newsobserver.com projects - Michael Burbidge - Comments

Re: Bishops: Bullying bill sets precedent

Prototype — Tue, 05 May 2009 09:22:05 -0400

When I was coming up it was mostly the fat guys who got bullied. And those who wore glasses. And those who did not belong to the country club (I came up before private schools.) And those guys who made good grades got bullied. And those who cried a lot got bullied. And then that guy who wore "pegged" pants got bullied right much. In my day there were quite a few reasons to get bullied. None of the reasons were good but that did not stop the bullying. But then again we did not have a law against it. I'm sure that would have stopped it. LOL

Re: Bishops: Bullying bill sets precedent

domewatcher — Tue, 05 May 2009 09:00:14 -0400

I'm not real sure the North Carolina legislature will be able to stop bullying, with or without a law. The bullies have been bullying since Adam ate the apple. And probably even before. I may be one of the few but I like who I like......regardless of who the General Assembly tells me to like.

When the General Assembly is able to change human nature, then, my friends, we are on to something.

Bishops are shameful

Real_Americans_Think — Mon, 04 May 2009 22:19:14 -0400

If Bishops want to inject their religious-based bigotry into public policy, then they need to be prepared to be censured for their bigoted views. Their homophobic anti-gay agenda is simply despicable. What kind of Bishop thinks it is okay to beat gays to death just because they are gay? The santimony and hypocrisy is outrageous. This is just more proof that there is too much religion foisted upon the rest of us by self-proclaimed Christians who use the Bible to justify their bigotry.

Re: Bishops: Bullying bill sets precedent

PaulTerrell — Mon, 04 May 2009 20:52:44 -0400

These are two parts from this bill:

Nothing in this act shall be construed to create any classification, protected class, suspect category, or preference beyond those existing in present statute or case law."

Bullying or harassing behavior includes, but is not limited to, acts reasonably perceived as being motivated by any actual or perceived differentiating characteristic, such as race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, gender, socioeconomic status, academic status, gender identity, physical appearance, sexual orientation, or mental, physical, developmental, or sensory disability, or by association with a person who has or is perceived to have one or more of these characteristics.

If a student is harassed because they support Miss Prejean's position on marriage, would they be covered by this bill? The first bill quote above has me really interested in the lawyer speak of this bill. I would sure love to use a bill like this on the college campus known as UNC-Chapell Hill. Intolerance of any kind like the people attacking Miss Prejean and former rep. Tancredo are just as bad and need to be recognized as that by people on the left who have left posts here.
There is after all only ONE unprotected class left in this country. can anyone here name it? We ALL should have zero tolerance for any kind of bullying. Yet someone here blamed a family group using it as a political football. I do recall the other side using it as a political football as well when it failed last time.

How about we take politics out of the equation on both sides and just do what is right.

Re: Bishops: Bullying bill sets precedent

lfeas0n — Mon, 04 May 2009 17:37:49 -0400

"What would Jesus do?"

The pompous posturing of these bishops is just one more example of "Christians" being un-Christ like.

Navkor, mjfigs, and James_Protzman all make excellent points. We need to flood the legislature with these points to counteract the campaign of exclusion and discrimination waged by the bishops.

That's what I meant

James_Protzman — Mon, 04 May 2009 17:02:40 -0400

but you know how I like to pray with birds.

Freudian homonym mistake?

ryanteaguebeckwith — Mon, 04 May 2009 16:46:39 -0400

I think you mean "exercised."

— RTB

Re: Bishops: Bullying bill sets precedent

mjfigs — Mon, 04 May 2009 16:27:49 -0400

Bullying, Hate crimes...who cares what their personal life is like. Its is wrong. Gays, non gays, legals, illegals, blacks, whites...all HUMAN BEINGS. We forget that main aspect.

Re: Bishops: Bullying bill sets precedent

navkor — Mon, 04 May 2009 16:24:09 -0400

"The result of a well intentioned bill such as this one is that when certain groups are elevated into being more equal than others, it is just plain wrong. The bullying bill should be for everyone."

But everyone IS included in this bill. Like all non-discrimination laws, the new law pertains to bullying on the basis of sexual orientation. EVERYONE has a sexual orientation- gay, straight, bisexual, asexual- all are equally protected, even if all aren't equally bullied. I would understand your concern if the law protected only LGBT students, but it doesn't.

Also keep in mind that the law pertains to real and PERCEIVED orientations- the two kids who recently committed suicide were bullied because they were perceived to be gay, not actually gay as far as we know.

Furthermore, the law also pertains to race, gender and disability status. Where's the commentary about those issues? Teachers should step in if an african-american student is bullied, but can turn away if the student is gay (because many teachers do just that)?

In response to the Bishops- findings of fact are like throwing spaghetti at a wall- they include anything even remotely related to the case in question. The findings of fact mentioned in this article also refer to religious liberty laws- are these bishops opposed to THOSE too?

It saddens me to see Christians

James_Protzman — Mon, 04 May 2009 16:18:27 -0400

get exorcised this way in the pursuit of such a hateful agenda. The NC Family Policy Council wants nothing less than to marginalize gays, ensuring that they are forever treated as second-class citizens. Through their selective reading of the Bible and their blind hypocrisy, they are violating every tenet in the teachings of Christ that I know of. Every. Single. One.

I'm not a person who normally prays, but I'm praying for them and the so-called Christian Action League. I pray that they look to their god for guidance and abandon their horrific campaign of hate and discrimination.

These are the very same evangelical Christians who support torture, of course. And why not? When you accept a god who would torture non-believers for all eternity, you are either insane or deluded or both.

It makes me sick to my stomach.

Re: Bishops: Bullying bill sets precedent

cigipson — Mon, 04 May 2009 15:40:44 -0400

Yes, bullying is wrong, no matter who you are or how you define yourself. The result of a well intentioned bill such as this one is that when certain groups are elevated into being more equal than others, it is just plain wrong. The bullying bill should be for everyone.

Re: Bishops: Bullying led me to God

Gosh — Mon, 04 May 2009 15:30:33 -0400

What gender are Roman Catholic bishops anyway?

It seems like they're opposing a bill to protect future recruits.

I'm sorry, but these tools are jerks. God bless.

Re: Warnings about Obama and abortion

acidqueen — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 23:11:42 -0400

Daniel Akin needs to keep his laws off of my body. I have to take birth control pills so that I can actually have a menstrual cycle (for the literate: look up Stein-Leventhal Syndrome sometime). If Akin and others like him get his way, I and others in my boat will be well and truly hooped--but at least his capricious child-god won't consider me a sinner who's bound for the mythical lake of fire...well not for that, anyway.

Re: Warnings about Obama and abortion

domewatcher — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 18:55:24 -0400

I must agree that Obama has the edge in separating church and state. He separated himself from Jeremiah Wright in world record time.

So much for the separation of church and state

scharrison — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 18:46:24 -0400

"To wit: Daniel Akin, president of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, sent an e-mail to students titled “Why Faithful Evangelicals Cannot Vote for Barack Obama,” reports Yonat Shimron."

Which is a blatant violation of IRS tax exemption rules, and should result in the immediate revocation of SBTS's tax exempt status. But it won't.