He is admirably witty- and on drugs, at that! ;-) Not making fun John, love the posts, actually.
On 4/17/07, Dan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
John, where ever you got your education, I want to go there. Dan V At 03:24 PM 4/17/2007 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said something that elicited my response: I wrote that. I appologize if it offended anyone. I'm on drug therapy and alone a lot. i'm sure I had a point or something that went with it, but my appology stands. I wasn't trying to offend anyone, except maybe a few religous hypocrits that aren't on the list. john -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [email protected] Sent: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 12:55 PM Subject: Re: [QUAD-L] freedom of speech At 07:20 PM 4/15/2007 -0700, Dan T said something that elicited my response: I think the excess eggs should be served at communion. Like the caviar of Christ or something. Maybe add a caudacill from Mary false and malicious statement or report about someone Well as Catholics we are suppose to believe that the Host IS the BODY and BLOOD of Christ - kind of gruesome when you think about it. So doesn't it follow that this would be an appropriate use of these soon to be trashed cells? Anyway, the correct definition of Libel is: "A false publication, as in writing, print, signs, or pictures, that damages a person's reputation." Or: "a false and malicious publication printed for the purpose of defaming a living person". You left out the last clause. In any event, it doesn't damage anyones reputation. What about hate talk? It certainly isn't that. The following are a few examples of hate talk: 'We ought to send those niggers back to Africa where they came from'. 'All cripples should be shot as all they do is leech off the system.' 'Those God damn Jews killed Jesus and I say they should pay for it'. See the difference? You may not like what was posted to this list and that is your prerogative so just delete it. And toughen up your skin a little - it's a rough world out there ;) Dan V *Dan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>* wrote: Dan T, If you can find them, where are they? Are they really Hate talk? Are they really slander (actually the correct word is libel)? If so, please give me the legal definition of the two (you can use a free on-line dictionary) and how they relate. I am also a Catholic but I was not offended by anything I read on this topic. Dan V At 08:34 PM 4/13/2007 -0700, Dan T said something that elicited my response: Dan, I can find those items you questioned below and they are particularly offensive to me as a Catholic. Dan T. Dan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: What in the Hell are you people talking about! Hate talk? By who? Slander? By who? Remember boys and girls just because someone doesn't agree with you, you can't start calling them names. If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. In other words, grow up. Dan V Jim Lubin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: You can't use "freedom of speech" to justify hate speech. It was completely uncalled for, as were most of his other rants. Angie, I think you were the one that brought up the freedom of speech issue but with that freedom comes responsibility. No one has the right to slander others or their beliefs. A point or opinion can be expressed civilly. Dan T. ------------------------------ AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com <http://www.aol.com?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000437>.
-- Life is 440 horsepower in a 2-cylinder engine. -Henry Miller
