Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I believe there are people in the world who are somewhat in fear of terrorists threats.
agreed and probably more than necessary ...
however, the threat exists.
I also believe that it's unfair to refer to terrorists' objection and threats as "Muslim objection and threats", as you have done
above.
ok, on a different topic, i may agree ... however, i don't do that PC crap ... and in This case, the only objections and threats
originate from muslims (and i won't specify radical/fundamental/exremist because i am not privy to their viewpoint ... however, they are All muslims).
Not any other sect of any kind.
If it were more than one, i would agree, 'terroristS' ... however, that is not the case in any of the artists currently suffering extreme duress.
It's not just you.
i know, i've read your comments to others. sometimes appropriate, sometimes not.
Your particular opinion is not the standard, either. Matter of fact, i don't believe there is a 'standard' of thought.
i know mine fluctuate based on the circumstance of the situation. I would imagine others do as well.
When you (and others) use the word Muslim, when you really mean terrorist, it seems to indicate that, to you, Muslim = terrorist. You can and
do use the words interchangeably, sometimes adding the adjective "moderate" to differentiate the milder Muslims. The ones who aren't
terrorists...
and the 'word police' don't interest me one bit. i say what i mean and i mean what i say ... i am human, i error but i also learn from same.
when the christians banned Harry Potter, they were the 'crazy christians', to me
when the Fed building in AL fell, he was the 'freakin' fruitcake and nutso - insert religion here'
when the pilot flew into the IRS building, again, he was a 'lunatic - insert religion here'
when the churches were torched, it was 'those maniacal atheists' (i truly forget which group but insert religion)
when the abortion clinics were being attacked and drs killed - it was those 'expletive -insert religion-pro-lifers'
when the election riots occurred, it was those 'off their rocker tea partiers - crazy insert religion here'
**** not, hey look at that group of wild, crazy and whacked-out, American citizens ***
it's just American english, get used to it.
If it weren't for the fact that most activities that occur specifically to inflict and inflame a sense of terror, usually originate in some form of
religion, perhaps i would naturally speak differently (without any prompting from anyone). However, it is what it is and i am not afraid to say so.
if you disagree, show me otherwise.
This very attitude is what needs to be addressed, IMO, and what I think Katie Couric was saying. I'm not even convinced you are aware that
you're doing this, but it's a common occurrence in these threads about Muslims. You might want to give that some thought.
don't need to, i lived before, during and after both All in the Family (prvsly quoted) and Cosby and many others. As stated before, in the beginning,
it served a purpose ... over time, it eroded advances made and created new problems.
We shouldn't try to appease those who are making the threats to scare these people, should we? Should we be politically correct and try our
best not to offend these tyrants?
no but we do anyway. PC, never ... "try best not to offend", sure ... at least that concept works for me.
Or should we let them know that they cannot take from us the very foundation of the freedoms that we enjoy in our country? Just because some
politicians have given up on the ideals this country was founded on, doesn't mean we all should.
well i certainly haven't and i am not the person to discuss loss of freedom with ... boy do i have stories to tell. but on a brighter note, We the
People are the government and when we get that straight, the rest will fall into place. It is cosmic balance.
If we were to let people's fear (and even terrorists acts) stop us from being the country this was intended to be, then we've given up.
did you miss the Patriot Act? TSA? DHS? need i go on?
We have so many divisive issues today. In my mind, if this show could help take one away or bring it out for intelligent discussion, it really
couldn't hurt.
issues / tissues ... quit lookin at the small stuff ... we have much bigger things with which to concern ourselves and fill
our airwaves ... just my opinion.
I don't think we're arguing about whether the show has a right to exist
correct ... but i'm not sure when this discussion evolved
into an argument about anything ... did i miss that?
I guess we have a difference of opinion on whether it would be successful or serve to unite people, even if a little bit.
we do
I would be willing to give it a shot.
likewise but again, don't we already have enough nonsensical entertainment already?
And of course I strongly disagree with you using the word Muslim when you meant radical or terrorist.
ok, disagree but QUIT telling me what i mean ...you are wrong. I said muslim threats, i mean muslim threats and until it is something different, i
don't intend to change my word or 'meaning' for you or anyone else.
you could say i was being as congenial as you were when you assumed i was spreading disinfo (Molly) before being bothered to look for yourself. Be
the change you wish to see. Ghandi
yes soapbox but at least we are engaged in a discussion, isn't that what this is about?
on a side note: here's one reason i have 'issue' with 'terrorist' ... in all of my life until turn of the century, the word simply did NOT exist,
period. You will not find a definition for it in many 'older' dictionaries, especially printed ones. and, considering the above, i prefer
specifics, not generalities as that word indicates. It is far too generalized for me to use as frequently as desired. you ok with
that?
edit on 5-1-2011 by Honor93 because: add text
