Protestantism

» pink101 - Free Speech

In response to Free Speech posted by paper_turtle:

.
Like I wrote, it would be difficult to respond to your post.
.
You didn't like my example. So you would put limits my self expression? I don't think you mean to do that; but, if I cannot give the example that makes my point, I am reduced or changed to suit your interests. You don't like it when someone does that to you. We must learn to respect the other person's rights as we respect our own.
.
We have to be extremely careful how we go about reframing the meanings of our First Ten Amendments for we play right into the hands of our political leadership.
.
We do need a concern for the greater good of the society in which we live. I'm sure you agree.
.

-- posted by pink101

» paper_turtle - Free Speech

In response to Free Speech posted by pink101:

So you would put limits my self expression?
.
Forgive me, but I want to groan. Come on, Phil. PLEASE. Your example was insulting. Perhaps you have forgotten that I was on welfare.
.
What's wrong with **voluntarily** making a resolve to speak respectfully about people?
.
What'w arong with showing enough respect for *yourself* not to wish to behave disrespectfully towards others?
.
What's wrong with having some regard for the needs, rights, and feelings of others?
.
What's wrong with caring enough for truth and for ***meaningful*** dialogue to care enough to speak in a way which will promote both rather than leading to fighting and nothing but arguing about who's right and who's wrong?
.
And what would it cost you to take my questions seriously?
.
peace and love,
Paper Turtle

-- posted by paper_turtle

» pink101 - Civil Rights

In response to Free Speech posted by paper_turtle:
.
I have taken your questions and points seriously.
.
.
I'm sorry you have decided to be victimized by my example of some bad name calling. Perhaps I should have used the example of an old curmudgeon?
.
Walking on eggs has always been a difficult task for me.
.
You should be proud of the heritage that allows a person to be protected from starving or having to stand in line to beg for a hand out off some rich person's table. I remember, once, when I stood in line in one of Michigan's unemployment benefit lines. I felt a surge of shame that I had to receive welfare. Then, I thought of the man, Eugene Debbs who went to federal prison fighting for such rights as Social Security, and I felt proud to uphold that hard won RIGHT.
.
Many people fought and died for us in many ways. For us not to be proud of what they did on our behalf is a slap in their face. Ever hear the story of Joe Hill?
.
:~)
.
Welfare is one of our Civil Rights. Stand proud and never be ashamed--ever!!
.
Here is a man who has had his Civil Rights abused by our government--exactly what the Founders feared:
.
http://www.npr.org/templates/dmg/popup.p...
.

-- posted by pink101

» paper_turtle - Civil Rights

In response to Civil Rights posted by pink101:

I wasn't claiming victim status. I am not ashamed of being on welfare. I was, though, saying that it behooves us to take into account that the person to whom we are speaking might be a welfare mother (or whatever), and perhaps we will *want* to show respect by not making a statement which might be interpreted as an insult.
.
My experiences on welfare, made me very aware that the stereotype of a welfare cheat does great damage. It hurts those on welfare and it misleads the public, causing reduction in benefits, discrimination, and other negative behaviors which do not help those on welfare feel empowered to improve their lives.
.
My basic point is that what we do *now,* in this present moment is as important, or perhaps more important than whatever we may know about theory or law.
.
Now, if I were to posit this same argument in terms of Christianity you might readily agree with me. I find it interesting that your responses to me are similar to the kinds of arguments a Fundamentalist would address to me if I were to write (for example) that the "fruits" of the spirit are more important than law.
.
I say that the climate each one of us creates by how we choose to express ourselves has a very significant influence on the quality of life we enjoy AND what laws are passed or not passed.
.
IMHO respect for truth means having a strong desire to present one's ideas in the best possible way, so that people will not take offense and shut out the words. IMHO we would all benefit in taking up the challenge of learning how to effectively express ourselves without benefit of being negative. And IMHO if we voluntarily take up this challenge we might even help defeat the dumbing down of America.
.
peace and love,
Bonnie

-- posted by paper_turtle

» pink101 - Offensive

In response to Civil Rights posted by paper_turtle:
.
Much of what one posits to any discussion can be seen as offensive to another
.
I had hoped this thread could be a worthwhile look into what are called Civil Rights.
.
Yet, I respect your posits here and have tried to answer them without being personal. Hopefully, that is noticeable.
.
My focus and the way I have tried to pose my responses to you was toward the idea of what constitutes a Civil Right. Civil Rights, in my understanding, are those rights created by compacts between us that protect our right to life and the pursuit of happiness.
.
I happen to see the weight put on polite or so-called politically-correct speech as an affront on Civil Rights the most basic of which is self expression. If someone doesn't like the way I express myself, I can take that into consideration the next time I decide to say or do something. Otherwise, I can retreat into some hiding place.
.
What comes after what is considered to be politically-correct can vary depending on the society in which one lives. Not bowing down to Mecca when the call to prayer is given from the parapet might cause some poor peasant in some far off country to lose their head in a public execution. Things do have a tendency to go to extremes. One of the problems the Founders had with a bill of rights was that what about the specific rights that don't get enumerated? Does that give the government power to abuse? That might be covered in the Tenth Amendment and in other places.
.

-- posted by pink101

» Migisi - Civil Rights

In response to Civil Rights posted by pink101:

.
Good link you posted. Gives a real-life example of our loss of civil rights. The early American patriots were arrested and imprisoned for opposing King George. You and I could suffer the same fate by opposing this King George. The Constitution and Bill of Rights mean nothing to those with power. THIS is what I find offensive on SO many levels.

-- posted by Migisi

» pink101 - Civil Rights

In response to Civil Rights posted by Migisi:
.
Yup, except for our courts which the corporate interests are working hard to pack with their dogs. Jefferson was well aware of the problems. He and Madison spoke well to them as Little Tommy Tucker of South Carolina--a state with a non elected form of government--tried to dismiss the issues.
.
Conscientious awareness is our best weapon against tyranny. We can't succumb to the helplessness which results from buying into idiotic prophecy. The enemies of freedom are all too knowledgeable about how to use ideology to achieve their goals and objectives. If a person will follow some ideology they are the willing victims of tyranny. Look around you. The stupidss are all over the place just sitting there on their hinders with their front paws up and their mouths open and begging to be fed bunk.
.

-- posted by pink101

» Migisi - Civil Rights

In response to Civil Rights posted by pink101:

.
We can't succumb to the helplessness which results from buying into idiotic prophecy.
.
Do the end-times believers fit current events into the vague and symbolic revelations prophecy? Yeah, I think so. Nevertheless, I personally see/hear what's happening in and to my country, and I don't like it one bit.

-- posted by Migisi

» pink101 - Don't Like It One Bit

.
"... I don't like it one bit."
.
Nor do I.
.
Some of the Founders were well aware of the dangers and that is exactly why the Bill of Rights was included as the first ten amendments to the Constitution.
.
Jefferson believed the courts were our protection against any abuses. He is right. That link on Ali Al-mari proves that point. If the Bush administration had won that case, you can be sure there would have been more such attainders carried out by the administration. Military Courts have no place over civilians. That's the trick card Bush has been trying to play. Enemy combatant indeed! Who on earth is counseling the turkey?
.
That's testosterone gone wild.
.

-- posted by pink101

» pink101 - Erata--Parapet

In response to Offensive posted by pink101:

.
I knew that was wrong and I didn't get it in time.
.
The word, parapet, should have been minaret which is a slender tower from which a priest calls the community to prayer in society ruled by the law of Islam.
.

-- posted by pink101