More on the idiocy that is the riots "caused" by the Danish cartoons of Mohammed:
In an interview with Britain's Daily Telegraph, EU Justice and Security Commissioner Franco Frattini said the charter would encourage the media to show "prudence" when covering religion.
"The press will give the Muslim world the message: We are aware of the consequences of exercising the right of free expression," he told the newspaper. "We can and we are ready to self-regulate that right."
Nice, huh? Thankfully, noted at the end of the article, the code would not have "legal status."
Several town employees told [Town Manager Mark] Stankiewicz they did not agree with his decision and worried the flag could provoke violence against Town Hall in light of the attacks against Danish and other European embassies throughout the Middle East. Stankiewicz described their concerns as an ''overreaction."
The Stoughton No Place for Hate Committee (neat name, eh?), a local antidiscrimination group, plans to discuss the episode at its meeting tonight because of fears that residents might be hurt or insulted. ''There's always that chance that there will be people who are offended, and we want to guard against that," said Karon Skinner-Catrone, chairperson of the 10-person group, some of whom are town officials.
"Being offended" -- the greatest malady of the 21st century. Just ask a radical Muslim. Or a multiculti leftist here at home.
"Being offended" -- the greatest malady of the 21st century. Just ask a radical Muslim. Or a multiculti leftist here at home.
Or right-wingers here at home who flip their lids and start a media war because someone says "Happy Holidays." Or protest because something at the movies is "liberal propaganda." Or take offense when only actual science is taught in schools.
Or whine because they're offended by a breast on TV or free speech like Bush-bashing in a song.
Being overly sensitive is definitely a problem-- but it's not one that's limited to one side of the fence or the other.
Posted by: dan at February 10, 2006 03:53 PM""Being offended" -- the greatest malady of the 21st century. Just ask a radical Muslim. Or a multiculti leftist here at home."
Or the boss at the Dover Post.
Posted by: Dana Garrett at February 10, 2006 07:41 PMOr the Republicans after hearing the orations at Corretta Scott King's funeral.
Posted by: Dana Garrett at February 10, 2006 07:43 PMThe main problem with what you guys have offered is that 1. radical Muslims kill when they're offended; 2. here at home, multiculti leftists want to criminalize being offended.
Posted by: Hube at February 11, 2006 07:57 AM"The main problem with what you guys have offered is that 1. radical Muslims kill when they're offended; 2. here at home, multiculti leftists want to criminalize being offended."
Ah, I see, when you can't take the criticism that WAS made, pretend you are responding to a criticism that wasn't made. I NEVER responded to any claim justifying Muslims killing people over free speech. I responded to this assertion AND I EVEN QUOTED IT to help you understand what I was responding to:
"Being offended" -- the greatest malady of the 21st century. Just ask a radical Muslim. Or a multiculti leftist here at home."
So I quote it and even that doesn't make you respond to what I said, only something you would prefer me to say. LOL! How typical. How dishonest.
I await your apology.
Posted by: Dana Garrett at February 11, 2006 05:49 PMWhy would I offer an apology, Dana? Merely because of your instinctive need to play word games and act all high and mighty? NOWHERE in my comment did I even imply you agreed with what the Muslims are doing or the leftsist here at home. But, you didn't even address it -- all you did was offer "But the conservatves do it too -- WAHHH!"
What you (and dan) do is essentially AVOID the overall point of the post which I stand by. See my previous comment. The Dover Post's boss or the Repubs at the funeral are completely ridiculous comparisons to murder and criminalization of being offended. Oh, are you upset because I said [multiculti] "leftists" want to criminalize people who give offense? Here's a word for you: Hyperbole. I'm sure you know it well.
Now, why don't you find the time to address that "good point" about freedom of association conflicting with free speech? I think we've all waited long enough. What, do you think you're gonna make some "grand entrance" or something -- "Here's Dana Garrett finally addressing the conflict between free speech and freedom of association!"
Nah -- it's a lot easier to keep maligning the Post and its owner in post after post, comment after comment instead of responding to that very pertinent query.
Posted by: Hube at February 11, 2006 06:53 PM