Am I overreacting?
-
Bassam Abdul-Baki wrote:
I thought it was illegal? I thought it can only be disposed of in a certain way only?
How these things work, in practice, is that if a person perfoms an act which is approved by "liberals" -- say, burning the flag, or harrassing the patrons of the public library with one's massively unwashed body odors -- then it counts are "free speech". But on the other hand, if a person perfoms an act which is disapproved by "liberals" -- say, displaying a picture of the results of abortions, or stating that abortion is murder, or stating that homosexual behavior is immoral -- then it does not count as "free speech," but rather is an incitement to "hatred" and ought to be suppressed.
Ilíon wrote:
homosexual behavior
Just what is homosexual behaviour? Surely it is purely sexual behaviour, the moral weight of which is in any reasonable person's eyes much less than that of public lying and bigotry?
Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find anything that agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it. (Siddhartha Gautama - The Buddha), 563-483 B.C.
-
Christian Graus wrote:
Surely you're allowed to use your freedom of speech to comment, just not to smack them in the face ?
Not more than I week ago I was being assured by Jon, and others, that freedom of speech was not about being offensive. Now, we are back to it being exclusively about being offensive. I wish people could make their minds up. For my part, the reason I have freedom of speech is specifically so that I can state that flag burning should be illegal and actually have it become illegal if enough of my neighbors agree with me. Unless, that is, there is specific language in the constitution stating that burning a flag is protected free speech. Freedom of speech is not about making comments, it is about making law.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
Stan Shannon wrote:
Now, we are back to it being exclusively about being offensive. I wish people could make their minds up.
I only saw this now, long after posting the above One man, one insult, thread. :laugh:
Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find anything that agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it. (Siddhartha Gautama - The Buddha), 563-483 B.C.
-
Yep - dead and cremated.
I'm pretty sure I would not like to live in a world in which I would never be offended. I am absolutely certain I don't want to live in a world in which you would never be offended. Dave
-
So waving a flag is freedom of speech. Burning a flag is wilful destruction of property?
-------------------------------------------------------- Knowledge is knowing that the tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it in fruit salad!!
-
In my little town there is a house on the main drag with tons of anti-abortion stuff like signs saying "ABORTION IS MURDER." Never really cared about it before, however, today I drove by and there is a new sign. It says, "ABORTION IS TODAY'S HOLOCAUST" WTF? I understand that abortion gets a lot of people riled up, but I find this so totally offensive. I understand free speech but I find this incendiary. Am I just overreacting because of my religion or would those of you WHO ARE REASONABLE (which excludes a number from SB) feel the same way?
Blog link to be reinstated at a later date.
Yes - you're overreacting. For someone who honestly believes that abortion is murder, legalized abortion easily equates to state sanctioned murder. With nearly a million legal abortions per year in the US alone since 1973 that puts the number of these "state sanctioned murders" pretty high. Throw in the rest of the world and it makes the holocaust look downright tame. Disclaimer - The above statements are not necessarily my beliefs just a logical understanding given a specific belief.
-
But it took free speech to create those laws in the first place. Someone said "Hey, I think we need a law protecting the flag from abuse" and then someone else said "Hey, I think thats a good idea", so t hey made a little law for their little town. See, that is free speech which allows free people to actually define and immediately affect the parameters of their own society. It is free speech with teeth. You still have not answered or explained why that free speech is bad and 'flag burning' free speech is good. I simply do not understand the reasoning behind that. It makes no sense at all to me.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
Stan Shannon wrote:
You still have not answered or explained why that free speech is bad
Stan, I'm pretty sure you're just playing dumb. You know as well as I do that the majority of the Bill of Rights amendments specify powers that the government doesn't have and cannot exercise. Originally the specification only covered the Federal Government, but 14th Amendment has been interpreted to mean that the provisions of these amendments deny that power to the states as well. That's all settled law and will not change if every other judge on the Supreme Court is to the right of Roberts.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
Ilíon wrote:
homosexual behavior
Just what is homosexual behaviour? Surely it is purely sexual behaviour, the moral weight of which is in any reasonable person's eyes much less than that of public lying and bigotry?
Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find anything that agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it. (Siddhartha Gautama - The Buddha), 563-483 B.C.
Brady Kelly wrote:
Surely it is purely sexual behaviour, the moral weight of which is in any reasonable person's eyes much less than that of public lying and bigotry?
Not in Ilion's eyes. He disapproves of homosexual behavior but public lying and bigotry are his stock in trade.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
Brady Kelly wrote:
Surely it is purely sexual behaviour, the moral weight of which is in any reasonable person's eyes much less than that of public lying and bigotry?
Not in Ilion's eyes. He disapproves of homosexual behavior but public lying and bigotry are his stock in trade.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
Exactly the point of my rhetorical question. :-\
Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find anything that agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it. (Siddhartha Gautama - The Buddha), 563-483 B.C.
-
I do not know if I have to say it again, the porn does nothing more than promoting sex, right? Do we need to find the relation between sex and abortion? Best regards, Paul.
Jesus Christ is LOVE! Please tell somebody.
-
Exactly the point of my rhetorical question. :-\
Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find anything that agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it. (Siddhartha Gautama - The Buddha), 563-483 B.C.
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
Now, we are back to it being exclusively about being offensive. I wish people could make their minds up.
I only saw this now, long after posting the above One man, one insult, thread. :laugh:
Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find anything that agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it. (Siddhartha Gautama - The Buddha), 563-483 B.C.
Brady Kelly wrote:
I only saw this now, long after posting the above One man, one insult, thread.
Insults have nothing to do with it, at least in the U.S. Free Speech is a shorthand for the US Constitution denying the right to abridge freedom of speech to any governmental body. Doesn't protect me from having Chris decide when to asterisk my words or when to delete a post, or ban me altogether. Somehow, Stan gets confused over this.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
Even the bible says that Abortion is not murder! It defines the killing of an unborn child as crime against property, not against the individual. So all the Bible-Bashing Cretins are hypocritical tossers who can f#'& off telling others how to live by their self imposed biblical rules when even they can't!
------------------------------------ We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office. - Aesop
Dalek Dave wrote:
Bible-Bashing Cretins
You might want to take a deep breath and think a little before you go off on a rant. I think the word you are looking for is "Bible-Thumping," not "Bible-Bashing."
Dalek Dave wrote:
Even the bible says that Abortion is not murder! It defines the killing of an unborn child as crime against property, not against the individual.
Where does it say that?
Gary Kirkham Forever Forgiven and Alive in the Spirit "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life. Me blog, You read
-
Dalek Dave wrote:
Bible-Bashing Cretins
You might want to take a deep breath and think a little before you go off on a rant. I think the word you are looking for is "Bible-Thumping," not "Bible-Bashing."
Dalek Dave wrote:
Even the bible says that Abortion is not murder! It defines the killing of an unborn child as crime against property, not against the individual.
Where does it say that?
Gary Kirkham Forever Forgiven and Alive in the Spirit "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life. Me blog, You read
Thumping, Yes! Sorry. Try Exodus 21:22 "If men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she has a miscarriage, yet there is no further injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman’s husband may demand of him, and he shall pay as the judges decide" Fined! not Executed. Execution was a punishment for murder, Fining was for a Civil Offence. Hope that helps.
------------------------------------ We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office. - Aesop
-
Thumping, Yes! Sorry. Try Exodus 21:22 "If men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she has a miscarriage, yet there is no further injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman’s husband may demand of him, and he shall pay as the judges decide" Fined! not Executed. Execution was a punishment for murder, Fining was for a Civil Offence. Hope that helps.
------------------------------------ We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office. - Aesop
What do you make of the next couple of verses?
Gary Kirkham Forever Forgiven and Alive in the Spirit "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life. Me blog, You read
-
What do you make of the next couple of verses?
Gary Kirkham Forever Forgiven and Alive in the Spirit "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life. Me blog, You read
Eye for an Eye etc... This only applies to the wife. If you take her unborn child you get fined, but if you do her other damage you are punished accordingly. This means that God thinks a wife is important, but the child isn't. Thanks for clarifying that for others.
------------------------------------ We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office. - Aesop
-
Thumping, Yes! Sorry. Try Exodus 21:22 "If men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she has a miscarriage, yet there is no further injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman’s husband may demand of him, and he shall pay as the judges decide" Fined! not Executed. Execution was a punishment for murder, Fining was for a Civil Offence. Hope that helps.
------------------------------------ We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office. - Aesop
Here is an article about that verse I thought was interesting, you may be interested as well.
Gary Kirkham Forever Forgiven and Alive in the Spirit "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life. Me blog, You read
-
Thumping, Yes! Sorry. Try Exodus 21:22 "If men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she has a miscarriage, yet there is no further injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman’s husband may demand of him, and he shall pay as the judges decide" Fined! not Executed. Execution was a punishment for murder, Fining was for a Civil Offence. Hope that helps.
------------------------------------ We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office. - Aesop
To go along with that, take a look at how the NIV renders that verse: "If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely, but there..."
Gary Kirkham Forever Forgiven and Alive in the Spirit "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life. Me blog, You read
-
leckey wrote:
Am I just overreacting because of my religion
What on Earth is your religion? Are you a Peloci Catholic? But no, you're not overreacting. That sort of statement is designed specifically to be abrasive to anyone who doesn't agree. I wouldn't exactly say that it's incorrect, but it is low to use that kind of imagery to help promote their view. And of course, to anyone who doesn't agree with the sentiment, it seems to deminish the holocaust which would be incendiary to them. Even thought they are really saying that they truely believe that it's just as serious as the holocaust.
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.
If I understand this correctly her outrage is against the comparison to the holocaust since she's Jewish.
I've heard more said about less.
-
If I understand this correctly her outrage is against the comparison to the holocaust since she's Jewish.
I've heard more said about less.
I didn't realize she was. Which leads me though to wonder what the Jewish stance on abortion is. To many who are against abortion, the analogy is considered accurate because they believe that strongly that abortion is the government sanctioned killing of babies on a massive scale. It's likely also used because it will enrage those who don't agree (which certainly makes it negative), but I don't think they use the analogy to diminish the holocaust in any way. In which case, I would have to change my answer to yes, she is possibly overreacting.
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.