Forums | MacLife

gas huffer wrote:

smilr wrote:

gas huffer wrote:

Funny how many of you so-called liberals are offended by free speech and expression...

I give your troll 1 star out of 5.

We aren't offended by free speech or expression, we are offended by the content of this example of free speech / expression.

Noone here said that the persons building the statue shouldn't be allowed to build it, but we can critique and judge what they put up however much we like - which is itself freedom of speech and expression :-p

I give your troll 0 out of 5 stars.

I am offended by the pettyness exhibited in this thread - my expression of which is itself freedom of speech and expression.  It's not like this guy was wasting taxpayer funds...

I guess you guys like offensive art that uses tax payer funds as long as it conforms to your interests....

You are crossing the line and violating the Don't Be a Jerk rule.

gas huffer wrote:

Funny how many of you so-called liberals are offended by free speech and expression...

What?

Who says one can't be offended, disgusted, amused or angered by one's use of free speech or expression?

Has anyone suggested that the state act to censor these individuals?  To keep them from speaking?

Man, you need a refresher course on the Constitution.  It protects speech from government prohibition, not from the criticism of others.

gas huffer wrote:

and so it goes....

Your statement...

gas huffer wrote:

Funny how many of you so-called liberals are offended by free speech and expression...

...made no sense.  In fact, lots of speech is intended to offend.  To shock.  To irritate.

That speech (and in fact, ALL speech) should be protected.  That doesn't mean it cannot be criticized or commented on.

gas huffer wrote:

Good point, I will expect liberals to be as senstive as religious moralists from now on...

What we need now is a mini version of this Miss Liberty in a giant vat of urine and then we can all hold hands.

What does that even mean? 

You're confusing the defense of art as speech with actually affinity for that speech.

gas huffer wrote:

You're confused that the affinity for speech is necessary contingency of the freeedom to express it.  I guess I just like freedom enough not to be such a critic.

Huh?

Say, I thought this was a discussion forum, not a rant room.

If someone wants to soapboax about what offends them I can have every right to point out how I find their "offense exression" equally offensive.

Did someone tell you that you didn't have such a "right?"  You questioned the support for freedom of speech by other posters here.  I pointed out that you had no basis upon which to make that assumption.

I guess it's okay to soapbox in here as long as its in line with the majoritarian opinion...

Did someone tell you that you couldn't post in this thread?

user wrote:

You can have a contrary opinion all you want.

And if someone thinks you're talking nonsense, they can say THAT.

Your generalizations about the people in this forum are most annoying, particularly for someone who has posted so little.

edit: just checked the dates - wtf? if you've been lurking here for that long, you should know - I have no sympathy

once again you are pretending that this place does not have a leftist, liberal bent to it?

in DENIAL much?

much ado about nothing, sorry I called you people on it.

bratboy wrote:

[
However, you seem to be convinced that EVERYONE here is a liberal.

you should change your username to "strawman"

gas huffer wrote:

bratboy wrote:

However, you seem to be convinced that EVERYONE here is a liberal.

you should change your username to "strawman"

You repeatedly use terms such as "you people," "people here," "you liberals," etc.  What else am I supposed to think?

What are you even doing in this thread?  You complained about free speech--and when called on that, you shift to complaining about soapboxing, and how only the dominant viewpoint is allowed.  When that's challenged, you shift to complaining about how everyone is seemingly unaware of the ideological slant.

Do you stand by anything you've said here?

bratboy wrote:

gas huffer wrote:

bratboy wrote:

However, you seem to be convinced that EVERYONE here is a liberal.

you should change your username to "strawman"

You repeatedly use terms such as "you people," "people here," "you liberals," etc.  What else am I supposed to think?

What are you even doing in this thread?  You complained about free speech--and when called on that, you shift to complaining about soapboxing, and how only the dominant viewpoint is allowed.  When that's challenged, you shift to complaining about how everyone is seemingly unaware of the ideological slant.

Do you stand by anything you've said here?

i think i've used the term liberal like twice, and once when referring to the nature of ruling and not to an individual.

you people are senstive.  I can't even use the term you people without anyone who wishes to fly off the handle stramanning the term into it meaning EVERYONE.

if you dont like my use of the term, that's your problem.

when i post without quoting, and say "you people" - it's safe that only the people who recognize that the comment was directed at them would respond.

instead, you kneejerk and say NOT ME as if I had pointed my finger at each and everyone of you.  if  Imena t EACH AND EVERYONE OF YOU i think I would have said that?

this is the most senstive group of individuals i've ever seen gathered in one place, which is, in fact, why i find you guys interesting.


and again, why do you insist on pretending i use the term liberal in a derogatory manner?

this place needs an enema.

Last edited by gas huffer (2006-07-08 3:40 pm)

Damn, you just beat me to it.

Yes, boss.

:: wonders if the smack down stick works on mods too ::

OK, now that the trouble is gone, perhaps we can open this back up for actual discussion...

333imacman wrote:

Remember Camp David?

I remember well. I can't believe he took a banning sitting down. Did he re-register under a different name, with better behavior?