Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Büge]

I believe that the right to free speech as the Constitution defines it comes with the responsibility of self-moderation.  Just because you CAN burn holy canon for the purpose of making a political point doesn't mean you SHOULD.

I always assumed that such freedoms included the clause that you recognized that you would be held responsible for your own actions and should you take those actions, you recognized there will be consequences for said actions.

[Detonator]

I'd feel differently if the guy himself was in any danger at all for doing through with this. Something about this man burning the Koran over here and people/soliders in the Middle East facing the immediate violent consequences feels pretty wrong.

Direct provocation like this should be stopped if it serves no real purpose.

Again, this wouldn't be such a problem if the media weren't pouring attention onto the guy.

I believe that the right to free speech as the Constitution defines it comes with the responsibility of self-moderation.  Just because you CAN burn holy canon for the purpose of making a political point doesn't mean you SHOULD.

Well, obviously.  I never once condoned what the guy is doing.

I always assumed that such freedoms included the clause that you recognized that you would be held responsible for your own actions and should you take those actions, you recognized there will be consequences for said actions.

I seem to remember an argument on the old boards about the implications of provoking violence while not breaking the law.  I forget what happened there.

[Büge]

Don't recall that one.

[Mongrel]

this wouldn't be such a problem if the media weren't pouring attention onto the guy.

This kind of cuts to the heart of the matter. I mean, hell, you guys practically sleepwalk through flag burnings now, too bad they couldn't do the same.

[SCD]

this wouldn't be such a problem if the media weren't pouring attention onto the guy.

This kind of cuts to the heart of the matter. I mean, hell, you guys practically sleepwalk through flag burnings now, too bad they couldn't do the same.

Not to mention threats and assassination attempts to  Kurt Westergaard...  Double standard?  What would you be talking of, sir?

[Royal☭]

Well, I'm glad this guy is cutting out his burning the Koran, as it was endangering our soldiers who are in the process of burning Muslims right now.

[Thad]

Mother fucker should've been thrown in Guantanamo, he probably was more of a threat to US national security than the poor bastards left to rot in there.  If he wasn't white he probably would have been shot dead a while ago.

Catloaf, isn't there, like, a class on the US Constitution that you could take at the local community college or something?  Or maybe you could just Google it?

[Classic]

I thought Catloaf was making a commentary on gitmo... For some reason. O well.

Don't recall that [board shattering argument from the previous boards about a homophobe who got hit by a violent gay man with an illegal concealed weapon for spouting something incendiary under his breath].

That's good. Because it never happened.

[Büge]

Oh thaaaaat

Listen, there's a line between calling someone a fag, and burning their holy symbols. I would also argue that neither is worth getting beaten within an inch of one's life.

[SCD]

Well, unlike some people I'm glad to see that the pastor can listen to reason. 

SecDef Gates gives short call and asks nice, pastor concedes and plans to meet up with the Iman in NY later on.

Kabbage:  This is why you shouldn't be so quick to question the first.  As wrong as the book-burning was, it was a protest based on fears grounded on the historical fact that Muslim states tend to build mosques on the churches or temples of the states they conquer.  More importantly, the attempted protest and the drama that ensues has encouraged dialog in a way that would not happened if the national or state government intervened (the burning without a permit would only pave way for a fine).  Now the Pastor and Iman, who under normal circumstances or those of which you suggested would never have met, have a chance to really sit down and talk over coffee or tea, something that would likely assist greatly the Iman in his attempts to find funding for the center.  No doubt that the Prez and his staff did the right thing here.



This is also why I admire Gates - he gets it done.  No fuss, no muss or pleading for the cameras.  Just gets a phone number from one of his spooks and talks it out. 

[Catloaf]

Mother fucker should've been thrown in Guantanamo, he probably was more of a threat to US national security than the poor bastards left to rot in there.  If he wasn't white he probably would have been shot dead a while ago.

Catloaf, isn't there, like, a class on the US Constitution that you could take at the local community college or something?  Or maybe you could just Google it?

While I'll admit it's often hard to tell when I'm seriously stupid/crazy and when I'm speaking in sarcastic hyperbole, this was the latter.

I try to be noticeably more ludicrous in my statements when being sarcastic, but apparently I failed at that and/or am too crazy/stupid when I'm serious.

[Royal☭]

the biggest issue I have with media coverage is that this pastor burning books was not what was endangering the troops and hurting muslim relations.  This guy is small fries compared to our invasion and occupation of muslim countries.

[Brentai]

You're seven years too late to try and stop that.

[Bal]

No one should object on the basis that he has no right to burn the Koran, and any number of Korans that are his property,  and the same goes for the ground zero Al-Qaeda 19 Memorial Education Center, or whatever it is.  Particularly when there are so many other grounds from which to object.

[Beat Bandit]

the biggest issue I have with media coverage is that this pastor burning books was not what was endangering the troops and hurting muslim relations.  This guy is small fries compared to our invasion and occupation of muslim countries.

I thought we were making a big deal about stuff like this as part of the plan to pretend the government didn't tell us we still have troops there.

[Royal☭]

You're thinking of Iraq.  In Afghanistan, the best way to reduce the killing and violence was to increase the number of troops, natch.

[Classic]

no right to burn

Actually, in many dense municipalities burning outside of very specific conditions is illegal. For the simple reason that the local governments can recoup some of its emergency monies in fines if an uncontrolled fire is say... started by a book burning.

EDIT:

Come to think of it, I could probably make a small bonfire if I really wanted to without getting into trouble... but the cops around here are kind of pricks, so who knows.

[Büge]

So hardline bigots are foiled by zoning ordnances? I can live with that.

[Thad]

Well, unlike some people I'm glad to see that the pastor can listen to reason. 

SecDef Gates gives short call and asks nice, pastor concedes and plans to meet up with the Iman in NY later on.

[...]

This is also why I admire Gates - he gets it done.  No fuss, no muss or pleading for the cameras.  Just gets a phone number from one of his spooks and talks it out.

Yes, because there is exactly no way in which an incendiary nutjob finding out he gets to talk to a cabinet member just because he's an incendiary nutjob could ever cause any problems down the road, ever.

Kabbage:  This is why you shouldn't be so quick to question the first.  As wrong as the book-burning was, it was a protest based on fears grounded on the historical fact that Muslim states tend to build mosques on the churches or temples of the states they conquer.

Yeah, THAT'S what it was.

Fuck's sake, SCD, I know you hate Muslims and all, but spit out the Kool-Aid for a minute.  A community center with a prayer room a couple of blocks away from the attack site -- from American Muslims who have no ties to the terrorists who attacked the WTC -- is hardly a giant raised middle finger to a "conquered state".

The guy's fears weren't "grounded in historical fact".  He's an insane bigot who hangs out with Fred Phelps and does crazy shit to get attention.

More importantly, the attempted protest and the drama that ensues has encouraged dialog in a way that would not happened if the national or state government intervened (the burning without a permit would only pave way for a fine).  Now the Pastor and Iman, who under normal circumstances or those of which you suggested would never have met, have a chance to really sit down and talk over coffee or tea, something that would likely assist greatly the Iman in his attempts to find funding for the center.

Yeah, because all the people screaming about OMG GROUND ZERO MOSQUE are going to change their minds over this.

There's only one thing that's going to get Fox News to stop the "Ground Zero Mosque" stories: we hit the second week of November and they don't need election-year posturing anymore.

No one should object on the basis that he has no right to burn the Koran, and any number of Korans that are his property,  and the same goes for the ground zero Al-Qaeda 19 Memorial Education Center, or whatever it is.  Particularly when there are so many other grounds from which to object.

See, the narrative where these two things are compared and mentioned in the same sentence is as nasty a side effect of this conversation as anything.

Yes, burning Korans is covered by the First Amendment even if people consider it morally wrong.

And yes, building a community center two blocks from Ground Zero is covered by the First Amendment even if people consider it morally wrong.

But beyond that superficial similarity, they're pretty damn different situations.  Burning Korans is a deliberately incendiary (literally as well as figuratively) act rooted in intolerance.  In the case of the Islamic community center, I've seen no real evidence that it's intended as some kind of TERROR VICTORY MOSQUE -- in this case, it's the people who OBJECT to it who are unreasoningly intolerant.

[Bal]

Which is why my only point was that there are many things to object to about both things, but their right to do them isn't one of them. I don't think it's a terror victory mosque, and I wouldn't mind if it were, but there are certainly reasonable people who can be offended by the idea of what they're building for legitimate reasons. I don't think being deliberately incendiary (figuratively of course) should be an issue. Just because we live in a world where drawing a picture of Mohammad gets people rioting in the streets doesn't mean we should, and if we backed down off something every time the Islamic world, or anyone else, was going to get violently angry about it, we wouldn't get anywhere.

Book burning guy is still a crazy ass toolbox, but the only people he's really inciting here are also tools, for the most part.