Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your
contribution is not tax-deductible.)
PayPal Acct: 
Feedback: 
Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):
| [ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, [3], 4 ] |
| Subject: Re: P.S. | |
|
Author: Jimmy |
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 20:28:49 10/06/07 Sat Author Host/IP: c-71-197-21-170.hsd1.mi.comcast.net/71.197.21.170 In reply to: Kylopod 's message, "Re: P.S." on 11:41:59 10/06/07 Sat ">>What people are you referring to? > >People advocating extreme ideas that others want >censored." What the fuck is up with these arrows? I find them confusing. They were never there before. At any rate. Are you saying those that don't want to censor extremists are also, therefore, extreme themselves? You can't be. I'll say this, from my own experience, I've never found that to be the case because if what I'm inferring from you is a monster paradox, bro. I don't like the Geraldo types who just want the story but what about the Nelson Algren types who go into the homes of these frustrated souls and gives them a voice and in the process works everything out? KING ME! "We've been through this before." You brought it up. In fact, I hate talking about this. It makes me kind of ill. But it should. We have to be accountable for what Mel did and so does he. It doesn't change what I think of him because I don't think he's that guy from that night. We'll just disagree on that. "You know as well as I >do that Mel gave far from a straight answer on the >Holocaust question. Your explanation was that he >doesn't want to insult his dad. That's a reasonable >explanation, one I've flirted with myself, but by now >I just don't think so." You're trying to paint me into a corner. You've got me by the balls. How did it make you feel, honestly, when Mel quasi-ducked that question? Don't have it memorized but it does come down to something of "My dad has never lied to me." He loves his dad and doesn't want to embarrass him. You'll know better than me everything Mel's dad and has said and done over the years. I remember he said something about the Germans didn't have enough resources to continue the camps. That's rather flimsy and even so, all that meant was the abuse was no longer as sophisticated. I hate talking about this. I really do. And I hate the sort of flippant comments Mel's father makes. But I only find them to be flippant and that he doesn't realize the consequences of his actions. You watch "Curb Your Enthusiasm?" Larry was about to get a haircut and his Irish barber--for some reason--started telling him his daughter had recently miscarried. Larry said, "She's already got nine children." LOL!!!! But the guy went insane on him and started beating him with a towel. Larry David gets and expresses himself one way. Mel Gibson gets it and does it his way. I found what David said both hilarious and yet awful ONCE the barber reacted. > "Where do modern scientists get their theories? Jesus?" Touche. I now want to take this moment to apologize to all the other lores out there. GET OUT OF MY FACE!!! :) ">There were many ways in which the ancients knew that >the earth was round, long before the advent of >science. They could see a ship's mast in the distance >without seeing the ship's body (which was below the >horizon)." Smoke and mirrors. No. But the fact that the mast was below the horizon is simply because the mast is below the horizon. Science, in its dogma which I accept, says that is because the earth is round. And we pray to the Lord. Lord Hear our Prayer. "Or they could notice the earth's curved >shadow on the moon during a lunar eclipse. A Greek >philosopher named Eratosthenes calculated Earth's >circumference and diameter to an astonishing level of >accuracy (compared to modern measurements)." Dude, what the fuck? Am I from the South. Back off. You're hurting my feelings. You 'are' pedantic. No, I'm just kidding. I enjoyed those anecdotes. They illustrate your argument very nicely. > ">But why are you arguing "no one will take it >seriously" for Holocaust denial, then playing Devil's >Advocate when it comes to flat earth?" I fail to see the connection. Hmmmm....ARE YOU SAYING I LIE TO PEOPLE ABOUT SHIT!!! That I'm the bad guy? If so, you are wrong. I'll play devil's advocate (I hate that term but it's the only one I know at the moment) both flippantly as well as seriously. One has to if they want to make an educated decision. I'll CLOSE with the devil advocate so long as the conclusion he or she is buying into is morally right. I trust myself with this power. And that's WHY they call it devil's advocate. BEAT HIM!!! Do not ignore him. At least that is what I was taught. "The only real >difference between the two claims is that the first is >a thousand times more offensive." Of course it is but you are the one who made the connection, sir. Of maybe I did. At any rate, you are totally right that the denial is far more offensive than taking a hypothetical skeptical approach and applying it back onto itself. Since I don't see how denying the holocaust could help me why would I do it? Even if it could help me I would not do it. I could cheat on my girlfriend if I wanted to and I could get away with it. And sometimes I think about it. But I won't do it. Because I have standards and those standards were shaped by my morals. And if I do something bad I feel miserable. And this has NOTHING to do with Sascha Baron Cohen. BRING HIM ON!!!! By the way, he was in the final episode of "Curb Your Enthusiasm," as you probably know. I didn't even recognize him yet I knew I knew him. My draw dropped during the credits. FUCKING SWEET!!!! "But if you're going >to start saying we're all indoctrinated in science, >you could make the same argument with the study of >history." WITH EVERYTHING!!! What, we should fore go the litmus test? I forgot what that was but I know what it means. I did learn about it in Physical Science but I only remember it because it was the concrete impetus of the term a lot of people have thrown around. And I just did it myself. > >"You're right in the sense that much of the populace >does not think for themselves." And I just proved it with the whole Litmus analogy. "Everyone uses "flat >earth" as the emblem of irrational belief even though >most people probably don't have a clue how scientists >actually know the earth is round, other than that we >have the pictures from NASA. It just goes to show that >most people believe what they've been taught to >believe, even when they're talking about the >importance of independent thinking." And that was my point. I just couldn't expand it as well. Are you mad at me? :) > >"There are two basic problems with giving marginalized >extremists a platform." All right, let's hear 'em! "The first is that there are so >many extremist ideas out there we literally wouldn't >have the time to cover them all." While true that's a little off-topic. Is that a bonus idea? " The second is that it >would serve no good purpose. If there were televised >debates between flat earth theorists and mainstream >geologists, I guarantee you that the membership of the >Flat Earth Society would increase." LOL!!! And that's why Colbert is cool. He gives an outlet for those ideas while at the same time lampooning them. That could be dangerous in the wrong hands. But Steve is cool so he's good-to-go. That is kinda what you're saying and it shouldn't surprise you to find out I agree. " Not because they >have any good arguments, but because there will always >be people out there drawn to such things as long as >they are aware of them." So what do we do about THAT!!! Will there ever be a day where the masses will receive the same education as the Prep School set? No. So what is your solution for the unwashed? I'm listening because that's the crux of the whole dilemna. But there is no solution. Clinton had 8 years to do something about education in this country. What did he do!? NOTHING!!! There is nothing you can do. So will always have a credulous populace and therefore we have to filter what they can watch. BUT THAT BRINGS US BACK TO WHOSE DOING THE FILTERING!!!! And worse the developed filtering procedures can get into the wrong hands. You saw "Good Night and Good Luck" right? That fucking Murrow was a bad-ass mother fucker. No fear. What would Eddie say about Ahman? Should I go ask Keith Olberman!? Get outta here. " Most people would probably be >unaffected, but it wouldn't really help them either. >People interested in hearing such views can seek them >out--and that's why we have the Internet, libraries, >and so on. There's no point in going out of our way to >give them exposure." Of course you make some excellent points but we still disagree. So let me ask you this: Why did Bollinger invite him to speak in the first place? What were his official reasons and if you don't accept them what's beneath them. Is Bollinger a Zionist? I dunno. I don't anything about him just that he shared a stage with that monster and talked some shit and that I respected him for it. That's very bold. Ask Salman Rushdie. > >"It's a little more complicated with Ahmadinejad. >(Didn't look the spelling up, that's just a guess.)" I gave up a long time ago. That's why nicknames RULE! "He >already has some exposure, and power. Still, I'm not >sure what they hope to accomplish by giving him a >platform." Probably to show the tolerance of our society. Remember during the Cold War when the Soviets challenged us for not broadcasting their version of the fire-side chats to the people? Weren't they kinda right? Yes, they will not broadcast our shit, they don't have freedom of speech. But we do. The Russians are good at chess. The Stalinists were assholes but overall I think the majority of rank-and-file Russians are good people. I feel bad that I never thought about them growing up in the Eighties. >"You are way off." Relax, I was clearly joking. Do you really think I'm gonna encourage my children to bully an innocent kid. I was merely demonstrating that some will. Rosie and Bill hashed this shit out already. Though I wouldn't want to grow up in a gay home if I did I wouldn't know the difference. And MTV, I think, had a whole show about just 'how' awesome these gay adoptees have it. Whatever. Don't sell me, Cocheese. That medium is not the route to my soul. My girls' cousin is gay. If he were to adopt children one day they would be playing with mine. This all goes back to the dinner scene in "The Family Stone" where Diane Keaton goes CRAZY on Sarah Jessica Parker...unfairly. "I care plenty about kids having good >homes, and I have seen nothing to convince me that >being raised by two gay people creates a terrible >childhood. Other things being equal, it's almost >certainly healthier than a single parent home." Begrudgingly, I agree. You know what a good idea for a movie would be? A black kid raised by two gay white men. [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ] |
| Subject | Author | Date |
| Re: P.S. | Kylopod | 20:10:32 10/07/07 Sun |
|
||
|
Forum timezone: GMT-14 VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB: Before posting please read our privacy policy. VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems. Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved. |