I am NOT Charlie either.
- Thread starter Jiffypop69
- Start date
Because some people are more "sensitive" and more prone to react violently, is why we should confine our mocking to Jews, Christians and Amish. (Personally, I don't believe in mocking any persons or groups. That is why I don't watch Jon Stewart anymore.)
BTW: Apparently, 600 members of ISIS come from Belgium and some have returned back to Belgium, the latest target of terrorists.
How boring life would be if we all sang from the same hymn book ... which is what Charlie represents and can't be tolerated by Muslim terrorists (and a few here apparently).
Anyone who thinks for a moment that Seth is a terrorist, supports terrorism and/or is a terrorist sympathizer is nuts. There are very few things in life that are black or white. Sometimes, to find common ground we have to ignore the hardliners on both sides of the great divide.
http://news.nationalpost.com/2015/0...-video-threatening-attacks-back-home-is-dead/
So sad, but better over there than here, I guess.
So sad, but better over there than here, I guess.
Thanks Rockslin.......eerrr, I mean SkyRider.
Its common sense - you can't fight intolerance with more intolerance, you won't beat the ignorant with more ignorance. You have the right to free speech, and you have the right to be intolerant and ignorant and offensive. But you will only get yourself deeper into the fight by demonstrating your intolerance, ignorance, and to continue to offend. Everyone knows their "rights", but seems a lot of folks have forgotten the "Golden Rule", or maybe never bothered to learn it in the first place. Courtesy, dialogue, empathy and honesty are not appeasement (except maybe in the mind of the intolerant and ignorant).
Our buddy Fuji prides himself on shouting down anyone who offers an opinion different than his on just about any topic; disagree with him and you're a sympathizer, or appeaser, or whatever. He did it to Occasionally and me on this thread, and I think he did the same to you on some thread where you suggested negotiating with terrorists (I'll add my $0.02 over there in a minute). No room for alternate opinions in Fuji's sad little universe - in that regard, Fuji is a Kouachi brother much more than he is Charlie Hebdo.
And he still hasn't tried to contact me for that drink!
I never said he supports terrorism, he is lying. I said he "drank the pashtunwali koolaid" for his argument that the Taliban were just following their traditions for failing to crack down on al Qaeda. His post is on record and I'm happy to defend what I said. I think Seth will not find it as easy to defend what he said. He is in a snit because I called him out on it.
Here he is again putting the blame on Charlie Hedbo and arguing it is somehow the fault of the victim that the terrorists committed atrocity.
I called him on his BS then and here now it is much the same.
But he's still going to call me an appeaser, or apologist, or whatever. Because that's who he is - ignorant and intolerant of different opinions, but always ready to offend and attack. Fuji Kuoachi.
It's been a good...and spirited debate...very good arguments for "Charlie" and some against. Thanks everyone for your opinions, and insight.
Till next time.
Till next time.
Exactly.
What some people fail to understand is that freedom of speech is all well and good. But say something dumb to someone and don't expect all people sit back and like it. Most won't retaliate, but some will. And Charlie has a history of baiting and getting some minor retaliation back already. But for sake of having fun, selling more copies, or making a stand of freedom of press they some reason keep on doing it.
This time their luck ran out as some guys went extreme and shot up everyone.
What people hard up on freedom of speech is that they don't respect other people's feelings or actions and that because it may be legal to mock people, that they should be able to keep doing it and expect the people being made fun of to suck it up and like it. It may be legal to go up to random people and tell them to F-off. No cop is going to jail you for doing that, but why anyone wants to keep on baiting people is childish. That's the type of stuff kids in public school do when bored in class or at recess. And don't expect people to like it. Some people will shout back, hit you or....... shoot you.
Lesson learned.
It's like school. Everyone knows which guys are stronger than others. It's perfectly legal and freedom of speech to mouth off to anyone. Mouth off to most nerds and nothing will happen. Mouth off to the teacher, get sent to the office. Mouth off to the jock who can lift two people on his shoulders, well.... don't be surprised if he bangs your head against a locker. Is it right for him to do that? No. Is it right for you to piss him off like a child? No.
But if someone wants to continue being a jerk and pissing everyone off, then at least be smart enough to pick your battles. Have fun making fun of nerds, but if you want to provoke the jock, then you better have a good pair of running shoes because if he gets hold of you in a foot chase he'll probably tackle you and mash your face on the pavement.
So why act like an ass and piss off people for kicks? Just expect that people also have the freedom to retaliate. It may not be legal, but they physically have every ability to kick you in the face if they really wanted to. He might get arrested. But you still got kicked in the face. So who loses? Both people.
It's likely due to people knowing that they are playing Russian Roulette. But instead of a gun with only 6 bullets, it hold 600. 599 of the holes are empty. They know that say and doing what you want and nothing will happen 99.9% of the time. But all it takes is some bad luck and you pulled trigger at that hole #600 with a bullet.
As unfortunate as the Charlie people are, they kept pulling the triggers and nothing happened.... but they sadly pulled the trigger at #600 this time.
Time for everybody to step back and take a timeout. Let the temperature cool down a bit.
I think the West proved its point by printing the latest edition of Charlie. Let's not rub their noses in it.
To me that is the point. If an allegedly religious belief states that murder is an acceptable response to criticism it deserves to be criticized.
And it's worth mentioning that the related attack had nothing to do with the actions of the people involved, just the fact they were Jews.
SETH.
The point I was trying to make,...but it seems, not very well,...is this editor, by simply using the religious term blasphemy as a means of describing my comments on a religion,...is narrow minded.
A religious person starts a conversation by asking me what religion am I,…when I say,…none,…their response is to call me an atheist,… now the question and response,… is that not at the very least, narrow minded ???
A marriage can only be with a man a and a women, is that not narrow minded, and even insulting ???
I will not personally insult a religious person,…unless of coarse they initiate insults.
My SO is religious,…we have abosoltlulyt no issues on that front.
I don’t insult her religion, actually she has a lot of negative things to say about how people abuse religion.
But insulting a religion, polical party, hockey team, or what ever, in print, or internet etc,…this NOT personal,…if you can’t handle the it,…you really need to have your “beliefs” re confirmed, because you are not really to confident.
There is NO vicious circle.
The Pope is now saying that people should not insult religion,…I realize this is his game,…but he has no right to tell me what I can or cannot say about his businness.
I probably pissed you off,…but this is my postion,…which in a free country,…I am allowed to have.
FAST
Well technically he's right. It is blasphemy. Doesn't mean religions don't often deserve criticism and it doesn't mean blasphemy is necessarily a bad thing.
I was expecting to go out for a beer tonight, but the invitation never materialized, so I get the opportunity to get to chat with you over this.
FAST, don't worry, you didn't piss me off, & hopefully I didn't piss you off either.
If you are not religious, that is your choice and I'll respect your choice.
I happen to be a non-practicing Catholic, which means I sometimes get double-tapped - once by practicing Catholics who aren't happy that I've lapsed, and then by atheists who aren't happy that I'm believe in some sort of Supreme Being. And my SO is Jewish, so although I'm religious, some family members think its the wrong religion!
You're not religious, but I am. But I see no reason that the two of us can't get along just fine. I'm not going to push my religion on you but I'll ask that you respect my choice as well. If I say something offensive to you, intentionally or not, and you convey your sense of offense to me, I will stop (although I have the right to continue via free speech, I try not to be an offensive asshole). Naturally, I will expect the same courtesy from you. If for some reason you can't control the offensive asshole tendency after I ask you to stop, that's when our problems begin. That's not just regarding religion; I'm going to respect your choices, your gender, your sexuality, race, age background, etc. You have a right to be treated as I would like to be treated, and I have an obligation to treat you the way I'd like to be treated. Decently.
As humans, we have many rights and freedoms that were hard earned and always under threat, But, we also have responsibilities and obligations to each other. An easy one is - don't be an asshole. Next one after that is - if you choose to be an asshole, accept the risks & responsibilities.
You know, FAST, not only did you NOT piss me off, you also didn't let me down! You stood your ground without pissing on mine. Hopefully I achieved the same with you. Maybe we won't become friends, but we've eliminated at least a few reasons to potentially be adversaries, haven't we?
There's criticism, which is not necessarily a bad thing.
Then theres offense - which is a bad thing.
Then theres the basic decency of the individual to know the difference between criticism and offense - basically knowing when to stop. If you're told to stop doing something because that person has become offended, you have the option to stop or the freedom of speech to continue to harangue that person. Your own humanity will dictate which you choose. Extremists don't stop, but they don't see themselves as the extremists - they see themselves as being "right".
I like quoting Tecumseh's Death Poem, "trouble no one about their religion, respect their views and demand that they respect yours"..........
