Do me this dignity, a final word

[Ninja_Sher]

ah empwrm, how is your French Canadian extermination going ???

[Darth Kwisatz]

Not much point in allowing exceptions to prove the rules of a proposition wherever you stand for or against the position of another.

Isn't it better to simply let facts, questions and speculations speak for themselves and allow the audience to decide? A robust contention would survive any but the most biased flaming, or at worst be lost among tangental responses. A poor contention would meet a natural end. Either type would exhaust itself eventually. This is a more thoughtful forum than most, ostensibly not for the faint hearted? Sledging reflects poorly on the writer anyway, so the validity their point is more likely than not to be tainted by poor form. Is the reasoned and written judgement of peers in reply not a greater burden of punishment than mere censorship? "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend your right to say it". Falsehood is one thing, but to opine however well or poorly is surely the privilege of the free? Is it not better to muster a knockout reply than to resort to administrative remedies? Hasty resort to rules indicates a vacuum of other abiding virtue, and is necessary only at the point of utter breakdown. This thread is something of a rollercoaster, but reason would appear to be alive and well within it. Self-censorship ought better to be self-imposed discipline borne of the pursuit of higher effectiveness, than demanded and imposed from outside. Is not a forum such as this a point of relief from the usual forms, a place to speculate, to contend, to learn and to inform, such as by the weight of reason brought by others if one is absolutely deviant and abberrant? Sure there are differences of culture and andvancement in the world, of which some approve and others don't. Some will be offended by anything, others by nothing. Is it better to reign in hell or serve in heaven? Is the best answer sometimes another question? Is there anything more threatening than a question for which one is not prepared? Go after those whose heads you seek with questions! Probe the dark recesses of the mind! Expose that which elicits discontent! Don't just censor or dismiss! Don't slam the door, mask the symptoms or shoot messengers! Don't become patsies and scapegoats for accusations of political correctness! If you want to attack abomination without attacking, go for the truth! Find out how. Find out why. Find out from whence abomination comes! Confront it as equals, even if one has the advantage. "Water finds its level". Seek equilibrium and you will find.

[VigilVirus]

Woah, way too many trite expressions in that post, even if it was intended to be an inspirational speech. But otherwise, your point seems to be that all opinions should be considered, evaluated and replied to rather than censored. What censorship are you referring to anyway?

And while in most cases, this is true, some opinions can inherently and unchangeably incite violence, which in my opinion shouldn't be acceptable in a public debate. These arguments are based on emotions, rather than facts and therefore carry no inherent validity.

[Darth Kwisatz]

Can't help being trite.

[TMA_1]

That picture is indeed inflated satire. The parallels are pretty damn slim. The walls and fences being built within Israel are being made in an attempt to stop the horrific attacks that plague the jewish populations of Israel. It is strictly a defensive wall, though it does have many down sides to it's construcution, no dbout about it. it wasent made to exterminate the palistinian peoples though, that is rediculous. IT does hinder the palistinian people in many ways though, but honestly nobodyhas given a solution that works better.

[erjin999]

Only thing is, its often not "within" Isreal  :-.

[Anathema]

That picture is indeed inflated satire. The parallels are pretty damn slim. The walls and fences being built within Israel are being made in an attempt to stop the horrific attacks that plague the jewish populations of Israel. It is strictly a defensive wall, though it does have many down sides to it's construcution, no dbout about it. it wasent made to exterminate the palistinian peoples though, that is rediculous. IT does hinder the palistinian people in many ways though, but honestly nobodyhas given a solution that works better.

Agreed.

Only thing is, its often not "within" Isreal  :-.

It's in the internationally recognised borders of Israel. If the Palestinians living inside those borders take offense, maybe they should have done a bit more effort of containing their radicals themselves.

[Smeghead]

Empworm, Don't you find it ironic that you're obvious love for Dune co-exists with a seeming hate for Islam?

Frank Herbert loved the romanticised tales of Arabian Knights and general Islamic culture, the Fremen are actually re-incarnations of Islamic desert dwellers, they speak something like Arabic... That and you get alot of concepts from Islam like Jihad... Dune takes alot for Islamic culture, and without it Dune would not exist...

If you hate something, and want to crap on about how much you hate it, fine... There ain't no law against hating, you can hate muslims as much as you like, because you have a right to your beliefs...

However, don't go crying when people get offended and do something to you (like ban you from a forum)

Its their right to condemn your beliefs and punish you for being offensive ;) If you were smart enough to know that you'd probably just keep quiet