Tired of elections being between the lesser of two evils.When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. -Socrates
Its meaning in this sense is only distantly related to the modern form of "bully", which means "harasser of the weak". The word is related to the Dutch boel, meaning lover, and is also found in the German word Nebenbuhler, meaning a rival for a lady's affection. In English usage around 1700, "bully" came to be similar to "pimp," which gives us the connotation of a ruffian or harasser.
Due to the archaic nature of the adjective "bully" and the religious symbolism of the word pulpit (the elevated platform used by a preacher), this phrase is now often used as a pejorative. This misinterpretation implies intimidation and, possibly, an abuse of authority. An example of this contemporary usage would be the sentence: "He uses his job as a bully pulpit, regaling his subordinates with his political opinions as part of their morning meetings."
Savage and I are different. He thinks Christians who cite the Bible to condemn homosexuality but ignore the other parts are hypocrites. I think they are just stupid or ill informed.
Last edited by CriticalThought; 05-01-12 at 07:30 PM.
I love the NSA. It's like having a secret fan-base you will never see, but they're there, watching everything you write and it makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside knowing that I may be some person's only form of unconstitutional entertainment one night.
Here's Savage's apology: On "Bull****" and "Pansy-Assed" | Slog
And the latest piece from the Seattle Times: Sparks fly over Dan Savage's comments to students about Bible | Local News | The Seattle Times
So, despite all evidence to the contrary...you are going to say that an action must be repeated against a specific individual before it can be considered bullying? How many times must it be repeated? Once? Twice?Again, one remark towards a groups action is not "bullying"....it is stretching.
Criticizing parts of the Bible is not "bullying".