From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of John Clark On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 1:09 AM, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List <[email protected]> wrote: > Have you seen the cartoons… that went beyond criticizing or poking fun at > someone else’s faith… the portrayal of the prophet (for those of that faith) > is obscene, insulting, gratuitously degrading in overt sexual manner I haven't seen the cartoons so perhaps they really were, obscene, insulting and gratuitously degrading, but I really don't care if they are or not. Which is where you and I differ. I defend their right to free speech on principal, but I also enjoy the right of free speech and am exercising it by stating my view that – based on viewing some of the material this newspaper published – they were offensive chauvinistic racists. Whether or not they viewed themselves that way; their product speaks for itself. > It has no redeeming quality to it. Well, if it insults the prophet (it's about time somebody did) and if religious imbeciles hate it then it can't be all bad. So then by your argument, defecating in holy water for example would be a defensible act? > That is just offensive to me Tough. You don't have a constitutional right never to be offended, and besides the feeling of moral superiority experienced when you are deeply offended can be rather pleasant. Tough, right back at you John. I have the right to express my offense! And nobody can be offended by what they don't see, it would have taken a special effort by you to find those cartoons, and you probably knew even before you saw them that you would likely be offended by them. No, it took very little effort on my part; I saw them posted on another group I am on. > I defend their right of free speech in the same manner as I defend the right > of the KKK or Nazi skinheads to march. Free speech is only free as long as it > extends to even the most obnoxious hate groups I am very glad to hear that. But defending some groups right to Free Speech; does not imply *ENDORSEMENT*! > (including the racist newspaper Charlie Hebdo) To tell the truth I never heard of Charlie Hebdo until a few days ago so maybe it really is as bad as you say, but even if it is I think your timing is abysmal. I heard about them once or twice, but never followed them at all. My timing is intentional instead John. There is this strange idea floating around that in order to defend free speech we must now stand behind the racist offensive crap that Charlie Hebdo published. This weird we are all Charlie Hebdo meme floating around; well I can tell you I sure as hell *AM NOT* Charlie Hebdo! I am offended that you would pick this of all times to fire criticisms at Charlie Hebdo. I picked this moment deliberately because firstly: in a few media cycle moments this will just become a layer of sediment in the forgotten bottom of old news; and secondly to make a point that needs making *now* (as some people try to insinuate this newly minted “requirement” of supporting free speech that we should all stand behind that newspapers published message – turning what you just told me, around on you *tough You don't have a constitutional right never to be offended * And yet though I am offended I am somehow still alive and uninjured, in fact being offended from time to time probably does a person good, keeps the blood moving. There are levels of offensive John. -Chris John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
RE: Why is there something rather than nothing? From quantum theory to dialectics?
'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List Sun, 11 Jan 2015 12:35:25 -0800
- RE: Why is there something rather ... 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List
- Re: Why is there something rather ... spudboy100 via Everything List
- RE: Why is there something rather ... 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List
- RE: Why is there something rather ... 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List
- Re: Why is there something rather ... Bruno Marchal
- Re: Why is there something rather ... Quentin Anciaux
- Re: Why is there something rather ... Telmo Menezes
- Re: Why is there something rather ... Bruno Marchal
- Re: Why is there something rather ... Bruno Marchal
- Re: Why is there something rather ... John Clark
- RE: Why is there something rather ... 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List
- Re: Why is there something rather ... John Clark
- RE: Why is there something rather ... 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List
- Re: Why is there something rather ... John Clark
- Re: Why is there something rather ... spudboy100 via Everything List
- Re: Why is there something rather ... Bruno Marchal
- RE: Why is there something rather ... 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List
- Re: Why is there something rather ... John Clark
- Re: Why is there something rather ... John Clark
- Re: Why is there something rather ... Samiya Illias
- Re: Why is there something rather ... PGC

