delusions of grandeur Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 And how is this different from religious summer camps? They allow gheys to join? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeeR Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 Wow, Beck is a special brand of a-hole. Really a sick, sick cuff. Big news there. Typical for extremists, esp those who count on media attention for their continued "career." And actually extremists hardly have the market cornered. Several huddlers have repeatedly reminded us that tragic deaths are funny I don't get having a "political camp" either, but calling is creepy sounds like an over-the-top assumption. And it is irrelevant regardless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 They allow gheys to join? OK, so there's that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 (edited) Just curious where you draw the line though. When I was in HS, they had week long summer camp sponsored by VFW where one kid from each school was chosen to go and we sort of acted out a mini government. Sort of a Jr. Senators thing. By the end of the week, there were elections and such. Besides being pretty fun, we learned a bit and got to put something on our college application. But that was certainly a youth camp about politics. Not party driven, mind you, but one could argue it was at least Nationalistic to a degree since it trumpeted government as it is in the US. Obviously a far cry from any major "programming", but then I wonder how hardcore the camp in Norway really was. Whether, in addition to being very insensitive, the Hitler Youth comment was also completely and totally off-base. And how is this different from religious summer camps? seems to me there is a pretty clear difference between teaching civics, and something hosted by a political party's "youth wing". it's certainly true that basic civics and history lessons, in the hands of certain teachers or certain curricula, can become a form of indoctrination themselves. that's indeed a problem, and drawing the line can be difficult and subjective. but wherever you draw the line, I feel 100% secure in saying that to my mind a youth wing sponsored by a political party is always going to be on the wrong side of it. Edited July 27, 2011 by Azazello1313 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 seems to me there is a pretty clear difference between teaching civics, and something hosted by a political party's "youth wing". it's certainly true that basic civics and history lessons, in the hands of certain teachers or certain curricula, can become a form of indoctrination themselves. that's indeed a problem, and drawing the line can be difficult and subjective. but wherever you draw the line, I feel 100% secure in saying that to my mind a youth wing sponsored by a political party is always going to be on the wrong side of it. And religious camps? How is that not indoctrination? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 And religious camps? How is that not indoctrination? I'm sure some religious camps could be described that way. so could boy scouts, or any sort of nature camp, or just about anything if you want to stretch the definition. none of that strikes me as being in any way comparable to something sponsored by the "youth wing" of a political party, which is just plain creepy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 Didn't Beck tell all the tea-bagger parents to bring their kids to his tea-bagger rallies? That's why Fox got rid of him, Beck was a closeted liberal Muslim all along. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 a youth wing sponsored by a political party is always going to be on the wrong side of it. What about Young Republicans? While I disagree with them, I don't see why the Republicans shouldn't have a young members organization. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 (edited) What about Young Republicans? While I disagree with them, I don't see why the Republicans shouldn't have a young members organization. isn't that targeted at college kids? edit to add: The Young Republicans is an organization for members of the Republican Party of the United States between the ages of 18 and 40 if that's what this norway camp was, then no big deal. the article said "teens and 20s", which is vague. sorta got the impression there were more school-age kids, but if it's voting age "kids" there's obviously not much to complain about. Edited July 27, 2011 by Azazello1313 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 I'm sure some religious camps could be described that way. so could boy scouts, or any sort of nature camp, or just about anything if you want to stretch the definition. none of that strikes me as being in any way comparable to something sponsored by the "youth wing" of a political party, which is just plain creepy. No need to make a point of including obvious stretches like nature camps to minimize the similarities between religious camps and political camps. Both indoctrinate a belief system regarding how people should govern themselves. Both preach ideology. So, what truly is the difference? Oh, I forgot a church should never be confused with a government or political party. Despite the fact that the Vatican City is actually a sovereign state and the line between religion and politics in the middle east is completely non existent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 My reading leads me to believe these political youth camps are sposnsored by many of their poilitcal parties, the one that was the subject of the shooting spree is apprently the best/most organized/most popular. That's Norway's business so I don't think there's anything to complain about. I'd be much more in favor of my kids going to a political youth camp than seeing another McDonald's/apple/x-box commercial if indoctrination was the concern. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 No need to make a point of including obvious stretches like nature camps to minimize the similarities between religious camps and political camps. Both indoctrinate a belief system regarding how people should govern themselves. Both preach ideology. So, what truly is the difference? Oh, I forgot a church should never be confused with a government or political party. Despite the fact that the Vatican City is actually a sovereign state and the line between religion and politics in the middle east is completely non existent. you're starting to make about as much sense as moneymakers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeeR Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 That's usually what you get when detlef gets on his religion-hate tangents. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiegie Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 isn't that targeted at college kids? edit to add: The Young Republicans is an organization for members of the Republican Party of the United States between the ages of 18 and 40 if that's what this norway camp was, then no big deal. the article said "teens and 20s", which is vague. sorta got the impression there were more school-age kids, but if it's voting age "kids" there's obviously not much to complain about. here you go: http://www.gopyouthconvention.org/home.html they take them from age 15 (the participants at the Norway camp were between 14-25 years old) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 here you go: http://www.gopyouthconvention.org/home.html they take them from age 15 (the participants at the Norway camp were between 14-25 years old) The first thing when I saw this post was how the Hitler youth camps are the same as the GOP youth camps and the Norway camps. Because quite obviously, a youth camp for politics is exactly the same as Hitler . . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 here you go: http://www.gopyouthconvention.org/home.html they take them from age 15 (the participants at the Norway camp were between 14-25 years old) well then as I've said several times already, I don't like it. I would certainly never send my kids to anything like it, it just seems inappropriate to me. however, I'll send 'em for some good jesus indoctrination at church camp, because of course that's the exact same thing and I am a disgusting hypocrite. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiegie Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 well then as I've said several times already, I don't like it. you disappoint me--I was hoping you were going to argue that 15 year-olds attending something like this is different than 14 year-olds attending something like this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 you disappoint me--I was hoping you were going to argue that 15 year-olds attending something like this is different than 14 year-olds attending something like this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukon Cornelius Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 you disappoint me--I was hoping you were going to argue that 15 year-olds attending something like this is different than 14 year-olds attending something like this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 you're starting to make about as much sense as moneymakers. That's usually what you get when detlef gets on his religion-hate tangents. How disappointing. Really, is that all you have? Seriously guys, if it's that obvious, why not take the 30 seconds it must take to make the obvious distinction between one group gathering a bunch of kids and feeding them political ideology and another gathering a bunch of kids and indoctrinating them into what they expect to be a lifelong devotion of some deity that hands down nuggets of truth to live by? Which is, well, also ideology but just ideology that claims divine word. So that's the difference? One is a camp that preaches ideology and the other is one that preaches ideology mixed in with fantastic stories that we can't confirm? Great. I can see how the first is really creepy and the other is as pure as new snow. Honestly. I can get believing in religion. But what I don't get is thinking that one of the above is some creepy brainwashing and the other is above reproach. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 you disappoint me--I was hoping you were going to argue that 15 year-olds attending something like this is different than 14 year-olds attending something like this He will, when he's had a chance to think about it a little. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusions of grandeur Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 (edited) Honestly. I can get believing in religion. But what I don't get is thinking that one of the above is some creepy brainwashing and the other is above reproach. Who is saying either of those things? It's entirely arbitrary whether you support or oppose a particular group, or think one is okay and the other isn't. That's not really a debateable premise because it's completely dependent upon perspective. The only real distinction to your examples is that people tend to respect freedom of religion a bit more than they do force-fed ideology... Other than that, there is no difference between virtually all groups, because by definition, they all have interests, agendas, goals, etc. that they seek to serve, or else they wouldn't be groups... And of course they frequently feature opposition by some outsiders So I'm not sure I understand what your point is? All groups have agendas (some more good-natured than others), but it's up to you which ones you think are acceptable or not for you (and I guess in this case your kids too).. Edited July 27, 2011 by delusions of granduer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 How disappointing. Really, is that all you have? Seriously guys, if it's that obvious, why not take the 30 seconds it must take to make the obvious distinction between one group gathering a bunch of kids and feeding them political ideology and another gathering a bunch of kids and indoctrinating them into what they expect to be a lifelong devotion of some deity that hands down nuggets of truth to live by? Which is, well, also ideology but just ideology that claims divine word. So that's the difference? One is a camp that preaches ideology and the other is one that preaches ideology mixed in with fantastic stories that we can't confirm? Great. I can see how the first is really creepy and the other is as pure as new snow. Honestly. I can get believing in religion. But what I don't get is thinking that one of the above is some creepy brainwashing and the other is above reproach. political parties are by their very nature adversarial with one another. the whole point is to inculcate an us-vs-them mentality. they are to some degree a necessary evil in a democratic society, but these are not patterns of thought I like to see immature minds being pushed into. they are also not the sort of things they emphasize in any church camp I am personally familiar with. but of course you're the expert when it comes to what religion is really all about, so I guess I should just shut up and listen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 The only real distinction to your examples is that people tend to respect freedom of religion a bit more than they do force-fed ideology... Other than that, there is no difference between virtually all groups, because by definition, they all have interests, agendas, goals, etc. that they seek to serve, or else they wouldn't be groups... And of course they frequently feature opposition by some outsiders So I'm not sure I understand what your point is? All groups have agendas (some more good-natured than others), but it's up to you which ones you think are acceptable or not for you (and I guess in this case your kids too).. His point is twisted in the part-sentence I have bolded above. He's saying there really isn't any difference between Bible camp and a camp run by a political party, since both involve indoctrination of some kind. You appear to be saying that's not the case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 Who is saying either of those things? It's entirely arbitrary whether you support or oppose a particular group, or think one is okay and the other isn't. That's not really a debateable premise because it's completely dependent upon perspective. The only real distinction to your examples is that people tend to respect freedom of religion a bit more than they do force-fed ideology... Other than that, there is no difference between virtually all groups, because by definition, they all have interests, agendas, goals, etc. that they seek to serve, or else they wouldn't be groups... So I'm not sure I understand what your point is? All groups have agendas (some more good-natured than others), but it's up to you which ones you think are acceptable or not for you (and I guess in this case your kids too).. Well, apparently Azz thinks any political youth group is "creepy". In other words, he thinks it's creepy to teach a bunch of kids political ideology regardless of whether or not it's consistent with his political beliefs. And I get that and respect that it's not just an issue he has with a political youth groups that preach a belief that he's not into but with them in general. So it's not dependent upon perspective. Either you think kids should be gathered at summer camp and fed ideology or you don't. And to assume that it's cool to do so when it comes to religion but not when it comes to political parties assumes that one is above debate and the other is not. But here's the thing. Neither are. Not only are there those of us who are actually opposed to religion in general. There are even more who are opposed to the specific teachings of any number of specific religions even if they believe in another. In other words, it's basically the same as political parties. So, if it's somehow "creepy" to start kids down the path of democrat or GOP or labor party early on. Why is it also not "creepy" to start them down the path of any single religion early? And I'm not saying that parents shouldn't be able to put their kids in some religious camp if they think it's important. They're their kids, they can teach them as they wish. I'm just saying that it's no different than a liberal starting their kid down that road by putting them in a similar camp. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.