Atheos 12,663 Views
Joined Oct 6, '07.
Posts: 5,675 (54% Liked)
I recall very clearly, a large number of posters here, who are not POC, who decided they were offended by certain other posts,graphs,photos. So if they can be offended by those or decide they are offensive, AND they are not POC, then I can do the same for other groups who are targetted in mean-spirited ways.
Let's try to be fair about it, at the very least.
Stanley, did you ever attend a school where developmentally disabled individuals were the subject of ridicule by other students? Lack of understanding by adults? Did you ever visit an institution where developmentally disabled individuals were "warehoused" to avoid embarrassment to their families for having a "retarded" child? What about the lack of educational and vocational opportunities until the advent of disability legislation.
I believe it is uninformed to say that individuals with Down's Syndrome haven't been oppressed.
Whatever happened to the philosophy that the offended gets to decide what is offensive? This must be yet another example of do as I say, not as I do.
Hey... If you guys can deny the OBVIOUSLY chimp like caricatures of Obama I can deny the not so obvious replacement of Trig's face with someone that just happens to be so ugly that they may or may not resemble someone with Down's Syndrome.
Not the same thing.
Plus, since I can't ever recall Down Syndrome people being oppressed and ridiculed on a large scale I still call this claim bunk.
Wait... The downhill didn't start for you until 50???
Darn... It started for me at 30...
As for the hair, there is no silver or grey for me. Facial hair is going straight to white (over 50% already) and hair is receding faster than the speed of light.
If you change just a few words in your above argument, you will find it's exactly what some of the rest of us have been saying about other issues. To paraphrase:" it's only obvious to those looking for offense."
How can you say what the intent of the person who did the photoshop work was? You can't. And once they did the photoshopping, it had to be very obvious what the result resembled, and they said let's do it anyway. We can always say we didn't INTEND for it to be derogatory! Please. That argument doesn't fly in other debates here, and I can't let it fly this time either.
I think they know full well what the result might be, and that's why they did it. NOW they are saying otherwise.
Goes to show that if business says it you better not trust it.
I think I understand what you're saying. We're a government of the people and it's our fundamental right to petition the government to change.
However, the mob doesn't always rule, but sometimes it does. It did in the 70s when the mob (which actually really was a miniority of people, mostly young) demanded an end to the Vietnam War.
However, the mob didn't want black kids in their schools and the government forced the issue.
The mob demands the end of the war in Iraq and so far, we're still there.
So in a respect I'm standing in the middle between you and Timothy and agreeing and disagreeing with both, but leaning towards Timothy in that the mob doesn't write the law of the land. Probably this is for the best.
Yes indeed, we have.
I'm speaking in all sincerity and honesty here. I'm not perfect. I'm sure I have posted conflicting opinions at times, as you accurately state we all do. If you can point out posts in which I've been deliberately offensive or hurtful or blatantly inconsistent and hypocritical, I would genuinely appreciate you doing so, either here or in a PM. Because I honestly don't recall them. If they exist, then I owe apologies to my fellow posters. If they don't exist, then I will ask those who accuse me of such to acknowledge that philosophical differences of opinion are not the equivalent of hate, do not stem from hate and should not be labeled as hate.
If someone wanted to die I would have no problem following their wishes and helping them or even doing were it legal to do so. If my mother asked me to kill her instead of letting her suffer I'd do it in a heart beat. Blessed are the merciful if I recall...
I WOULDN'T make that decision on my own though. They would have to make that decision.
We speak of creating life and taking it. All of that is irrelevant. The single greatest right is self determination. NOTHING trumps that. If one wants to die no one has the right to stop it. I'd go so far to say that medical status should be irrelevant. The mere decision to die should be respected. Even more so when someone is no longer physically able to do it themselves.
From a legal standpoint, parents are always culpable for their childrens actions. This is why parents of ill behaved children are always sued.
The only problem I have with this is that I think the prosecutors are reaching with the charges that they are using.
I have no problem with a law holding a parent responsible but the law used and the charges applied need to match the crime being committed.
Otherwise we'll start charging friends with Attempted Murder when they peer pressure another friend into trying a cigarette...
I will wait to see if it hits more media sources but...
EXCLUSIVE: PALIN RESIGNATION 'DAMAGE CONTROL' FOR COMING 'ICEBERG SCANDAL' ... MORE: EMBEZZLEMENT INDICTMENTS COMING?
Read more at link above.
Original quote altered by me.
Stan, does this observation apply to you as well? Or only those who disagree with you?
Are you ever offensive? Perhaps if you acknowledged such, we could call off the all-nighter.
Palin used a sports analogy to explain her decision: "I know when to pass the ball."
If you're going to make accusations, Stan, you need to back them up.
You name one human being that isn't guilty of hypocrisy and I will conclusively label you a liar. We all contradict ourselves and we are all guilty of hypocrisy from time to time.
Advertise With Us