One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
All Speech Has Consequences-Just because You Are Free To Say Something, Should You?
Page <<first <prev 4 of 5 next>
May 6, 2015 12:58:41   #
crazylibertarian Loc: Florida by way of New York & Rhode Island
 
The infamous “Piss Christ” episode was where Andres Seraano received a National Institute of Art grant that he used to take a photograph of a crucifix immersed in a beaker of his urine. Was there something special about his urine? But that mustn’t be offensive. Desecrating Christianity is liberal pastime.


Then, there was the display, in The Brooklyn Museum of Art, of an African artist’s rendering of a portrait of The Blessed Virgin Mary using elephant dung. Mayor Rudi Giuliani objected to having it shown in a publically supported institution. Ahh, but artistic freedom screamed the usual suspects including Susan Sarandon, the eternal angelic liberal, and the venerable senator at the time from New York, one Hillary Clinton.

And, do not forget the New Mexico case where a Sante Fe museum showed a painting by a Chicana lesbian depicting Our Land of Guadaloupe in a desecratory manner. The bishop objected on the same basis as Giuliani and was met with similar derision.

We’re supposed to accept these things.

Reply
May 6, 2015 14:39:09   #
DanceTherapist Loc: NYC, now Oakland, Ca
 
KKHI - point well taken.

And a great topic for discussion. I've already replied to SheWolf's topic about this attack in Texas.

It is well worth for many to think about the consequences of free speach.

Ms. Geller was not a "crank". She is, as SheWolf described, self-serving, uncaring, narcissistic, playing with 1st Amendment rights. Yes, I remember the whole exhibit at MOMA, the "piss Christ" and other pieces by other British artists.

I believe one ought to think carefully before doing and/or exhibiting something to which they are fully entitled according to our Constitutional rights. I am not opposed to free speach, by any measure.

I do think that what is amoral and depicts anyone's religious beliefs, or anyone's sexual orientation with hatred and beligerence, needs to step back, and think carefully about the ends justifying the means. To Muslims, depiction, as you said, of the Mohammed, and all sentient beings, is prohibited. This needs careful consideration. What is next? Nazi's again marching in Skokie? The KKK, alive and thriving in, not
only the South? OH, yes, the Khmer Rouge is also alive
and thriving in Cambodia.

Christians, Jews, Muslims, LGBT hatred, all protected under our 1st Amendment rights.

Amoral or perfectly alright?

What do you all think??? Curious in Oakland. Dance
Therapist.

Reply
May 6, 2015 14:44:04   #
DanceTherapist Loc: NYC, now Oakland, Ca
 
rockinetc., sorry, but your saying the angelic liberal something or other about Susan Sarandon has just labeled you as another hater, pretty much as the same as the artists you've mentioned.

You have less credibility than others who have brought this subject to light with insight and inspection.

I cannot begin to take you in a serious manner. Think about that. no smiles or frownies. Just plain talk.

Reply
 
 
May 6, 2015 15:15:33   #
moldyoldy
 
DanceTherapist wrote:
rockinetc., sorry, but your saying the angelic liberal something or other about Susan Sarandon has just labeled you as another hater, pretty much as the same as the artists you've mentioned.

You have less credibility than others who have brought this subject to light with insight and inspection.

I cannot begin to take you in a serious manner. Think about that. no smiles or frownies. Just plain talk.


It seems that all of these desecrations are an attempt to get a reaction. I do not approve of any of them. Peoples beliefs are their own business, and should not be demeaned or forced on others. The lady in texas new what she was doing would likely get a violent reaction. She willingly put people in danger to get notoriety. Now the anti Muslims are up in arms, the peaceful local Muslim community is in danger, and she is grinning all the way to the bank.

Reply
May 6, 2015 18:40:03   #
crazylibertarian Loc: Florida by way of New York & Rhode Island
 
I don't care whay you think.

Reply
May 6, 2015 20:24:53   #
Armageddun Loc: The show me state
 
KHH1 wrote:
True that...they do reflect/deflect...when you accuse them of something truthful...they say it back to you.......they post n-gger over and over then tell me i'm the racist...they do not recognize what each other say, just the response...and that is addressed from the premise it was an initial statment and was unprovoked....


I want to ask a real question and this is not to be a smartalec.

Why can black people call each other the n word and its ok even in public but if a white person uses the n word they are racist???

Reply
May 6, 2015 21:59:44   #
Navy Rob Loc: Hampton Roads Va
 
Im gonna say whatever i want whenever i want. Do something about it

Reply
 
 
May 6, 2015 22:01:10   #
Navy Rob Loc: Hampton Roads Va
 
And i aint no racist! Im a conservative white rednexk with mixed daughters.

Reply
May 6, 2015 22:20:17   #
Armageddun Loc: The show me state
 
Navy Rob wrote:
And i aint no racist! Im a conservative white rednexk with mixed daughters.


:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Reply
May 6, 2015 22:24:32   #
Navy Rob Loc: Hampton Roads Va
 
Armageddun wrote:
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


Thank you bro. Just when they think they know who you are...racebaiters tend to be this way. So do liberals. They cry to the end of the earth that they want honest discourse but do they really

Reply
May 6, 2015 22:30:48   #
Armageddun Loc: The show me state
 
Navy Rob wrote:
Thank you bro. Just when they think they know who you are...racebaiters tend to be this way. So do liberals. They cry to the end of the earth that they want honest discourse but do they really


Sometimes their silence is deafening.. :roll: :roll: :!:

Reply
 
 
May 7, 2015 07:06:46   #
1OldGeezer
 
DanceTherapist wrote:
KKHI - point well taken.

And a great topic for discussion. I've already replied to SheWolf's topic about this attack in Texas.

It is well worth for many to think about the consequences of free speach.

Ms. Geller was not a "crank". She is, as SheWolf described, self-serving, uncaring, narcissistic, playing with 1st Amendment rights. Yes, I remember the whole exhibit at MOMA, the "piss Christ" and other pieces by other British artists.

I believe one ought to think carefully before doing and/or exhibiting something to which they are fully entitled according to our Constitutional rights. I am not opposed to free speach, by any measure.

I do think that what is amoral and depicts anyone's religious beliefs, or anyone's sexual orientation with hatred and beligerence, needs to step back, and think carefully about the ends justifying the means. To Muslims, depiction, as you said, of the Mohammed, and all sentient beings, is prohibited. This needs careful consideration. What is next? Nazi's again marching in Skokie? The KKK, alive and thriving in, not
only the South? OH, yes, the Khmer Rouge is also alive
and thriving in Cambodia.

Christians, Jews, Muslims, LGBT hatred, all protected under our 1st Amendment rights.

Amoral or perfectly alright?

What do you all think??? Curious in Oakland. Dance
Therapist.
KKHI - point well taken. br br And a great topic ... (show quote)


DanceTherapist,

You seem to have pretty much missed the point of the whole episode at Garland. It pretty well illustrated the differences between liberty for American citizens as defined by our constitution and Islamic rule (Sharia law). This is apparently needed as many people on this forum seemed to entirely miss the point.

No one is saying that you should insult anyone but you should have the right to express an opinion even (especially) if someone else doesn't like it. That is a VERY IMPORTANT right guaranteed by our constitution. You have the right to Ignore anything I say, but you don't have the right to kill me for saying it.

You are politically active as evidenced by your participation in this forum, are you aware of the worldwide efforts, including the efforts in the United States, to bring Sharia Law to "the world"? Islamic rule (sharia law) is tyranny, it is more than a religion, it is a governing system. (If you are a woman you probably wouldn't like it.)

This effort to limit free speech under threat of death is just one of the first steps in implementing Islamic (sharia law) rule. Are you aware of what is happening throughout the middle east presently???????

I suggest you do a little research on the subject, that is what the Garland incident was all about.

1oldgeezer

Reply
May 7, 2015 10:09:51   #
crazylibertarian Loc: Florida by way of New York & Rhode Island
 
DanceTherapist wrote:
rockinetc., sorry, but your saying the angelic liberal something or other about Susan Sarandon has just labeled you as another hater, pretty much as the same as the artists you've mentioned.

You have less credibility than others who have brought this subject to light with insight and inspection.

I cannot begin to take you in a serious manner. Think about that. no smiles or frownies. Just plain talk.


I don't really care if you find my cynicism so repulsive. What's the matter, those three absolutely true stories upset you?

Susan Sarandon's opinions have been about as unpredictable as the sunrise. She is in the very vanguard of vogue liberalism.

All you offered in your posting was a broadside. If that's your idea of reasonable debate, it fails in the rules.

In a Linked-In group, I drew charges of anti-semitism because I dared to proffer the opinion that by 1938, Hitler was a minor leaguer in the Tyranny Sweepstakes next to Stalin and that had he died at that time, he’d have gone down in history as Germany’s greatest statesman. That is an opinion that is shared by many historians, mainstream and otherwise. How that person inferred anti-semitism from that posting is beyond me.

There is an Old World, Japanese and Asian view of honor which is germane to what I am about to write. For me to feel any honor about your opinion, I must honor you & it, otherwise it means nothing and your must feel honor for me. By your posting, you have indicated no honor for me so I can feel none for your lack of esteem. And the same goes for that other man in Linked-In.

Think about that. You see no smiles or frownies. Just plain talk

Reply
May 7, 2015 13:54:24   #
bylm1-Bernie
 
DanceTherapist wrote:
rockinetc., sorry, but your saying the angelic liberal something or other about Susan Sarandon has just labeled you as another hater, pretty much as the same as the artists you've mentioned.

You have less credibility than others who have brought this subject to light with insight and inspection.

I cannot begin to take you in a serious manner. Think about that. no smiles or frownies. Just plain talk.




Therapist, I see you have been on OPP for about 2 or 3 weeks now. Welcome. I hope you find it interesting and rewarding. I have enjoyed it and I think I can speak for many others that we occasionally like to have a little fun and jostle one another from time to time. That's why I was a little taken aback when I read your scolding rebuke of Mr. Beaman for his reference to Susan Sarandon as angelic in a light attempt to poke a little fun at a famous public figure who is renowned for her liberalism. To label him as a "hater" is quite a bit over the top in my opinion. I don't know if you were just trying to be cute or if we can count on this type of character assassination from you in the future. If the latter is true, then I think you can count on much diminished credibility on this forum. If we can't smile a little, even in disagreement, then I, personally, have very little interest in a continued dialogue here. In my opinion, the latitude we have here is, to a large degree, what makes it interesting. Sometimes we type as we think and don't take enough time to review what we have said. I wouldn't want to have to guard my every word or phrase to the point where I spend all day on a reply.

Reply
May 7, 2015 18:56:04   #
crazylibertarian Loc: Florida by way of New York & Rhode Island
 
bylm1 wrote:
Therapist, I see you have been on OPP for about 2 or 3 weeks now. Welcome. I hope you find it interesting and rewarding. I have enjoyed it and I think I can speak for many others that we occasionally like to have a little fun and jostle one another from time to time. That's why I was a little taken aback when I read your scolding rebuke of Mr. Beaman for his reference to Susan Sarandon as angelic in a light attempt to poke a little fun at a famous public figure who is renowned for her liberalism. To label him as a "hater" is quite a bit over the top in my opinion. I don't know if you were just trying to be cute or if we can count on this type of character assassination from you in the future. If the latter is true, then I think you can count on much diminished credibility on this forum. If we can't smile a little, even in disagreement, then I, personally, have very little interest in a continued dialogue here. In my opinion, the latitude we have here is, to a large degree, what makes it interesting. Sometimes we type as we think and don't take enough time to review what we have said. I wouldn't want to have to guard my every word or phrase to the point where I spend all day on a reply.
Therapist, I see you have been on OPP for about 2 ... (show quote)


Thank you very much bylm1.


:D :-D :) :lol: :twisted: :XD: :thumbup:

Reply
Page <<first <prev 4 of 5 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.