Valedictorian Rips Up Preapproved Speech, Recites Prayer Instead (page 17)

Marvin Shilmer

-

“Marvin: I think you are confusing two different things. Whatever the motivation for someone doing something is very different from the accomplishment that results from the motivation.”

Simon,

Since I’ve not suggested an accomplishment is necessarily a consequent to a particular motivation then I fail to see why you think I’ve confused these two different things.

As you say, and I agree, motivations are personal. But so long as humans have psyche and society then learning what compels people is important to understanding humanity and improving human society. This is why it’s important to know what makes people tick, and why it’s offensive to me when someone suggests we should sit through speeches a speaker does not own. When an audience decides to sit for the speech of a valedictorian—or anyone else—they are being treated dishonestly if the speaker is pontificating something they do not own.

Marvin Shilmer

Vidiot

Simon - "If he'd stood up and recited a 'Soliloquy to the Sphagetti Monster' would that have been as 'awesome'?"

Tres awesome, actually.

Funny as hell, too.

Our pasta, who art in a colander, draining be your noodles. Thy noodle come, Thy sauce be yum, on top some grated parmesan. Give us this day our garlic bread, and forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trample on our lawns. And lead us not into vegetarianism, but deliver us some pizza, for thine is the meatball, the onion, and the bay leaves, forever and ever. R'Amen.

Simon

When someone works hard to accomplish a monumental feat I want to know what compelled them to be who and what they are to that point in their life. What they share I may agree or disagree with. But I want to know regardless.

Since I’ve not suggested an accomplishment is necessarily a consequent to a particular motivation then I fail to see why you think I’ve confused these two different things.

Yeah, you flip and flop away Marvin.

Why do you care what someone's motivation is if it is of no consequence?

Seems kind of dumb to me.

"Hey, I'd best waste a hour listening to this guy talk because it is of no relevence whatsoever but by sitting here people might think I'm intelligent !"

Simon

Yes, at least the Sphagetti Monster prayer is original, interesting and humerous.

Christians could learn a lot from it ...

Marvin Shilmer

-

“Marvin, what's the point?”

slimboyfat,

My point is not singular.

1. It’s disgusting to me that I’d be invited to listen to a speech that’s anything other than precisely what that person wants to say.

2. It’s unhelpful for a person to preach something they don’t honestly believe themselves.

3. It’s helpful to listen to people express what compels them to do as they have.

4. Whether we agree or disagree with what a person says is immaterial to what we can learn by them saying whatever they say.

5. In US public schools it’s inappropriate for school authorities to invite religious speech or to approve religious speech by a student. But it is not inappropriate for a student to speak honestly for themselves when they’ve been invited to speak for themselves. The US Constitution is deemed to prohibit the former but not the latter. This is why neither the school authorities nor the valedictorian at issue have been or will be held civilly or criminally liable for the particular speech at issue.

6. It’s frightening to see people react narrow-mindedly to what is no more than a young man expressing himself honestly about what he thinks is a motivation of his. We should be glad that any young person honestly expresses what they think, and then use that knowledge to help advance human society.

Marvin Shilmer

-

“Why do you care what someone's motivation is if it is of no consequence?”

Simon,

If motivations were of no consequence then I wouldn’t care about motivations.

But I do care about motivations.

I care what motivates people because what motivates people is of great consequence to human society.

Marvin Shilmer

-

“You are defending someone saying the lords prayer based on "they shouldn't say what the authorities approve" when the lord prayer is, to those who believe it, the ultimate reciting of an approved text by the ultimate authority.

“Can't you see the hypocrisy or the flaw in your argument?”

Simon,

It is not my position that a person who speaks publicly should not say what authorities approve.

It is my position that a person who speaks publicly should say what they honestly hold.

Hence if a student is asked to give a speech that is approved by authorities but is not owned by the student then it would be dishonest for that student to give that speech. Worse, were the student to give this approved speech he or she would be lying to the audience.

When I listen to achievers an important aspect to me is what compelled the person to be who and what they are. It’s disgusting for me to think anyone would have me listen to a speech expressing anything other than what the speaker owns.

Everything I expose myself to is a learning opportunity. When what I expose myself to is dishonest it makes learning much, much harder.

Marvin Shilmer

AndDontCallMeShirley

Marvin: We should be glad that any young person honestly expresses what they think, and then use that knowledge to help advance human society.

Then why are you so resistant to persons here who express what they think? Or, are you only open to what "young" people think?

Incidentally, you completely missed my point in the Warren Buffet illustration I posted. Not suprising.

BTW, Marvin, I think you should shut down your blog criticizing the Watchtower Society. Based on your opinions stated on this thread it would be highly hypocritical of you to not just sit quietly and listen and learn from the governing body. Furthermore, for you to openly express disagreement with the WT is forbidden under your own rules.

Marvin Shilmer

-

“Then why are you so resistant to persons here who express what they think? Or, are you only open to what "young" people think?”

AndDontCallMeShirley,

I’ve not resisted persons.

I’ve resisted particular ideas.

There's a difference.

“Incidentally, you completely missed my point in the Warren Buffet illustration I posted. Not surprising.”

What you attempted to refute on the basis of a Buffett seminar was not refuted by your illustration. When people give audience to Buffett one thing they all want to know is what motivates the man.

“BTW, Marvin, I think you should shut down your blog criticizing the Watchtower Society. Based on your opinions stated on this thread it would be highly hypocritical of you to not just sit quietly and listen and learn from the governing body. Furthermore, for you to openly express disagreement with the WT is forbidden under your own rules.”

I expose myself to what comes from the Watchtower organization like I do to anyone or anything else. What can be learned from it I share with others.

- If the thing learned is dishonesty, I share that. It’s helpful to point out dishonesty, with reasons for the conclusion.

- If the thing learned is honest, I share that. It’s helpful to point out honesty, with reasons for the conclusion.

- If the thing learned is illogical, I share that. It’s helpful to point out fallacy, with reasons for the conclusion.

- If the thing learned is logical, I share that. It’s helpful to point out logic, with reasons for the conclusion.

Would you have me do something different?

Marvin Shilmer

AndDontCallMeShirley

Hence if a student is asked to give a speech that is approved by authorities but is not owned by the student then it would be dishonest for that student to give that speech. Worse, were the student to give this approved speech he or she would be lying to the audience.

--

He was not handed that speech for the first time as he stepped to the podium. No doubt he had days, or more likely weeks, to review the material and rehearse it.

If he disagreed with the pre-approved speech, he had some options:

1. give it anyway and say things he doesn't necessarily believe in,

2. pretend to approve the speech then tear it up and do his own thing (which he did),

3. request to write his own speech

4. if no equitable agreement was met, do the honorable thing and refuse to give a speech entirely.

Frankly, #4 would be highly impressive to me. Someone willing to forego personal glory to stand by personal convictions is highly honorable, and even more rare. That would've told me more about his character than any speech could hope to.

As I stated earlier, he pulled a fast one and lied, or at the very least, a grand deception. There's no honor in that, and nothing I find motivational or worthy of emulation.

Valedictorian Rips Up Preapproved Speech, Recites Prayer Instead

Share this