Bootstrap, is this true? You've gone over to the dark side?Anthony wrote: ↑Wed Jun 03, 2026 7:47 pm - 50% of all content on a daily basis on MN is taking place on that subforum with JohnH, bootstrap, sdzfan, me, and others posting consistently and talking/arguing about current political events. This is the context of the entire thread and the accusations of denouncing trump.
Demands to Denounce
-
ken_sylvania
- Posts: 2241
- Joined: Sat Sep 14, 2024 5:41 pm
- Affiliation: Mennonite
Re: Demands to Denounce
0 x
Re: Demands to Denounce
I don’t understand how participating in the politics form is herding the discussion from non-political forums. It’s less mucking out the chicken barn and more pooping in the barn yourself.
0 x
"Woe to those who make unjust laws, to those who issue oppressive decrees, to deprive the poor of their rights and withhold justice from the oppressed of my people, making widows their prey and robbing the fatherless."
-- Isaiah 10:1-2
-- Isaiah 10:1-2
Re: Demands to Denounce
I grew so weary of people adjudicating if comments belong in the politics forum or not that I start all threads there just in case.
1 x
Re: Demands to Denounce
Here's the problem I have: this is an account of what I am apparently thinking or feeling or saying, and I can't imagine thinking or feeling or saying those things. So ... someone else owns my inner thought life, and claims are true even if nobody can find posts that demonstrate that?
How would you feel if we did that to you? Do I get to speak for what goes on in your inner life? Or are my thoughts and feelings and writings the things that I actually think and feel and write?
0 x
1. Are we discussing the topic? Good.
2. Are we going around and around in a fight? Let's stop doing that.
3. Is there some serious wrongdoing or relational injury? Let's address that, probably not in public and certainly not for show.
2. Are we going around and around in a fight? Let's stop doing that.
3. Is there some serious wrongdoing or relational injury? Let's address that, probably not in public and certainly not for show.
Re: Demands to Denounce
No I never joined the politics subforum. JohnH, have you?ken_sylvania wrote: ↑Wed Jun 03, 2026 10:15 pmBootstrap, is this true? You've gone over to the dark side?Anthony wrote: ↑Wed Jun 03, 2026 7:47 pm - 50% of all content on a daily basis on MN is taking place on that subforum with JohnH, bootstrap, sdzfan, me, and others posting consistently and talking/arguing about current political events. This is the context of the entire thread and the accusations of denouncing trump.
0 x
1. Are we discussing the topic? Good.
2. Are we going around and around in a fight? Let's stop doing that.
3. Is there some serious wrongdoing or relational injury? Let's address that, probably not in public and certainly not for show.
2. Are we going around and around in a fight? Let's stop doing that.
3. Is there some serious wrongdoing or relational injury? Let's address that, probably not in public and certainly not for show.
Re: Demands to Denounce
Again, I would like to see at least one clear example of this.
Do you think there are times that you do support and denounce him? Do you think there are times you take criticism of Trump personally?
0 x
1. Are we discussing the topic? Good.
2. Are we going around and around in a fight? Let's stop doing that.
3. Is there some serious wrongdoing or relational injury? Let's address that, probably not in public and certainly not for show.
2. Are we going around and around in a fight? Let's stop doing that.
3. Is there some serious wrongdoing or relational injury? Let's address that, probably not in public and certainly not for show.
Re: Demands to Denounce
Isn't that insisting the other person doesn't mean what they say they mean, and you should "own" them, making sure they cannot discuss the point because they have to fend off the personal attack instead?JohnH wrote: ↑Wed Jun 03, 2026 2:08 pmWhen it's about a particular action or policy, it seems quite appropriate to ask if their opposition is to that action or policy or merely opposition to the person doing it.ohio jones wrote: ↑Wed Jun 03, 2026 1:42 pm There is a degree of difference between denouncing a person and denouncing their actions, of course. But as a way of shutting down or deflecting discussion, they are very similar. When someone calls into question the actions of a political figure and the predictable response is "but did you denounce the other party when they did something or other years ago?" it's just a descent into the morass of political squabbling. There are better ways of engaging the subject.
0 x
1. Are we discussing the topic? Good.
2. Are we going around and around in a fight? Let's stop doing that.
3. Is there some serious wrongdoing or relational injury? Let's address that, probably not in public and certainly not for show.
2. Are we going around and around in a fight? Let's stop doing that.
3. Is there some serious wrongdoing or relational injury? Let's address that, probably not in public and certainly not for show.
Re: Demands to Denounce
I think your timing is terrible and this is probably not the appropriate time to be asking these questions.
1 x
Re: Demands to Denounce
Part of my issue with this conversation is the way the word “denounce” is being used.
The word “denounce” means “to publicly and strongly condemn, criticize, or accuse someone or something as being wrong, evil, or blameworthy.”
“Publicly” is the key here. I haven’t seen anyone on this forum demand that another participant make some sort of public statement denouncing Trump.
What I do see is the word “denounce” being used to collapse together very different things:
What I generally see happening is that one group is criticizing Trump and another group is defending him. That’s normal.
What adds to my confusion is that some people who have spent years defending Trump or arguing against his critics bristle at being described as “Trump supporters.”
To me, “supporter” does not mean “uncritical sycophant.” Most people do not agree with everything a politician they support says or does. You can support a politician, vote for a politician, or defend a politician while still criticizing them.
So I wonder if some of what is being described as pressure to “denounce” Trump is actually the experience of reading criticism of Trump or disagreement with your defense of him.
So I want to be clear with the people I argue with here: your humanity is not up for debate. Your right to have an opinion is not up for debate. We are all created in the image of God.
I also have the right to my opinions. I have the right to oppose the President. I have the right to criticize his actions and policies. I have the right to disagree with arguments made in his defense.
So yes, I will argue with you. I will disagree with you. I may even think your arguments are wrong.
But my belief that you are wrong has no bearing whatsoever on my belief that you possess inherent worth and dignity as a human being.
All of us are more than our political beliefs and opinions.
The word “denounce” means “to publicly and strongly condemn, criticize, or accuse someone or something as being wrong, evil, or blameworthy.”
“Publicly” is the key here. I haven’t seen anyone on this forum demand that another participant make some sort of public statement denouncing Trump.
What I do see is the word “denounce” being used to collapse together very different things:
- Criticism of Trump
- Disagreement with Trump
- Opposition to a policy
- Calling him immoral
- Refusing to defend him
- Rejecting him entirely
What I generally see happening is that one group is criticizing Trump and another group is defending him. That’s normal.
What adds to my confusion is that some people who have spent years defending Trump or arguing against his critics bristle at being described as “Trump supporters.”
To me, “supporter” does not mean “uncritical sycophant.” Most people do not agree with everything a politician they support says or does. You can support a politician, vote for a politician, or defend a politician while still criticizing them.
So I wonder if some of what is being described as pressure to “denounce” Trump is actually the experience of reading criticism of Trump or disagreement with your defense of him.
So I want to be clear with the people I argue with here: your humanity is not up for debate. Your right to have an opinion is not up for debate. We are all created in the image of God.
I also have the right to my opinions. I have the right to oppose the President. I have the right to criticize his actions and policies. I have the right to disagree with arguments made in his defense.
So yes, I will argue with you. I will disagree with you. I may even think your arguments are wrong.
But my belief that you are wrong has no bearing whatsoever on my belief that you possess inherent worth and dignity as a human being.
All of us are more than our political beliefs and opinions.
2 x
"Woe to those who make unjust laws, to those who issue oppressive decrees, to deprive the poor of their rights and withhold justice from the oppressed of my people, making widows their prey and robbing the fatherless."
-- Isaiah 10:1-2
-- Isaiah 10:1-2
Re: Demands to Denounce
The source of your confusion is that you consider anyone who worn make a blanket denunciation of Trump to be a “Trump supporter”.
This is the problem with polarised American politics today.
Calling me, for example, a “Trump supporter” is both an act of attempting to dehumanise me and also an outright lie. Yet you keep doing it.
This is the problem with polarised American politics today.
Calling me, for example, a “Trump supporter” is both an act of attempting to dehumanise me and also an outright lie. Yet you keep doing it.
1 x