Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Free speech, Garland Tx.
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Glocktogo" data-source="post: 2744989" data-attributes="member: 1132"><p>That's pretty un-American of you Lurk. I'm disappointed in you. <img src="/images/smilies/frown.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":(" title="Frown :(" data-shortname=":(" /></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>You're continuing to show that you don't understand America, how it was founded or what it stands for. I'm flabbergasted that you don't get it. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Do you somehow think that hasn't been tried? How tactful should we be to keep terrorists from committing violence?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>So you're essentially saying that these Muslims are devoid of the ability to reason and are merely slaves to their animalistic urges? Are they subhuman in your eyes?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>All in all, I think the exercise in this thread has born fruit. We've discovered that at least a few OSA'ers would've proudly stood with those who didn't want to declare America's independence, because it might've offended King George III and he might resort to violence. They would've stood proudly with Neville Chamberlain, because speaking German and tossing undesirables into ovens would be less objectionable than preparing to repel violent men. </p><p></p><p>I fully understand practicing non-violence, because I do it every day. However, I would NEVER call someone who was exercising their free speech rights against violent thugs, stupid. If they're brave enough to stand up and be counted, and they do what is necessary to prepare for the consequences (which Geller fully did), they're free to navigate in my book. If I disagree with what they say or the underlying foundation of it, I may choose to stay home and see what happens. If I go and get hurt by evil savages, well I'm not so foolish as to blame the person exercising their natural rights as enumerated in the Constitution of the United States. </p><p></p><p>No, I think I'll hold the evil savages responsible instead. I respect your right to disagree with that, but I don't respect your position if you do. My respect for you is diminished in direct proportion to what extreme you go to in defense of such silly notions. <img src="/images/smilies/frown.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":(" title="Frown :(" data-shortname=":(" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Glocktogo, post: 2744989, member: 1132"] That's pretty un-American of you Lurk. I'm disappointed in you. :( You're continuing to show that you don't understand America, how it was founded or what it stands for. I'm flabbergasted that you don't get it. Do you somehow think that hasn't been tried? How tactful should we be to keep terrorists from committing violence? So you're essentially saying that these Muslims are devoid of the ability to reason and are merely slaves to their animalistic urges? Are they subhuman in your eyes? All in all, I think the exercise in this thread has born fruit. We've discovered that at least a few OSA'ers would've proudly stood with those who didn't want to declare America's independence, because it might've offended King George III and he might resort to violence. They would've stood proudly with Neville Chamberlain, because speaking German and tossing undesirables into ovens would be less objectionable than preparing to repel violent men. I fully understand practicing non-violence, because I do it every day. However, I would NEVER call someone who was exercising their free speech rights against violent thugs, stupid. If they're brave enough to stand up and be counted, and they do what is necessary to prepare for the consequences (which Geller fully did), they're free to navigate in my book. If I disagree with what they say or the underlying foundation of it, I may choose to stay home and see what happens. If I go and get hurt by evil savages, well I'm not so foolish as to blame the person exercising their natural rights as enumerated in the Constitution of the United States. No, I think I'll hold the evil savages responsible instead. I respect your right to disagree with that, but I don't respect your position if you do. My respect for you is diminished in direct proportion to what extreme you go to in defense of such silly notions. :( [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Free speech, Garland Tx.
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom