Labeling and Civility
I'm glad Rick brought up "fundamentalism." It is a term whose pedigree can be traced back to the fundamentalist/modernist debates in early 20th-century Protestantism over what the one side called "the fundamentals," which was also the name of a set of books that offered a presentation of what these fundamentals are. What happened in the late-70s/early-80s is that the term "fundamentalism," which was originally purely descriptive of an American Protestant Christian movement in a particular era, morphed into meaning any nut with a cause, a gun, a Scripture, and an attitude. So, now we have "Islamic fundamentalists," "Jewish fundamentalists," etc., etc., which etymologically is pure nonsense. I suspect it was originally devised as a way to employ guilt-by-association to dismiss America's religious conservatives without having to actually engage them as fellow citizens who are free and equal. Here's the way the game played: (1) The Iranian Hostage takers are "Islamic fundamentalists," (2) Jerry Falwell, James Dobson, Pat Robertson, et. Al. Are "Christian fundamentlists," (3) the Sept. 11 terrorists are "Islamic fundamentalists," therefore, Falwell, Dobson, Robertson are a lot like the folks in (1) and (3). At the end of the day, I can take solace in Alvin Plantinga's humorous retort that the term "fundamentalist" has no actual cognitive content in these sorts of discussions, but is merely a visceral reaction on the part of some people to label the "'stupid sumbitch [son of a bitch] whose theological opinions are considerably to the right of mine'." (Alvin Plantinga, Warranted Christian Belief [New York: Oxford, 2000], 245). Frank On 4/9/04 12:02 PM, "Rick Duncan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I agree completely with Frank about use of words like > "homophobe" to label people with whom we disagree. > > I used the word "Christophobe" to illustrate that > Prof. Newsom's own reasoning would lead one to > conclude that he himself was guilty of being some kind > of "phobe." I should have made clear that I intended > this limited use of the term. > > Another term that gets misused a lot both on this list > and, more often, in the media is "Fundamentalist." > When this word is used to label people, who do not > themselves identify as "Fundamentalists," for the > purpose of marginalizing their arguments, it is > similarly "uncivil and disreputable." > > Rick Duncan > > > --- Francis Beckwith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: >> One could say, in response to Michael, that his >> beliefs prevent him from >> affirming the value of "homophobes." Of course, he >> thinks that judging >> homosexuality as immoral is a mistaken point of >> view, a disorder one may >> say. But I don't recall ever coming across the >> argument that establishes >> the unquestioned veracity of this conclusion. >> >> It seems to me that to call someone a name in >> replacement of an actual >> argument is uncivil and disreputable. So, let me >> suggest that we refrain >> from using terms that carry no intellectual freight, >> such as "homophobe" or >> "Christophobe." Let's be a little less logophobic. >> >> Frank >> >> >> >> On 4/9/04 8:23 AM, "Rick Duncan" >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> >>> --- Newsom Michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: No, I didn't miss the point. The employee's religious beliefs prevent him from affirming the value of gay people. I >> call that homophobia. >>> >>> It sounds like your ideological beliefs prevent >> you >>> from affirming the value of Christians who believe >>> that homsexuality is a serious moral disorder. I >> call >>> that Christophobia and religious bigotry. >>> >>> Rick Duncan >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> = >>> Rick Duncan >>> Welpton Professor of Law >>> University of Nebraska College of Law >>> Lincoln, NE 68583-0902 >>> >>> "When the Round Table is broken every man must >> follow either Galahad or >>> Mordred: middle things are gone." C.S.Lewis, Grand >> Miracle >>> >>> "I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, >> briefed, debriefed, or >>> numbered." --The Prisoner >>> >>> __ >>> Do you Yahoo!? >>> Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway >>> http://promotions.yahoo.com/design_giveaway/ >>> ___ >>> To post, send message to >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get >> password, see >>> >> > http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw >>> >> >> ___ >> To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get >> password, see > http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw > > > = > Rick Duncan > Welpton Professor of Law > University of Nebraska College of Law > Lincoln, NE 68583-0902 > > "When the Round Table is broken every man must follow either Galahad or > Mordred: middle things are gone." C.S.Lewis, Grand Miracle
Re: FYI An Interesting Case
The use of the term "fundamentalist" is not inherently uncivil or disreputable. Many people are fundamentalists and describe themselves that way. I have a pack of relatives like that. Other relatives are not, however. But I agree that the term can be misused and applied to many who are not. Most Christians I know, like most Jews and Muslims are not fundamentalists. But some are. Including some who do not like the term, but whose views track with those who use the term to describe themselves. Steve On Friday, April 9, 2004, at 03:02 PM, Rick Duncan wrote: I agree completely with Frank about use of words like "homophobe" to label people with whom we disagree. I used the word "Christophobe" to illustrate that Prof. Newsom's own reasoning would lead one to conclude that he himself was guilty of being some kind of "phobe." I should have made clear that I intended this limited use of the term. Another term that gets misused a lot both on this list and, more often, in the media is "Fundamentalist." When this word is used to label people, who do not themselves identify as "Fundamentalists," for the purpose of marginalizing their arguments, it is similarly "uncivil and disreputable." Rick Duncan --- Francis Beckwith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: One could say, in response to Michael, that his beliefs prevent him from affirming the value of "homophobes." Of course, he thinks that judging homosexuality as immoral is a mistaken point of view, a disorder one may say. But I don't recall ever coming across the argument that establishes the unquestioned veracity of this conclusion. It seems to me that to call someone a name in replacement of an actual argument is uncivil and disreputable. So, let me suggest that we refrain from using terms that carry no intellectual freight, such as "homophobe" or "Christophobe." Let's be a little less logophobic. Frank On 4/9/04 8:23 AM, "Rick Duncan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- Newsom Michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: No, I didn't miss the point. The employee's religious beliefs prevent him from affirming the value of gay people. I call that homophobia. It sounds like your ideological beliefs prevent you from affirming the value of Christians who believe that homsexuality is a serious moral disorder. I call that Christophobia and religious bigotry. Rick Duncan = Rick Duncan Welpton Professor of Law University of Nebraska College of Law Lincoln, NE 68583-0902 "When the Round Table is broken every man must follow either Galahad or Mordred: middle things are gone." C.S.Lewis, Grand Miracle "I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed, or numbered." --The Prisoner __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway http://promotions.yahoo.com/design_giveaway/ ___ To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw ___ To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw = Rick Duncan Welpton Professor of Law University of Nebraska College of Law Lincoln, NE 68583-0902 "When the Round Table is broken every man must follow either Galahad or Mordred: middle things are gone." C.S.Lewis, Grand Miracle "I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed, or numbered." --The Prisoner __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway http://promotions.yahoo.com/design_giveaway/ ___ To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw -- Prof. Steven D. Jamar vox: 202-806-8017 Howard University School of Law fax: 202-806-8428 2900 Van Ness Street NW mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Washington, DC 20008 http://www.law.howard.edu/faculty/pages/jamar Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal; but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal. For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also. Matthew 6:19-21 ___ To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Re: FYI An Interesting Case, please change heading
I find this discussion quite tiresome, but to the extend the participants feel it's necessary to continue it, could you please change the subject head fron "FYI An Interesting Case" to something more appropriate. You are no longer discussing the case, and if the heading would instead be something like "more discussing of what we should or should not call each other" I could not to hit the delete key without reading it. In a message dated 4/9/2004 3:05:42 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I agree completely with Frank about use of words like"homophobe" to label people with whom we disagree.I used the word "Christophobe" to illustrate thatProf. Newsom's own reasoning would lead one toconclude that he himself was guilty of being some kindof "phobe." I should have made clear that I intendedthis limited use of the term. Another term that gets misused a lot both on this listand, more often, in the media is "Fundamentalist."When this word is used to label people, who do notthemselves identify as "Fundamentalists," for thepurpose of marginalizing their arguments, it issimilarly "uncivil and disreputable." Rick Duncan--- Francis Beckwith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:> One could say, in response to Michael, that his> beliefs prevent him from> affirming the value of "homophobes." Of course, he> thinks that judging> homosexuality as immoral is a mistaken point of> view, a disorder one may> say. But I don't recall ever coming across the> argument that establishes> the unquestioned veracity of this conclusion.> > It seems to me that to call someone a name in> replacement of an actual> argument is uncivil and disreputable. So, let me> suggest that we refrain> from using terms that carry no intellectual freight,> such as "homophobe" or> "Christophobe." Let's be a little less logophobic.> > Frank> > > > On 4/9/04 8:23 AM, "Rick Duncan"> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> > > > > --- Newsom Michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> >> No, I didn't miss the point. The employee's> >> religious beliefs prevent> >> him from affirming the value of gay people. I> call> >> that homophobia.> > > > It sounds like your ideological beliefs prevent> you> > from affirming the value of Christians who believe> > that homsexuality is a serious moral disorder. I> call> > that Christophobia and religious bigotry.> > > > Rick Duncan ___ To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Re: FYI An Interesting Case
One can disagree with Catholicism and still respect Catholics. One can disagree with Judaism without being antisemitic. One can disagree with another's belief system on just about any point without either hating or fearing the other as a person. How else could one explain how many people who disagree vehemently with Pat Buchanan but who know him personally like him personally? From a distance I can't understand how that can be - but surely it can be true. Witness: Carville and Matalin. And similarly one can disagree with the properness of homosexual conduct and homosexual advocates and not be a homophobic person. I do not need to accept to tolerate. I do not need to accept another's values to value the person as a person. I think wording can make a big difference here. An employer, it seems to me, ought to be able to require all employees to affirm that they will not act in a particular way against any other particular group (religious, sexual orientation, or otherwise); and even it seems to me, that they will affirm that they will value every person as a person regardless of beliefs. But it does seem to me to be a bit problematic to require employees to affirmatively state that they value another person's values. Some of us may indeed value all manner of diverse views. But most of us, I suspect, have difficulty valuing all other sets of values, especially in the face of some of those values that posit a lock on the truth whether secular (liberalism, conservatism, communitarianism, libertarian, etc.) or religious (many (not all) Christians, some (not all) Jews, and some(not all) Muslims each claim to have the one and only and final religious truth). And yet that is what we are called upon to do. Steve -- Prof. Steven D. Jamar vox: 202-806-8017 Howard University School of Law fax: 202-806-8567 2900 Van Ness Street NW mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Washington, DC 20008 http://www.law.howard.edu/faculty/pages/jamar/ "It is by education I learn to do by choice, what other men do by the constraint of fear." Aristotle ___ To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Auto Response from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The offices of the American Jewish Committee will be closed on Monday, April 12, and Tuesday, April 13, in observance of the concluding days of the Passover holiday. I will not have access to e-mail on those days. ___ To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Re: FYI An Interesting Case
I agree completely with Frank about use of words like "homophobe" to label people with whom we disagree. I used the word "Christophobe" to illustrate that Prof. Newsom's own reasoning would lead one to conclude that he himself was guilty of being some kind of "phobe." I should have made clear that I intended this limited use of the term. Another term that gets misused a lot both on this list and, more often, in the media is "Fundamentalist." When this word is used to label people, who do not themselves identify as "Fundamentalists," for the purpose of marginalizing their arguments, it is similarly "uncivil and disreputable." Rick Duncan --- Francis Beckwith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > One could say, in response to Michael, that his > beliefs prevent him from > affirming the value of "homophobes." Of course, he > thinks that judging > homosexuality as immoral is a mistaken point of > view, a disorder one may > say. But I don't recall ever coming across the > argument that establishes > the unquestioned veracity of this conclusion. > > It seems to me that to call someone a name in > replacement of an actual > argument is uncivil and disreputable. So, let me > suggest that we refrain > from using terms that carry no intellectual freight, > such as "homophobe" or > "Christophobe." Let's be a little less logophobic. > > Frank > > > > On 4/9/04 8:23 AM, "Rick Duncan" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > --- Newsom Michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> No, I didn't miss the point. The employee's > >> religious beliefs prevent > >> him from affirming the value of gay people. I > call > >> that homophobia. > > > > It sounds like your ideological beliefs prevent > you > > from affirming the value of Christians who believe > > that homsexuality is a serious moral disorder. I > call > > that Christophobia and religious bigotry. > > > > Rick Duncan > > > > > > > > > > = > > Rick Duncan > > Welpton Professor of Law > > University of Nebraska College of Law > > Lincoln, NE 68583-0902 > > > > "When the Round Table is broken every man must > follow either Galahad or > > Mordred: middle things are gone." C.S.Lewis, Grand > Miracle > > > > "I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, > briefed, debriefed, or > > numbered." --The Prisoner > > > > __ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway > > http://promotions.yahoo.com/design_giveaway/ > > ___ > > To post, send message to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get > password, see > > > http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw > > > > ___ > To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get > password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw = Rick Duncan Welpton Professor of Law University of Nebraska College of Law Lincoln, NE 68583-0902 "When the Round Table is broken every man must follow either Galahad or Mordred: middle things are gone." C.S.Lewis, Grand Miracle "I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed, or numbered." --The Prisoner __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway http://promotions.yahoo.com/design_giveaway/ ___ To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Auto Response from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I will be out of the office until April 14, 2004, and will not be checking email regularly while I am away. If you need assistance prior to my return, please contact: Kara Stein at [EMAIL PROTECTED] or (212) 891-6742. ___ To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Re: FYI An Interesting Case
One could say, in response to Michael, that his beliefs prevent him from affirming the value of "homophobes." Of course, he thinks that judging homosexuality as immoral is a mistaken point of view, a disorder one may say. But I don't recall ever coming across the argument that establishes the unquestioned veracity of this conclusion. It seems to me that to call someone a name in replacement of an actual argument is uncivil and disreputable. So, let me suggest that we refrain from using terms that carry no intellectual freight, such as "homophobe" or "Christophobe." Let's be a little less logophobic. Frank On 4/9/04 8:23 AM, "Rick Duncan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- Newsom Michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> No, I didn't miss the point. The employee's >> religious beliefs prevent >> him from affirming the value of gay people. I call >> that homophobia. > > It sounds like your ideological beliefs prevent you > from affirming the value of Christians who believe > that homsexuality is a serious moral disorder. I call > that Christophobia and religious bigotry. > > Rick Duncan > > > > > = > Rick Duncan > Welpton Professor of Law > University of Nebraska College of Law > Lincoln, NE 68583-0902 > > "When the Round Table is broken every man must follow either Galahad or > Mordred: middle things are gone." C.S.Lewis, Grand Miracle > > "I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed, or > numbered." --The Prisoner > > __ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway > http://promotions.yahoo.com/design_giveaway/ > ___ > To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see > http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw > ___ To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
RE: FYI An Interesting Case
--- Newsom Michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > No, I didn't miss the point. The employee's > religious beliefs prevent > him from affirming the value of gay people. I call > that homophobia. It sounds like your ideological beliefs prevent you from affirming the value of Christians who believe that homsexuality is a serious moral disorder. I call that Christophobia and religious bigotry. Rick Duncan = Rick Duncan Welpton Professor of Law University of Nebraska College of Law Lincoln, NE 68583-0902 "When the Round Table is broken every man must follow either Galahad or Mordred: middle things are gone." C.S.Lewis, Grand Miracle "I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed, or numbered." --The Prisoner __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway http://promotions.yahoo.com/design_giveaway/ ___ To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
