S13.E12: Elizabeth Warren, Dave Barry, Fareed Zakaria, Ross Douthat, Christina Bellantoni

[maraleia]

 

Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), "Live Right and Find Happiness" author Dave Barry, "In Defense of Liberal Education" author Fareed Zakaria, New York Times columnist Ross Douthat and Roll Call editor-in-chief Christina Bellantoni.

 

[FuriousStyles]

I liked this episode. Didnt care so much for Bill kind of dismissing Fareed's point about Islam in other countries. Anybody would be upset if their religion or religious figures were defaced or attacked. Millions of people right here in the US would be outraged if some magazine printed a picture of Jesus doing something inappropriate. Does that mean they would all want the artist of that picture to be murdered? No. I dont think one automatically means the other. But I think that's really Bill's disdain for Islam and religion in general rather than anything based in fact. I forget which panelist said it, but they were like if there really were millions upon millions of Islamists who believed in the most radical form of the religion there would probably be way more terrorist attacks around the world than we have.

I was surprised Bill brought up the "outrage" over his joke about the One Direction kid. The media clearly had moved on. It was lnt really that big of a deal.

I'm still wondering why nobody mentioned that its insane to let your 8, 9, 10 year old walk home from school by themselves these days. Sorry to say, but this isnt 1965. A child is x times more likely to be snatched up by some pedophile than to make it home. I dont blame any parent for being hyper vigilant about their kid's safety. Now as far as the other stuff goes (sports, oveeachieving in school, etc) I agree parents can be overbearing and its made a generation of kids who are entitled and lazy.

Im sorry Walter Scott had to die, but im thrilled his murder was filmed. Now the doubters can get their heads out of the sand and admit that this type of shit really happens. Not only does that POS cop kill that man in cold blood but he also tried to plant evidence and lied on the police report. And the other cop in the video had to have lied on the report too (blue wall and all). The PD was going to carry on business as usual without any real investigation even though the evidence clearly showed the man was shot in the back at some great distance away.

[redlaces]

I'm still wondering why nobody mentioned that its insane to let your 8, 9, 10 year old walk home from school by themselves these days. Sorry to say, but this isnt 1965.

 

That line of thought just reinforces how our culture these days are turning our children into weak individuals that wouldn't know how to think for themselves unless they had a phone with wi-fi or mommy picking them up in the mini van. If you do your research, you know who is raping the little kids.. It's not scary guys in vans..It's probably uncle, grandpa or a trusted family friend.. Women included..  You have GOT to let kids get out in the world and learn and live. A 10 year old walking home from school alone is insane?? I can't even with that. It makes no sense to me. Our children these days all have some sort of ailment that needs medication and cannot survive in the world without mommy powdering their ass. What are we turning into?? Kids aren't getting pulled into vans at a crazy rate, yes it happens, way too much.. What happens MUCH more often at an astonishing rate is trusted people fucking your kids. Look in your own backyard first. Damn, I was on safety patrol when I was 10. On a major road. Why do we keep on harping on bullshit? Oh.. Because it's easy to point and blame. What the hell happened to us? Seriously? We are more afraid of gluten and peanut butter.. I thought we were cooler than that. Fucking weak. 

[27bored]

I loved the pushback from Fareed on religion. Bill talks out of his ass a lot when it comes to religion and he generally gets away with it. I'm glad he had someone like Fareed on to contradict his nonsense. A fifth of the world is Muslim and he feels because a small segment of them resort to terrorism and warfare in the name of their religion that everyone is responsible for it.

 

His exchange with Ross about the cop shooting is why I generally give conservatives a pass on RT when it seems like they're peddling talking points. Ross was trying to make a non-partisan point and Bill still had to try and make it a "left-right" issue. He said the right believes racism doesn't exist. Uh, no Bill, they just don't buy it when people on the left try and pander to racial minorities by insinuating race into issues that have nothing to do with race. They don't buy that it's a "racist dogwhistle" when Newt Gingrich calls Obama the food-stamp President, or that it's hatred when Republicans don't support amnesty. Maybe if people like you would stop peddling the same ad hominem attack at every turn, with issues like this where black men keep getting killed by police, it wont seem so pat to argue there's a racial component. You cheapen the notion of racism by promiscuously throwing it out.

 

Re: how kids used to be raised. I get their point to an extent -- we don't need to make sure kids avoid soda and gluten -- but the world is a much bigger and dicier place now than it used to be in the 60s and 70s.

Edited April 11, 2015 by 27bored

[iMonrey]

Fareed seemed to be spoiling for a fight with Bill about Muslims, just like Ben Affleck was. Unfortunately, I don't think either one of them made a really good point - or at least not the right point. It must have killed Fareed to sit through New Rules without being able to respond. The problem is, as soon as you start saying "They're not all like that, most of them are good people," you've missed the point. It's kind of like saying "Some of my best friends are black/gay/Jewish/whatever." There's a difference between the people and the religion.

 

But then, Bill misses the point too and loses me whenever he tries to say Islam is worse than Christianity. It's not. I wish he would just stick to painting all organized religion with the same brush. Better still, I wish he would just drop the subject altogether because it's gotten old and he's not making any headway with anyone.

 

I did, however, agree wholeheartedly with Bill about the Police Culture. I know a lot of gun enthusiasts will disagree but I'm with Bill on this whole idea that police are supposed to shoot to kill/take down and not just aim for the leg.

 

I also agree with Dave Barry about helicopter parenting. And I'm not convinced the world today is so very different from the 50s and 60s. I don't know that child snatching has become some kind of epidemic, I just think the news exploits those stories so much people have that perception now. I also think somewhere around the 1980s politicians latched onto a sure-fire platform - Families - and now all they talk about are Families Families Families so much it's gotten into our heads that being a parent and having children is the most important wonderful miraculous thing in the world. Instead of, you know, the thing that people have been doing since the dawn of time and didn't used to act like having kids was the crowning achievement in their whole lives.

[DB in CMH]

But then, Bill misses the point too and loses me whenever he tries to say Islam is worse than Christianity. It's not. I wish he would just stick to painting all organized religion with the same brush. Better still, I wish he would just drop the subject altogether because it's gotten old and he's not making any headway with anyone.

I did, however, agree wholeheartedly with Bill about the Police Culture. I know a lot of gun enthusiasts will disagree but I'm with Bill on this whole idea that police are supposed to shoot to kill/take down and not just aim for the leg.

I also agree with Dave Barry about helicopter parenting. And I'm not convinced the world today is so very different from the 50s and 60s. I don't know that child snatching has become some kind of epidemic, I just think the news exploits those stories so much people have that perception now. I also think somewhere around the 1980s politicians latched onto a sure-fire platform - Families - and now all they talk about are Families Families Families so much it's gotten into our heads that being a parent and having children is the most important wonderful miraculous thing in the world. Instead of, you know, the thing that people have been doing since the dawn of time and didn't used to act like having kids was the crowning achievement in their whole lives.

 

 

Study after study confirms that we are safe now than we were in the 70s, and it's not even close. We lived in a small town, and even from very, very young played around the yard alone. 10/11 (around 1990) seemed to be about the age when we were given the latitude to go further in the world - to the mall alone, and so on. Teach kids to be self-sufficient and it will pay dividends. As a university teacher now, you can tell kids that were sheltered from kids that were not. Both eventually make it to the same place of being adults, but the unsheltered kids get there way faster. I was very self sufficient by 18 - moved to a new city alone to go to university, found my own apartment and so on. I really cherish those memories and experiences.

 

As for the religion stuff. I agree with Maher more often than I don't, but he goes over the line quite a bit. From my view, the difference between Christianity and Islam is that the Christian crazies have a lot fewer followers than Muslim crazies do. That appears to give them strength. There are very Christian countries in Africa where there are campaigns against gays, but they are not as seemingly "modern" as the Muslim countries where being gay is also criminalized. I'm glad that Maher brings that up. 

[ganesh]

Anybody would be upset if their religion or religious figures were defaced or attacked. Millions of people right here in the US would be outraged if some magazine printed a picture of Jesus doing something inappropriate.

 

Yes, cf. piss christ from the 80s. The difference is, no one killed people over it. It was all over the news and congress wanted to kill the NEA because of it. The reaction was based on the rule of law. 

 

The problem is, as soon as you start saying "They're not all like that, most of them are good people," you've missed the point. It's kind of like saying "Some of my best friends are black/gay/Jewish/whatever." There's a difference between the people and the religion.

But then, Bill misses the point too and loses me whenever he tries to say Islam is worse than Christianity. It's not. I wish he would just stick to painting all organized religion with the same brush.

 

It's the classic strawman argument. Again, I have yet to see anyone address Bill's actual arguments about this. The bottom line is that the major religions are horrendous on gender equality. Bill would be better served by sticking with the big brush. His argument is stronger. It's just that the current news is dominated by IS, etc., which is islam. I do believe that if something similar came up with christians, he'd be equally derisive.

 

I forget which panelist said it, but they were like if there really were millions upon millions of Islamists who believed in the most radical form of the religion there would probably be way more terrorist attacks around the world than we have.

 

A fifth of the world is Muslim and he feels because a small segment of them resort to terrorism and warfare in the name of their religion that everyone is responsible for it.

That's just not Bill's point. Bill has never refuted that there are 'normal, regular' people who practice islam. He's saying what counts as 'mainstream' islam is terribly oppressive. Sure 99% aren't going to blow stuff up, but how many of them support female clerics? How many think it's ok that the married woman is property of the husband? 

 

I'm sure that 90+% of christians don't actually care where gay people get their wedding cakes either, but there's enough that do that have passed laws about it. 

 

But I think that's really Bill's disdain for Islam and religion in general rather than anything based in fact.

 

Bill is 100% disdainful. Bill also cites a host of facts nearly every time people argue with him. No one either addresses them or says he's wrong about the facts. I'm not saying he's 100% right. There's real, actual laws in countries that are based on the koran that promote a patriarchy. So, good for whomever if you're devout and get comfort from your faith, but if you're telling me that means it's ok your wife isn't allowed to drive a car or you can decide whom your daughter marries, then you're flat out wrong. Don't like it? Too bad. 

 

There seems to be this stigma that if someone says they're devout that they're untouchable and above criticism. No. It's 2015. The world runs on the rule of law. This is absurd. 

 

From my view, the difference between Christianity and Islam is that the Christian crazies have a lot fewer followers than Muslim crazies do. That appears to give them strength. There are very Christian countries in Africa where there are campaigns against gays, but they are not as seemingly "modern" as the Muslim countries where being gay is also criminalized. I'm glad that Maher brings that up.

 

I believe there's actual laws in Nigeria where you can killed for being gay. I think part of it is that IS is this new, very real terror with a strong online presence that's in our face. If Nigeria were chopping off gay people's heads and posting it on youtube, we'd take notice. 

 

I thought the explain a joke was funny. Bill does have a point about how nearly everyone gets offended by everything and sometimes a joke is a joke. 

 

Fracking should be banned. The country isn't going to seriously cut emissions and provide baseload power without nuclear. 

 

Kids walk to school in my neighborhood all the time. When people say, 'oh kids don't go out anymore,' they don't know. The playground and the park have kids there all weekend. The parents usually hang around but let the kids go off on their own. 

Edited April 11, 2015 by ganesh

[bobbyjoe]

I wish there was someone on the panel, when Fareed Zakaria started using Indonesia as an example of a moderate Islamic country, who would have pointed out that even in Indonesia, in places like Aceh Province, there are violent laws against gays.  The larger Indonesian government has allowed certain provinces to enact Sharia law.  In Aceh, for example, you can currently be given up to 100 months in prison or 100 lashes (which could lead to severe mutilation, if not death) for being gay.  As far as someone like Zakaria is concerned, that doesn't strike me as a "whoops, I forgot to mention that" fact; it strikes me as something unmentioned because it interferes with his argument.  But that's a pretty serious omission.

 

I agree that Bill's not always going about this conversation the right way, but neither are a lot of his critics.  It's dishonest if Indonesia is frequently pulled out of the hat by Bill's critics as some shining example of moderation, when they're not telling the whole story there.

[ruby24]

I'm surprised they didn't even talk about the Iran deal once. I was hoping for it to be brought up as more than just a joke in the monologue.

[sistermagpie]

I'm still wondering why nobody mentioned that its insane to let your 8, 9, 10 year old walk home from school by themselves these days. Sorry to say, but this isnt 1965. A child is x times more likely to be snatched up by some pedophile than to make it home.

 

 

No, they're LESS likely to be snatched up (not that so many were ever snatched up). They even mentioned this on the show. In the 60s and 70s we were going through a big crime wave in the US. The crime rate has dropped an incredible amount. Do you really have this impression that the streets are this full of predators that it's not only more dangerous to walk home than it was in 1965 but incredibly more dangerous?

[Victor the Crab]

Yes Bill, we're a lot more open about accepting gays in society than we've ever been. Like when Jim Nabors officially came out of the closet, nobody made childish, immature snarky comments about it and him. Well, except for you, you hypocritical asswipe you.

[27bored]

That's just not Bill's point. Bill has never refuted that there are 'normal, regular' people who practice islam. He's saying what counts as 'mainstream' islam is terribly oppressive. Sure 99% aren't going to blow stuff up, but how many of them support female clerics? How many think it's ok that the married woman is property of the husband?

 

I'm sure that 90+% of christians don't actually care where gay people get their wedding cakes either, but there's enough that do that have passed laws about it.

 

I think you're making an apples to oranges comparison. There's a difference between doctrinaire Islam and cultural norms within the Arab world. Bill conflates the two as being one in the same and seems to think the only thing stopping American Muslims from behaving in the same way as those who kill in the name of Islam is opportunity. And RFRAs protecting people who don't want to bake a cake for a gay wedding because it goes against their religion isn't the same as gays in the Arab world being murdered.

 

Bill is 100% disdainful. Bill also cites a host of facts nearly every time people argue with him. No one either addresses them or says he's wrong about the facts. I'm not saying he's 100% right. There's real, actual laws in countries that are based on the koran that promote a patriarchy. So, good for whomever if you're devout and get comfort from your faith, but if you're telling me that means it's ok your wife isn't allowed to drive a car or you can decide whom your daughter marries, then you're flat out wrong. Don't like it? Too bad.

 

There seems to be this stigma that if someone says they're devout that they're untouchable and above criticism. No. It's 2015. The world runs on the rule of law. This is absurd.

 

What facts is Bill quoting again? He thinks you can reduce the entire religion of Islam down to a Pew poll and a few out-of-context quotes from the Koran. That's not facts. That's not really even an argument. That's playing gotcha to avoid engaging the issue and potentially being wrong. Most Muslims don't even live in the Arab world, let alone agree with murder and warfare to carry out their religious beliefs. Furthermore, I don't think Bill gives a shit about women and gays. Not that he's a misogynist and homophobe, but I think his hang-ups about religion have fuck all to do with mistreatment of women and gays. That's the cover he uses to justify his own bigotries regarding religion.

[iMonrey]

 

I think you're making an apples to oranges comparison. There's a difference between doctrinaire Islam and cultural norms within the Arab world.

 

Actually, the Zakarias and Afflecks who want to argue Bill's point are making the apples and oranges comparison. Their argument is always "most Muslims aren't like that, most Muslims are good people who don't support terrorism." And that - is totally not the point Bill is making. The point is Islam itself, not its adherents. Bill is right, it says "kill the gays" right there in the holy book. Whether Muslims choose to ignore that or embrace it is irrelevant. You can't argue what's in the Koran or what's in the Bible when it's written right there. If you want to respond with what "most" Muslims do or don't do you're changing the subject, either deliberately (because you can't argue against the fact) or mistakenly because you can't distinguish between a religion and its adherents. And yeah, people do that all the time. They cherry-pick the parts of their religion they like and ignore some other stuff but that's just the foibles of the devout.

 

Where Bill misses the point, where Islam is concerned, is that the fact that Isis or Al Quada or whoever are Muslims is indicative of nothing other than their area of origin. Islam is no more responsible for terrorism than any other religion, and any religion can be used the same way.

Edited April 12, 2015 by iMonrey

[ganesh]

In Aceh, for example, you can currently be given up to 100 months in prison or 100 lashes (which could lead to severe mutilation, if not death) for being gay.

I agree that Bill's not always going about this conversation the right way, but neither are a lot of his critics.  It's dishonest if Indonesia is frequently pulled out of the hat by Bill's critics as some shining example of moderation, when they're not telling the whole story there.

 

I think the message is being lost because Bill talks about it so much that people are sick of hearing him. FZ seemed that way on the show to me. Bill's initial point was that basing the rule of law on *any* religious text is flat out wrong. He called out so-called liberals who go scream and yell when someone is called a homophobic slur, for example, yet, what are they doing about this case in Indonesia? It's also a fact that some African 'christian' nations have similar laws against being gay, as well as muslim nations in the middle east. 

 

 

Actually, the Zakarias and Afflecks who want to argue Bill's point are making the apples and oranges comparison. Their argument is always "most Muslims aren't like that, most Muslims are good people who don't support terrorism." And that - is totally not the point Bill is making.

 

So, Bill cites one 4 year old poll. It's an opening statement. There's plenty of instances of ruling by religion currently going on that he mentions a lot, but I don't see people like FZ, who seems like a reasonable smart person, grasping the core of the problem. Bill has pointed out about women not being able to drive cars, he's brought up honor killings in the news. There's plenty going on. 

 

Everyone jumps on that 'you can't condemn 1 billion people. Most aren't like that' Ok, most aren't. Why can't I be critical? Most christians don't care if gay people get married, but plenty are passing laws against it. Why can't I condemn them too?

 

If people get so up in arms at legit criticisms of their religion, that's on them. Honestly, I swear if you go an a scale where like you move towards the more 'devout religious' end of it, you'll find religious ignorance similarly correlated. 

 

Islam is no more responsible for terrorism than any other religion, and any religion can be used the same way.

 

I said before, Bill needs to stick with the broad brush on religion, which he did in his movie. What he needs to say is 'don't live your life based on a book written centuries/thousands of years ago. You need to figure out what context means.'

 

They cherry-pick the parts of their religion they like and ignore some other stuff but that's just the foibles of the devout.

 

Or most reasonable people would say that things like kill the gays and don't eat shrimp are strictures from a time long past and understand that they don't apply to contemporary society.

Edited April 12, 2015 by ganesh

[27bored]

Actually, the Zakarias and Afflecks who want to argue Bill's point are making the apples and oranges comparison. Their argument is always "most Muslims aren't like that, most Muslims are good people who don't support terrorism." And that - is totally not the point Bill is making. The point is Islam itself, not its adherents. Bill is right, it says "kill the gays" right there in the holy book. Whether Muslims choose to ignore that or embrace it is irrelevant. You can't argue what's in the Koran or what's in the Bible when it's written right there. If you want to respond with what "most" Muslims do or don't do you're changing the subject, either deliberately (because you can't argue against the fact) or mistakenly because you can't distinguish between a religion and its adherents. And yeah, people do that all the time. They cherry-pick the parts of their religion they like and ignore some other stuff but that's just the foibles of the devout.

 

Couple of things. First, the Koran doesn't say "kill the gays". It cites homosexuality as a sin, as it does a whole host of things, sexual and non-sexual alike. I think it's a common stereotype and belies a certain amount of ignorance on a lot of people's part when they assume Islam and most religions have this particularized grudge against homosexuality, as though it's cool with every other kind of deviation from the husband/wife model. It's even debatable that the Koran sees a persons thoughts and desires and their actions as being one in the same (as it pertains to what is "punishable"). It's kind of understood that you'll have urges and wants that might be sinful, but it's more important what you act on and indulge in. 

 

I said it's an apples to oranges comparison because Bill isn't informed enough to draw a distinction between the teachings of the Islamic faith and the Arab world resorting to chaos (murder, warfare) when they feel their beliefs are being offended. Citing the source material as the only problem like Bill does, and thus convicting people by association, only winds up with him offending people who have nothing to do with the methods of extremists. The majority of Muslims are demonstrably peaceful, and yet because in part of the world they're crazy the whole religion is bullshit? No. It's even similar to what we see in this country. The Bible doesn't condone homosexuality, for example, but there's a difference between Christians not supporting same-sex marriage and expressing that belief in their vote, and the Westboro Baptist Church trolling people at funerals with their hate-filled signs. I think Bill wants to see the snake turn on itself, but most people aren't going to do that just to make it easier for him to make sense of the world. He's smart enough and old enough to understand concepts like "people are different even if they share the same religion".

 

So, Bill cites one 4 year old poll. It's an opening statement. There's plenty of instances of ruling by religion currently going on that he mentions a lot, but I don't see people like FZ, who seems like a reasonable smart person, grasping the core of the problem. Bill has pointed out about women not being able to drive cars, he's brought up honor killings in the news. There's plenty going on.

 

But Bill thinking religion is the "core of the problem" is wrongheaded, too. I don't think Fareed Zakaria is unaware of the inequality women face in much of the Muslim world, for example, but he might also be aware that four out of the five most populous Muslim countries in the world have elected women leaders, and thus thinks the problem may be more specific to one country or one region than the existence of Islam, which encompasses a billion people.

 

Everyone jumps on that 'you can't condemn 1 billion people. Most aren't like that' Ok, most aren't. Why can't I be critical? Most christians don't care if gay people get married, but plenty are passing laws against it. Why can't I condemn them too?

 

Because "condemning them too" isn't all that different than what you're condemning them for. If you support same-sex marriage, you should be more concerned with addressing what people are saying and changing people's minds by making a cogent argument. The part a lot of people forget when it comes to calling people out for their views is that you have to then be the change you want to see. Show the tolerance you want to see shown for others, yes even for people you don't agree with. But what Bill does a lot is mock religious doctrine and then excuses by saying it's because they're not tolerant of other people. All that means is he's no better than they are.

 

If people get so up in arms at legit criticisms of their religion, that's on them. Honestly, I swear if you go an a scale where like you move towards the more 'devout religious' end of it, you'll find religious ignorance similarly correlated.

 

I'll just say I respectfully disagree. I think any legit criticism needs to have a baseline of respect for that which is being criticized.

[ganesh]

 

 

 

 

Forget it. I can't even and it's not worth being dinged.

Edited April 12, 2015 by ganesh

[jbrecken]

I'm still wondering why nobody mentioned that its insane to let your 8, 9, 10 year old walk home from school by themselves these days. Sorry to say, but this isnt 1965. A child is x times more likely to be snatched up by some pedophile than to make it home.

However, here the x is a very small number -  0.01%  or thereabouts.  But the average American parent is not willing to take any risk as long as x isn't 0.

[GHScorpiosRule]

I know this is a small thing, in the grand scheme of things, but it irritates me beyond belief that Bill continues to mispronounce Silver Spring, MD.  It is Silver Spring, not Silver Springs.  This was the second or third time I've heard him say it like that. 

[attica]

The mechanics-of-writing-structure geek in me enjoyed 'explaining jokes to idiots' bit.

 

From Bill's monologue, I recognized the joke about eye doctors' using 'better like this? or better like this?' as straight out of a classic routine from Bill's pal, Carol Leifer. If I'm generous, I'll call it homage or hat-tip. If I'm not, well, Fareed has company. 

[Maherjunkie]

 

Because "condemning them too" isn't all that different than what you're condemning them for. If you support same-sex marriage, you should be more concerned with addressing what people are saying and changing people's minds by making a cogent argument. The part a lot of people forget when it comes to calling people out for their views is that you have to then be the change you want to see. Show the tolerance you want to see shown for others, yes even for people you don't agree with. But what Bill does a lot is mock religious doctrine and then excuses by saying it's because they're not tolerant of other people. All that means is he's no better than they are.

I already am the change I want to see, but people who have a problem with gays in general, who follow the bible literally, probably aren't going to change their minds no matter how cogent the argument, but people who are less so might be inclined to look at the argument differently, or see it as important.

[Hanahope]

I'm still wondering why nobody mentioned that its insane to let your 8, 9, 10 year old walk home from school by themselves these days. Sorry to say, but this isnt 1965. A child is x times more likely to be snatched up by some pedophile than to make it home.

 

I agree with the poster above who mentioned that most child abuse is coming from the family or friends, not from van-driving strangers.  However, one point I will make is that back in the 60s-70s, most families had a stay at home mom.  So even though I did walk home either to my grandmother's house (two very long blocks) or rode the bus to my family's empty home (for about two hours until my mother came home from work), most of the neighbors (and my school friends) had a mother at home with whom I could go to if there was a problem, or just there to watch the street out of the kitchen window.  That isn't the case quite so much these days. 

[27bored]

I already am the change I want to see, but people who have a problem with gays in general, who follow the bible literally, probably aren't going to change their minds no matter how cogent the argument, but people who are less so might be inclined to look at the argument differently, or see it as important.

 

I agree. I was moreso talking about addressing the issue and not necessarily the person's underlying motivation for their position. If the issue is same-sex marriage, explaining why it should be legal is fine, and people are free to agree or disagree. If someone says No, Because Jesus then it makes sense to address religious subtext. But what Bill often does with that issue and most issues is he insinuates religion into issues that either don't have anything to do with it, or they are more complicated than just what someone's holy book says, allegedly.

[FuriousStyles]

I agree with the poster above who mentioned that most child abuse is coming from the family or friends, not from van-driving strangers.  However, one point I will make is that back in the 60s-70s, most families had a stay at home mom.  So even though I did walk home either to my grandmother's house (two very long blocks) or rode the bus to my family's empty home (for about two hours until my mother came home from work), most of the neighbors (and my school friends) had a mother at home with whom I could go to if there was a problem, or just there to watch the street out of the kitchen window.  That isn't the case quite so much these days. 

I understand all too well the statistic that child abuse is more likely to come from a family member or friend.  I had an incident with a neighbor when I was 12.  Nothing as traumatic as actual rape but it was still extremely inappropriate and obviously something that still bothers me today.  And you when when it happened?  While I was walking home from school.  So for me, both can certainly be true, and all the facts and stats doesn't negate the very real possibility (I understand not probability) of something terrible happening while small children are left alone in public areas.  

 

I also agree that the individual family and community dynamic is not the same as it once was.  Many neighborhoods from what I've heard and read back then had a real familial vibe to it.  Each neighbor knew each other well and looked out for the other's kids.  I doubt that's the case anymore, especially in the more metropolitan areas.      

[sistermagpie]

I also agree that the individual family and community dynamic is not the same as it once was.  Many neighborhoods from what I've heard and read back then had a real familial vibe to it.  Each neighbor knew each other well and looked out for the other's kids.  I doubt that's the case anymore, especially in the more metropolitan areas.

 

 

Doesn't that also just offer more opportunities for neighbors to be inappropriate to kids on their way home from school too?

[Maherjunkie]

A neighbor was inappropriate with me when I was right next door.  Proximity doesn't always matter.

[Qoass]

 

But the average American parent is not willing to take any risk as long as x isn't 0.

 

Then why are there so many of those silly "Baby on Board" signs on cars?  A kid is much more likely to be harmed on road than the sidewalk.

[Maherjunkie]

I always wanted to make a sign that said "Bored on Baby".

[ahpny]

I found this one of the weaker episodes, and was particularly disappointed in the lack of significant contribution of Ross Douthat. He’s supposed to be one of the smart ones.

 

Nevertheless, the Bill-Fareed confrontation was interesting and I see some validity in both of their positions.

Show the tolerance you want to see shown for others, yes even for people you don't agree with.

 

This sounds fine, has obvious appeal, and works much of the time. But it breaks down when the people who don’t agree with you want to kill you no matter how respectful you might be toward them. They, and their views, are not worthy of your respect and to believe otherwise is to be dangerously naïve. Exactly how many hold such beliefs was the reason Bill's (repeated) citation to that Pew poll became contentious. But labeling something odious as “off limits” merely because a billion people consider it a religious tenet doesn’t make it any less odious. PC crap be damned.

 

But Fareed raised several valid points – how do you productively deal with the real problems that all acknowledge? There’s little to be accomplished by gratuitously dissing religious views, and in particular the views of one particular religion, merely because they are the views of that religion. Even if that yields a great joke, as Fareed needled. Efforts would seem to be more constructively spent on trying to change views rather than just insulting those who hold them as ignorant and unworthy of respect. While Bill might counter argue that his criticisms are hardly gratuitous, I don't see the same degree of moral clarity he does. What we now consider ethical and right in some instances was quite different than what we believed just a few years ago. Because others fail to "evolve' at the our pace doesn't necessarily make them evil. Of course those same arguments might have been used to justify slavery 150 years ago, so what do I know.

 

But Fareed’s attempt to dismiss the Pew poll fell flat with me. Even if it’s just one poll from several years ago, and hardly perfect – as no poll ever is – there’s nothing contradicting it that he can cite. If he (or anyone else) thinks that poll is so wrong or outdated, then let them commission their own poll and prove Bill wrong on the facts based on better data. Indeed, if that poll is so glaringly wrong, why hasn't anyone else done so?

[ganesh]

But labeling something odious as “off limits” merely because a billion people consider it a religious tenet doesn’t make it any less odious. PC crap be damned.

 

Tolerance of other people's intolerance is a canard and condescending when you're talking about extending equal rights and legal protections to all segments of society. There should not be laws firing gay people for no cause at the least certainly not state-sanctioned murder at the worst. This isn't a policy debate. We're talking about people's lives. 

 

Efforts would seem to be more constructively spent on trying to change views rather than just insulting those who hold them as ignorant and unworthy of respect.

 

I think part of Bill's point is that change will come from people within the respective religions, and that's not happening. As he continues to explain that no one seems to get, the "median belief" of people in any religion is that gays can be discriminated against, or women can't drive cars, or honor killings are ok, or parents can force their kids to marry, etc. When Affleck was on, they had the mid show guest who was trying to explain that and they made a mess of it. 

 

Bill needs a page one rewrite of his own argument. I think he's right. He needs to frame it as western religions and islam and not just islam. When people say, 'not all the billion muslims are like that, no, they aren't, but the median is. 

 

I still have yet to hear an argument justifying why women can't drive cars in Saudi Arabia and why there's laws on the books where honor killings are ok. Not all of them are like that, but the ones that are, are running governments in the middle east and africa. 

[attica]

I still have yet to hear an argument justifying why women can't drive cars in Saudi Arabia

 

Volvos and Vulvas don't mix?

[ganesh]

Michael, I want a volvo.

 

That's not a vol*vo*.

[LoveIsJoy]

 I also agree that the individual family and community dynamic is not the same as it once was.  Many neighborhoods from what I've heard and read back then had a real familial vibe to it.  Each neighbor knew each other well and looked out for the other's kids.  I doubt that's the case anymore, especially in the more metropolitan areas.

Another difference in the neighborhood dynamic now--versus the 60's/70's when I was a kid--is that there were lots of kids outside walking around (to school, to the library, to the playground etc.) all at the same time. It was commonplace. Nowadays, in some areas you rarely see kids out and about in the same way. My worry would be that a child walking alone in 2015 would stand out like a target without the presence of others helping to look out. It seems to me that a return to free-range parenting works best if you're not the only family practicing it.

I also wonder if children are statistically safer now than in the past, BECAUSE this generation of parents are more protective. No idea...just wondering.

[Victor the Crab]

Volvos and Vulvas don't mix?

 

 

Michael, I want a volvo.

 

That's not a vol*vo*.

 

"Well, we're halfway through the show and it's time for a half time report. I think the show has been going particularly well. I particularly like how the young lad, Rick, has been going off the joke into the dead laugh area. Going into the international sphere, they're going to have to face some stiff competition especially from the Swedes with their comedy series "Ooh, Where's My Volvo?" and also, of course, from the French with their comedy series, "Mr. Poo Poo Goes to the Lavatory". Anyway, the half time's over now and it's back to the action."

 

Jerzy Balowski taking a break from going psycho with an axe and chopping up anything he sees on The Young Ones.