It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Petraeus: Burning Quran Endangers Troops

page: 12
<< 9  10  11   >>

log in


posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 02:36 AM
reply to post by Digital_Reality

A man and his woman are getting ready to go out on a date, their first since their baby was born. She puts on the only dress she has that fits her and says "Does this dress make me look fat?" He looks at her body with a good 20 pounds of extra baby weight on it, and then says "No dear, you look gorgeous!" (When he really did think she looked fat in the dress).

A person has the right to freedom of expression, they also have the free will to choose if they should use it or not.

This man had the right to freedom of expression, he chose to avoid causing her pain about the way she looked and other possible consequences of what he had to say.

I think if a survey was done I would find many a man who would say, yes, they had used their free will to not speak freely (even though they had freedom of speech).

We have choices in how we say and do things. If I receive several gifts at a party I can thank everyone for their gifts fairly equally. Or I can thank a few and tell one in front of the others that their gift was the best one I received and hurt the feelings of the other. I have free will to choose if I am going to cause harm to someone else.

I can say to a guy that has lost weight "You are looking pretty buff these days" or I can say "Hey, you are not as fat as you used to be."

We can, with our words and actions build up or break down. Construct or destruct. I have free will. Even if others choose to destruct I can take a different path and construct. I can build or destroy.

If everyone takes the path that we all choose to destruct what will be left of humanity?

posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 05:55 AM
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

Who doesn't share the opinion that is really just a book? Why you and the poster you were replying to, don't share that opinion that it is just a book. Why because Terry Jones the man who started all this controversy doesn't believe it is just a book either. That is why he wants to burn it, because he knows many people the world over don't consider it to be just a book, and he doesn't consider it to be just a book either.

Humm, sounds similar to what I said, very similar indeed

Yet you and the poster you are responding too are not saying that. You are saying it is wrong of people to react because it is just a book, yet you aren't saying its equally wrong for people to burn it because it's just a book.

Destruction of property is wrong period! I forgot how people like to split hairs and use OCD when they imagine and attempt to twist meanings and words.

Your arguments are biased to exclusively favor one side on what is always a two sided coin in the way the equation is politically represented.

Saying what is in one's heart is what is important is biased? Material things are symbolic and they are very important but they are not worth killing others over.
Burn my Bible, Flag and even my house if one must, I will fight for my right to own those material items but they will not destroy what is in my heart and mind. I feel that both sides of the coin was already addressed.

It's a very disengenous and false and poorly thought out argument, because if you are arguing this issue at all, you clearly don't see this issue as just a book, and if it was just a book, no one would be singling out this specific book to burn for religious and political purposes, and no one would be reacting to it.

Some people like to talk just to hear themselves talk.

Understanding what you are really expressing and saying and what you aren't really expressing and saying is important too ever reaching the point where anyone would see such things that are icons and symbols of an idealogy as just a book.

Round and round some go, twisting and turning and repeating and repeating over and over until they imagine they actually made a statement that might show what they say is the opposite of what the other person said.....

Stupid is as stupid does.

Now I can guess it's time to speak in third person, find a video to post and imagine their agenda was accomplished


edit on 13-9-2010 by sweetliberty because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 06:06 AM
how does a general, get scared?

commander in a war zone, ok.

what's going on?

obamma tell him it is bad thing?

or what?

new topics
<< 9  10  11   >>

log in