Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The March of Dimes Syndrome

city-journal.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 125 posts

Re: The March of Dimes Syndrome

#81

Post by Tao3300 »

TulliusCicero wrote: post #69
Tao3300 wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still think the cake thing was weird. I mean, why would you want someone who doesn't like you or hates your lifestyle to make you a cake? You really think they're going to do their best work? Hey, Person-Who-Doesn't-Like-Me, commit to this creative project celebrating what you don't like about me. I can't wait to see it.

If a generally-open-to-the-public business refused to service women or black people or Muslims, should we be okay with that too, because hey, they probably don't want someone who dislikes them to provide them a product?

You must be replying in the wrong place. I didn't say it was okay. I said knowingly forcing someone to do this is a good way to get a shitty cake.

Re: The March of Dimes Syndrome

#82

Post by thoradam »

WarOnPrivacy wrote: post #35
righthand wrote: post #33

This is propaganda belittling social causes and ignoring societal decline. Not everything gets better always. Why is this on HN?

Because it was posted by someone who didn't know (or did know) that the mag is wallpaper for The Manhattan Institute. ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_Journal ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_J._Casey#Return_to_pri...

It is true that I don’t this publication. I also don’t know the author or what The Manhattan Institute is. In general unless a piece of text is asking me to take something on faith or I am unable to reason with it I don’t care in the slightest who wrote it, where it was published or what their affiliations are.

Re: The March of Dimes Syndrome

#83

Post by wtfwhateven »

cogman10 wrote: post #63
Georgelemental wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you are business open to the public you should serve the public. The slippery slope is beyond obvious. Can a doctor refuse to treat gay patients? A lawyer refuse to represent gay clients? A professor refuse to teach gay students? If many businesses were doing that, that would be pretty bad, yeah. But the activist demands go far beyond that. Masterpiece Cakeshop and 303 Creative LLC weren't sued for refusing to s…

> sell cakes to white people, and refusing to bake a cake for a white nationalist event. Good job comparing a gay wedding to nazis. > Quick internet search: And here's the followup story https://www.latimes.com/socal/daily-pilot/opinion/story/2022... The novel was not pushed by the liberals or whatever. It was a rouge and fired staff member that decided to place the novel which ended up in the library doing an invent…

OP knows all of this, he's being dishonest to push an agenda sadly.

Look at his submission history and you'll see similar attempts to do that. In his comments he also comes to the defence of an ex moderator of 8chan that had answers other than "no, absolutely not" to whether CSAM should be allowed on it.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40385450

Re: The March of Dimes Syndrome

#84

Post by mistercow »

anal_reactor wrote: post #75
mistercow wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like you (and the author of this pretty blatant propaganda) are assuming the very strange and unfounded premise that most activists believe that there is exactly one problem with the world worth solving. Of course activists move onto the next problem once the problem they’ve been focusing on is solved. Similarly, I brush my teeth once I get out of the shower. I haven’t “moved the goalposts”; I’m just attendi…

> It seems like you (and the author of this pretty blatant propaganda) are assuming the very strange and unfounded premise that most activists believe that there is exactly one problem with the world worth solving. But this is exactly how it works. Very few activists are activists "for good causes in general", most of them identify themselves with a very narrow set of issues and build their identity around that.

We’re just arguing anecdotes at this point, but I’ve known a lot of left wing activists, and I have never met one who only cared about a narrow set of issues. In fact, the more typical failure mode is wanting to fight on so many fronts at once that they seem to struggle to focus.

Re: The March of Dimes Syndrome

#85

Post by TheNewsIsHere »

anal_reactor wrote: post #76
Martinussen wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That entire paragraph is mostly a strawman, or, if you're feeling charitable, coming from an extremely surface-level awareness of the actual issues they're talking about.

Not necessarily. I can recall that a few years back I was browsing some right-wing forum and someone wrote "they will force you to have sex with them" which seemed absolutely ridiculous. Then I was browsing a left-wing forum and the concensus was "refusing to date black people is racism and therefore the worst thing you can possibly do, refusing to date transsexuals is kinda allowed but we'd rather see you do". I had…

I submit that the idea that it’s racist at face value not to date a Black person is ridiculous. If we indulge that type of view with any sort of seriousness, we’re just lending undue legitimacy to that idea.

It is no more or less ridiculous than me being sexist because I am not interested in women. I’m not sexist. I’m just not into women. Reasonable people can identify the difference. We shouldn’t mistake crazy views for sane ones.

Re: The March of Dimes Syndrome

#86

Post by WarOnPrivacy »

thoradam wrote: post #82
WarOnPrivacy wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it was posted by someone who didn't know (or did know) that the mag is wallpaper for The Manhattan Institute. ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_Journal ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_J._Casey#Return_to_pri...

It is true that I don’t this publication. I also don’t know the author or what The Manhattan Institute is. In general unless a piece of text is asking me to take something on faith or I am unable to reason with it I don’t care in the slightest who wrote it, where it was published or what their affiliations are.

> In general unless a piece of text is asking me to take something on faith

The longer I live the more I realize I don't know. For me it means I have to have some trust in the people communicating with me - that they're operating in good faith. More so when their comms are persuasive arguments.

Without my trust + their forthrightness, I have to expend significant time and energy parsing and vetting their statements - for little practical benefit.

Re: The March of Dimes Syndrome

#87

Post by Aloha »

alwa wrote: post #37
twojobsoneboss wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Put more charitably, there are always problems facing society

It does seem like there's a qualitative difference between that framing and its parent comment: there are always problems facing society, but once activists have organized around a specific category of problem, they seem to react to success by intensifying within that category rather than diversifying their efforts to address whatever's next-most-pressing on the overall list of issues.

Yeah - this is my point precisely.

Re: The March of Dimes Syndrome

#88

Post by Aloha »

mistercow wrote: post #39
Aloha wrote: post #16

This at its core is the problem with activism , be it left or right - what do you do once you 'solve' the cause you set out to solve? The answer is very rarely "ride off into the sunset" - often its moving goalposts.

It seems like you (and the author of this pretty blatant propaganda) are assuming the very strange and unfounded premise that most activists believe that there is exactly one problem with the world worth solving. Of course activists move onto the next problem once the problem they’ve been focusing on is solved. Similarly, I brush my teeth once I get out of the shower. I haven’t “moved the goalposts”; I’m just attendi…

I don't classify groups like the United Way as activist organization - they are an organization that are broadly focused on making things better, rather than single focus organization, which have to pivot (or move goal posts) once they reach the ends of their goals.

Re: The March of Dimes Syndrome

#89

Post by Georgelemental »

TulliusCicero wrote: post #70
Georgelemental wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you are business open to the public you should serve the public. The slippery slope is beyond obvious. Can a doctor refuse to treat gay patients? A lawyer refuse to represent gay clients? A professor refuse to teach gay students? If many businesses were doing that, that would be pretty bad, yeah. But the activist demands go far beyond that. Masterpiece Cakeshop and 303 Creative LLC weren't sued for refusing to s…

> Masterpiece Cakeshop and 303 Creative LLC weren't sued for refusing to serve gay clients—they were perfectly willing to serve gay clients! What they were sued for was refusing to provide services that would express support for a specific event—a gay wedding. It's a gay wedding because they're gay. It's like refusing to service black people because hey, they're having a "black wedding"! The gayness here is a propert…

> It's a gay wedding because they're gay.

No, it's a same-sex wedding because the two people involved are of the same sex. There nothing inherently impossible about a homosexual marrying someone of the opposite sex, or a heterosexual marrying someone of the same sex. They are unlikely to want to do those things, of course, but they could if they did want to. (And, of course, many people are not exclusively homosexual or heterosexual!)

Millions (billions, if you consider the entire world population) of people believe that the institution of marriage is inherently something that happens between a man and a woman. Just like many people believe that marriage is inherently exclusive/monogamous, or inherently not permitted between close biological relatives, or inherently reserved to people above a certain age, or 1000 other restrictions that you or I may or may not agree with. Is it illegally discriminatory against people with siblings to refuse to bake a cake for a wedding between brother and sister? What about a polygamous Mormon marriage where the husband is taking his 17th wife, would refusing to service that event be illegal religious discrimination?

Re: The March of Dimes Syndrome

#90

Post by Georgelemental »

wtfwhateven wrote: post #79
Georgelemental wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you are business open to the public you should serve the public. The slippery slope is beyond obvious. Can a doctor refuse to treat gay patients? A lawyer refuse to represent gay clients? A professor refuse to teach gay students? If many businesses were doing that, that would be pretty bad, yeah. But the activist demands go far beyond that. Masterpiece Cakeshop and 303 Creative LLC weren't sued for refusing to s…

This cake shop refuses to make a cake that is pink and blue because trans people. You knew that as it's in the article you keep linking. If this person could legally refuse to serve LGBT people entirely he absolutely would.

[flagged]
Post reply on HN