a badge of honour in an Independent article in which she argued that, ‘The idea that in a free society absolutely everything should be open to debate has a detrimental effect on marginalised groups.’
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.co.uk ...
Oxford used to have humanities studies that, along with the sciences, were among the strongest in the world.
Regretfully, the libs have ruined the humanities there, as they have in virtually all the major world universities.
Thankfully, the sciences still have their high standards.
After all, few manage any kind of STEM degree without experiencing lots and lots of discomfort. At least those students can bask in the comfort of knowing those silly little girly girls on the protest side couldn’t even qualify to clean the johns in the physics dept.
Even more relevant. We have become a very polarized society where the lunatic fringe has become the norm, and they are stamping out all that is good and decent.
There will be violence, either through resistance to this mad agenda, or as a result of a lack thereof.
well I’m not comfortable with whiny liberals around, do my ‘rights to feel comfortable’ matter? or just liberals?
What does a vagina and uterus have to do with murder?
“those silly little girly girls on the protest side couldn’t even qualify to clean the johns in the physics dept.”
They go and get a PMP certificate and run engineering firms instead. “Don’t know about engineering, your company, or event he industry you serve, but I want to run things. I have a PMP.”
At least all this nonsense is exploding the myth of the value of college.
>>They said it was outrageous that two human beings “who do not have uteruses” should get to hold forth on abortion
So, liberals who don’t carry a handgun for protection should shut up about handguns carried for protection. Same for semi-auto rifles for militia duties. If a liberal has never bought a gun at a gun show, then they should shut up about gun show loopholes too.
That’s right.
What I usually say is: If you don’t want a gun, don’t have one.
A bunch of women were handing out white feathers (a symbol of cowardice) to any man at the party who hadn't joined the military and gone to war. And I thought "Who the hell are these wenches?"
Because back then, women could not go into the military, could not be sent to the frontlines, were safe in every way from being called upon to put their money where their mouths were. It was very easy for a woman, back in the day, to call a man "coward" because he wouldn't go to war.
That's the comparison I would make. If you cannot possibly get pregnant, carry it for 9 months, and then have to give birth to it... it's very easy to hand out white feathers.
>>That’s the comparison I would make. If you cannot possibly get pregnant, carry it for 9 months, and then have to give birth to it... it’s very easy to hand out white feathers.
Because men have no emotional attachment to their children? For you, childbearing is just the act of carrying the child for 9 months and pushing it through a vagina??
Women have the right to hand out the feathers because, back in the days of “gender roles”, women were vitally important for turning men into social creatures so that we have a stake in protecting society. You see, women have a voice in men doing dangerous things for the greater good just as men have a voice in women not murdering children in the womb.
The only question is the nature of the debate. Are babies in the womb human? I have a pro-abortion niece who played classical music to her baby from the week that her brain began to develop. Now, she will tell you that a “fetus” is not a person, yet she played music to it for its mental development. That level of irrationality is why men need to have a voice in the debate.
"Those who would give up essential Liberty to purchase a
little temporary Safety deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."-- Benjamin Franklin
Ignorance is strength
We’ll have to agree to disagree, because I despise a woman telling a man to “be brave in war” when she knows she’ll never have to face it, and I despise a man telling a woman to “be brave in childbirth” because he knows he’ll never have to face it. I really don’t have anything else to contribute to this conversation other than that little bit. I said it, and I’m done.
>>We’ll have to agree to disagree, because I despise a woman telling a man to “be brave in war†when she knows she’ll never have to face it, and I despise a man telling a woman to “be brave in childbirth†because he knows he’ll never have to face it. I really don’t have anything else to contribute to this conversation other than that little bit. I said it, and I’m done.
I don’t know if you are just trying to argue like a liberal, but that’s what you are doing:
1) Agree to disagree
2) Add in your statement
3) Declare the subject “settled”
I’ll give YOU the white feather.
Things have changed since Jethro spent six years there.
There is no right to be comfortable. Life is not fair, which doesn’t mean there aren’t opportunities for those who are wiling to take them and while doing so probably be uncomfortable in some form or way. You make your bed you lie in it. I hate the last expression, but these are all things my parents, mostly my mom always told me, along with if you aren’t willing to do something correctly, don’t bother doing it. lol I will say the one with the most truth is Life is Not Fair. Which means life is diverse as everyone is different in talents, abilities, means, aspirations and ambition.
I say life is fair - it just doesn’t seem fair.
Fine. Don’t care. I’m not in it to win, just to make a space for my point of view. Those lurkers out there who may feel the same but didn’t dare say, let them know they are not alone.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
