Displaying decay at CMU II
Regarding Carnegie Mellon University's fourth annual Anti-Gravity Downhill Derby on April 18, where a student distastefully put herself on display as some sort of papal paradox: This serves as yet another example of liberal hypocrisy. When liberals agree with “the message,” they defend it as “freedom of expression,” but as soon as liberals disagree with “the message,” they dismiss it as “hatemongering.”
Just imagine if a conservative student were to mock gay marriage or Muslims as part of a university-sponsored event.
If there's any doubt as to the legitimacy of my remarks, please refer to the hue and cry over Chick-fil-A President and COO Dan Cathy's response to a reporter regarding his beliefs about gay marriage.
But fear not; I'm sure some liberal-minded person with a far more tolerant mind than my own will artfully explain to me how this young woman's sordid display should not be construed as “bigotry.”
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.