Conservative commits suicide following backlash for harassing a drag queen

[Tanj]

Could you expand please - I didn't understand the point you made

There's no evidence that the protest and suicide are linked by anything other than the fact one happened after the other.

 

[coffee4u]

Hey, quit it. Stop being so utterly disrespectful of this thread. Your post has ZERO to do with the topic. If you want to start your own, I'm sure you know how to do it. If not, then comply with the Rules of CF and stay on topic. Don't make me have to report you in order to comply with the rules here.

Your original post was about the left and right and freedom of speech, wasn't it? I mean that was what was at the crux of this, one mans freedom of speech which lead to his harassment and unfortunate suicide. So it brought this current situation at the University to mind, so I believed that I was posting on topic.

I had made a longer post which explained more but it was late and I was tired so I just posted that part since I knew I would get an alert to say the thread had been posted to. Your response back is exactly the point I was trying to make. Instead of asking how it was relevant you start tossing threats around.
A person should be able to hold a peaceful demonstration, debate should be held in University showing both sides and normal discourse should be possible between people without one side using words like 'hate", "Inciting violence" and "Phobia" So yes the world has gone crazy. Since my opinion is not wanted here this will be my last post.

1.)
However, I don't see progressives feeling the same. The only people they believe deserves any amount of freedom is themselves.

Exactly, their 'tolerance' is only for themselves. Young people today have no manners.

 

[FireDragon76]

The protestor was a gay atheist

So what exactly was he upset about? Honestly, it just sounds like a mentally disturbed individual.

 

[Zoii]

I'm not sure what kind of protesting was being done. Were they simply standing outside with signs? Were they peaceful or were they obnoxious.

Well its a pity you didnt examine the link and be informed before incorrectly commenting. The conservative political group (I am unaware if they collectively had any religious persuasion) chanted in a public library over a reading to children that was being led by a gentleman dressed in drag. What then followed was an in-your-face confrontation by the leader of that group with the person attempting to read to the children

I believe in everyone's right to protest peacefully without being attacked for it.

There was no physical altercation but a substantial verbal altercation. Are you suggesting that if a group disrupts an event, those supporting that event should not resist that disruption? The other issue is that it was in a public library and thus affected the entire library. The scene wasnt ugly but it got verbally confrontational.

However, I don't see progressives feeling the same. The only people they believe deserves any amount of freedom is themselves.

This is where you need to stop. I truly get sick of people turning any discussion into a Left V right political platform. I must say you people from the USA are the main offenders. If you want to throw acid at each other, then do not do it in this thread. It has ZERO to do with the OP. If you cant then I shall make a report.

We see this in how they attack others. The Christian bakery, for instance, was pretty much sued out of existence. And this is what they are about. They have gotten a teenagers scholarship to Harvard revoked because they didn't like something he said on Facebook and when they found out he was granted a scholarship they called and wrote letters until the scholarship was revoked. In incident after incident they are going after people's livelihoods for saying things the progressive left doesn't agree with - while at the same time happy to spout the most venomous hatred toward those who don't believe as they do.

I think this behavior from the left needs to end. People are either free to follow their faith however they see fit or free to voice their opinion on various topics or we live under tyranny... The left is scary because they are happy for tyranny so long as it's them being tyrannical.

Once again this has ZERO to do with the OP despite my best efforts to deflect people away from this type of unrelated diatribe.

That to me is classic child abuse, especially considering that 90% of "transgender" prepubescent children who are allowed to go through puberty naturally will grow out of it or otherwise stop being gender confused therefore to disallow a normal puberty is to abuse a child

If you want to have a platform to sprout your views on transgenderism, then start a new thread. You have gone completely off topic. Im telling you this so that you understand why it is that Ive decided to report this post.

Anytime you can use preventative care over massive surgery we should be, for the sake of the patient, and disallowing a child to go through a normal puberty is opting for massive surgery over potentially helpful non-surgical preventative care. (and my faith in Christ or the Bible doesn't even enter into that stance)

What has this to do with the OP - ZERO and you are wilfully disrespecting the thread.

So of course there are many many factors to consider whenever you decide whether or not a thing requires a "protest" of any kind, and I don't necessarily think running around anywhere with a sign is helpful at all..

Massive efforts to harass people (in this case to death) because they protested anything (whether you agree with them or not) beyond a peaceful counter protest is tyrannical behavior and will result in nothing good.

There is no evidence of tyrannical behaviour. His own political party denounced his confrontational behaviour. Can you now get back on topic please.

 

[Zoii]

Your original post was about the left and right and freedom of speech, wasn't it?

No it wasnt. Read it again and stay on topic please. Your views are very welcome - its just I dont want this turned into a Left V Right finger pointing exercise. There's enough of those here already.

 

[Zoii]

Look everyone - This is NOT a thread inviting people to have yet another "I hate Conservatives" or "I hate Lefties" thread. Now I'm specifically going to point at our American cousins who have a habit of doing this. Can you please curb that behaviour.

This is also NOT a platform to express your annoyance or vehement disapproval of homosexuality or transgenderism.

Please read the OP. This challenges you to discuss whether the tactics of religious affiliations to get people to listen to their viewpoints, particularly within the context of various forms of speech expression - ie social media, protests, waving placards or blocking events...use your imagination - I'm challenging the concept that these are methods that achieve the goals intended.

 

[Zoii]

Their strategic plan was obviously a form of protesting, which they have a right to do as does anyone. I am in favor of free speech. As a Christian, I do not protest.

Yes I guess your right - Blocking the event was a form of protesting. I'm not sure when you do it that its legal, but that's beside the point. So when the leader of the protesting group confronted the person reading to the children, which no doubt youve listened to, what do you think that achieved for the group.

Now, I understand (though its the media so whether their info is right or not I have zero ideas) that these young conservatives have Christian ideologies (though the leader is openly gay - which makes this whole thing odd) which is understandable why they would object to reading in a public place. What do you think the ultimate outcome was? Im trying to make a point that those with religious ideologies may not achieve their aim when they seek to influence people through confrontation.

Waving placards telling people they are wicked.... there must be a better way to "sell" the message and are those taking to the streets given some education on how to be better at it.

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

So - given now that I agree with you - was the approach by this group, a strategy you would espouse. What end did it achieve. What would you have done differently.

It seems that the aim was to stop the library from holding events like this. Apparently he just wasn't up for the struggle.

 

[Zoii]

if I'm understanding this correctly, as in, he felt so bad about what he'd done he commuted suicide. Or he couldn't handle the fallout of people berating him for this.

It does seem that way though, in point of fact, the events could be entirely separate.

We simply don't base important questions that may lead to important decisions on a case/individual so far from the norm as this man seems to be.

Then extract that individual out of the equation if you like. Does tactics like that though, protests, placards indicating people are wicked or going to hell, telling people that if they dont accept their beliefs they will burn in hell - does this work? Is there a better way to reach people?

Islam seems to be more successful in this regard. Its growing at a prolific rate.

 

[Zoii]

I don't need to fact check my point of view. Feel free to start your own thread though: The Controversial Research on 'Desistance' in Transgender Youth

Wow you're doing it again - so disrespectful of the OP.

 

[Zoii]

It seems that the aim was to stop the library from holding events like this. Apparently he just wasn't up for the struggle.

Yes I agree - and blockades albeit illegal - have their place in forcing social change and can be seen as moral and right - Read Mahatma Gandhi's memoir for a classic example.

But poor fellow - gosh he needed better support and guidance

But leaving that individual aside - was this a tactic that's worthy - will it achieve the objective. If you were selling a religious moral message, is blockade the way to do it? What would you do.

 

[Zoii]

There's no evidence that the protest and suicide are linked by anything other than the fact one happened after the other.

Well...if comments from his aunt are accurate, there is a belief by her that the events are indeed connected. But in some sense you are correct in that the poor guy was a vulnerable soul. Brave though - he led a strong campaign against SSM and was a strong monarchist - not popular positions to hold especially for a gay man.

 

[Tanj]

Well...if comments from his aunt are accurate, there is a belief by her that the events are indeed connected.

Right. His aunt. There's an objective, unbiased source.

But in some sense you are correct in that the poor guy was a vulnerable soul. Brave though - he led a strong campaign against SSM and was a strong monarchist - not popular positions to hold especially for a gay man.

Doesn't mean people should be gallivanting about thinking post hoc ergo proptor hoc is valid reasoning

 

[Zoii]

Right. His aunt. There's an objective, unbiased source.

LOL fair point

Doesn't mean people should be gallivanting about thinking post hoc ergo proptor hoc is valid reasoning

Heck Tanj - I'm not great with Latin - would you mind converting that for those of us less scholared please.

 

[Tinker Grey]

@Zoii, post hoc ergo proptor hoc == Latin: "after this, therefore because of this") is an informal fallacy that states: "Since event Y followed event X, event Y must have been caused by event X." It is often shortened simply to post hoc fallacy. (Post hoc ergo propter hoc - Wikipedia)

When someone says "correlation is not causation", they are rebutting this. Kind of. Because Y came after X, we cannot say X caused Y.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Yep.

I’ve been attending small, urban, theologically-conservative churches for the last decade or so and, to their credit, the overwhelming majority of folks I’ve known within those churches have been keenly aware that the traditional “sales pitch” has been been really self-serving, off-putting, and disrespectful, and have been trying to find better ways of doing things.

It's almost as if shaming people into agreeing with a particular moral viewpoint is, ultimately, more about signaling to others one's status as a member of a group...and a less effective way of getting others to understand a viewpoint.

I will say though, I do believe there are those Christians who genuinely believe that someone's eternal soul is in danger of damnation...and they believe that is more important than anyone's feelings at the time.

I can't really say the same for some other groups that try to push their morality on people.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Before I begin, allow me to exclude elements that we can all accept - That is:

• This site, and a large proportion of individuals (of all religious persuasions) do not condone homosexuality. Indeed many non-religious people revile homosexuality.
• Equally, there is an increasing proportion of individuals that have an opposing opinion. We all know that so please - DONT GET CHILDISH AND RESORT TO A " HOMOSEXUALS ARE BAD VS NO THEY ARE NOT" debate. We know one another's position so it doesn't need a debate for the one millionth time here.

This story is about a group of Australian conservatives (I do not know if they have a religious persuasion or not) who decided to go to a library event where a drag queen was reading a story to children.

NOW - Before you jump in and say ARGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHH, the children attended with the full knowledge and consent of their parents who had no issue with it.

Apparently the conservatives disrupted the event and there was some minor confrontation. There was some backlash against those individuals and the principal instigator in particular.

This principal instigator later took his life. Testimonies about his character talked of the young man being a kind and thoughtful individual.

Whats this thread about? - Australia has seen several cases of this ilk. A very prominent sportsman was dismissed for reviling people he did not approve of on religious grounds. He was dismissed from his contract. Now there's this example.

My question is - Are those of religious persuasion, being adequately educated on how to "Sell" there religious message. How well are they being counselled. For when you weigh up the cost - What good was achieved by this young person - What good was achieved by the famous rugby player. What good has come out of it all - Indeed it'd seem that all that was gained was upset, anger, negatives. Was there a better way that would entice people to listen, instead of causing disharmony.

Head of Liberal National Club who mobbed drag queens reading to kids dies

Does anyone actually know that the backlash is what drove him to suicide? Like....was there a letter or message he made prior to doing it?

 

[Zoii]

Does anyone actually know that the backlash is what drove him to suicide? Like....was there a letter or message he made prior to doing it?

I've not seen the actual remarks but apparently the group has social media accounts that included twitter. They received negative comments about their actions, the conservative party to which they belong, criticised their tactics, and the local conservative MP also criticised their actions.

I've read the actual twitter replies and other social media since his death. Everyone was saddened by the whole thing. There was a very warm statement made by the drag queen to the media, and directed at the family. He knew the young guy personally and knew him to be warm and hilariously funny, albeit he had political ideology that opposed his. Everyone was upset by all this. There were no winners.

 

[Zoii]

I will say though, I do believe there are those Christians who genuinely believe that someone's eternal soul is in danger of damnation...and they believe that is more important than anyone's feelings at the time.

You've hit onto what this thread is all about. I can accept that individuals, whether Jewish or Christian or Islamic, have a passionate and total belief in their understanding of what is morally right. Is the tactic of shaming or shouting or blockading or [insert your own direct action tactic] going to achieve the end you desire - that is - to encourage people to take up your religious paradigm.

OR would a positive message be the way to go - God loves you. Come hang out with us - There's no judgement here..... maybe that's a better starting point.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Ive not see the actual remarks but apparently the group has social media accounts that included twitter. They received negative comments about their actions, the conservative party to which they belong, criticised their tactics, and the local conservative MP also criticised their actions.

I've read the actual twitter replies and other social media since his death. Everyone was saddened by the whole thing. There was a very warm statement made by the drag queen to the media, and directed at the family. He knew the young guy personally and knew him to be warm and hilariously funny, albeit he had political ideology that opposed his. Everyone was upset by all this. There were no winners.

I'm certainly not discounting the possibility that the backlash was the catalyst....the timing alone makes it seem likely. I'm not saying that the possibility of a backlash like that means that people shouldn't express their opinions about something either.

I will say that I disagree with his views, and I certainly disagree with him expressing them as an attack against trans people (not the morality of being trans...but the morality of people because they are trans) if indeed he did that.

In the same way, I think people should consider the way they respond to such people and such opinions that they disagree with. It's certainly possible that one can express their disgust with a belief or opinion without directly attacking the person holding it.

I think that's a problem with social media and identity politics in general. People stop recognizing the individual humanity of people and start making generalizations about them based upon generalizations about their group.....whether it's trans or Christian.

He should be able to express his opinions....people should be able to respond....but there's nothing wrong with being civil and remembering that we're all human and therefore flawed.