Site Search:
 
Speak Korean Now!
Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!
Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Was gunman in Oregon shootings targeting a particular group?

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Rteacher



Joined: 23 May 2005
Location: Western MA, USA

PostPosted: Fri Oct 02, 2015 3:52 pm    Post subject: Was gunman in Oregon shootings targeting a particular group? Reply with quote

Maybe he was just taking a survey before he shot everyone - as many times as he could ... http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/03/us/chris-harper-mercer-umpqua-community-college-shooting.html?_r=0

Here's one defensive article ... http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/10/02/before-you-claim-the-ucc-shooting-was-about-christian-persecution-consider-all-the-evidence/

Here's a more "common man" view ... [/url]http://nypost.com/2015/10/01/oregon-gunman-singled-out-christians-during-rampage/[url][/url]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
CentralCali



Joined: 17 May 2007

PostPosted: Fri Oct 02, 2015 5:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nothing proves his motive. The dude was not rational. Irrational people do not need rational bases to do irrational things.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Swartz



Joined: 19 Dec 2014

PostPosted: Fri Oct 02, 2015 8:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, he singled out Christians. Since the 1960s (and before) mainstream western culture has socialized many young people into believing that Christianity is rooted in evil and intellectually backwards, which has caused many to rebel against it (though in reality, this is just a distractive measure). In my younger days, when I was more skewed by that kind of top-down propaganda, I fell into that line of thinking that to be a Christian was to be backwards and stupid. I’m not a Christian, and though I think it often does more harm than good at the societal level, I can certainly appreciate its ability to ground people and promote virtues that are exceedingly lacking in modern western culture. Hence why it is constantly attacked.

What this incident and the multitude of others highlight is the endemic sickness of contemporary western culture, our acceptance of industry-approved psychotropic drug use among youth, divisive media-induced race-baiting, the collapse of family structures and social cohesion, and our inability to dismantle the system that created such pervasive dysfunction. There has been a system in place for the last 50 years or so which created these conditions, and it has finally come to a head.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Leon



Joined: 31 May 2010

PostPosted: Sat Oct 03, 2015 4:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Swartz wrote:
Yes, he singled out Christians. Since the 1960s (and before) mainstream western culture has socialized many young people into believing that Christianity is rooted in evil and intellectually backwards, which has caused many to rebel against it (though in reality, this is just a distractive measure). In my younger days, when I was more skewed by that kind of top-down propaganda, I fell into that line of thinking that to be a Christian was to be backwards and stupid. I’m not a Christian, and though I think it often does more harm than good at the societal level, I can certainly appreciate its ability to ground people and promote virtues that are exceedingly lacking in modern western culture. Hence why it is constantly attacked.

What this incident and the multitude of others highlight is the endemic sickness of contemporary western culture, our acceptance of industry-approved psychotropic drug use among youth, divisive media-induced race-baiting, the collapse of family structures and social cohesion, and our inability to dismantle the system that created such pervasive dysfunction. There has been a system in place for the last 50 years or so which created these conditions, and it has finally come to a head.


So much text, yet misses the completely obvious point. Also, the idea that Christianity is under attack in this country is absurd. It used to have much more influence/control over society, and now people are viewing the loss of that influence as an attack punctuated by sporadic attacks against Christians like this one that also happen against other groups.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Swartz



Joined: 19 Dec 2014

PostPosted: Sat Oct 03, 2015 12:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Leon wrote:
Swartz wrote:
Yes, he singled out Christians. Since the 1960s (and before) mainstream western culture has socialized many young people into believing that Christianity is rooted in evil and intellectually backwards, which has caused many to rebel against it (though in reality, this is just a distractive measure). In my younger days, when I was more skewed by that kind of top-down propaganda, I fell into that line of thinking that to be a Christian was to be backwards and stupid. I’m not a Christian, and though I think it often does more harm than good at the societal level, I can certainly appreciate its ability to ground people and promote virtues that are exceedingly lacking in modern western culture. Hence why it is constantly attacked.

What this incident and the multitude of others highlight is the endemic sickness of contemporary western culture, our acceptance of industry-approved psychotropic drug use among youth, divisive media-induced race-baiting, the collapse of family structures and social cohesion, and our inability to dismantle the system that created such pervasive dysfunction. There has been a system in place for the last 50 years or so which created these conditions, and it has finally come to a head.


So much text, yet misses the completely obvious point. Also, the idea that Christianity is under attack in this country is absurd. It used to have much more influence/control over society, and now people are viewing the loss of that influence as an attack punctuated by sporadic attacks against Christians like this one that also happen against other groups.


Leon, it seems that in your rush to oppose me and rebalance the (typically depreciated) logical equilibrium on here, you failed to make a coherent statement.

1) Was the “completely obvious point” I missed that attacks like this “also happen against other groups” or was it something else? Either way, consider revising.

2) If it is absurd that Christianity’s “loss of influence” could be a result of it having been attacked (read: not “under attack”, though bonus points for the dramatic spin), presenting an alternative theory will help you with future argumentation; i.e., you might explain to your audience the chance, virtuous rise of atheistic humanism in its place. Again, not a Christian myself and I have my own theories, but wanted to give you a second opportunity to clarify your statements before proceeding.

Perhaps you would like to try again?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
trueblue



Joined: 15 Jun 2014
Location: In between the lines

PostPosted: Sat Oct 03, 2015 4:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
What this incident and the multitude of others highlight is the endemic sickness of contemporary western culture, our acceptance of industry-approved psychotropic drug use among youth, divisive media-induced race-baiting, the collapse of family structures and social cohesion, and our inability to dismantle the system that created such pervasive dysfunction. There has been a system in place for the last 50 years or so which created these conditions, and it has finally come to a head.


It seems Swartz continues to point out the obvious, but, per regulation, very few here seem to acknowledge.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
actionjackson



Joined: 30 Dec 2007
Location: Any place I'm at

PostPosted: Sat Oct 03, 2015 5:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

An account from someone in the room seems to think it wasn't about targeting Christians at all.

Quote:
McGowan told family members that the gunman didn't specifically target Christians but asked them about faith. The shooter, apparently planning to die during the massacre, told students: "I'll see you soon" or "I'll meet you soon."

"The shooter would call a person: 'You, stand up,'" Salas said, recalling what her son told her. "And then he would ask them if they were a Christian, knew God, or had religion. And it wasn't like it was stated on TV. It wasn't about that he was just trying to pinpoint Christians, no."

The shooter would tell them it wouldn't hurt.

"And then he would shoot them," she said.

The gunman deliberately picked some people to shoot, but also sprayed bullets randomly, he told his mother.

http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2015/10/gunman_in_oregon_college_shoot.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Leon



Joined: 31 May 2010

PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 2:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Swartz wrote:
Leon wrote:
Swartz wrote:
Yes, he singled out Christians. Since the 1960s (and before) mainstream western culture has socialized many young people into believing that Christianity is rooted in evil and intellectually backwards, which has caused many to rebel against it (though in reality, this is just a distractive measure). In my younger days, when I was more skewed by that kind of top-down propaganda, I fell into that line of thinking that to be a Christian was to be backwards and stupid. I’m not a Christian, and though I think it often does more harm than good at the societal level, I can certainly appreciate its ability to ground people and promote virtues that are exceedingly lacking in modern western culture. Hence why it is constantly attacked.

What this incident and the multitude of others highlight is the endemic sickness of contemporary western culture, our acceptance of industry-approved psychotropic drug use among youth, divisive media-induced race-baiting, the collapse of family structures and social cohesion, and our inability to dismantle the system that created such pervasive dysfunction. There has been a system in place for the last 50 years or so which created these conditions, and it has finally come to a head.


So much text, yet misses the completely obvious point. Also, the idea that Christianity is under attack in this country is absurd. It used to have much more influence/control over society, and now people are viewing the loss of that influence as an attack punctuated by sporadic attacks against Christians like this one that also happen against other groups.


Leon, it seems that in your rush to oppose me and rebalance the (typically depreciated) logical equilibrium on here, you failed to make a coherent statement.

1) Was the “completely obvious point” I missed that attacks like this “also happen against other groups” or was it something else? Either way, consider revising.

2) If it is absurd that Christianity’s “loss of influence” could be a result of it having been attacked (read: not “under attack”, though bonus points for the dramatic spin), presenting an alternative theory will help you with future argumentation; i.e., you might explain to your audience the chance, virtuous rise of atheistic humanism in its place. Again, not a Christian myself and I have my own theories, but wanted to give you a second opportunity to clarify your statements before proceeding.

Perhaps you would like to try again?


Trust me, I am not worried about opposing or rebalancing you. Since you still are missing the point, I will lead you there. Do other countries have mental illnesses an prescribe guns? Do other western countries have changing family structures and social norms? Do other western countries have very liberal gun laws? Do other western countries have mass shooting events of the scale and frequency that we do?

As to Christianity, there are ebs and flows to it, but it still maintains massive influence. Social groups almost always react poorly to losing power, so this is where this paranoia and defensiveness stems from, I guess.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Swartz



Joined: 19 Dec 2014

PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 5:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I wasn’t asking you to lead me to a point, Leon; I was asking you to make one. And as far as I can tell, you have still failed to do so. Let me help you out. My intention is not to argue with Leon or anyone else, but to highlight how disconnected from reality the liberal mind is.

I say “acceptance of industry-approved psychotropic drug use among youth” … Leon says “mental illness”. Seeing how the vast majority (if not all) of these mass shooters have been drug addicts (typically via prescribed psychotropics with labels warning that suicidal/homicidal thoughts may occur – i.e., CAUSING mental illness), “mental illness” in itself may not be the most apt description.

I say “collapse of family structures” … Leon says “changing family structures”. Because it’s too soon to know the benefits of out of wedlock births, single parent homes, and skyrocketing divorce rates, right? We should all be able to appreciate that bit of Newspeak.

Leon reformats and minimizes these concepts because the “completely obvious” thing he wants to blame is guns. If I were to ask Leon if his solution would be to take away guns, I’m guessing he would say “no”, that it would be best to make them more difficult to get. Sounds reasonable, right? In liberal utopian theory, sure. But in reality this would just make guns more difficult for responsible citizens to purchase through legal channels, giving criminals, the government, and the criminal class it is now importing, a leg up.

Liberals are easily herded into line on the gun issue because the media has formatted a Pavlovian reaction inside of them for whenever something like this happens; while day-to-day they are able to easily brush off headlines like the following:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-for-second-straight-weekend-more-than-50-shot-in-chicago-20150928-story.html

I wonder how many of those people purchased their guns legally. Care to guess, Leon? Actual crime stats paint a better-rounded picture of reality. The liberal utopia isn’t coming, and it isn’t going to come if/when more restrictions are placed on guns. If you are unable to see the big picture and prone to the NPR Pavlovian reaction mentioned above, try harder. There are a lot of people in Europe now wishing they hadn’t given up their right to own firearms; that’s a lesson a society shouldn’t have to learn more than once.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Leon



Joined: 31 May 2010

PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 5:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Swartz wrote:
I wasn’t asking you to lead me to a point, Leon; I was asking you to make one. And as far as I can tell, you have still failed to do so. Let me help you out. My intention is not to argue with Leon or anyone else, but to highlight how disconnected from reality the liberal mind is.

I say “acceptance of industry-approved psychotropic drug use among youth” … Leon says “mental illness”. Seeing how the vast majority (if not all) of these mass shooters have been drug addicts (typically via prescribed psychotropics with labels warning that suicidal/homicidal thoughts may occur – i.e., CAUSING mental illness), “mental illness” in itself may not be the most apt description.

I say “collapse of family structures” … Leon says “changing family structures”. Because it’s too soon to know the benefits of out of wedlock births, single parent homes, and skyrocketing divorce rates, right? We should all be able to appreciate that bit of Newspeak.

Leon reformats and minimizes these concepts because the “completely obvious” thing he wants to blame is guns. If I were to ask Leon if his solution would be to take away guns, I’m guessing he would say “no”, that it would be best to make them more difficult to get. Sounds reasonable, right? In liberal utopian theory, sure. But in reality this would just make guns more difficult for responsible citizens to purchase through legal channels, giving criminals, the government, and the criminal class it is now importing, a leg up.

Liberals are easily herded into line on the gun issue because the media has formatted a Pavlovian reaction inside of them for whenever something like this happens; while day-to-day they are able to easily brush off headlines like the following:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-for-second-straight-weekend-more-than-50-shot-in-chicago-20150928-story.html

I wonder how many of those people purchased their guns legally. Care to guess, Leon? Actual crime stats paint a better-rounded picture of reality. The liberal utopia isn’t coming, and it isn’t going to come if/when more restrictions are placed on guns. If you are unable to see the big picture and prone to the NPR Pavlovian reaction mentioned above, try harder. There are a lot of people in Europe now wishing they hadn’t given up their right to own firearms; that’s a lesson a society shouldn’t have to learn more than once.


Last sentence, first paragraph- pot kettle black. As I mentioned before you are quite good at sounding intelligent. As you are quite sure that I am a liberal (I'm not even sure what this word means to be honest, it's meaning has been severely distorted on this board) what are you identifying as?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Swartz



Joined: 19 Dec 2014

PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 5:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Anti-Liberal.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Leon



Joined: 31 May 2010

PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 5:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Swartz wrote:
Anti-Liberal.


That's kind of a sad thing to be, don't you think? To have to define yourself as against something rather than for something. When you say liberal what do you mean? American style liberal, classic liberal, liberal world order, libertarian, what? It is an extremely imprecise word.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sligo



Joined: 15 Oct 2008

PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 6:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pro-choice movement - Religious types block it due to old words in books men with beards wrote thousands of years ago.

Stem cell research - see above

Gay rights - see above

Women's rights - see above

Free speech - see above

All of the above are hamperring the progress of society. People are dying due to lack of medical progress. People are being discriminated against (sometimes violently or even lethally) due to words written in book from a forgotten age. Religion does more harm to society than any gunman can. I am against private ownership of guns, but i would see religion outlawed before guns!

People can be ethical without religion!

Disclaimer: what the guy did was wrong, and my sympathies go to the families of the victims. These shootings are harming society, but nowhere near as much as religion is!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Swartz



Joined: 19 Dec 2014

PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 6:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Leon wrote:
Swartz wrote:
Anti-Liberal.


That's kind of a sad thing to be, don't you think? To have to define yourself as against something rather than for something. When you say liberal what do you mean? American style liberal, classic liberal, liberal world order, libertarian, what? It is an extremely imprecise word.


I was being a bit tongue in cheek. But I believe in many things, Leon – my own people and culture first and foremost (as horrible as that sounds these days). I don’t plan to stay long and understand this forum is limited to a small, tight-knit group and a few of Steelrails’ socks, but I’m speaking of neoliberalism as culturally defined since about the 1960s, a system that is currently crashing down due to it not being based on reality or human nature; not classical liberalism or any other, though I appreciate various liberal principles and would happily embrace them myself if I believed the utopia mentioned prior was attainable. I hope I can provide a more sufficient answer to that question in the future, but will leave it there for now.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sirius black



Joined: 04 Jun 2010

PostPosted: Tue Oct 13, 2015 12:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just my observation but individuals and societies/countries change religion to fit their cultural world view.
I think it would be interesting to see if a people changed their religion either by choice or conquest, that the new religion is changed to fit their culture.
The tribes of the middle east were warlike before Islam and remained so after islam, however, the Malay who were relatively peaceful before Islam are the more peaceful practitioners of Islam.
Europe were warlike when they were invaded by the Romans and after conversion to Christianity remained warlike. Up till WW2 Europe had a war between one or more of its countries every generation pretty much for several hundred years prior.
However, the peaceful tribes of northern and sub Saharan Africa who converted remained peaceful.

As for the shooter. America specifically seems to have in its DNA a violent thread in its middle class. Columbine, Sandy Hook, etc, most of these are committed by middle class people and also over things that are considered trivial. No other industrialized country (or for that matter developing country) middle class is even close to being as violent.

Poor people committing crime like we see in the inner cities is normal for all societies throughout history. America's middle class is uniquely violent. We always attribute to some 'nut job' but it seems much deeper than that. The term 'going postal' is really for normal people.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2018 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International