Re: Look!!! He's acting a bit 'weird'!

On 7 Jun, 15:39, nigel <use...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
x-no-archive: yes

We find it strange that some people think it's acceptable for a poster
to wish people raped or dead, but it's less acceptable for people to
wish a poster would post somewhere more appropriate.



So much for "I may not agree with what you say, but i will defend to
the death your right to say it".

If you wish a poster would clear off, as far as i'm concerned, you are
entitled to your opinion, and you are entitled to express it - but
that doesn't mean i agree with it, or that your opinion is 'right' or
morally acceptable. If you want to be one of the pitchfork-wielding
villagers, then go for it, knock yourself out. But don't try to
pretend that you're 'enlightened' or a champion of free speech or
anything like that. The torch-waving, pitchfork-wielding villagers
are a bunch of small-minded morons with no conception of what goes on
in the real world outside the walls of their tiny little village.
They call him a 'monster' only because he exceeds the narrow limits
they have of the acceptable forms that human existence should take.
To some people, homosexuals are monsters; to others, infidels are less
than human and should be butchered for the one true faith.

That is why, if you consider individualility, originality, creativity,
freedom of belief and of speech, tolerance, and respect for lifestyles
different to your own to be not only important, but inalienable human
rights, you cannot be one of the mob of angry villagers without being
a complete and utter hypocrite. As such, it's not you as an
individual i target, nor is it your opinion i object to. It's your
hypocrisy that makes me puke.

BTW - i don't recall a single post in which people were complaining
about the /content/ of S. Gates's posts. There were people saying
that he annoyed them, that he was a pain in the ass, etc., etc., but
to turn around and say that you take offence only at the violent
thoughts to which he gives expression is a blatant mystification.
Other posters on here give vent to some of their more violent thoughts
in more socially acceptable ways and are not subjected to the same
sort of criticism. And that's not to mention all the sex and violence
in the media. What i'm getting at here is the double-standard in
operation. To go back to the example of the angry villagers, they are
so outraged by the monster's appearance and demeanor they physically
kill him. They would tear him limb from limb if he give them half a
chance. That is to say, they - the villagers - are the real monsters,
but their moral outrage stops them from perceiving this as a crime,
and that's why some of them work so hard to protect their indigination
- they believe it gives them free license to do whatever they wish.

I merely wanted to remind you all that there are wider issues at stake
than being slightly annoyed by someone's posting style, and to be
conscious of the unfortunate direction certain group dynamics can lead
to so long as they are allowed to run their course without being
corrected.

More generally - and this i direct now towards the rest of the group
as a whole - if you ask me, and i realize no one did, but if you did,
i would say that, after what each of us has gone through in our own
lives, if we can't find it in our hearts to show someone who manifests
all the symptoms of cognitive divergence a little respect and
tolerance, we ought to be ashamed of ourselves. After all, how can we
expect the outside world to treat us with respect and understanding
and even kindness when we refuse to treat others in a similar
predicament in the same way?

In another group, i perhaps would have kept my mouth shut, but not
here.

We have standards to maintain.

We're better than this - and you all know it, each and every one of
you.

Here endeth today's lesson.

Rock on


monkfish



Florence, Dougal and Zebedee


.