Not being happy the guy's dead doesn't make you a better person than those glad to see the back of him.
Nobody here even wished him dead (I don't doubt some people would've, given the oppourtunity:P ). I can understand being appalled by hatred along the lines of "I hope he gets AIDS, infects his wife and his kids get raped by dogs in hell". But on the whole people are just glad he's gone. As hatred goes, it's feeble.
I can't speak for celery here, but no, there are no beleifs I am willing to hate someone for. Hatred is dehumanizing and just begets more hatred. There are beleifs I would die fighting against, but none worth hating for. Hatred is self-centered and dehumanizing to others. The choice is either hatred or understanding. You can understand someone intelectually and hate them at the same time, but real understanding of another human being requires a level of empathy that hatred precludes. It is a very difficult thing to give up hating others, especially people that hate you. We should try anyway.
God you're such a fucking hippy. "It's okay to not like things but only if you love everyone and trees!"
God you're such a fucking hippy. "It's okay to not like things but only if you love everyone and trees!"
I'm afraid I'm going to have to go with VC here. I think there's something to be said for a basic egalitarian outlook, which acknowledges that human suffering, even among the iniquitous, is a bad thing. However, the sheer dose of sanctimony coming across here is absurd.
I can't speak for celery here, but no, there are no beleifs I am willing to hate someone for. Hatred is dehumanizing and just begets more hatred. There are beleifs I would die fighting against, but none worth hating for. Hatred is self-centered and dehumanizing to others. The choice is either hatred or understanding. You can understand someone intelectually and hate them at the same time, but real understanding of another human being requires a level of empathy that hatred precludes. It is a very difficult thing to give up hating others, especially people that hate you. We should try anyway.
God you're such a fucking hippy. "It's okay to not like things but only if you love everyone and trees!"
God you're such a fucking jackass.
It may astonish you to know that morality is not some counter culture new age fetish.
I can't speak for celery here, but no, there are no beleifs I am willing to hate someone for. Hatred is dehumanizing and just begets more hatred. There are beleifs I would die fighting against, but none worth hating for. Hatred is self-centered and dehumanizing to others. The choice is either hatred or understanding. You can understand someone intelectually and hate them at the same time, but real understanding of another human being requires a level of empathy that hatred precludes. It is a very difficult thing to give up hating others, especially people that hate you. We should try anyway.
God you're such a fucking hippy. "It's okay to not like things but only if you love everyone and trees!"
God you're such a fucking jackass.
It may astonish you to know that morality is not some counter culture new age fetish.
Yeah except that guy said nothing except pick the word he wanted to be the 'bad' word and talk about it to make it the 'bad' word.
I can't speak for celery here, but no, there are no beleifs I am willing to hate someone for. Hatred is dehumanizing and just begets more hatred. There are beleifs I would die fighting against, but none worth hating for. Hatred is self-centered and dehumanizing to others. The choice is either hatred or understanding. You can understand someone intelectually and hate them at the same time, but real understanding of another human being requires a level of empathy that hatred precludes. It is a very difficult thing to give up hating others, especially people that hate you. We should try anyway.
God you're such a fucking hippy. "It's okay to not like things but only if you love everyone and trees!"
God you're such a fucking jackass.
It may astonish you to know that morality is not some counter culture new age fetish.
Yeah except that guy said nothing except pick the word he wanted to be the 'bad' word and talk about it to make it the 'bad' word.
Which was not the objection that VC made.
Look, this thread was started to discuss the ideas involved. It is not a spontaneous reaction, it is the thread dedicated to the discussion of some varying reactions we all had to Falwell's death. Explanation and background philosophy and whatnot.
Given that fact, maybe there could be a little bit less eye rolling on the other side when general philosophies are given out. I'm a little bit tired of this game where one side tries to explain what it's thinking and the other kind of jumps up and down and complains that this is all a semantic game, that people are stupid hippies, that the thread is stupid and that this is an overblown reaction to people celebrating Falwell's death. Everyone had the reactions they did. This thread is about explaining them.
The objections themselves were two are three line posts and there were not a very high volume of them. I'm feeling a little bit ambushed here. Like the conversation went something like:
1. Woo Hoo! Falwell is dead!
2. Well that is kind of bad form.
1. Why do you think that?
2. Well, XYZ.
1. Geez! Enough with the sermon! Who asked you anyway!
I felt like a terrible person when seeing this thread was the first I knew that Falwell had died. I felt even worse when I realised that everything I'd ever known of the guy I learned in this thread. Finally, I felt like a failure as a human being when I realised that I didn't give a damn.
Honestly, I don't know what comes after death, but a rather large portion of America says that it's either gonna be good or won't be there at all. If it's either of those cases, I'm happy for a fellow human being making it to either end, and if it's hell... Well then he has bigger problems than what a bunch of total strangers decided to say and do after he's dead.
I'm glad he's gone, but even with the horrible things he's said, they were just words. I think it was said in this thread that the only people who listened to him were already convinced of the things he said anyways. His death does nothing to "solve" any problems, there will always be people like him. For every public bigot there is preaching hate, there are probably many more that are unpublicized doing worse. You celebrate the death of a loud ant.
I can't speak for celery here, but no, there are no beleifs I am willing to hate someone for. Hatred is dehumanizing and just begets more hatred. There are beleifs I would die fighting against, but none worth hating for. Hatred is self-centered and dehumanizing to others. The choice is either hatred or understanding. You can understand someone intelectually and hate them at the same time, but real understanding of another human being requires a level of empathy that hatred precludes. It is a very difficult thing to give up hating others, especially people that hate you. We should try anyway.
God you're such a fucking hippy. "It's okay to not like things but only if you love everyone and trees!"
God you're such a fucking jackass.
It may astonish you to know that morality is not some counter culture new age fetish.
Yeah except that guy said nothing except pick the word he wanted to be the 'bad' word and talk about it to make it the 'bad' word.
Which was not the objection that VC made.
Look, this thread was started to discuss the ideas involved. It is not a spontaneous reaction, it is the thread dedicated to the discussion of some varying reactions we all had to Falwell's death. Explanation and background philosophy and whatnot.
Given that fact, maybe there could be a little bit less eye rolling on the other side when general philosophies are given out. I'm a little bit tired of this game where one side tries to explain what it's thinking and the other kind of jumps up and down and complains that this is all a semantic game, that people are stupid hippies, that the thread is stupid and that this is an overblown reaction to people celebrating Falwell's death. Everyone had the reactions they did. This thread is about explaining them.
The objections themselves were two are three line posts and there were not a very high volume of them. I'm feeling a little bit ambushed here. Like the conversation went something like:
1. Woo Hoo! Falwell is dead!
2. Well that is kind of bad form.
1. Why do you think that?
2. Well, XYZ.
1. Geez! Enough with the sermon! Who asked you anyway!
You feel ambushed? How about all the people in this thread who were saying "good, one less bigot in the world." And suddenly we are the worst people on the planet, just as bad, or, as some have said, worse then Falwell (I think hitler was tossed around a time or two as well).
Neither side has come out of this thread bathed in light... so don't act like your side has been any more rational then the other.
Sentry on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
wrote:
When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
edited May 2007
It's been more like
1: I'm glad that he'll stop spewing hate
2: You shouldn't celebrate someone's death
1: I'm not celebrating his death, I'm just glad that bigotry is less. There is a difference
2: Being glad that someone's actions are gone is the same as being glad they're dead
1: No it's not, there's a subtle difference
2: Look, if you're happy they're no longer doing what you don't like, because they're dead, you're celebrating their death
1: I would be just as happy if they weren't dead but had stopped though. Of course, the only way hate-mongering like that will stop is if someone's dead. Of course, that someone is usually (at least in this case) a self-righteous blowhard. Can we at least agree that Falwell sucked while he was alive?
2: Yes. Noone's denying Falwell sucked while he was alive
1: Aha, but now the sucky guy's gone, so doesn't that give you a little bit of satisfaction?
3: Screw you guys, I'm glad he's dead!
You feel ambushed? How about all the people in this thread who were saying "good, one less bigot in the world." And suddenly we are the worst people on the planet, just as bad, or, as some have said, worse then Falwell (I think hitler was tossed around a time or two as well).
O please.
One can point out that a rivulet of water and a huge river share the same properties without saying that a rivulet is a river.
This is just another lame ass strawman.
And in any case, this was a thread specifically created to discuss the ideas behind respect for the dead, with Falwell as an example. If you came in here saying how glad that there was one less bigot in the world and then felt ambushed it's your own damn fault for not understanding the thread topic.
"O wow, I just had no idea that in this thread about respect for the dead anyone would say we should respect the dead."
I'm glad he's gone, but even with the horrible things he's said, they were just words. I think it was said in this thread that the only people who listened to him were already convinced of the things he said anyways. His death does nothing to "solve" any problems, there will always be people like him. For every public bigot there is preaching hate, there are probably many more that are unpublicized doing worse. You celebrate the death of a loud ant.
I have to disagree. Not only are words themselves powerful catalysts, but he was instrumental in creating the "religious right" as we know it today, which I don't think any of us honestly feel is a force for anything but intolerance, preaching and if they got their way, theocracy.
You feel ambushed? How about all the people in this thread who were saying "good, one less bigot in the world." And suddenly we are the worst people on the planet, just as bad, or, as some have said, worse then Falwell (I think hitler was tossed around a time or two as well).
O please.
One can point out that a rivulet of water and a huge river share the same properties without saying that a rivulet is a river.
This is just another lame ass strawman.
And in any case, this was a thread specifically created to discuss the ideas behind respect for the dead, with Falwell as an example. If you came in here saying how glad that there was one less bigot in the world and then felt ambushed it's your own damn fault for not understanding the thread topic.
"O wow, I just had no idea that in this thread about respect for the dead anyone would say we should respect the dead."
Oh, I forgot your side was right. If you felt ambushed because people disagreed with you, maybe debate and discourse isn't for you. Perhaps you'd be happier in an "agree with me or else" thread.
And my contention, since page 1, is that being dead does not automatically give you a level of respect. Congrats, you died, everyone fucking does it.
Sentry on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
wrote:
When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
As the OP, while I admit the threads regarding Falwell's death were clearly the catalyst for this, I was hoping we could talk more generally about respect for the dead (or not), rather than focusing on one guy that we pretty much all agree was a dick, regardless of what we're willing to say about him in death.
Is there something, ignoring courtesy to family/friends, that should stop us from speaking ill of the dead? Is there something unique and special about being human, alive or dead, that we should always seek to honor and treat with respect?
I'd feel horrible if I mentioned something to my friend about their mother / father. I probably am over sensitive to it, but they both went through a lot of emotional trauma with the death of a family member, and I just don't want to drudge up old feelings about that.
I can't speak for celery here, but no, there are no beleifs I am willing to hate someone for. Hatred is dehumanizing and just begets more hatred. There are beleifs I would die fighting against, but none worth hating for. Hatred is self-centered and dehumanizing to others. The choice is either hatred or understanding. You can understand someone intelectually and hate them at the same time, but real understanding of another human being requires a level of empathy that hatred precludes. It is a very difficult thing to give up hating others, especially people that hate you. We should try anyway.
God you're such a fucking hippy. "It's okay to not like things but only if you love everyone and trees!"
God you're such a fucking jackass.
It may astonish you to know that morality is not some counter culture new age fetish.
You have deliberately neglected to respond to all the reasoned arguments that the side you're not on has provided. And then you have the gall to get uppity when I get short with someone saying something stupid on your side. "I am Shinto" is not a valid counter-argument. What counter-arguments you have provided are dogmatic false-dichotomies and unsupported one-liners like "ololz treat others to cake and you will get some too!" Either fucking engage the real arguments or don't fucking bother responding.
Is there something, ignoring courtesy to family/friends, that should stop us from speaking ill of the dead? Is there something unique and special about being human, alive or dead, that we should always seek to honor and treat with respect?
Depends. If you're a follower of the first documented hippie in human history, then yes. If you have a moral system that mirrors that of the first documented hippie in human history, then yes. If you have a moral system based on what people do rather than what they're born as, no.
Oh, I forgot your side was right. If you felt ambushed because people disagreed with you, maybe debate and discourse isn't for you. Perhaps you'd be happier in an "agree with me or else" thread.
Cut the shit. I felt ambushed because in a thread for discussion people role their eyes and complain about ideas being laid out. That is what the thread is for. I'm not complaining about people disagreeing.
You feel ambushed because apparently in a thread designed to talk about whether the dead should be respected or not, people held the position that they should. You are wrong.
You have deliberately neglected to respond to all the reasoned arguments that the side you're not on has provided.
What a huge load of shit.
And then you have the gall to get uppity when I get short with someone saying something stupid on your side. "I am Shinto" is not a valid counter-argument. What counter-arguments you have provided are dogmatic false-dichotomies and unsupported one-liners like "ololz treat others to cake and you will get some too!" Either fucking engage the real arguments or don't fucking bother responding.
Whatever. This is your pattern. You engage in a discussion for a page or two and when people don't come around you accuse them of throwing up smoke, then of not answering your arguments, then you accuse them of derailing the thread or not engaging your arguments.
I'm pretty much done ever responding to you. Adios VC.
Oh, I forgot your side was right. If you felt ambushed because people disagreed with you, maybe debate and discourse isn't for you. Perhaps you'd be happier in an "agree with me or else" thread.
Cut the shit. I felt ambushed because in a thread for discussion people role their eyes and complain about ideas being laid out. That is what the thread is for. I'm not complaining about people disagreeing.
You feel ambushed because apparently in a thread designed to talk about whether the dead should be respected or not, people held the position that they should. You are wrong.
Oh yeah, the meta-argument not only was totally relevant to your position, but in fact proved it beyond the need to even acknowledge other possible viewpoints.
Is there something, ignoring courtesy to family/friends, that should stop us from speaking ill of the dead? Is there something unique and special about being human, alive or dead, that we should always seek to honor and treat with respect?
Depends. If you're a follower of the first documented hippie in human history, then yes. If you have a moral system that mirrors that of the first documented hippie in human history, then yes. If you have a moral system based on what people do rather than what they're born as, no.
the problem with that is that it's a reeeaallll slippery slope with hate. falwell was an asshole, and i'm not saying you don't have the "right" to hate his actions or anything (or hell, even him), but at what point do you get to where you start to hate everybody you even slightly disagree with?
for all of falwell's assholery, he didn't murder anybody. he didn't really do anything except spew hateful rhetoric. i mean, damn, welfare reform probably hurt more people than falwell ever did. do you hate bill clinton? jimmy carter's incompetence kept hostages in iran for a long, long ass time. do you hate him? falwell wasn't some horrible inhuman monster, no matter how much you want to vilify him, and he probably doesn't warrant the kind of hate shown here and in other places.
my point is that there reaches a point where you could spend your time hating every public figure you disgaree with on some level, but honestly, who has that kind of time and energy? all you end up being is a dude on some internet forum angrily trying to defend his right to hate by calling people "fucking hippies".
yeah, congrats buddy. hate seems to have worked out real well for you there.
Pants Man on
"okay byron, my grandma has a right to be happy, so i give you my blessing. just... don't get her pregnant. i don't need another mom."
You have deliberately neglected to respond to all the reasoned arguments that the side you're not on has provided.
What a huge load of shit.
And then you have the gall to get uppity when I get short with someone saying something stupid on your side. "I am Shinto" is not a valid counter-argument. What counter-arguments you have provided are dogmatic false-dichotomies and unsupported one-liners like "ololz treat others to cake and you will get some too!" Either fucking engage the real arguments or don't fucking bother responding.
Whatever. This is your pattern. You engage in a discussion for a page or two and when people don't come around you accuse them of throwing up smoke, then of not answering your arguments, then you accuse them of derailing the thread or not engaging your arguments.
I'm pretty much done ever responding to you. Adios VC.
That's just the way it goes with you and a handful of other people who are as far as I can see only vaguely literate. For example people who think that dying and being killed are the same thing, and people who think being glad someone's gone means physically desecrating their resting place. I'm sure this cop-out will impress SithDrummer, seeing as he has the same affliction as you.
Is there something, ignoring courtesy to family/friends, that should stop us from speaking ill of the dead? Is there something unique and special about being human, alive or dead, that we should always seek to honor and treat with respect?
Depends. If you're a follower of the first documented hippie in human history, then yes. If you have a moral system that mirrors that of the first documented hippie in human history, then yes. If you have a moral system based on what people do rather than what they're born as, no.
the problem with that is that it's a reeeaallll slippery slope with hate. falwell was an asshole, and i'm not saying you don't have the "right" to hate his actions or anything (or hell, even him), but at what point do you get to where you start to hate everybody you even slightly disagree with?
At what point do you get to where you start to bomb abortion-clinics because you go to church?
Oh, I forgot your side was right. If you felt ambushed because people disagreed with you, maybe debate and discourse isn't for you. Perhaps you'd be happier in an "agree with me or else" thread.
Cut the shit. I felt ambushed because in a thread for discussion people role their eyes and complain about ideas being laid out. That is what the thread is for. I'm not complaining about people disagreeing.
You feel ambushed because apparently in a thread designed to talk about whether the dead should be respected or not, people held the position that they should. You are wrong.
Oh yeah, the meta-argument not only was totally relevant to your position, but in fact proved it beyond the need to even acknowledge other possible viewpoints.
Yeah, the meta-argument.
Like in these twothreads. The only other two discussing the subject.
In which apparently Sentry felt ambushed by the stream of abuse he was exposed to. Scanning through both threads, we find the vitriole that assaulted him:
At what point do you get to where you start to bomb abortion-clinics because you go to church?
At no point because that's a fucking retarded.
what
i'm not saying that Christians can't be guilty of the same thing, but come one dude, that's not even coming close to responding to my post.
You're right. Your slippery-slope argument was totally more valid than my slippery-slope argument. Because mine hasn't ever even happened and yours always happens and stuff. The rest of your post was a lecture about how everyone should love Falwell for dying but to make sure not to love the fact that he died. Guess what? Some people don't believe dying is in and of itself deserving of respect. Everything dies, it's not special. Take that away and we have a person who devoted his entire life to deliberately hurting as many people as his influence could reach based solely on traits that have no negative impact on the people around them. Once again, would it have been better if he changed his mind? Sure. But it would also be sweet if I happened to find the Master Sword in my closet. Just because something would be better doesn't mean it's smart to bet on it.
You also seem to suffer from delusions that hate only happens because people go and deliberately pick out some people they want to hate and then devote 20 hours a week to, I dunno, I guess sitting there looking constipated and going "GRRRR!!!"? "Hate takes so much time and effort!" is both false and a cop-out.
Oh yeah, the meta-argument not only was totally relevant to your position, but in fact proved it beyond the need to even acknowledge other possible viewpoints.
Yeah, the meta-argument.
Like in these twothreads. The only other two discussing the subject.
In which apparently Sentry felt ambushed by the stream of abuse he was exposed to. Scanning through both threads, we find the vitriole that assaulted him:
Don't get me wrong, I'm not going to miss him at all, but I tend to agree with Shinto. Besides, he's dead, where's the sport in it?
These are the only two posts critical of celebrating Falwell's death. The only two posts outside this thread.
Poor bastard. How could we be so cruel? Clearly the meta-discussion really was rough outside of this thread.
You can't argue about the argument within the existing thread? Because I'm pretty sure I said "meta-argument" not "meta-posting". I don't actually believe you have literacy problems, I just don't believe you care enough about what other people think to put forth the effort to read anything they say for comprehension. So now why are you trying to derail the thread to bring up the subject of other threads that were locked for being in bad taste?
At what point do you get to where you start to bomb abortion-clinics because you go to church?
At no point because that's a fucking retarded.
what
i'm not saying that Christians can't be guilty of the same thing, but come one dude, that's not even coming close to responding to my post.
You're right. Your slippery-slope argument was totally more valid than my slippery-slope argument. Because mine hasn't ever even happened and yours always happens and stuff. The rest of your post was a lecture about how everyone should love Falwell for dying but to make sure not to love the fact that he died. Guess what? Some people don't believe dying is in and of itself deserving of respect. Everything dies, it's not special. Take that away and we have a person who devoted his entire life to deliberately hurting as many people as his influence could reach based solely on traits that have no negative impact on the people around them. Once again, would it have been better if he changed his mind? Sure. But it would also be sweet if I happened to find the Master Sword in my closet. Just because something would be better doesn't mean it's smart to bet on it.
You also seem to suffer from delusions that hate only happens because people go and deliberately pick out some people they want to hate and then devote 20 hours a week to, I dunno, I guess sitting there looking constipated and going "GRRRR!!!"? "Hate takes so much time and effort!" is both false and a cop-out.
hahah okay. i'm clearly the one losing his cool, not the guy calling people names like a fifth grader (you know, the guy who's supposed to be the moderator). also, how much time have you spent defending yourself here? an hour? two hours?
the other thing is that in my post, i more or less called falwell a jerk three times. i sure as hell didn't say "everyone should love him for dying" (which doesn't make sense anway).
my point was that he was an asshole, but in the grand scheme of things, what he did was small potatoes compared to concrete things that even respectable people did. to hate a guy even after he's dead for the kind of things he did is just a waste of time and effort.
Pants Man on
"okay byron, my grandma has a right to be happy, so i give you my blessing. just... don't get her pregnant. i don't need another mom."
At what point do you get to where you start to bomb abortion-clinics because you go to church?
At no point because that's a fucking retarded.
what
i'm not saying that Christians can't be guilty of the same thing, but come one dude, that's not even coming close to responding to my post.
You know?
edit: VC -- you still didn't respond.
edit2: and to mention slippery slopes after you weirdly brought up bombing abortion clinics?
Not holding Christian values as pertaining to the dead is a slippery slope to hating everyone you disagree with in the same sense that going to church is the first step down a slippery slope to bombing abortion-clinics. In order for either slippery-slope to work, you have to assume the person in question is pretty fucking retarded, too retarded frankly to be allowed to run around without supervision. If he doesn't see the difference between actively trying to worsen the lives of innocent people and getting caught up in a political quagmire there's no way I'm going to be the one he's willing to listen to about the difference, so I'm not bothering.
he doesn't see the difference between actively trying to worsen the lives of innocent people and getting caught up in a political quagmire there's no way I'm going to be the one he's willing to listen to about the difference, so I'm not bothering.
to begin with, that's a pretty bad representation of falwell. i'm sure it's easier for you to think that he jumped out of bed every morning saying "WOOO HOW CAN I MAKE SOME GAYBOS MISERABLE TODAY?!?", but that's more of a cop out than anything. you're just vilifying a guy beyond what he actually did so you can feel justfied in your hate.
personally, i think actions that actually effect people in a concrete way are much worse than stupid words that don't effect people unless they allow them to effect 'em.
but i'm glad you can pick and choose what arguments you want to respond to so as to make yourself feel better. keep that hate train rollin'
Pants Man on
"okay byron, my grandma has a right to be happy, so i give you my blessing. just... don't get her pregnant. i don't need another mom."
hahah okay. i'm clearly the one losing his cool, not the guy calling people names like a fifth grader (you know, the guy who's supposed to be the moderator). also, how much time have you spent defending yourself here? an hour? two hours?
Your mom is overweight and that's why your argument is wrong. Seriously, every non-argument you come up with I can easily match, and identify by name.
the other thing is that in my post, i more or less called falwell a jerk three times. i sure as hell didn't say "everyone should love him for dying" (which doesn't make sense anway).
True, you didn't say we have to love him. Just that if we hate him we're bad people.
my point was that he was an asshole, but in the grand scheme of things, what he did was small potatoes compared to concrete things that even respectable people did. to hate a guy even after he's dead for the kind of things he did is just a waste of time and effort.
And I say your point is false for reasons I provided already but you have not yet responded to.
I don't really know what you're talking about VC, but I will take a moment to say that I am neither a hippie nor a Christian. My insistence that one show some modicum of respect for human life, any human life, is borne out of my personal moral compass. That's what we're discussing here.
straw man slippery slope ad hom false dichotomy lol
hahah okay. i'm clearly the one losing his cool, not the guy calling people names like a fifth grader (you know, the guy who's supposed to be the moderator). also, how much time have you spent defending yourself here? an hour? two hours?
Your mom is overweight and that's why your argument is wrong. Seriously, every non-argument you come up with I can easily match, and identify by name.
the other thing is that in my post, i more or less called falwell a jerk three times. i sure as hell didn't say "everyone should love him for dying" (which doesn't make sense anway).
True, you didn't say we have to love him. Just that if we hate him we're bad people.
my point was that he was an asshole, but in the grand scheme of things, what he did was small potatoes compared to concrete things that even respectable people did. to hate a guy even after he's dead for the kind of things he did is just a waste of time and effort.
And I say your point is false for reasons I provided already but you have not yet responded to.
1. on that point i was just saying that you're being a crappy mod if your go to move is to call people names.
2. show me where i say this. hell, i even said that you had the right to hate him and his actions. all i've ever said was that it's a waste of time.
3. and i just did.
Pants Man on
"okay byron, my grandma has a right to be happy, so i give you my blessing. just... don't get her pregnant. i don't need another mom."
he doesn't see the difference between actively trying to worsen the lives of innocent people and getting caught up in a political quagmire there's no way I'm going to be the one he's willing to listen to about the difference, so I'm not bothering.
to begin with, that's a pretty bad representation of falwell. i'm sure it's easier for you to think that he jumped out of bed every morning saying "WOOO HOW CAN I MAKE SOME GAYBOS MISERABLE TODAY?!?", but that's more of a cop out than anything. you're just vilifying a guy beyond what he actually did so you can feel justfied in your hate.
Yes, what I really want is to hate people. I don't really care about the people he hurt or the damage he did to this country's political architecture, I just want an excuse to hate somebody. Straw man. So far every one of your arguments has been a logical fallacy from the rules thread, in case you weren't keeping score.
personally, i think actions that actually effect people in a concrete way are much worse than stupid words that don't effect people unless they allow them to effect 'em.
Yeah well that's a personal problem. I hope when you have kids and someone makes fun of them for wearing the wrong brands and exercises their social influence in the class to make sure people don't make friends with your kid, you tell them to "suck it up and quit being a bitch", because I'd hate for you to be inconsistent.
but i'm glad you can pick and choose what arguments you want to respond to so as to make yourself feel better. keep that hate train rollin'
Did you know that some people aren't Christians and don't hold Christian dogma to be by default true? If you did, it would help your ability to even engage alternative points of view, and you wouldn't even have to adopt them!
Posts
They aren't.
Nobody here even wished him dead (I don't doubt some people would've, given the oppourtunity:P ). I can understand being appalled by hatred along the lines of "I hope he gets AIDS, infects his wife and his kids get raped by dogs in hell". But on the whole people are just glad he's gone. As hatred goes, it's feeble.
...
You're right, debates about comparative morals always end up being extremely productive.
In light of that, how about we declare the debate about JF dieing being a good thing dead and then move on to a thread about comparative morals?
They aren't always productive either.
God you're such a fucking hippy. "It's okay to not like things but only if you love everyone and trees!"
*vaaa-rooooom*
I'm afraid I'm going to have to go with VC here. I think there's something to be said for a basic egalitarian outlook, which acknowledges that human suffering, even among the iniquitous, is a bad thing. However, the sheer dose of sanctimony coming across here is absurd.
God you're such a fucking jackass.
It may astonish you to know that morality is not some counter culture new age fetish.
Which was not the objection that VC made.
Look, this thread was started to discuss the ideas involved. It is not a spontaneous reaction, it is the thread dedicated to the discussion of some varying reactions we all had to Falwell's death. Explanation and background philosophy and whatnot.
Given that fact, maybe there could be a little bit less eye rolling on the other side when general philosophies are given out. I'm a little bit tired of this game where one side tries to explain what it's thinking and the other kind of jumps up and down and complains that this is all a semantic game, that people are stupid hippies, that the thread is stupid and that this is an overblown reaction to people celebrating Falwell's death. Everyone had the reactions they did. This thread is about explaining them.
The objections themselves were two are three line posts and there were not a very high volume of them. I'm feeling a little bit ambushed here. Like the conversation went something like:
1. Woo Hoo! Falwell is dead!
2. Well that is kind of bad form.
1. Why do you think that?
2. Well, XYZ.
1. Geez! Enough with the sermon! Who asked you anyway!
Honestly, I don't know what comes after death, but a rather large portion of America says that it's either gonna be good or won't be there at all. If it's either of those cases, I'm happy for a fellow human being making it to either end, and if it's hell... Well then he has bigger problems than what a bunch of total strangers decided to say and do after he's dead.
You feel ambushed? How about all the people in this thread who were saying "good, one less bigot in the world." And suddenly we are the worst people on the planet, just as bad, or, as some have said, worse then Falwell (I think hitler was tossed around a time or two as well).
Neither side has come out of this thread bathed in light... so don't act like your side has been any more rational then the other.
1: I'm glad that he'll stop spewing hate
2: You shouldn't celebrate someone's death
1: I'm not celebrating his death, I'm just glad that bigotry is less. There is a difference
2: Being glad that someone's actions are gone is the same as being glad they're dead
1: No it's not, there's a subtle difference
2: Look, if you're happy they're no longer doing what you don't like, because they're dead, you're celebrating their death
1: I would be just as happy if they weren't dead but had stopped though. Of course, the only way hate-mongering like that will stop is if someone's dead. Of course, that someone is usually (at least in this case) a self-righteous blowhard. Can we at least agree that Falwell sucked while he was alive?
2: Yes. Noone's denying Falwell sucked while he was alive
1: Aha, but now the sucky guy's gone, so doesn't that give you a little bit of satisfaction?
3: Screw you guys, I'm glad he's dead!
O please.
One can point out that a rivulet of water and a huge river share the same properties without saying that a rivulet is a river.
This is just another lame ass strawman.
And in any case, this was a thread specifically created to discuss the ideas behind respect for the dead, with Falwell as an example. If you came in here saying how glad that there was one less bigot in the world and then felt ambushed it's your own damn fault for not understanding the thread topic.
"O wow, I just had no idea that in this thread about respect for the dead anyone would say we should respect the dead."
I have to disagree. Not only are words themselves powerful catalysts, but he was instrumental in creating the "religious right" as we know it today, which I don't think any of us honestly feel is a force for anything but intolerance, preaching and if they got their way, theocracy.
Oh, I forgot your side was right. If you felt ambushed because people disagreed with you, maybe debate and discourse isn't for you. Perhaps you'd be happier in an "agree with me or else" thread.
And my contention, since page 1, is that being dead does not automatically give you a level of respect. Congrats, you died, everyone fucking does it.
Is there something, ignoring courtesy to family/friends, that should stop us from speaking ill of the dead? Is there something unique and special about being human, alive or dead, that we should always seek to honor and treat with respect?
You have deliberately neglected to respond to all the reasoned arguments that the side you're not on has provided. And then you have the gall to get uppity when I get short with someone saying something stupid on your side. "I am Shinto" is not a valid counter-argument. What counter-arguments you have provided are dogmatic false-dichotomies and unsupported one-liners like "ololz treat others to cake and you will get some too!" Either fucking engage the real arguments or don't fucking bother responding.
Depends. If you're a follower of the first documented hippie in human history, then yes. If you have a moral system that mirrors that of the first documented hippie in human history, then yes. If you have a moral system based on what people do rather than what they're born as, no.
Cut the shit. I felt ambushed because in a thread for discussion people role their eyes and complain about ideas being laid out. That is what the thread is for. I'm not complaining about people disagreeing.
You feel ambushed because apparently in a thread designed to talk about whether the dead should be respected or not, people held the position that they should. You are wrong.
What a huge load of shit.
Whatever. This is your pattern. You engage in a discussion for a page or two and when people don't come around you accuse them of throwing up smoke, then of not answering your arguments, then you accuse them of derailing the thread or not engaging your arguments.
I'm pretty much done ever responding to you. Adios VC.
Oh yeah, the meta-argument not only was totally relevant to your position, but in fact proved it beyond the need to even acknowledge other possible viewpoints.
the problem with that is that it's a reeeaallll slippery slope with hate. falwell was an asshole, and i'm not saying you don't have the "right" to hate his actions or anything (or hell, even him), but at what point do you get to where you start to hate everybody you even slightly disagree with?
for all of falwell's assholery, he didn't murder anybody. he didn't really do anything except spew hateful rhetoric. i mean, damn, welfare reform probably hurt more people than falwell ever did. do you hate bill clinton? jimmy carter's incompetence kept hostages in iran for a long, long ass time. do you hate him? falwell wasn't some horrible inhuman monster, no matter how much you want to vilify him, and he probably doesn't warrant the kind of hate shown here and in other places.
my point is that there reaches a point where you could spend your time hating every public figure you disgaree with on some level, but honestly, who has that kind of time and energy? all you end up being is a dude on some internet forum angrily trying to defend his right to hate by calling people "fucking hippies".
yeah, congrats buddy. hate seems to have worked out real well for you there.
That's just the way it goes with you and a handful of other people who are as far as I can see only vaguely literate. For example people who think that dying and being killed are the same thing, and people who think being glad someone's gone means physically desecrating their resting place. I'm sure this cop-out will impress SithDrummer, seeing as he has the same affliction as you.
At what point do you get to where you start to bomb abortion-clinics because you go to church?
what
i'm not saying that Christians can't be guilty of the same thing, but come one dude, that's not even coming close to responding to my post.
Yeah, the meta-argument.
Like in these two threads. The only other two discussing the subject.
In which apparently Sentry felt ambushed by the stream of abuse he was exposed to. Scanning through both threads, we find the vitriole that assaulted him:
These are the only two posts critical of celebrating Falwell's death. The only two posts outside this thread.
Poor bastard. How could we be so cruel? Clearly the meta-discussion really was rough outside of this thread.
You're right. Your slippery-slope argument was totally more valid than my slippery-slope argument. Because mine hasn't ever even happened and yours always happens and stuff. The rest of your post was a lecture about how everyone should love Falwell for dying but to make sure not to love the fact that he died. Guess what? Some people don't believe dying is in and of itself deserving of respect. Everything dies, it's not special. Take that away and we have a person who devoted his entire life to deliberately hurting as many people as his influence could reach based solely on traits that have no negative impact on the people around them. Once again, would it have been better if he changed his mind? Sure. But it would also be sweet if I happened to find the Master Sword in my closet. Just because something would be better doesn't mean it's smart to bet on it.
You also seem to suffer from delusions that hate only happens because people go and deliberately pick out some people they want to hate and then devote 20 hours a week to, I dunno, I guess sitting there looking constipated and going "GRRRR!!!"? "Hate takes so much time and effort!" is both false and a cop-out.
edit: VC -- you still didn't respond.
edit2: and to mention slippery slopes after you weirdly brought up bombing abortion clinics?
You can't argue about the argument within the existing thread? Because I'm pretty sure I said "meta-argument" not "meta-posting". I don't actually believe you have literacy problems, I just don't believe you care enough about what other people think to put forth the effort to read anything they say for comprehension. So now why are you trying to derail the thread to bring up the subject of other threads that were locked for being in bad taste?
hahah okay. i'm clearly the one losing his cool, not the guy calling people names like a fifth grader (you know, the guy who's supposed to be the moderator). also, how much time have you spent defending yourself here? an hour? two hours?
the other thing is that in my post, i more or less called falwell a jerk three times. i sure as hell didn't say "everyone should love him for dying" (which doesn't make sense anway).
my point was that he was an asshole, but in the grand scheme of things, what he did was small potatoes compared to concrete things that even respectable people did. to hate a guy even after he's dead for the kind of things he did is just a waste of time and effort.
Not holding Christian values as pertaining to the dead is a slippery slope to hating everyone you disagree with in the same sense that going to church is the first step down a slippery slope to bombing abortion-clinics. In order for either slippery-slope to work, you have to assume the person in question is pretty fucking retarded, too retarded frankly to be allowed to run around without supervision. If he doesn't see the difference between actively trying to worsen the lives of innocent people and getting caught up in a political quagmire there's no way I'm going to be the one he's willing to listen to about the difference, so I'm not bothering.
to begin with, that's a pretty bad representation of falwell. i'm sure it's easier for you to think that he jumped out of bed every morning saying "WOOO HOW CAN I MAKE SOME GAYBOS MISERABLE TODAY?!?", but that's more of a cop out than anything. you're just vilifying a guy beyond what he actually did so you can feel justfied in your hate.
personally, i think actions that actually effect people in a concrete way are much worse than stupid words that don't effect people unless they allow them to effect 'em.
but i'm glad you can pick and choose what arguments you want to respond to so as to make yourself feel better. keep that hate train rollin'
Your mom is overweight and that's why your argument is wrong. Seriously, every non-argument you come up with I can easily match, and identify by name.
True, you didn't say we have to love him. Just that if we hate him we're bad people.
And I say your point is false for reasons I provided already but you have not yet responded to.
straw man slippery slope ad hom false dichotomy lol
1. on that point i was just saying that you're being a crappy mod if your go to move is to call people names.
2. show me where i say this. hell, i even said that you had the right to hate him and his actions. all i've ever said was that it's a waste of time.
3. and i just did.
Yes, what I really want is to hate people. I don't really care about the people he hurt or the damage he did to this country's political architecture, I just want an excuse to hate somebody. Straw man. So far every one of your arguments has been a logical fallacy from the rules thread, in case you weren't keeping score.
Yeah well that's a personal problem. I hope when you have kids and someone makes fun of them for wearing the wrong brands and exercises their social influence in the class to make sure people don't make friends with your kid, you tell them to "suck it up and quit being a bitch", because I'd hate for you to be inconsistent.
Did you know that some people aren't Christians and don't hold Christian dogma to be by default true? If you did, it would help your ability to even engage alternative points of view, and you wouldn't even have to adopt them!