quote:Originally posted by Dagonee: The fact that you continue to refer to it as "childish offense" means that you don't respect others' feelings. It's really that simple. Quid is a grownup. She has these feelings. You call them childish. Is that respect?
By the way, here are some capital letters. You seem to have only a sporadic supply.
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
last time i checked, caps were used to express a hightened tone (or yelling). for all your talk about maturity, you seem to have missed the boat.
and yes, i think quid's opinion on ths issue is childish, and selfish in a sense. i am allowed to disagree with her opinions the last time i checked, i am allowed to think they are immature or self-centered. however, i still respect her right to have them, and that is why i gave you all examples and a (in my opinion) a cogent argument in my refutation of her opinions. if didnt respect them, i would have simply dismissed them alltogether, and not provided an explanatino of my diagreement with her
Posts: 441 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by katharina: Hmm...nah. I'm almost afraid to say it because it could be taken badly, but in my head, that sounds like He Who Must Not Be Named, which means Voldemort.
I do sort of like Snuffles, though. Probably won't use it - not terribly respectful.
Isn't Snuffles the name Harry called Sirius when he was in dog form or when other people were around? Man that would just be weird...
Posts: 2867 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:last time i checked, caps were used to express a hightened tone (or yelling).
They are also used to begin sentences, names, and the first person singular subject pronoun. Given your punctuation style, I was making a suggestion that might improve the readbility of your posts.
quote:and yes, i think quid's opinion on ths issue is childish, and selfish in a sense. i am allowed to disagree with her opinions the last time i checked
Of course you are. But when you then pretend to respect her feelings, you are going to be called on it. Because you don't respect them. You think they're childish. This isn't a sign of respect.
I vehemently disagree with quite a few people here, on many topics. Were I to call their feelings childish, I would not be respecting them.
i think quid's opinion on ths issue is childish, and selfish in a sense. i am allowed to disagree with her opinions the last time i checked, i am allowed to think they are immature or self-centered. however, i still respect her right to have them
I haven't weighed in on this thread before, but I have been eavesdropping. I kind of feel a little hurt by the virulence that has infected this thread. Let's all please take a deep breath and meditate on "Respect", before we continue.
Of course, we don't all have to agree with quid's beliefs. Or Angio's. This forum would quickly become very boring if every thread included postings no more thought-provoking than "I agree!"
But, we really ought to try to maintain respect. Before you click "Add Reply", read what you've written, and imagine how you would feel if someone wrote that about YOU. And because disrespect tends to foster further disrespect, you may find yourself soon under attack.
I really enjoy being a part of Hatrack, largely because it is a nice, friendly, good-humored community of interesting and intelligent people. It is a nice place to come for fun and escape. But nastiness and disrespect undermines all that.
That said, I must say that I, too, am made very uncomfortable by taking The Name in vain. For my practice, and in my faith, it is reserved only for sacred usage, such as in prayer. Now, I understand that I am in a minority opinion in this -- after all, I DO live in the real world, and I am exposed the the locution all the time. I hope, however, that I never become so hardened to it that it fails to jolt and make me (at least internally) wince.
When I must include a reference, I write "G'd". And as interjections, I freely scatter "Gosh", "Golly", "Garsh", "Gee", and "Sheesh". I have heard that some people find those terms offensive; for me, I find them charming.
Can we all just make nice?
Posts: 10397 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I just figured Angio was new and trying to get attention on a large board. Treating people badly is one way to do that.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: Why exactly is her attitude childish and selfish? She is offended by someone saying something, and politely asked people to stop doing so.
It is your reaction to that polite request, Angiomorphism, which is both childish and selfish.
first off, let me be clear: it is true that i do not respect the actual opinions held by quid. i think they are over-sensitive and immature. however, like i said, i do respect her right to have them. what that means is that i expect to have a civilized (sometimes with a touch of humour to keep things interesting) discussion about her, and my own, opinions. i have said many times that the reasons i do not agree (and by extension in this case, do not respect) her opinions on the use of the word God is because i find it selfish to ask a large group of people to change their diction when they are saying something that is not meant to be, nor is in my opinion at all, offensive. the use of God in "oh my gawd!" is simply mean as an exclamation of surprise. it has nothing to do with any diety in particular, as it has evolved over the years into a term that i think is value neutral. lots of things that do not offend me, but may offend other people, i refrain from using, because i can understand how these thigns would be offensive to some. the reason im fighting it in this case is because i believe that under no circumstance is oh my god offensive. it simply isnt. quid thinks we are talking about her God in particular when we say this, but that is not true. if i believed in the ancient greek gods, and proclaimed one day: oh my god!, then how wou;d that have anything at all do to with teh xian god? it wouldnt, because my god isnt the xian god. furthermore, for someone like myself, who does not believe in god, or God, or gods at all, and for many people that do believe in some of these, "oh my god" is simply what i stated it was before, an expressino of exclamation, and nothing more.
it is for this reason that i feel as though it is unreasonable for someone to ask me, or anyone else to stop using this term. for me, it would be like someone telling me to stop using the word cross, when i say, for example, "don't cross me!", because it is in reference to X's crucifiction. is that a better example? cross in that context has nothing to do with xtianity, nor is it intented to have anythign to do with it, or be offensive in any way.
therefore, for someone to hold a view like the "cross" one seems selfish and immature to me, for you are asking a wide group of people to conform to your way of thought. and why are you asking this? furthermore, what makes this an appropriate topic here at this forum? most likely when quid posted this, she wasn't expecting to receive too much oposition, but that is the problem. she took for granted that for some of us, the freedom to say things that are completely innoffensive is something we value. this kind of request, as well as the moderator's post, are seen as a sort of slippery slope, that would allow just about anyone to ask others to stop saying certain words in any context that they deem offensive, and be justified in doing so here.
quid has the right to be offended, and the right to hold her opinion, however ludicrous i may think it is, but i do not believe she has the right to tell me to stop saying something that the vast majority of us would consider totally innofensive.
my reaction is well thought out, and a result of careful consideration to avoid anything too offensive. your's is merely one of ignorance Rakeesh
Posts: 441 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by katharina: I just figured Angio was new and trying to get attention on a large board. Treating people badly is one way to do that.
im sorry, but is disagreeing with someone's opinion considered treating someone badly? or is it voicing that disagreement? i dont follow.
i thought the point of this board was to have discussions, and disagree, and discover new perspectives.
and for the record, we are all trying to get attention, its the human condition
Posts: 441 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:the use of God in "oh my gawd!" is simply mean as an exclamation of surprise. it has nothing to do with any diety in particular, as it has evolved over the years into a term that i think is value neutral.
What you are failing to grasp is that the meaning of "Oh my God!" that you say is value-neutral comes directly from the reference of the word "God" to a particular diety believed in by particular people. If it didn't refer to a diety, it would not have acquired that meaning.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:the use of God in "oh my gawd!" is simply mean as an exclamation of surprise. it has nothing to do with any diety in particular, as it has evolved over the years into a term that i think is value neutral.
What you are failing to grasp is that the meaning of "Oh my God!" that you say is value-neutral comes directly from the reference of the word "God" to a particular diety believed in by particular people. If it didn't refer to a diety, it would not have acquired that meaning.
its not about a particular diety, it could be about any diety whatsoever. notice the "my" in the term, implying it refers to the person's god who is using it. in that case, for me it would be, "oh science", for others "oh zeus! or budda! or vishnu!" not the xian god exclusively
Posts: 441 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
How many times can we repeat the same thing over and over and over and over and over again?
Some of us will respect quid's request, some of us won't. Judging from Angiomorphism's posts, if one decides to skip over his posts for his use of the word God, then they won't be missing much.
posted
its funny you should say that you skip over posts whenyou see the word god, cuz i skip over posts when i see you posted them
ok sry that was a little harsh, but the 4th grader inside of me couldnt pass it up. cheers
if you choose to ignore my posts, then that is fine, but i assure you that you will be limiting your own perspective, because i always listen carefully to what those who disagree with me say, i have even been known sometimes to completely change my opinion based on discussion
Posts: 441 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:first off, let me be clear: it is true that i do not respect the actual opinions held by quid.
It's a good thing you let us mouth-breathing whiners know that. I hadn't noticed.
quote:however, like i said, i do respect her right to have them.
Respecting someone's right to have an opinion is a meaningless, worthless virtue.
quote:what that means is that i expect to have a civilized (sometimes with a touch of humour to keep things interesting) discussion about her, and my own, opinions.
Repeatedly calling someone selfish and immatuyre is neither civilized nor humorous.
quote:i have said many times that the reasons i do not agree (and by extension in this case, do not respect) her opinions on the use of the word God is because i find it selfish to ask a large group of people to change their diction when they are saying something that is not meant to be, nor is in my opinion at all, offensive.
Thanks for reiterating your lack of respect. I'd forgotten that after you mentioned it like three sentences ago. It is not selfish of her to request you stop saying something that offends her. She has not in any way compelled you to do so. She asked you, nicely, to refrain from saying something she deems offensive.
The fact that you think it is value-neutral is irrelevant. She didn't ask you to stop because she thought you were offended. She asked you to stop because she was offended. I ask you again, since you haven't answered: why is it selfish to ask politely someone stop saying something? Why?
You are being laughably hypocritical in return. You're asking her not to be offended, and belittling her for being offended.
quote:the use of God in "oh my gawd!" is simply mean as an exclamation of surprise. it has nothing to do with any diety in particular, as it has evolved over the years into a term that i think is value neutral.
On Planet Angiomorphism, perhaps. In the real world, which people aside from you inhabit, this is not always the case. In other words, not everyone thinks the same way you do. Some people think it is not, in fact, value-neutral but rather it has value in and of itself. You don't get to determine what someone is or is not offended by. The presumptuousness of that assumption is frankly hilarious.
quote:lots of things that do not offend me, but may offend other people, i refrain from using, because i can understand how these thigns would be offensive to some.
It is selfish of you not to extend the same courtesy to quid. It is willfully ignorant of you not to broaden your mind the small amount it would take to see how it could be offensive to others.
I'm not even going to touch on your absurd 'other g-d' argument, Angiomorphism, save to say this. For one thing, many of the religions you mentioned had or have proscriptions against blasphemy as well-so someone may well be offended.
quote:therefore, for someone to hold a view like the "cross" one seems selfish and immature to me, for you are asking a wide group of people to conform to your way of thought.
You are doing exactly the same thing-and you're asking a much larger group of people to conform. Hypocrite.
quote:she took for granted that for some of us, the freedom to say things that are completely innoffensive is something we value.
Now you get to mind-read and determine what people find offensive. Actually, that's the first thing you've said that holds up-the one supports the other.
quote:however ludicrous i may think it is, but i do not believe she has the right to tell me to stop saying something that the vast majority of us would consider totally innofensive.
It's good to know you're being very mature, repeatedly insulting her. And on the issue of repetition, it doesn't make things true. She has not commanded you to stop saying g-d. And many people do find it offensive. Read the bloody thread!
quote:my reaction is well thought out, and a result of careful consideration to avoid anything too offensive. your's is merely one of ignorance Rakeesh
Perhaps it is due to my substantial ignorance that I recognize your reaction's obvious lack of careful consideration.
Ugh. You're not going to dissuade me from being unhappy with this change on the forum, no matter how stupid you make your arguments Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
id rather not waste my time going through your whole argument, because it is clear to me that we arent getting anywhere. suffice it to say, i could alsmost repeat everything you said to me right back to you word for word about your reasoning.
i will say this. i have absolutely no problem refraining from swearing, or making ligitimately offensive comments here. that being said, i simply cannot immagine any context or intelligent perspective that would realistically find the use of god in "oh my god" as offensive. so for me, this request is non sensical, and is like asking me to stop using an arbitrary word just because someone finds some way to be offended by it. and i find that offense to be selfish yes, because it is a manisfestation of one person's hyper-sensitivity being forced on everyone else.
you might see the offensive content, but i dont, and for that reason, it is an unreasonable request to make that i change my diction for her.
perhaps this represents a microcosm for my much larger distaste of how many people demand others to conform to their beliefs and values, but i also think that it has merit alone. you need to calm down, and actually adress my arguments with counter arguments, not you're innexperienced and innefective point by point name calling routine.
EDIT: im out and off for the weekend, so later folks, have a great weekend!
Posts: 441 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
I see what you are saying and agree that trying to say that Quid believes 'God' is equivalent to 'the' is ignoring her feelings and what she has stated.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
As a member of the Hatrack jerk brigade, I am given the unfortunate duty to formally deny your application for membership on the grounds that you are a complete dimwit.
Thank you for applying, we will consider your application in the future when you have developed some sense of irony and humor. We strive for our members to at least be able to spell and use capitalization.
Again, we thank you for your interest and look forward to watching you make a fool of yourself in the future.
posted
Angio, I do wish you wouldn't claim that 'oh my God' would mean 'science' to you. Science is not a god, and by claiming it is, you are just giving ammunition to the relativist cretinist types who claim that their explanation is just as good as any other, and should be given equal time in schools.
And would you please start spellchecking and capitalising? You're making atheists look bad.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hey, you know what? steven actually hasn't been that much of a jerk. He's been defensive and weird, but a lot of that defensiveness comes from the fact that we've been jumping all over him for believing nutty stuff and having the gall to think that his scientific studies prove his nutty stuff.
I don't see why "science has proved that the Ancient Chinese Masters were right about ear position being an important determining factor in one's development" is a valid target for scorn, mockery, and derision, whereas any number of other religious beliefs are sacrosanct to the point that mocking them will provoke moderator response.
None of us buy steven's line, but it's not HIS fault that he's bought into an unpopular superstition.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't have a problem with steven's odd beliefs. I more had a problem with the things he said in The Thread That Was Deleted.
Posts: 7050 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
