Results 1 to 22 of 22
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    407
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts

    And the band plays on...

    There is no rest to the shame that some people display...

    And the band plays on...


    Whether you agreed or disagreed...
    save this irreverance for the day AFTER the funeral.


  2. Hide this ad by registering as a member
  3. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    705
    Thanks
    9
    Thanked 8 Times in 6 Posts
    There's something ironic about people holding signs saying someones going to hell at their funeral in front of their friends and family during their mourning.

  4. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Nashville
    Posts
    3,519
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 122 Times in 62 Posts
    Thats the catch-22 of this country

    This is the beauty, and ultimate stupidity, of freedom.

  5. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    los angeles, ca
    Posts
    286
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    Originally posted by jetpack42
    Thats the catch-22 of this country

    This is the beauty, and ultimate stupidity, of freedom.
    that is probably the best way to put it.

  6. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    20
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Yet the family doesn't have the freedom to charge these morons. I'd do it anyway, because some things are just not acceptable...

  7. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Nashville
    Posts
    3,519
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 122 Times in 62 Posts
    Originally posted by Beltash
    Yet the family doesn't have the freedom to charge these morons. I'd do it anyway, because some things are just not acceptable...
    charge them with what? standing on a street with a sign?

  8. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    los angeles, ca
    Posts
    286
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    maybe he is suggesting that we amend the constitution to disallow people from being able to say things that we disagree with.

  9. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    407
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Originally posted by seb
    maybe he is suggesting that we amend the constitution to disallow people from being able to say things that we disagree with.
    A) I believe he means "charge them" as whip an ass.

    B) FREEDOM does NOT mean the freedom to do whatever whenever without repurcussions. Had I been there, without my family, to see that I would have more than likely been in a verbal "conflict". If they (my family) were with me... I would take my 4 year old and 3 year old within earshot and said.." Take a look kids. This is the reason this country and freedom is so great. If it were most any other place... the police would take them away. Permanently." Then, naturally, they would have started calling me every name in the book.

    It is NOT a fault of Freedom that P.O.S's like that exist... it is a lack of decency and morality.

  10. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    los angeles, ca
    Posts
    286
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    personally i disagree with the timing and the manner that those protesters took, however, it is their right in our liberal democracy to express their thoughts same as it applies to you. i remember hearing most recent on a family guy re-run "i disagree with what you have to say, but i will die defending your right to say it." that is the strength of the our system and the ability to dissent without fear of being thrown in jail, but to knowingly trying to escalate something relatively peaceful into potential violence is something that people should strive to keep away from.

    personally, it sounds like your view of freedom is limited to having a similar mantra as yourself and thats not really freedom is it? there will always be dissent and that is healthy and good; it strengthens our democracy and allows for social change. these are all gray areas with no absolutes and easy answers. laws are in place so that there is a framework to decide these type of things before they happen.

    some moderately related listening from npr. good points and balanced
    NPR : Politics in an Age of Terror
    Last edited by seb; June 11th, 2004 at 05:12 PM.

  11. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    La Crosse, WI
    Posts
    59
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    seb, i couldn't agree with you more. htat's a great qoute from the family guy, by the way (i gotta get cable). anyway i think that that's what happens when you take a position with such a large public profile. President of the USA is a controversial position, and half the people are gonna hate you at any given time. that comes with the job. therefore I think those people had every right to be there. On the other hand, I think they should have, like stale says, the decency and compassion to not say such things at his funeral, for chrissakes. It undermines the impact of their message. I feel like I should apologize for their inconsiderate...ness... or whatever.

  12. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Nashville
    Posts
    3,519
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 122 Times in 62 Posts
    I honestly can't remember the last time I saw a gathering of people with signs that seemed logical. Anytime a bunch of people get together like that, the message gets so watered down that it either:
    1-doesn't make sense
    2-is retarded

    or in this case, 1 and 2.

  13. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    362
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    i remember hearing most recent on a family guy re-run "i disagree with what you have to say, but i will die defending your right to say it."
    :funny: I believe that was Voltaire. I love how Fox shows always manage to throw in enlightenment philosophs's ideas into their latest episode of Family Guy, Futurama, and The Simpsons.

    sorry, I just had a final on this stuff today

    Back to the point, that's absolutely disgraceful. I can understand that these people have some issues with Reagan, but have some basic respect. people. This is sad stuff. :mad:

  14. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    20
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Erm charge them as in scare them away... Disrespect of that caliber IMO can be met with the consequence, and that would be the families anger. But if a family was provoked like that and some one lost their head or just didn't feel like taking it, they would get in trouble and the antagonists would be the "victims"...

    I'm just saying there are consequences for stupidity and in my experience there are things about our system that hold back the "education" of stupid creatures like these protesters.

    Though I agree with what's been said and would gladly defend ones right, even if I didn't agree.

    Consequence is a fundamental aspect of the way a human or any other creature learns.

    But like many things there is no way around the problem I've brought up, it's better the way it is.

  15. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Nashville
    Posts
    3,519
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 122 Times in 62 Posts
    A good ass-kicking wouldn't make these people any smarter.

  16. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    723
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 11 Times in 7 Posts
    While I probably wouldn't be out waving signs condemning someone in front of their family, I can understand the motivation for them doing so (it's not really meant as an attack on the family anyway, it's for the cameras and viewers). I think the point is basically that they didn't want people to forget that Reagan wasn't a saint. There's a tendency to overlook the flaws of famous people, especially after they have died (not wanting to speak ill of the dead). Just look at Kennedy, people are more than willing to forget a lot of things, because he was so young and given the circumstances that he died under.

    Personally, I think it takes a lot of courage to speak your mind, even when you know that you'll be villified for it. That being said, I still think they could have waited a week. (Edit: actually, thinking about it, what other time would they have to present their view? After the funeral and events surrounding it, most people are just going to move on with their lives, likely with the rosy impression they are presented with)

  17. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    407
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    I don't care when you do it ( that particular protest) Just show some DAMN respect for the family. Remember when the Gay kid in the midwest was murdered a few years back? A bunch of rednecks gathered across the street from the funeral and held signs that said "the kid" is burning in hell and "god hates faggots"!!! Was that "freedom of expression"?!? Would you HONESTLY defend their right to do that? Reagan may not have been a Saint but he did a lot of good for this country. That kid was a kid, living his life. SOme disagree with how he did it. Did EITHER of them deserve that final disrespect?
    Did their respective families?
    People seem to overlook that the founding fathers intended freedom of speech to be free and public discourse about things, ideas and the like. That you would be able to speak out in a CIVILIZED manner against your leaders without fear of reprisal. Not Scream "Burn FAGGOT Burn" or "Reagan's in Hell." When freedom of speech is equated with freedom to do or say whatever you want regardless... then it's not freedom at all. It is failure of a people to remain civilized.
    I guarantee you, as much as I dispise Clinton, when he dies, I would expect the same civility from "my side" and I would get in some "right wingers" face if they had a sign like that on the day of his funeral.

    It's not politics.

    It's not freedom.

    It is what's right.

    I have tought about this issue a bit over the past day or so and I have decided MY view is this... People, no matter how stupid, are smart enough to know what is right and what is wrong. When it is patently obvious that speech is flat out evil, devisive or hate inspiring. The people should deal with the messenger(s).
    In morality... there is black, white AND grey. The black and white? OBVIOUS to descern... the grey... well, that's what your mind is for. I would not defend the right of a someone, anyone, to display their views that way. I would, however sad, defend there right to do it at a proper time. When would that be? The day after the frikkin funeral. If they would have a problem with that I would reserve the RIGHT to wait for their funeral and take a nice, hearty shit on their coffin.
    It would be my personal expression of my freedom to object to their way of thought. My right...
    AND I'm an artist so I got that freedom on my side... as well.

  18. #17
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    los angeles, ca
    Posts
    286
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    "If all mankind minus one were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind." John Stewart Mills, 'On Liberty'

    in strictly logical term, it is/was entirely legal, no matter how much you disagree(or find it distasteful). respect is an abstract concept/value not consistant from person to person therefore not protected by law. your arguement involving the death of a gay boy in the midwest does not really apply although it does attempt to sway emotions.

    stalecracker, you make use of many logical fallacies in trying to make an arguement. i find your comment "It is what's right," to be most troubling. what one person believes to be right may not be shared by all people. you should try to be more tolerant of points of view.

    and before you try to lash out against me in a sneaky fashion(yes, im talking about the p.o.s. comment), notice that i have not endorsed the protestors, nor have i said anything about their cause; i only refer to it being something legal. i don't see how there can be any additional arguement except reffering to respect. once respect becomes something protected by law, there is nothing you or i can do about protestors as they stay within legal boundries.

  19. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    407
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    and before you try to lash out against me in a sneaky fashion(yes, im talking about the p.o.s. comment),
    I was NOT lashing out at you Seb. I used your name in that illustration to drive my point home that was is said and what is quoted can be comprised of the same words yet worlds apart.

    I apologize if it was taken by you as an attack.

    I never said you endorsed one side or the other.

    This is a discussion, nothing more.

    what one person believes to be right may not be shared by all people. you should try to be more tolerant of points of view.
    I am, believe it or not, very tolerant. I could not care less whether or not you or anyone else liked or disliked Reagan, his policies, presidency or haircut. My entire point was that the freedom loving AMERICANS (most likely) who stood outside a funeral, in full view (ultimately) of the family of the deceased with their "religious views" declared for all to see...

    Were WRONG.
    My problem is with the timing of the act, not so much the act itself. Does the act itself bother me? Yes. DO I think they were wrong? Yes. Do they have the right to do congregate and demonstrate? You betcha. Do they have a moral obligation to show respect? In MY OPINION ONLY...

    yes.

    I noticed that of the two responses to my rant. ! focused on politics and the other addressed my lack of tolerance. No mention of the kid who was murdered and his family harassed OR the statement concerning Clinton.
    Nice spin, seb.

    "If all mankind minus one were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind." John Stewart Mills, 'On Liberty'
    That is inherently flawed in and of itself... if you had a village and the village believed, for the most part.. the same set of core beliefs. Life, liberty and safety... for instance. On person decides that they have the right to, for example, stand naked on their front lawn and make lewd gestures at the passing school kids... how is the village better off allowing that one person to continue on?
    on th eother hand... say that one person wants to NOT attend the worship services on a weekly base or at all... does the same villagae have the right to force him? No. The flaw in the above quotation is that it does not allow for the individuals "way of thinking" as being inherently damning to the village. To quote Spock (hah)

    "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few... or the one."

    The Ten Comandments that the Founding Fathers used as a moral guide for the constitution as well as the Declaration isn't just some "god" document... it's the best code for living a free, just and happy life. Don't kill, don't fuck around and don't lust after what you don't have. Be nice to your parents and be nice to the people next door. There's also that little bit about having no other gods before me. I once heard a speker who put that into "human" terms... "Realize that there is something out there bigger than you. God, Millions of people or, i don't know, the universe... Imagine how big those things are and then remember... it isn't all about just you. It's about us all... remember that and try live like you believe it.

  20. #19
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    407
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    And the Bush Administration should stop riding Regan's body as a method to get Bush's poll numbers back up.
    wikdotsys, they are from the same political party. That is politics. Did you make the same observation when kerry invokes the name of JFK? Or has he been dead long enough. Bush, the press, blah, blah have been referring to Reagan in regards to Bush's presidency since the get go. Good and bad... you DO realize that.

  21. #20
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    los angeles, ca
    Posts
    286
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    I noticed that of the two responses to my rant. ! focused on politics and the other addressed my lack of tolerance. No mention of the kid who was murdered and his family harassed OR the statement concerning Clinton.
    ah. i removed that sentence for clarity reasons. lets see if i can explain that again. by the precident set forth in the previous arguement, of protestors at a funeral being legal so far as they do not deprieve anyone of their fundemental rights, it is reasonable to apply the same standard to protestors at the gay boy's funeral and at the future funeral of president clinton.

    because something is legal, does not mean that you need to agree with it however you are bound to follow the letter of the law. abortion can be an example of one of those things. many people find it morally wrong and do not make use of it, whereas others may find it a reasonable and legal means to an end.

    I was NOT lashing out at you Seb. I used your name in that illustration to drive my point home that was is said and what is quoted can be comprised of the same words yet worlds apart.
    that is fine, but i found your choice of names to pick for your hypothetical example to be a concidence.

    That is inherently flawed in and of itself...
    "the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others" Mills again, same book.

    Freedom of speech is not absolute as most people know. the adage, "you have the right to swing your arm as long as it doesn't hit my nose" most often is used as an analogy. It seems as though you are taking the quote relating to actions that one undertakes. i think it is meant as the defined by the dictionary "A belief or conclusion held with confidence but not substantiated by positive knowledge or proof." So essentially, the prior quote relates to what one thinks, not what one does. this second quote essentially brings up the harm principle; it is summed up as allowing intervention when speech causes a direct and clear violation of rights (also "libel laws, blackmail, advertising blatant untruths about commercial products, advertising dangerous products to children (e.g. cigarettes), and securing truth in contracts").

    The Ten Comandments that the Founding Fathers used
    i am rather unsure of that. the consitution is mostly a framework for a system of government. and in recent years, it has been said that several of the founding fathers were rationalists, and occasional church-goers(if ever).

    and one your further points abour morality, et cetera, everyone has their own standard they live by, but i am arguing that not everyone lives by the same mantra. it is the laws which both protect and guide us, but with utmost logic and tolerance should they be established.

  22. #21
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    90
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    I'm not going to comment if I liked Reagan (sp?) or not. But I wouldn't go to someone I hated's funeral and say what an idiot they were. That's just disrespectful to the people who actually feel he did a good job, or mourn for his loss. And anyway the death of a human is not a laughing matter.

  23. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    407
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Whether you agreed or disagreed... save this irreverance for the day AFTER the funeral.
    What started it all... amazing, isn't it?

Similar Threads

  1. SketchBook: Syre plays with fire
    By Syre in forum Sketchbooks
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: August 31st, 2012, 02:30 AM
  2. SketchBook: DREAMCREAM: pixelflux plays with art
    By pixelflux in forum Sketchbooks
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: June 22nd, 2010, 05:01 PM
  3. Art: Mystery Plays
    By link_choi in forum Finished Art
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: August 12th, 2009, 09:36 PM
  4. 1 Plays
    By PILOTVN in forum Photoshop
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: May 7th, 2009, 01:55 AM

Members who have read this thread: 0

There are no members to list at the moment.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Designed by The Coldest Water, we build the coldest best water bottles, ice packs and best pillows.