Y'all may be right on that, but hate speech of that type directed publicly at a
single named individual is, IMO, a greater offense that hate speech that
applies to nameless groups of individuals. It's moot here since Godfrey doesn't
seem at all ruffled or intimidated by it. Some individuals would not be so
[hmmmm] understanding.
Jeffery
On Oct 25, 2010, at 6:40 AM, Steven Desjardins wrote:
> Using "hate crime" for this diminishes the use of the phrase when it
> is actually warranted. We're talking about a snarky remark expressing
> dislike (uncivil but in bounds) expressed in an unacceptable way.
> Just to note, there has been an expected response. Folks used their
> own "freedom of speech" to express their displeasure. Bill was not
> banned from the list but left of his own accord in the face of
> criticism. That is simply how groups of people work. I personally
> hope Bill will cool off a bit and come back. People make mistakes and
> you can't shoot them every time their all too common ugly side
> emerges.
>
> On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 11:21 PM, P. J. Alling
> <webstertwenty...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Political correctness has officially run amuck here. Hate crime?
>> Pulllease.... Someone's sensibilities being bruised is not a hate crime.
>> Bill Robb, made a truthful statement in as offensive a manor as he could.
>> So what. I've put both Godfrey and Bill on my kill list at different times
>> for different reasons. Both can be total SOBs. Writing something I
>> personally find, stupid, arrogant, obnoxious, self destructive, insulting,
>> you name it isn't a crime. Save calling things crimes that actually are.
>>
>> On 10/24/2010 3:36 PM, Jeffery Smith wrote:
>>>
>>> Boorish is putting it mildly. It DOES fall under hate crime (which
>>> includes insults and verbal abuse). I think hate crime is a clear line that
>>> we don't traverse on this list. Pompous gas bag is not a hate crime. Faggot
>>> is. I would prefer the way William F. Buckley introduced Norman Mailer
>>> ("unalloyed narcissism"). Mailer even found it charming.
>>>
>>> Jeffery
>>>
>>>
>>> On Oct 24, 2010, at 2:22 PM, Walter Gilbert wrote:
>>>
>>>> Shunning someone for boorish behavior isn't trampling on their rights.
>>>> It's merely depriving them of a platform from which to engage in that
>>>> boorish behavior ... a platform to which no one person is entitled.
>>>>
>>>> -- Walt
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> why? isn't pompous twittery also an inherent trait? If you limit other
>>>>> people's right to say things you don't like, someone else will limit
>>>>> your
>>>>> right to say things they don't like. We all know where that leads.
>>>>>
>>>>> Secondly, why do you limit it to inherent properties, whatever that
>>>>> means?
>>>>> What if being gay turns out not to be an inherent property? Does that
>>>>> suddenly make it ok to insult gay people? I don't think so.
>>>>>
>>>>> B
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>>>> PDML@pdml.net
>>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
>>>> follow the directions.
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> "His lack of education is more than compensated for by his keenly developed
>> moral bankruptcy."
>> -Woody Allen
>>
>>
>> --
>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> PDML@pdml.net
>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
>> follow the directions.
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Steve Desjardins
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
> the directions.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
