|
|
| Author |
Message |
Celestra
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 6929
|
 Posted: 03/03/04 - 05:06 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
Nobody but you.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
 |
Confused
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
Posts: 6730
|
|
Posted: 03/03/04 - 05:13 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Vekril wrote: | Phoenix wrote
| Quote: | So I'm assuming you would expect all the jews in the holocaust museum to accept the guy in the nazi uniform standing next to him.
|
Accept him, of course not. Have enough self control to not physically attack him, yes. More realistic response - attempt to have security remove the person. A movie theatre and a museum are both private businesses, they have the right to refund someone's money and ask them to leave, which would not be unreasonable in both cases as a way to prevent any possible problems such as what occurred in this case. |
Security would apply more force than peanuts d*****t. And the suggestion that the response would be less is ridiculous.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Minion
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 29 Apr 2003
Posts: 3474
Location: The Ghetto
|
|
Posted: 03/03/04 - 05:19 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Celestra wrote: | | Nobody but you. |
Umm...
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Wiccans
Luke Warm
Joined: 20 Jul 2003
Posts: 483
Location: Canada
|
|
Posted: 03/03/04 - 11:54 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Phoenix wrote: | | So I'm assuming you would expect all the jews in the holocaust museum to accept the guy in the nazi uniform standing next to him. |
Well now... I've read nearly the entire thread, my summary feeling was that it was a waste of time doing so, but what the f**k, I'm bored here at my desk at work, at least it passed some time. So here I go passing a bit more time...
To your above comment: Ignoring someone and/or thinking they're an "asshat" (to coin the common phrase from this thread) does NOT equal "accepting" them. This theoretical nazi standing in the holocaust museum, what's he doing? Is he just standing there looking at the exhibits? If so, perhaps he's educating himself on the history of his group of people. His mere precense there is not disruptive, UNLESS THOSE WHO FIND IT OFFENSIVE CHOOSE TO MAKE A SCENE/ISSUE OUT OF IT!!! You can be offended and not take physical action against something. Physical assault is not a necessity to show that you're offended! Now if that theoretical Nazi was going up to all the jews in attendance spouting stuff like "all Jews must die!" and stuff, then yes he's being disruptive, and should be dealt with.
Let's take the next step. This "devil" in the movie theatre... was he just sitting there in his costume watching the movie? Or was he parading around saying all christians must die?
THAT, I believe, is where the hypocracy statements stem from. Real Christians should have A) prayed quietly for the salvation of this heathen's soul or B) spoken with him in an attempt to help him (wether he wanted help or not). The moment they started throwing shit at him they tossed their system out the f*****g window and became just as bad as him, if not worse. They started the physical disturbance. They didn't have to "accept" him, but they didn't have to throw shit at him.
On a personal note, Phoenix... while I personally don't agree with your religious beliefs, I respect them for what they are, and I respect the manner with which you have defended them. Right up until the point where you started disregarding logical arguments against you and started pulling out all that lame crap about "learn to spell". Your credibility went right out the window, it was painfully obvious that you had no further defense to offer, so you resorted to (forgive this twist... but it's appropriate) throwing the spelling gummy bear at someone who misspelled a word.
Spelling a word wrong when you're typing out a thought does not make your thought invalid or incorrect, as long as the implied meaning of the word is clear. Hypicrissy, Hypokrassy, Hypocrasy, Highpockrassy, etc etc, it's clear what was meant.
To the latest comment regarding the security response being more, I highly doubt it. Security guards in most situations are not allowed to use physical force. Basically they can't touch the person. The only time they're allowed to intervene physically is to interrupt a physical altercation (ie: fight). All security could do is ask him to leave. The moment they touch him it becomes assault and he has the right to defend himself with equal force. If the "devil" refused to leave as requested, they can then inform him he's no longer welcome and if he refuses to leave they will notify the authorities and press charges for trespassing. If he continued to refuse to vacate the premises, they'd have to call the police (who are authorized to use physical force to remove him if he resists/refuses).
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Wiccans
Luke Warm
Joined: 20 Jul 2003
Posts: 483
Location: Canada
|
|
Posted: 03/03/04 - 12:00 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
Oh... and /wave Celebunny! =P
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Confused
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
Posts: 6730
|
|
Posted: 03/03/04 - 13:01 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Wiccans wrote: | | Phoenix wrote: | | So I'm assuming you would expect all the jews in the holocaust museum to accept the guy in the nazi uniform standing next to him. |
Well now... I've read nearly the entire thread, my summary feeling was that it was a waste of time doing so, but what the f**k, I'm bored here at my desk at work, at least it passed some time. So here I go passing a bit more time...
To your above comment: Ignoring someone and/or thinking they're an "asshat" (to coin the common phrase from this thread) does NOT equal "accepting" them. This theoretical nazi standing in the holocaust museum, what's he doing? Is he just standing there looking at the exhibits? If so, perhaps he's educating himself on the history of his group of people. His mere precense there is not disruptive, UNLESS THOSE WHO FIND IT OFFENSIVE CHOOSE TO MAKE A SCENE/ISSUE OUT OF IT!!! You can be offended and not take physical action against something. Physical assault is not a necessity to show that you're offended! Now if that theoretical Nazi was going up to all the jews in attendance spouting stuff like "all Jews must die!" and stuff, then yes he's being disruptive, and should be dealt with.
Let's take the next step. This "devil" in the movie theatre... was he just sitting there in his costume watching the movie? Or was he parading around saying all christians must die?
THAT, I believe, is where the hypocracy statements stem from. Real Christians should have A) prayed quietly for the salvation of this heathen's soul or B) spoken with him in an attempt to help him (wether he wanted help or not). The moment they started throwing shit at him they tossed their system out the f*****g window and became just as bad as him, if not worse. They started the physical disturbance. They didn't have to "accept" him, but they didn't have to throw shit at him.
On a personal note, Phoenix... while I personally don't agree with your religious beliefs, I respect them for what they are, and I respect the manner with which you have defended them. Right up until the point where you started disregarding logical arguments against you and started pulling out all that lame crap about "learn to spell". Your credibility went right out the window, it was painfully obvious that you had no further defense to offer, so you resorted to (forgive this twist... but it's appropriate) throwing the spelling gummy bear at someone who misspelled a word.
Spelling a word wrong when you're typing out a thought does not make your thought invalid or incorrect, as long as the implied meaning of the word is clear. Hypicrissy, Hypokrassy, Hypocrasy, Highpockrassy, etc etc, it's clear what was meant.
To the latest comment regarding the security response being more, I highly doubt it. Security guards in most situations are not allowed to use physical force. Basically they can't touch the person. The only time they're allowed to intervene physically is to interrupt a physical altercation (ie: fight). All security could do is ask him to leave. The moment they touch him it becomes assault and he has the right to defend himself with equal force. If the "devil" refused to leave as requested, they can then inform him he's no longer welcome and if he refuses to leave they will notify the authorities and press charges for trespassing. If he continued to refuse to vacate the premises, they'd have to call the police (who are authorized to use physical force to remove him if he resists/refuses). |
The nazi wouldn't have to say a word for his actions to be tactless. You know it. I know it. Why waste your time writing this BS?
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Wiccans
Luke Warm
Joined: 20 Jul 2003
Posts: 483
Location: Canada
|
|
Posted: 03/03/04 - 13:37 Post subject:
|
|
|
You've missed my point (or you've conveniently changed the point you were originally trying to make). No one's debating that the "asshats" in these scenarios had tact or not. You keep bringing that point up as your only defense, yet it's been conceeded all along.
Regardless of how someone's actions lack tact, it doesn't give a group of people free reign to attack them, whether it's with gummi bears, stones, or shotguns.
Educate me on this question from the Christian standpoint please: Where does it say or imply that "those who lack tact shall be deemed not worthy of salvations, let them be stoned" anywhere?
Oh well, just another example of you avoiding the rest of the post and focusing on one (irrelevant / uncontested) point.
As to why I wasted my time writing that "BS" please refer to my original post where I explained that.
Last edited by Wiccans on 03/03/04 - 13:41; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Confused
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
Posts: 6730
|
|
Posted: 03/03/04 - 13:39 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Wiccans wrote: | You've missed my point (or you've conveniently changed the point you were originally trying to make). No one's debating that the "asshats" in these scenarios had tact or not. You keep bringing that point up as your only defense, yet it's been conceeded all along.
Oh well, just another example of you avoiding the rest of the post and focusing on one (irrelevant / uncontested) point. |
No. You said it's acceptable for someone to enter the holocaust museum wearing a nazi uniform, so long as he's looking at the exhibits. That's ridiculous.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Wiccans
Luke Warm
Joined: 20 Jul 2003
Posts: 483
Location: Canada
|
|
Posted: 03/03/04 - 13:45 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Phoenix wrote: |
No. You said it's acceptable for someone to enter the holocaust museum wearing a nazi uniform, so long as he's looking at the exhibits. That's ridiculous. |
Did you read my post at all? Nowhere did I say that it would have to be "accepted". A good portion of my post was in direct regard to that exact point. I never proposed that they should accept him. I specifically said that they could ignore him without showing that they "accept" him. Similarily, they could rationally explain to the person that his actions are inappropriate given the settings and atmosphere. They don't have to express that view with physical force (which should be used as a last resort for self preservation, not as a primary means of resolving dispute).
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Confused
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
Posts: 6730
|
|
Posted: 03/03/04 - 13:50 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Wiccans wrote: | | Phoenix wrote: |
No. You said it's acceptable for someone to enter the holocaust museum wearing a nazi uniform, so long as he's looking at the exhibits. That's ridiculous. |
Did you read my post at all? Nowhere did I say that it would have to be "accepted". A good portion of my post was in direct regard to that exact point. I never proposed that they should accept him. I specifically said that they could ignore him without showing that they "accept" him. Similarily, they could rationally explain to the person that his actions are inappropriate given the settings and atmosphere. They don't have to express that view with physical force (which should be used as a last resort for self preservation, not as a primary means of resolving dispute). |
Neither did I say "accepted" moron. I said yuo're considering his actions "acceptable." Allow me to requote you.
| Quote: | | To your above comment: Ignoring someone and/or thinking they're an "asshat" (to coin the common phrase from this thread) does NOT equal "accepting" them. This theoretical nazi standing in the holocaust museum, what's he doing? Is he just standing there looking at the exhibits? If so, perhaps he's educating himself on the history of his group of people. His mere precense there is not disruptive, UNLESS THOSE WHO FIND IT OFFENSIVE CHOOSE TO MAKE A SCENE/ISSUE OUT OF IT!!! You can be offended and not take physical action against something. Physical assault is not a necessity to show that you're offended! Now if that theoretical Nazi was going up to all the jews in attendance spouting stuff like "all Jews must die!" and stuff, then yes he's being disruptive, and should be dealt with. |
Not taking action against someone who is so intentionally attempting to offend the decencies of those around him consitutes acceptance of his behavior. You people have no sense of honor.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Syke
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 12 Oct 2002
Posts: 2976
Location: Huntington Beach, CA
|
|
Posted: 03/03/04 - 14:25 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Phoenix wrote: | | Wiccans wrote: | You've missed my point (or you've conveniently changed the point you were originally trying to make). No one's debating that the "asshats" in these scenarios had tact or not. You keep bringing that point up as your only defense, yet it's been conceeded all along.
Oh well, just another example of you avoiding the rest of the post and focusing on one (irrelevant / uncontested) point. |
No. You said it's acceptable for someone to enter the holocaust museum wearing a nazi uniform, so long as he's looking at the exhibits. That's ridiculous. |
Being humble in times of extreme controversy such as in the holocaust museum scenario is regularly practiced in the christian religion, and few others.
If a Christian were to walk into a mosque, assuming they are a practicing Christian and true to their faith, they would have to hide any semblance of religious affiliation so that no one will get offended. That doesn't mean you should pretend you aren't Christian if someone were to inquire, but to be blatantly obvious about it is wrong, just as the "devil" in the movie theatre was wrong. The people in the movie theatre made a mistake by throwing candy at the guy, but what do you expect? They all sit down to watch a movie only to see a devil horns and a pitch fork poking out from the bottom of the screen.
They probably didn't want to stop the movie, or stop watching the movie just to go get the security to toss this fool out. They probably thought he'd get the hint after the 75 year old lady poured her soda on him.
That's a human way of thinking, and I'm sure a lot of you would do the same, or at least tossed a single M&M his way (skittles if you prefer).
Christian does not = perfect, but it should mean to show a certain amount of tact and humbleness, which these people didn't show.
Big mistake, but who doesn't make them?
It's only common sense not to start controversy over religion in the wrong manner (much like the devil did). You could totally turn someone away from your religion if you're forcing it into their thoughts, and in this way and many others, christians are supposed to be humble.
These Christians did not make this movie, they are only going to see it out of curiosity for the most part. They aren't forcing this "devil" to come watch the movie, they aren't forcing any part of their religion down his throat. So for this man to come to a movie about Jesus' death on the cross, dressed as the devil...is completely and utterly disgusting, and the people in the theatre resounded with the same feeling by throwing candy at him.
Should they have been more humble and thoughtful about it? Yes, but I bet they were already feeling weird about watching Jesus die in a hollywood produced film that is entirely fake and is only "based" on a true story. A story that saved their lives from an eternity in hell...that's pretty f*****g iffy right there..
So again, for this kid to run into the theatre with a devil costume on is insanely stupid, and the response from the so called "christians" in the theatre is expected. I don't blame them for throwing candy at the guy..but I know if I were in the same situation, I wouldn't have thrown anything.
These people were tested, and they failed. Good Job 19 year old kid in a devil suit, you found a group of Christians that are having a hard time following Jesus' footsteps in times of great controversy. Kudos and f**k off I say...
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Tinladar
Sir Postalot
Joined: 03 Jan 2003
Posts: 1448
|
|
Posted: 03/03/04 - 15:43 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Luturb wrote: | | Xarpolis wrote: | I'd open a law suit against the theater as well as anyone who participated in the food throwing.
f*****s, so what if he was dressed in a way you didn't like. You don't need to throw shit at the guy. Grow the f**k up =/ |
Sue for what? Sticky hair? If he had gotten hurt it would be one thing. A little coke on your head never hurt anybody. I'm sure he would have been completely disappointed if he had sat through the movie and nobody said a word.
I think the fact that an old lady dumped a coke on him is hilarious. Some people think the food-chuckers are uptight, but you're calling your lawyer because you got coke on you. |
off topic, but some guy on judge judy sued some chick for dumping soda on his head for talking during the movie =p..
he claimed that because soda got in his eyes, it caused his vision to get worse because he was wearing contacts!
needless to say, because it was judge judy.. she picked his bills clean and said ... Case dismissed!
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Wiccans
Luke Warm
Joined: 20 Jul 2003
Posts: 483
Location: Canada
|
|
Posted: 03/03/04 - 17:02 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Phoenix wrote: | | Wiccans wrote: | | Phoenix wrote: |
No. You said it's acceptable for someone to enter the holocaust museum wearing a nazi uniform, so long as he's looking at the exhibits. That's ridiculous. |
Did you read my post at all? Nowhere did I say that it would have to be "accepted". A good portion of my post was in direct regard to that exact point. I never proposed that they should accept him. I specifically said that they could ignore him without showing that they "accept" him. Similarily, they could rationally explain to the person that his actions are inappropriate given the settings and atmosphere. They don't have to express that view with physical force (which should be used as a last resort for self preservation, not as a primary means of resolving dispute). |
Neither did I say "accepted" moron. I said yuo're considering his actions "acceptable." Allow me to requote you.
| Quote: | | To your above comment: Ignoring someone and/or thinking they're an "asshat" (to coin the common phrase from this thread) does NOT equal "accepting" them. This theoretical nazi standing in the holocaust museum, what's he doing? Is he just standing there looking at the exhibits? If so, perhaps he's educating himself on the history of his group of people. His mere precense there is not disruptive, UNLESS THOSE WHO FIND IT OFFENSIVE CHOOSE TO MAKE A SCENE/ISSUE OUT OF IT!!! You can be offended and not take physical action against something. Physical assault is not a necessity to show that you're offended! Now if that theoretical Nazi was going up to all the jews in attendance spouting stuff like "all Jews must die!" and stuff, then yes he's being disruptive, and should be dealt with. |
Not taking action against someone who is so intentionally attempting to offend the decencies of those around him consitutes acceptance of his behavior. You people have no sense of honor. |
LOL I give up on you. Accepted / Acceptable, what's the difference. One's a past tense the other's a present tense, doesn't change what I was referring to, but you continually miss that part, so I suppose I'll leave it to you to learn if you so desire, not going to take any further time trying to explain such things to you.
As to the last comment, I simply shake my head in amazement. Not taking action constitutes acceptance? Is not ignoring someone who's trying to get a rise out of you (as this devil guy was likely trying to do) not "taking action"? Imagine if the people in the theatre had completely ignored this guy. He'd have walked out of there feeling like an idiot because he completely failed at his objective. Instead, he gets attacked by this group of people, accomplishing his mission.
I won't bother to further explain other ways of defending one's honor without attacking them. You, and many Christians in general (I'm making the assumption you are a Christian of course) seem so completely lost on that concept, past and present. I suppose the only course of action for Christians to "defend their honor" is to use violence or other such physical force. Yep... way to be following the example set forth by Christ. But then again, you can all make mistakes, repent, be forgiven, and go about your merry way as it suits you, I suppose, so hey... have at it man.
I try to respect people's beliefs for what they are even if I disagree with them. It's saddening that most people who follow religion are so brutally unable to return this courtesy. I'd have a hell of a lot more respect for religious people if they did. Some do, but the majority I come into contact with don't, yourself included.
Done with this debate, as I've seen before many times that you're never going to waver no matter how much logic is shoved in your face. Sleep well!
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Tolanin
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 3551
|
|
Posted: 03/03/04 - 17:07 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
if by logic you mean retarded b******t that barely makes any sense then yes i doubt logic is ever going to move the arguement much. Its nice to know that you consider being an a*****e who deliberately tries to p**s people off a belief system tho and its nice to know you suport the anarchy that would follow the acceptance of such a belief system.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Syke
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 12 Oct 2002
Posts: 2976
Location: Huntington Beach, CA
|
|
Posted: 03/03/04 - 18:14 Post subject:
|
|
|
wait wait before this ends on a bad note..I must summarize again...because I think you guys are confusing yourselves with the argument.
There are a couple of points:
1. The guy in the devil costume did something wrong. He initiated this whole situation, he provoked it.
2. The "christians" in the theatre did something wrong. (assuming they claimed to be practicing Christians) They extracted revenge on the "devil" guy, because they probably felt it was appropriate, they probably didn't think it was that grave of a reaction compared to stunt that the "devil" pulled. Mistake...
Now, on to my opinion.
I find what they did more excusable since they were provoked. The "devil" was not provoked to dress up in a devil suit and watch the movie, he did it for fun. I'm not saying the Christians shouldn't be punished, but they should definitely feel sorry for what they did, and I'm sure some of them do. Some of them know better and I know they will repent and try to act differently in the future. I'm sure a lot of them would actually apologize to this person given the chance.
I'm not really qualified to say this though, because it's up to each of those individuals to find the answer for themselves. You guys can speculate about it all you want, but your argument will go nowhere since you don't actually know what these people think about whole situation. You're just going to label them and their religion based on this one incident, and based on your own life experiences on these matters. None of you know them personally and so you can't continue arguing in this fashion.
Now, I said the word "I" ...find it more excusable because I am a person who believes in extracting immediate revenge on my own behalf, that's just the type of person I am. It makes me feel good at the end of the night if I can do some justice, but only for a good cause. At the same time though, I am also shy and reserved, so every time an incident similar to this mockery of religion happens to me, I keep it to myself for fear that I will look feeble when it comes to holding back my anger. I might end up being the butt of some sick and twisted joke..
Not feeble in the face of God, but to myself and to others...I would be doing myself a diservice if I found myself throwing candy at some idiot that's obviously only going around trying to extract negative reactions from me. I would be the butt of the joke, and I don't like being the center of attention when I'm the butt of any joke. These christians fell into the trap of becomeing the butt of the joke...sucks to know that even Christians aren't perfect, but that idea has been branded into my mind ever since I was a young boy. No one is perfect, and you can't expect everyone to act with tact ALL the time.
When you're faced with a situation as grave as this, tell me how "YOU" react.
It's just like Minion back in the day, when the idea of doing and saying s****y things to people just for the reaction was altogether new to me. I actually fell into his trap a few times, thinking that I absolutely "HAD" to get him back for the naughty things he said. Well, much to my surprise, that makes me just as bad as him and so I've been highly reluctant to "extract revenge on my own behalf," ever since I came to that epiphany. And I kinda realized that Minion isn't all that bad..
WheresNWS was exactly the same way, except his subject matter ranged only on political topics and religion, rather than herpes infestations and malignant tumors and growths around your sphincter...
Some of the topics he touched on came close to home for me and I was many times offended by what he said, and I fell into the same trap of trying to extract some weird type of internet revenge. Not so much revenge through conflicting pain, but showing him the pain of understanding and hopefully cracking open the hard shell taco that holds his brain in place...sometimes it hurts to change your way of thinking and I hoped to help him do just that. (even if he thought my ideas were crazy)
I guess all I'm trying to say is.. I love boobies, that's all...
I mean, can't we all just get along....with boobies?
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Celestra
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 6929
|
|
Posted: 03/03/04 - 18:22 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
Hi Yaladorn =)
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Confused
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
Posts: 6730
|
|
Posted: 03/03/04 - 19:59 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
You guys are acting like they beat the shit out of him. They exercised a tremendous amount of restraint by only throwing peanuts. The nazi would have been beaten near death.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Luturb
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 4042
Location: Livermore, California
|
|
Posted: 03/03/04 - 20:11 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
There is entirely too much angst being expended in this thread over some j*****s getting a coke poured on his head.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Tolanin
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 3551
|
|
Posted: 03/03/04 - 23:40 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Luturb wrote: | | There is entirely too much angst being expended in this thread over some j*****s getting a coke poured on his head. |
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 
|
|
