On Sep 25, 2006, at 10:12 AM, Charlie Coleman wrote:
Sorry, but if you are comparing Satan to Hillary running
for the
office of President of the United States, it is incorrect to claim
that he couldn't have any direct power in the world. If you are
...
The point is, Satan cannot run for office. Every Christian knows
this (IMO). That's why trying to make such a comparison 'real' is
not possible. And that is why I think most Christians would pretty
much ignore such a statement/comparison.
But he didn't make the statement from the pulpit; he made it to the
media. Presumably even Falwell knows that there are non-Christians
out there. He was also speaking in a subjunctive mood, which means
that the it was he was speaking of an imaginary event. When someone
says, "If I were you, I would blah, blah...", you understand that
they are not trying to claim that they could somehow magically become
you, and since you know that that's not possible, that you should
'pretty much ignore such a statement'. No, instead, you understand
that they are positing an imaginary situation for the purpose of
giving you advice from another perspective. The same holds true with
Falwell. Of course he isn't claiming that Satan will be entering the
Presidential race; instead, he was asking the listener to imagine
that situation as being possible, and noting that it would be less
offensive to his followers than that of Hillary running.
Sorry for the English lesson, but you seem to be focusing on the
implausibility of a literal interpretation of his words as a way of
weaseling out of his taking responsibility for those words.
Next, do you disagree that Falwell was talking in joking manner?
Yes, I do. I think he was talking in a denigrating manner, designed
to indicate that someone like Hillary Clinton isn't even worth taking
seriously. That's quite different than a joking manner, in which the
target of the joke would agree that it's all in good fun.
I'm not sure what anti-Bush video you're talking about. Was that
the one on MoveOn.org that people threw a fit about? Was it
submitted as a satire or comical piece?
Who knows? It was an open competition, and there were two videos out
of hundreds that used Nazi imagery. It was immediately seized upon by
right-wing groups, crying and whining about how dreadful anyone
associated with MoveOn.org was because of these two videos. At the
time, the rapidity of the response to the videos suggested that one
or both were actually
This was my point: that when you don't like the target of
such
comments, people will find a way to explain it away; to make it
innocuous. But when the target is one of your guys, why, there is no
punishment harsh enough to satisfy our outrage! I think that you've
demonstrated this nicely.
And, conversely, when you find something you don't like you'll find
a way to vilify it. I think you've demonstrated that very well
yourself. So here we are, vilifying each other and each other's
opinions and attitudes. You'd think that evolution would have
knocked this out of our nature by now, huh?
I don't think that it's an issue of vilifying or not; it's an issue
of hypocrisy. It's the refusal to allow one's opponents to use
unpleasant imagery while feeling perfectly at ease to use such
constructs yourself. It's the placing of oneself on a moral pedestal
to judge not only someone who actually made the statement, but to
also judge everyone even remotely tied to that person. Remember,
moveon.org didn't create the video, yet the right-wing has no problem
with attacking them as if they did. I hold Falwell responsible for
his words, but I do not hold every Christian responsible simply
because he is a leader of Christians. That is the difference, and
your attempt at playing this as "oh, everyone does it, so it's NBD"
just doesn't cut it.
-- Ed Leafe
-- http://leafe.com
-- http://dabodev.com
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
