Posted on 08/13/2013 1:29:27 PM PDT by spacejunkie2001
I need help/ammo. My kids go to a small Seventh Day Adventist school in Orlando. There's a new humanities teacher and the information that's in the pamphlet about him says the 'big subject' for 8th grade is "social justice".
I know what we conservatives consider SJ, and I agree with it but there are varying definitions on line. When I meet with this guy and the head of curriculum I want to be armed with as much accurate information as possible.
I'm trying not to be really pissed off that this is going on. I am arming my daughter with as much as possible but she's only 13.
There is a wide difference between the justice that is rooted in God’s word, which he has given us for a blueprint to a civil society, and told us to work within, and the social gospel of social justice, which is man made to avoid God’s ways, and which actually erodes the foundations of faith and justice.
Social Justice is a heavily politicized term and a mechanism for progressives to use to erode the US Constitution and the Bible.
Ask the teacher how he views the differences between Dr. Marin Luther King, Jr and Malcom X.
The Lord has given us the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s as a rich tapestry of examples of right and wrong, just and unjust.
My take: Social justice is all about equality of outcome regardless of effort. You should have just as much “chance” of success whether you work and sacrifice for it or not. But here’s Wiki’s answer.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_justice
JOSEPH was sold by his brothers, THAT wasn’t very JUST, it was a violation of Moral Law. Then the wife of his slave holder, accused him of trying to force her to have sex. She lied. That was NOT just, socially, against the Moral Code. Then they put him in jail, and his friends forgot about him. But look, the Lord was always with him. So people who taunt Social Justice as the TOP priority of the land, people who are being taken advantage of....the Judge of the WHOLE Earth sees and knows. When it is time, he’ll defend them. Always. Sometimes you do well by learning to serve, learning from the people you are ENSLAVED unto. They may trust you, and put you in charge of their whole household. I’d take my chances going before the Celestial Judge and asking for HIS Justice, than trying to make my case made in a courthouse on Earth. The outcome of a lot of court cases by humans, is that this too is UNJUST.
Here is a layman’s take and this template can be applied to most of the control freaks’ (i.e. left’s) philosophy:
Social justice assumes there is a social injustice that need to be corrected.
What is the solution to this “problem”?
More state control.
Except for sex and drugs because it is a Brave New World.
Most on the left espouse the belief that "we ARE gods".
Hate on Whitey 101.
Yeah, the left’s wet dream is to use the power of the state to exterminate those that disagree with them,
and they’d feel self-righteous in doing it.
Social Justice is what you get when you take regular justice and then replace Jesus with Karl Marx.
Social Justice: If you are white you are wrong. If you are a white male, you are just evil.
Do some reading of the constitution. it says the pursuit of happiness (or opportunity). We all are equal before the law and have the same opportunity. The uniqueness of the USA has been our ability to move up and down the social ladder.
When I was at the Rushmore monument a few years ago this has been perverted into the “pursuit of social justice” which means the results are all the same and that is the goal. It means that no one moves up and down also.
Social Justice is what socialist’s call justice and want it for all - meaning socialism. That’s my opinion.
“They want to create a world in which certain groups “justly” deserve to have a bigger piece of the pie under new rules that they create.”
That captures it. As the the term “social justice” is used by modern lefties, it generally means that the “good people” (i.e. the lefties) will give designated groups in society more money and assets, which have been taken away from other designated groups under force of law. The word “justice” is used in an attempt to characterize this transfer of wealth as morally mandated.
This is to be contrasted with “hamburger justice”, which occurs when someone is giving away free hamburgers. This is universally good. So is “hot dog justice” , and occasionally “beer justice.”
Social Justice is theft from people who work for the benefit of slackers who choose not to work.
WOW!
What you said.
Trayvon got social justice.
A black thug was shot and killed while committing a racially motivated murderous assault.
Good stuff! Thanks.
I got tired of driving to work and seeing guys younger than me playing roundball and fishing: made me feel like one of Athen’s silver mine slaves.
So I went mini-Galt. Somebody else can feed and service the gibsmedats.
http://www.believersweb.org/view.cfm?ID=682
you need to get your child out of that den of kooks now and enroll her in a different school
In modern application this does not necessarily imply that because John and Steve have dissimilar houses full of goodies there is injustice going on. It means that a difference in goodies between a group having John as a member and a group having Steve as a member is, that social justice is a relationship between classes and not individuals, that it is necessarily collectivist. This implies that no matter what the real relationship between John and Steve is economically, one may still be plundered on the other's behalf on the basis of group membership.
This is the justification for someone like Jeremiah Wright, the possessor of thousand-dollar suits and a 2 million-dollar house, may justly pick Joe the Plumber's pocket - the difference between the two is not their relative wealth but the relative wealth of groups in which they may be described as members: black and white respectively, in this case. This is the "social" portion of social justice - it applies between collectives, not between individuals.
What is amusing about this is that for Marx the economic relationship between the individuals involved is the only permissible signifier of class, not, as interpreted by the post-Frankfurt School Marxian doctrine, other markers such as race, sex, ethnicity. For Marx Joe the Plumber would have been justified in picking Wright's pocket and not the other way around. For Adorno, et al, it works the other way, or it can if it's expedient.
Most "classic" Marxists, however, would happily allow the reinterpretation so long as it serves to destabilize society and hasten the Revolution. Most modern Marxists aren't smart enough know the difference.
The real problem with this, as with other tenets of the Frankfurt School, is that any individual may be described as a member of multiple classes depending on what class signifiers one wishes to use, and that all such classes have conflicting class interests. The upshot is that social justice is, in application, a points system through which an individual may measure his or her moral right to someone else's pocketbook based on whatever class signifier is trendy at the moment. It results in the grotesque spectacle of a wealthy black handicapped man and a poor white lesbian woman comparing social wounds to see who has the moral high ground over the other. The only obvious low man on that totem pole is - wait for it - one who is a member of all the "privileged" classes of the moment: white, male, upper-middle-class, non-handicapped, employed, etc, etc, etc... Sound familiar?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.