Subject:
|
Re: Danish cartoons outrage some Moslem groups and nations
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 9 Feb 2006 17:22:05 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1589 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys wrote:
| |
Sure Pat “I was for Ariel’s stroke because he divided the Holy Land until I
was against Ariel’s stroke ‘cause I couldn’t have my Theme Park” Robertson
has his followers, and has called for assassinations, and other such crap.
|
| |
However, his followers wouldn’t amount to many thousands of people storming
the streets. There were 200,000+ muslims in one protest wit hthe burning
flags and calling for the heads of cartoonists.
|
Did he actually call for the assassination? If he did, what’s up with those
no-good followers of his who aren’t following orders? Talk is cheap.
Protected, in fact.
|
Well, let’s see. If I go on-air to millions and declare that a certain US
President should be assassinated, will Conservatives rally around me to
protect my right to free speech?
|
There happens to be a law against that, and the Secret Service takes that stuff
seriously. It’s best not to get cute in that arena. But if you posted that
and many other unpleasantries, say in a liberal NG, no one would care, because
they’d realize that you weren’t serious considering that option, but merely
expressing frustration and opinion. (on edit) I wonder if it is legal to say
that he should be assassinated rather than call for it? Dicey stuff. Best to
play it safe and simply call for the assassination of foreign leaders;-)
| |
Of course, if I were a dessicated, talentless hack who called for the
poisoning of a sitting Supreme Court Justice, I suppose I could laugh off my
terroristic threat as a “joke,” right?
|
Yeah, because it was meant as a joke (she’s a satirist, after all), so trying
to misconstrue her meaning is disingenuous at best, Dave! I know that I have
admonished against forming opinions based on “intent” in the past, but isn’t it
obvious that that statement wasn’t a real threat?
| |
| |
| |
I don’t think Robertson could muster 20 people to go “storming the gates”
to kill people. And if he did, I, along with millions of Christians around
the world, would flat out no holds barred, denounce him and his zealots
unequivocably as non-Christians.
|
AAhmen and Ahmen. Well spoken, Bruce!
|
Who are you talking to?
|
To Dave, Dave! Sorry about the “Bruce” part-- I was in another Python sketch...
| |
| |
| |
And I would disagree with that notion--the Christians that I know are
peace-first types. One has to look no further than the LSK funeral to see
that Christians, at least the true believers of God’s word, are like this.
|
“True believers of God’s word”-- careful Dave, that can be very easily
misconstrued. I would word it thusly: “faithful followers of Christ’s
Gospel of radical love”. Not as pithy, but more explicit and less likely to
be confused with some other whacked-out group of “true believers”.
|
Well, that’s the whole point, I guess. I’m not worried about you sensible
Christians (though apparently you don’t know when to rein in your profanity,
or something!)
|
(You should be concerned about skinner “liberals” who profess tolerance... as
long as it conforms to their world view, of course!)
| |
any more than I’m worried about the sensible Muslims I know.
It’s the fringe loonies who cause the problems.
|
Not necessarily. There are plenty of fringe loonies who are peaceful fringe
loonies. There are even fringe loonies who spit hate, but are otherwise
(relatively) harmless. It’s the ones who are burning and killing we need to
worry about.
My concern is that as the left and right get more and more over the top with
their partisan rhetoric, they paint each other to be the very fringe loonies
about which you speak-- essentially rendering the entire country a bin of
fringe loonies!
| |
If the United States feels justified in issuing direct proclamations against
outspoken, radical mullahs (and it does), then it should feel obligated to
issue similar proclamations aginst outspoken, radical evangelists (as opposed
to meeting with them and using them to drum up votes).
|
Politics. Did you ever believe it wasn’t nasty business?
JOHN
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
109 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
