there is no god
I'm not pretending that i am not replying.... your post set off the auto dull response..... obviously it got to you.Originally Posted by Mr JP Fugley
At last, something coherent and cogent.
"I want to pretend that I'm not replying, while still replying."
hobbes may note the passive aggressive undertones, I wouldn't dream of it.
it’s an election with no Democrats, in one of the whitest states in the union, where rich candidates pay $35 for your votes. Or, as Republicans call it, their vision for the future.
Frog Shoulder
BT Rep: +4
Obviously, it was so well thought out, argued and presented it could do nothing but get to me.I'm not pretending that i am not replying.... your post set off the auto dull response..... obviously it got to you.
Your use of the smillie as a debating technique is second to none. So much better than when you try to use words.
"there is nothing misogynistic about anything, stop trippin.
i type this way because im black and from nyc chill son "
there is no god
Last edited by vidcc; 06-02-2005 at 09:04 PM.
it’s an election with no Democrats, in one of the whitest states in the union, where rich candidates pay $35 for your votes. Or, as Republicans call it, their vision for the future.
effendi
Vid, please post what exactly you mean.
I'm also unable to grasp how you can say that you're for freedom of expression but you wish to prevent other people's pushing for their own moral values (provided you disagree with them) to become law.
Seems a bit daft, to me.
Last edited by manker; 06-02-2005 at 09:05 PM.
I plan on beating him to death with his kids. I'll use them as a bludgeon on his face. -
--Good for them if they survive.
there is no god
please give me an example of something done in the uk you disagree with...it could be anything from the poll tax to keeping the monarchy
edit: Where did I say I wish to prevent?
Last edited by vidcc; 06-02-2005 at 09:20 PM.
it’s an election with no Democrats, in one of the whitest states in the union, where rich candidates pay $35 for your votes. Or, as Republicans call it, their vision for the future.
effendi
Okay. I totally disagree with people who spend money beyond their means and then whine about being in debt.
===
I don't need you to approximate this to my situation.
I merely want you to clarify your position when asked to do so by folk that simply don't know where the hell you're coming from.
I plan on beating him to death with his kids. I'll use them as a bludgeon on his face. -
--Good for them if they survive.
there is no god
Jpaul is the one that suggested i wish to prevent people from trying. I simply said i disagree with people trying to get their personal values into law so those that don't share them have to abide by them.
I don't have to give up my right to free speech or freedom of expression to be a champion of those ideals.
i was more thinking of government acts than what people do when i asked for an example.
Last edited by vidcc; 06-02-2005 at 09:35 PM.
it’s an election with no Democrats, in one of the whitest states in the union, where rich candidates pay $35 for your votes. Or, as Republicans call it, their vision for the future.
effendi
I realise what you said.
Surely though you would try to get your own personal values made law, given the opportunity - this is only what the people you disagree with are doing.
If you had the right to authorise, for example, independent inspections of Guantanamo Bay to ensure that the prisoners were not being mistreated, then presumably you would do so. There will be folk who think that the current administration should be totally insular and responsible for policing their actions, you'd be forcing your ideal upon them.
To say it's okay for me to do it (lobby) but not okay for someone I disagree with to do it (lobby) isn't really being a champion of freedom of expression.
I plan on beating him to death with his kids. I'll use them as a bludgeon on his face. -
--Good for them if they survive.
Frog Shoulder
BT Rep: +4
The problem is that freedom of expression, in my view, must be absolute.
Everyone has the right to express their view as they see fit (as long as it is peaceful), including lobbying their representatives. Other people can lobby the contrary view.
I really don't know how someone can say they support freedom of expression, but then deny other people that absolute right. Hence my non-sequitur comments.
I genuinely do not understand the position vidcc is taking - I support freedom of expression, but I wish to limit it. A limited freedom is not a freedom.
Last edited by Mr JP Fugley; 06-02-2005 at 09:47 PM.
"there is nothing misogynistic about anything, stop trippin.
i type this way because im black and from nyc chill son "
there is no god
then why ask me to explain it
NO.... I believe my moral values are just that....mine.... and I don't try to get them made law
This isn't a personal moral value issue so it doesn't attach to what i am saying.
If I actually wanted to make a law to stop them from being able to do it I would agree, but I do not. All I did was express an opinion...that's free speech.
Do you not see any difference between saying I don't think they should be allowed and actually trying to stop them?.
If someone said I don't like watching football you would be fine with that. Surely you would oppose them trying stop you watching it as well.
it’s an election with no Democrats, in one of the whitest states in the union, where rich candidates pay $35 for your votes. Or, as Republicans call it, their vision for the future.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks