On Thursday 14 March 2002 02:56 pm, Vineet Kumar wrote: > * Warren Stramiello ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [020313 23:39]: > > Trying to stir up passions by comparing snipping racist remarks from > > source to the image of a torch-waving book burning (and the implicit > > link to nazism) doesn't strike me as a good analogy... the request that > > Finally! The nazis! I invoke Godwin's Law and declare this thread dead. > =) >
what's godwin's law? that is, i'm interested as long as it goes a step beyond permitting you to accuse someone of being a nazi and then taking your ball and going home. as for the flying accusations of racism that proliferate throughout this thread, if any single person is offended by anything, doesn't it behoove those individuals who take offence to take the matter up with the alleged offender? and, even if the offence is genuine, i still don't see that we have to surrender yet more of the constitution simply because some individuals scattered all over the country and/or globe might be offended by the stupid utterances of others; and, as far as racism is concerned, the fact is that racism, in the sense of having discrimatory attitudes towards others on the basis of ethnic origin, as unfortunate and bigoted as that may be, is not illegal. it's a moral issue or an issue of linguistics, but certainly not an issue that can be decided by any one or another proving that their particular sense of righteousness deserves to hold sway over another, because it's impossible to prove. however unburdened of prejudice i might believe myself to be, the fact remains that, when i look around, the bulk of my associations with others tend to reflect a number of biases. all of my male friends have dark hair--i guess that means i'm bigoted against blonde haired males. hey, guess what, all of my female friends also have dark hair. well, it's pretty damn apparent that i've got an issue with blonde haired people. does that make me a hairist, a colorist, or what? does the fact that i can't remember any jokes, whether about blondes or anything else get me some slack, here? personally, i'm at a loss to see either the funny side or the offensive side of the incriminating text. my momma and the rest of my family are neither white nor black--not that i've ever seen anybody in the world who is actually white or actually black, notwithstanding that there may well be many who choose to refer to themselves as white or black. somebody used the phrase "my tax dollars" in arguing that they should not be forced to pay for the inclusion in libraries of some book or other to which they objected. all i can say is that i'll support you in your cause when you support me in mine. however, i've long since resigned myself to the fact that the bible, despite assurances of the separation of church and state, is still the defacto creed offered as the means of public authentication of sworn testimony. first off, they are not your tax dollars--they are our tax dollars. taxes are a collective obligation. in fact, if we did get to choose what our contributions finance, i'm pretty sure that you'd miss the lack of bibles long before i would notice the absence of any of my favorites. next, if you've got an issue with the texts available in public libraries in the u.s., take it up with congress, as in the library of. lastly, if, for whatever reason, you want to withold taxes, that's your business, not ours. so, given your apparent sensibility to community welfare, be sure not to incriminate the participants in this thread in the course of whatever conspiracy it is that you imagine might accord you the sole right to determine where our tax dollars are spent. what the hell is wrong with you people? you've got the source. contact the author. this is debian-user, right? not jerryspringer-watcher? the smartest post i've seen in this thread came from an allegedly fifteen year old kid. screw the utterance of godwin's mysterious law--this thread should have died of embarrassment. ben
