 |
| |
|
|
Dr Strangelove
|
|
None of you are old enough to remember the days when little white boys down South would compete to find progressively more outrageous uses for the "N word", especially in the presence of a member of the "N" race. If the member of the "N" race was bigger and male the boys would make sure that big brother or Pa were close enough at hand to bail them out if need be. The same process applied to the "S" race and the "J" race, and G*d help you if you were white and objected, because that surely meant that you were of the "Q" persuasion, or even a "Y" or a "C".
It's a little better now.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Zulu Elephant
|
|
I get the feeling that I may be coming down on the wrong side of public opinion here but I don't think it's inconceivable that a reasonable person could be offended by the statement.
If someone knew an Iraqi that was killed in the invasion, I wouldn't think they were out of their mind to be slightly offended at someone saying "good job" to the army that killed their friend.
Im not saying that people shouldn't praise the army and if the hypothetical friend-of-a-dead-Iraqi were to start saying otherwise I'd be the first to tell them that they have no right to censor others.
BUT, I don't think it's "political correctness gone mad" to show that (even though you feel that the soldiers did a good job) you recognise that others may not be as happy as you that they did such a good job.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Albert Speer
|
|
Puerile Polemic
Mar 1999
time: 00:29
|
|
???
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Whaleboy
|
 |
Please make all cheques payable to Whaleboy
Jan 2003
time: 05:29
|
|
Its a little much, he's trying to place a fundamentally absolutist argument (as was the case for war at best   , and then wrap it up in a kind of moral relativism to make it appear PC. Thats generally the case with most PC stuff, but I personally advocate that we totally ignore the whole idea of political correctness.
Its a complete fallacy, in truth, it does not exist, there are merely only peoples opinions. The reasons for them believing in their opinions bares no relation to their actual argument, and thus logically, it holds as much water as ad hominem arguments.
One should take his position to be moral relativist by default (I know thats a contradiction in terms, but view it in context of my own opinions and my right to express them), by emphasising the fact, perhaps that is showing a degree of insecurity about his own opinion.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
mrmitchell
|
|
I'm offended.
(I don't mean to offend anyone, I'm just offended.)
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:29.
Apolyton Time is 00:29. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
19-06-2003 22:01
ACK!
. We need trained killers.
|