wring said it best, in one.
Glad he’s gone is fine. Celebrating is not.
And yes, I’m of the “eh, he’s dead. Oh well, let’s get some pie.”
Is it okay to be happy he’s finally left the Senate?
Cancel that - seems he had left some time ago. Well, okay then.
I don’t think that relishing Thurmond’s death is hateful. Death is a natural occurrence that happens to everyone, not an evil, terrifying bogeyman. Stop acting like it’s the worst thing that could happen. Especially to someone who was obviously elderly.
In life, Thurmond chose to remain ignorant, oppress his fellow human beings, and to spread hate. He won’t be able to do that any more. That’s why I’m glad he’s gone.
Better luck next time, Strom.
Hey, we must be telepathic, for at the moment I am eating cherry pie.
I’m got going to get into whether or not it is appropriate to express pleasure when a despised adversary dies. Obviously it is acceptable to some, but not to others. You might as well argue as to whether or not the paper should hang over or under the roll.
I would like to know, however, if those of you who have hammered away at others for expressing such pleasure have ever spent as much effort in promoting gay rights. If you have, then good for you. If you have not, then perhaps you might find a better use for your time and toruble.
If anybody thinks his death or the recent Supreme Court decision on sodomy is going to affect (even one little bit) the direction our personal freedoms and this country are heading needs a reality check.
Looks like Bush is headed for a 2nd term and his administration will continue to amaze at an even greater rate and with a greater magnitude.
You make yourself look that way. Nobody else does.
Unless the view the other person disagrees with is that homosexuality is wrong, I guess. Or else, shouldn’t you stop trying to convince everybody that your pro-gay opinion is right, once it is put to you that you are not agreed with?
Or is your opinion the only special one that deserves to be forced on people?
I am not convinced that Mockingbird is trying to convince anyone that his “pro-gay” opinion is right insofar as he is trying to make room for himself and others to live freely.
If you do believe that homosexuality is wrong, I would enjoin you not to be a homosexual. I am sure that this advice does not take you by surprise.
Personally, I find many lines of work ethically dubious, and some downright wrong. Let’s just say that if my preferences had the force of law, the world would be a very different place.
Well, mockingbird, I did use the wrong word above. Instead of invalid, I should’ve said incorrect.
And, yes, when your opinion, your perception, is based on that which is not correct, then that opinion, that perception is incorrect.
It doesn’t make a whit of difference if you’re Christian or not. The point is twofold: (a) Did you consider Thurmond to be a mean and spiteful person? (b) if so, Are you going to act mean and spiteful yourself.
I see you’ve provided more than enough pomposity, arrogance, and yes, childish hate, to answer that question on trumps.
What do you think it shows that I agree completely with JerseyDiamond on this? Maybe, it’s because, regardless of the source of the teaching, the teaching’s valid. Stick that in your pipe.
p.s. I’m not squelching dissent. Did I ever tell you not to protest the man’s actions? Did I ever tell you not to campaign for reform? What I did do was point out your inhumanity to you. You continue to claim those that are acting in a charitable, or at least not inhuman, manner are those who are inhuman.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Mockingbird *
Others can lead one to feel very pissed off. Others can act as an external catalyst. Or do you have no responsibility for what you say?
Y’know… I really do not give a shit what it supposedly says about my humanity. I am not Mother Theresa, I’m not Martin Luther King, and I am not Malcolm X.
**
So you admit your just as bad as Thurmond?
If you are too ignorant to see how your hate breeds more hate than there is no hope for your cause.
And here you are doing the same thing you are decrying in the same post. :rolleyes:
I am surprised you can roll our eyes with your head up your ass.
and point out where i said that, considering i specifically said that wasn’t what i was arguing against, but was opposed to your drunken Fratboyery.
Now you are arguing like december, saying that anyone who doesn’t decry palestinian bombers in every post is suddenly a Hammas agent. That argument is ignorant and flawed.
once again, NO ONE is asking you to treat him as a hero, they are asking yo to stop the gravedancing.
But don’t mind me, i’m apparently a bigot because of…disagreeing with a guy who happens to be gay? WTF? And since i disagree with some guys in this thread that happen to be straight, i must be bigoted against them as well…
Bingo.
He gets it, why don’t the rest of you?
Monty A question for you:
Would it be inhuman to celebrate OBL’s death?
(IOW, is there some point where it would become “human” to rejoice someone’s death?)
roll our eyes? so you agree with me that your behavior is terrible?
He just finished his final term.
No Wring, you seem to have entirely missed the context of my question.
Gobear was telling people to get a clue since they didn’t know what it was like to be harassed by jackbooted thugs in their own bedroom.
I asked him if he ever did. Seeing as it seems he hasn’t, then how can he tell people to get a clue based on their lack of experience when he hasn’t had the experience either.
I’m waiting to see if he’s going to claim a psychic bond of empathy, that justifies his privileged stance absent the experience he chastises others for not having.
So, in other words, it was Gobear claiming you needed to experience these things before you could have a clue.
I’m simply pointing out that Gobear is equally clueless.