Stephen--
I agree with your points.
I've stayed out of this discussion because I would not be comfortable on
either side.
As you say, much of what Michael S says is offensive, but this does not by
itself make it antisemitic.
As a Jew, his statements bother me, and I'm glad that Linda W has answered
them.
As a civil libertarian (card carrying member of the ACLU, etc) I feel that
he has the right to make them.
Ultimately, defending the general right to make offensive (to some)
statements protects the rights of all of us. Thius, I feel, is the bottom
line.
>The content of this message is more personal than is usual on
>this list, but I think the topic calls for it.
>
>Michael's posts are outrageous. They are often provocative,
>superficial, tasteless, insensitive, misinformed, ignorant, silly, and
>dumb. Linda Woolf thinks they're also anti-Semitic. But are they?
>
>I concede that Michael pushes the limit, and his insinuations come
>close, or may cross the line. But when labeling a comment racist or
>anti-Semitic, a conservative approach is best. We should set the
>criterion high enough that we limit false alarms. Crying wolf devalues
>the gravity of this charge, and leaves us open to comparison with the
>politically-correct, who denounce as racism any opinion with which
>they disagree. So if a comment is to be labeled racist or
>anti-Semitic, there should be no doubt at all. Linda has no doubt, but
>others on this list are less certain. So who decides?
>
>I think Michael knows this, and has cleverly worded his posts to stay
>close to the boundary. He's doing this not because he's anti-Semitic
>but because he wants to be provocative. He likes being a gadfly and
>pushing people's buttons. And I think he knows what button to push in
>Linda's case.
>
>But the curious thing is that his posts nevertheless contribute to
>this list. Despite their ignorance and provocative nature (or perhaps
>because of it), they frequently lead to some of the best discussions
>we've had. In particular, they've resulted in expert contributions by
>Linda on topics related to Judaism and the Holocaust, posts which were
>scholarly, informative and interesting. If it takes Michael's
>provocations to produce comments of this quality, let's have more of
>them.
>
>But I find one thing ironic. While we should remember a boy who cried
>wolf, it seems that only on this list do we have a Woolf who cried
>goy.
>
>-Stephen
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Stephen Black, Ph.D. tel: (819) 822-9600 ext 2470
>Department of Psychology fax: (819) 822-9661
>Bishop's University e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Lennoxville, QC
>J1M 1Z7
>Canada Department web page at http://www.ubishops.ca/ccc/div/soc/psy
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
* PAUL K. BRANDON [EMAIL PROTECTED] *
* Psychology Department 507-389-6217 *
* "The University formerly known as Mankato State" *
* http://www.mankato.msus.edu/dept/psych/welcome.html *
