Australian Politics Forum - spineless apologetics

Phemanderac

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3507
Gender: male

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #1095 - Jan 17^th, 2015 at 10:57am

freediver wrote on Jan 17^th, 2015 at 10:50am:

Do you think I am limiting cods' freedom of speech?

Do you think freedom of speech means she can compel me to publish whatever stupid tripe she spews?

Clearly, it doesn't matter at all what I think, it's your sandpit to do as you please in...

IF that happens to be hypocritical, lacking consistency and integrity what can anyone honestly do about it (apart from the obvious, not come here - that is the extent of one's freedom in your little sandbox son...)

Oh, and with your swear filter, YEP indeed to some degree you limit Cods Freedom of Speech, BUT to be honest, apart from in your mind (presently) this isn't actually even about Cods specifically - it is about "FREEDOM" - you know that as yet still undefined word...

Further, the inconsistency around YOUR rules in the place, yep that limits not only posters perceived freedom of speech, but also limits their sense of security...

That is on you matey totally and naught really to do with Cods to be fair.

Back to top

On the 26th of January you are all invited to celebrate little white penal day...

"They're not rules as such, more like guidelines" Pirates of the Caribbean..

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49042
At my desk.

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #1096 - Jan 17^th, 2015 at 12:09pm

Quote:

Clearly, it doesn't matter at all what I think, it's your sandpit to do as you please in...

You could try answering the question rather than spitting the dummy.

Quote:

IF that happens to be hypocritical, lacking consistency and integrity what can anyone honestly do about it (apart from the obvious, not come here - that is the extent of one's freedom in your little sandbox son...)

And your problem with this is?

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

Karnal

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 95817
Gender: male

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #1097 - Jan 17^th, 2015 at 1:03pm

freediver wrote on Jan 17^th, 2015 at 12:09pm:

Quote:

Clearly, it doesn't matter at all what I think, it's your sandpit to do as you please in...

You could try answering the question rather than spitting the dummy.

Have you ever been a spineless apologist yourself, FD?

I’m curious. Would you prefer to ignore this question or evade it?

Back to top

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #1098 - Jan 17^th, 2015 at 1:59pm

freediver wrote on Jan 17^th, 2015 at 10:50am:

Do you think freedom of speech means she can compel me to publish whatever stupid tripe she spews?

Interesting way of spinning it FD. Or to put it another way - does freedom of speech mean she is allowed to publish whatever stupid tripe she spews?

Maybe we can put it this way: "does freedom of speech compel the government to allow whatever stupid tripe any given person spews"?

Well yeah, basically it does.

You seem to have missed Phemanderac's point - yes it is your prerogative to publish whatever you want here, as its your site. But it doesn't mean its not hypocritical.

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49042
At my desk.

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #1099 - Jan 17^th, 2015 at 2:15pm

Quote:

Interesting way of spinning it FD. Or to put it another way - does freedom of speech mean she is allowed to publish whatever stupid tripe she spews?

Of course it does. But I am not going to do it for her.

Quote:

Maybe we can put it this way: "does freedom of speech compel the government to allow whatever stupid tripe any given person spews"?

They were talking about my website, not what the government will allow her to say or publish.

Quote:

You seem to have missed Phemanderac's point - yes it is your prerogative to publish whatever you want here, as its your site. But it doesn't mean its not hypocritical.

Have I ever said websites should be compelled to publish everything that is submitted to them for publication, in the interest of freedom of speech? How is it hypocritical? Even Charlie Hebdo chooses what to publish. Freedom is not compulsion.

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

Karnal Gold Member Online Australian Politics Posts: 95817 Gender:	Re: spineless apologetics Reply #1100 - Jan 17^th, 2015 at 2:53pm I’m curious, FD. Does freedom of speech include porkie pies? What do you think of the Press Council? The Australian Broadcasting Authority? The Australian Journalists Association’s Code of Ethics?
Back to top	IP Logged

Bobby. Gold Member Online Australian Politics Posts: 105024 Melbourne Gender:	Re: spineless apologetics Reply #1101 - Jan 17^th, 2015 at 3:18pm Muslims horrors: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2913733/Thrown-roof-stoned-death-crucifi...
Back to top	IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 38734
Gender: male

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #1102 - Jan 17^th, 2015 at 4:54pm

freediver wrote on Jan 17^th, 2015 at 10:50am:

Do you think I am limiting cods' freedom of speech?

Do you think freedom of speech means she can compel me to publish whatever stupid tripe she spews?

Your apparent definition seems to mean exactly that. Charlie Hebdo is free to publish anything, yet you, freediver, will select what you believe ought be published.

My definition would be entirely different, but you obviously don't give a stuff about the views of anyone else, if, in your view, they are stupid.

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49042
At my desk.

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #1103 - Jan 17^th, 2015 at 4:58pm

Quote:

Your apparent definition seems to mean exactly that. Charlie Hebdo is free to publish anything, yet you, freediver, will select what you believe ought be published.

That makes no sense Aussie. It is the same thing. We are both free to choose what to publish. No-one else can tell Charlie Hebdo what to publish. Same with my website. What you and the other apologists demand is the equivalent to Muslims demanding that Charlie Hebdo publish whatever they come up with.

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

Karnal

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 95817
Gender: male

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #1104 - Jan 17^th, 2015 at 5:52pm

freediver wrote on Jan 17^th, 2015 at 4:58pm:

Quote:

Your apparent definition seems to mean exactly that. Charlie Hebdo is free to publish anything, yet you, freediver, will select what you believe ought be published.

That makes no sense Aussie. It is the same thing. We are both free to choose what to publish. No-one else can tell Charlie Hebdo what to publish. Same with my website. What you and the other apologists demand is the equivalent to Muslims demanding that Charlie Hebdo publish whatever they come up with.

FD, are you, or have you ever been, a vaccilating, limpwristed, yeah-but-no-but Spineless Apologist?

Answer the question.

Back to top

IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 38734
Gender: male

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #1105 - Jan 17^th, 2015 at 6:41pm

freediver wrote on Jan 17^th, 2015 at 4:58pm:

Quote:

Your apparent definition seems to mean exactly that. Charlie Hebdo is free to publish anything, yet you, freediver, will select what you believe ought be published.

That makes no sense Aussie. It is the same thing. We are both free to choose what to publish. No-one else can tell Charlie Hebdo what to publish. Same with my website. What you and the other apologists demand is the equivalent to Muslims demanding that Charlie Hebdo publish whatever they come up with.

1. I am not an apologist for anyone or anything. If you have not realised that by now, you never will.

2. Hebdo is not refusing to publish ridicule, abuse, scorn derision, and incitement. It is electing to do so in the name of freedom of speech.

3. You are electing to censor (your version of) ridicule, abuse, scorn, deride, incite and exclude what you regard as unacceptable language. You somehow manage (in your own mind) to do that also in the name of freedom of speech.

And yet, you still do not see the naked hypocrisy.

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49042
At my desk.

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #1106 - Jan 17^th, 2015 at 6:49pm

Quote:

Hebdo is not refusing to publish ridicule, abuse, scorn derision, and incitement. It is electing to do so in the name of freedom of speech.

I believe they are in it for the money, primarily. And they do still choose what to publish. Obviously having your right to do so challenged will make anyone stand up for their rights. Well, most people anyway. Some would cravenly abandon their rights if a Muslim looked at them sideways.

Quote:

You are electing to censor (your version of)

How is this any different to what Charlie Hebdo does? Are you under the delusion that they publish literally everything that is submitted to them? Neither restrict's anyone's freedom of speech. I have never argued that freedom of speech means the ability to compel someone to publish what you want. Their is no hypocrisy, merely confusion on the part of you and cods.

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

Aussie Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 38734 Gender:	Re: spineless apologetics Reply #1107 - Jan 17^th, 2015 at 7:20pm This is when I'll 'wunaway.' No matter what I or anyone says, you will never, ever see how completely hypocritical you are. You are the absolute epitome of a censor of free speech.
Back to top	IP Logged

\|dev\|null Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 4434 Gender:	Re: spineless apologetics Reply #1108 - Jan 19^th, 2015 at 10:24am Aussie wrote on Jan 17^th, 2015 at 7:20pm: This is when I'll 'wunaway.' No matter what I or anyone says, you will never, ever see how completely hypocritical you are. You are the absolute epitome of a censor of free speech.
Back to top	"Pens and books are the weapons that defeat terrorism." - Malala Yousefzai, 2013. "we will never ever solve violence while we grasp for overly simplistic solutions." Freediver, 2007. IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49042
At my desk.

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #1109 - Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:37pm

Wun Aussie Wun.

Cods explaining that the charlie Hebdo cartoonists were not actually murdered. They were "sacrificed".

cods wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 8:26am:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 8:04am:

cods wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 8:01am:

Resolute wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:57am:

And yet again the appeasers are happy to invoke their right to freedom of speech, and of course their support for murders, whilst remaining comfortable and safe in their own opinionated little world.

and we dont want socks on this thread if you dont mind...its called I draw a line FREEDOM OF SPEECH..

what support are your referring to in particular???>..

not the bit where we prefer 17 people hadnt been sacrificed for a cartoon.....?

No cods, not 'sacrificed for a cartoon'...MURDERED because of a cartoon.

does it make any difference.. they are dead....because of a cartoon...

the owner did have a choice..when someone kills another person it is usually murder....

if someone is given a choice..regarding living or dying..

then its sacrifice...the owner sacrificed his staff....to the would be murderers...

Back to top

« Last Edit: Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:50pm by freediver »

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged