Closing a Thread: Warning! Graphic picture
- Thread starter just me
- Start date
Why do you care so much about the stupid shit stupid people say? Shouldn't it just be self evident that dumb people say dumb things?
It seems to me it's like getting worked up about someone claiming that Santa Clause is an elf-molester. Sure, it's kind of hurtful and maybe worrisome even to those who want to believe in Santa Clause, but it's no reason to get yourself worked up over.
I'm worried about you, sprinkles. He's a nobody who's going to harm nobody.
Please don't compare gay bashing to Santa Clause.
I'll put it to you this way: if we were discussing whether or not "nigger" was an OK term to use for black people, would you shrug that off and say compare it to insulting Santa?
If we were having a moral discussion about whether or not Arabs/Jews/Gypsies/whatever had the right to be their own skin color, would you say that you were worried about those objecting to those claims?
It's not about being PC, it's about not hating someone for existing. Judge people for their actions, not what they can't control.
Nobody's perfect from birth, and frankly, from here and now especially w/o a lot of work, patience and tolerance. I guess that depends on what perfection is to you, perhaps only more thorough understanding. I haven't ever seen [MENTION=680]just me[/MENTION] being close-minded as much as expressing his less than common view, for this forum anyway, and almost always expresses himself civilly, and gets as much grief as [MENTION=1871]muir[/MENTION]. The hate wagon is tempting but a bumpy ride. People aren't usually brought understanding by conflict as much as they overcome their emotional responses and find it despite the conflict. Finding the thought provoking ideas that help bring understanding is the difficult, but much more rewarding, way to evangelize.
Some people DO use that term just as some people DO bash gays just as some people DO still believe in Santa. What matters is how you cope with those facts. We're not having those discussions right now, but how we go about having those discussions. In other words, I'm not taking his side by allowing him to take a stance. Allowing him to take a stance allows me to oppose it.
As you were both so adamant in stating, silence may be mistaken for acceptance so let us not silence him, but oppose him.
You both seem to be taking his words too seriously. In that, in arguing against him and considering his views you give them too much weight and seriousness and you forget yourself. His words are nothing more than his words and are only as serious as you give weight to them.
Halfassing what? Taking his argument seriously? I mean, if you WANT to get carried away with every thing....
I think there is a fair middle ground where the discussion is meant to take place though.
His views are usually expressed in a hateful way by others, so the association is natural. However, if you look, at least it seems to me, he doesn't hold any hate with them. People are unintentionally hurtful in many, many ways, and I doubt anyone has succeeded in avoiding it entirely.
If words are only words then why bother? Things that are only words don't do anything the last I checked. Opposing benign things is a waste.
Discussion is a means, not an end.
I'm speaking on my own behalf.
I didn't close the thread. I used my words to attempt to start a debate. He never debated anyone, he used every opportunity to spew hate-speech. There's a difference between debate and hate-speech.
He's using rhetoric to appear sympathetic. Read what he's written and really think about what it is he's saying. He doesn't want them to be allowed to love each other, he doesn't want them to have jobs, and he think that they're just confused and can be made right by religion. Does that sound to you like he doesn't hold any hate towards them?
Consider this: speaking occupies a liminal middle ground in and of itself. The act of speaking, thinking, and talking are actions and activities that we engage in most of the time. On the other hand we oftentimes consider communication and thoughts as antithetical to action, ie actions speak louder than words, yet speaking and thinking are acts in and of themselves.
There IS a middle ground there for you to find. Words are as cheap and meaninglessness as you want them to be, but they can carry weight if you allow them to.
Why do we feel the need to justify the way we are? Why do we feel we must judge everyone? If a stone were thrown at you, would you feel justified to throw one back? Would you expect everyone to act as you acted?
One word can cause more than most would imagine.
One word can cause more than most would imagine.
I didn't close the thread either. I did the same as you. I also didn't open up this thread, but here we are.
How you choose to react to the words of others is all I'm interested in here and now.
[MENTION=4822]Matt3737[/MENTION]
As I said before I think it is only fair to close the thread by his own rules.
He said he is free to not hire anyone he wants so we should also be free to close any thread. I mean if I appeal to a mod to close a thread, and they agree with me, that's completely fair and by the book isn't it?
That's what the whole thing was about. The fact that he's free to discriminate and have his opinion. Well we also discriminated and had our opinions. The difference is that it got elevated to an admin that actually had the power to do something.
That's when words matter - when they inform actions.
As I said before I think it is only fair to close the thread by his own rules.
He said he is free to not hire anyone he wants so we should also be free to close any thread. I mean if I appeal to a mod to close a thread, and they agree with me, that's completely fair and by the book isn't it?
That's what the whole thing was about. The fact that he's free to discriminate and have his opinion. Well we also discriminated and had our opinions. The difference is that it got elevated to an admin that actually had the power to do something.
That's when words matter - when they inform actions.