Thursday, December 11, 2014

Catholic American University Sends Gay Marriage Dissenters to Diversity Gulag

So, how shall I put this...

What the hell?!?!?!??!?!?!

This is so offensive, so stupid and so deranged and tyrannical, that it really  could have only been invented and developed on a North American university campus:

"An anti-harassment training session at a Catholic university in Wisconsin encouraged employees to report anyone they hear criticizing gay marriage to the school’s human-resources department."

(You with me so far-this is at a Catholic university, and it is "anti-harassment" to report your colleagues if they dare have a critical opinion about gay marriage. You must denounce them, and report to HR right away so that they can be properly re-educated at the local, State Diversity Gulag site. Let's continue....)

"A presentation at the Marquette University training featured a story about a fictional wheelchair-bound employee, “Harassed Hans,” who had been overhearing his co-workers Becky and Maria talk about “their opposition to same-sex marriage all week,” according to an article in the National Catholic Register."

(This is really too much. "Harassed Hans" is our fictional character! It is harassing to Hans that anyone dares dissent on gay marriage! Presumably, Hans needs to be wheelchair-bound to add to his victim credentials? Perhaps "Harassed Hans" is not just wheelchair bound, but also gay AND wheelchair bound? Perhaps he is wheelchair bound, gay, Jewish and black?!?! That would be totally awesome. Let's continue...)

“Hans is right to report Maria and Becky’s conversation,” the presentation stated, adding that he should do it “right away.”


So wait. Maybe "Hans" is wheelchair bound, gay, Jewish, black and German, maybe left-handed and lactose intolerant also???

That would be even more awesome.

Let's continue....

Even though Becky and Maria were only expressing their opinions and didn’t mean to offend, they could still be engaging in harassment."

(Fantastic. Their intention is irrelevant, as is their freedom of conscience. What could possibly be wrong with that? Their thoughts have been criminalized and must be punished. They were merely having a conversation, expressing opinion but that means they could be "harassing" someone. Hey, to total hell with the First Amendment-thoughts and opinion are harassment! Let's continue...)

"The complainant does not need to be involved in the conversation to be offended,” it continued. “Hans’ sexual orientation is also irrelevant; he does not need to be gay to be offended by his co-workers’ discussion of same-sex marriage.”

That's perfect!

"Harassed Hans" like the many celebrated complainants in Canada's "Human Rights" Tribunal Cases, do not actually need to be a direct victim of anything.

It is suffice (and ultimately quite profitable) to feel offended on behalf of some fragile, aggrieved victim group or another.)

I think the wording of this diktat is one of the most offensive things I have seen in print in some time.

Read this very carefully:

"he does not need to be gay to be offended by his co-workers’ discussion of same-sex marriage"

This is a license to persecute and prosecute anyone for their thoughts, to destroy lives in order to establish a victimhood pecking order, a sinister squelching of free speech to assuage the exquisite sensitivities of people who often can really dish it out but can't take any criticism, and to silence debate.

To "settle" the science, as it were. 

"he does not need to be gay to be offended by his co-workers’ discussion of same-sex marriage"

This is a terrifying statement and Americans should be ashamed, deeply ashamed that this type of totalitarian thought policing is being tolerated, in the name of tolerance on campuses of higher learning.

It's outrageous and pathetic but not unusual in this day and age.

"he does not need to be gay to be offended by his co-workers’ discussion of same-sex marriage"

Shame on Americans who don't resist this particularly odious form of tyranny in any way, shape or form. 

Unfortunately, you can't shame the shameless, but that's another story.