I don't get why we worry about PC crap towards people that don’t hesitate to decapitate...

An article on the canceling of an Opera in Berlin written by Mozart (scene added by someone else) because it portrayed Muhammad... Not to mention the heads of many other gods and prophets including Jesus...But it isn't Jesus or Buddha they are worried about...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15013716/

And why should the Pope apologize??? Do Muslims apologize for their offence?

We are changing our lives for them just as the terroists wanted therefore the war on terror is becoming a losing battle...

In the words of Ben Franklin "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary saftey deserve neither liberty nor safety."

The essential liberty here is the freedom of speech and expression, or even the gift of god’s free will....

Yup, PC has gone to far.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.


Expect I'm not PC.

Sorry 5.56
Not sure I can support your portrayal of Cindy Sheehan as a terrorist supporter ... being against the war doesn't automatically mean you support the terrorists (if that were the case, you'd have to place my mug on your poster right next to Bin Laden and Cindy Sheehan).

AND BEFORE YOU DECIDE TO TAKE A SHOT AT ME - I DO SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, I just have a heartburn where GW is concerned.



Cindy has NEVER come out in support of ANY terrorist or ANY terrorist act. She just thinks that GW is a 'murderer' and a 'liar', something that many Americans agree with. She has has just been 'unfortunate' enough to be in the MSM headlines because of the death of her son in Iraq.

YOUR 'A VIRTUAL DUET' IS NOTHING BUT A LIE AND PROPAGANDA AT IT'S WORST, and in very poor taste. And this has NOTHING to do with PC (something I personally detest).

She might not support terrorism but she sure as heck doesn't support the troops either. She is a disgrace to her son and to all the fallen American heroes in the War on Terror.

Originally Posted by Donkey

I don't get why we worry about PC crap towards people that don’t hesitate to decapitate...

An article on the canceling of an Opera in Berlin written by Mozart (scene added by someone else) because it portrayed Muhammad... Not to mention the heads of many other gods and prophets including Jesus...But it isn't Jesus or Buddha they are worried about...

Hang on a sec this isnt a case of PCer's attacking Mozart at all...

The disputed scene is not part of Mozart’s original staging of the 225-year-old opera, but was an addition of Neuenfels’ production, which was last performed by the company in March 2004.

What you have is a case of artistic license vs security.

I tend to find these arguments on promoting free speech and stamping out PC kind of amusing because in every case it is the same people spouting on about how ludicrous it is and how the right to free speech is paramount and yet the very same people are present in other threads (ie people protesting the war etc.) complaining that these people shouldnt be protesting and if they were there they would be sorting out the protesters.
For example take 5.56's views above he manages to be on both sides of a fence at once.

So which is it guys free speech tempered with PC or some form of police state where you only have the right to agree with the majority or who ever is in charge?

Originally Posted by MontyB

Hang on a sec this isnt a case of PCer's attacking Mozart at all...


What you have is a case of artistic license vs security.

I tend to find these arguments on promoting free speech and stamping out PC kind of amusing because in every case it is the same people spouting on about how ludicrous it is and how the right to free speech is paramount and yet the very same people are present in other threads (ie people protesting the war etc.) complaining that these people shouldnt be protesting and if they were there they would be sorting out the protesters.
For example take 5.56's views above he manages to be on both sides of a fence at once.

So which is it guys free speech tempered with PC or some form of police state where you only have the right to agree with the majority or who ever is in charge?

I made refrence to the fact it was an added scene...

No it relates to PC for that it is only the Islam religion they are worried about no one seems to care the Jesus, Buddha, and Poseidon are portrayed...And that is the point I was trying to make....Because you see, for when some one talks about Muhammad wack-os fire bomb a embassy...

This cracks me up http://www.zipperfish.com/free/yaafm12.php (foul language)

Finally I have no problem with a peaceful protest...However not one where you chain yourself to a fence and cause a disturbance...And not when you are being disrespectful of a funeral and saying how that soldier should go to hell for fighting for his country...

Yes limitations to freedom of speech exist for good reason....ie you cant run around screaming fire...That would cuase physical injury...

Originally Posted by Donkey

I made refrence to the fact it was an added scene...

No it relates to PC for that it is only the Islam religion they are worried about no one seems to care the Jesus, Buddha, and Poseidon are portrayed...And that is the point I was trying to make....Because you see, for when some one talks about Muhammad wack-os fire bomb a embassy...

I dont disagree but then fanatics will be fanatics hell just look at some anti-abortionists blowing up clinics and killing doctors etc, I recall the catholic threats and outcry over Madonna's music and the movie "passion of Christ" and at one point I was advised to leave a town in Missouri because I pointed out I had no intention of going to church.

What it boils down to is that it is stupid to go around antagonising people just because you have a right to do so especially when those people dont take a joke so well.

This cracks me up http://www.zipperfish.com/free/yaafm12.php (foul language)

Hehe some of that is funny but sadly a lot of it is situational and on the whole it is a fairly heavy generalisation.

Finally I have no problem with a peaceful protest...However not one where you chain yourself to a fence and cause a disturbance...And not when you are being disrespectful of a funeral and saying how that soldier should go to hell for fighting for his country...

Yes limitations to freedom of speech exist for good reason....ie you cant run around screaming fire...That would cuase physical injury...

But this is just my point where you draw the line on free speech happens to be on your side of the argument when in reality free speech etc. says that I have the right to say what I like no matter how distasteful to you. So if you are serious about it then you have to accept peoples right to be disrespectful at funerals etc, you dont have to like it and you would hope people had enough class not to do it but you have to accept their right to protest.

Originally Posted by Chief Bones

Sorry 5.56
Not sure I can support your portrayal of Cindy Sheehan as a terrorist supporter ... being against the war doesn't automatically mean you support the terrorists (if that were the case, you'd have to place my mug on your poster right next to Bin Laden and Cindy Sheehan).

AND BEFORE YOU DECIDE TO TAKE A SHOT AT ME - I DO SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, I just have a heartburn where GW is concerned.



Cindy has NEVER come out in support of ANY terrorist or ANY terrorist act. She just thinks that GW is a 'murderer' and a 'liar', something that many Americans agree with. She has has just been 'unfortunate' enough to be in the MSM headlines because of the death of her son in Iraq.

YOUR 'A VIRTUAL DUET' IS NOTHING BUT A LIE AND PROPAGANDA AT IT'S WORST, and in very poor taste. And this has NOTHING to do with PC (something I personally detest).

What I detest is people that are openly critical of the president (any president) of our country. You don't have to agree with their policies nor their political affiliation. But you should respect the position and the office. No other American has the responsibilities of the president. Regardless of his actions and how you feel about them he is the elected leader of our country and our military. It's not a respector of a person but of the country. Other people see what we say and do and come to the conclusion that America can't be very good because a portion of the people are publicly attacking the leader of the most free nation in the world. Shameful.

As stated before, I did not ridicule Clinton while he was in office and I will follow the same set of rules for our current president as well as the next president whomever that may be.

Cindy with all of her friends at her book signing.....

Originally Posted by Senior Chief

What I detest is people that are openly critical of the president (any president) of our country. You don't have to agree with their policies nor their political affiliation. But you should respect the position and the office. No other American has the responsibilities of the president. Regardless of his actions and how you feel about them he is the elected leader of our country and our military. It's not a respector of a person but of the country. Other people see what we say and do and come to the conclusion that America can't be very good because a portion of the people are publicly attacking the leader of the most free nation in the world. Shameful.

As stated before, I did not ridicule Clinton while he was in office and I will follow the same set of rules for our current president as well as the next president whomever that may be.

Where on earth does it say one cannot criticize the POTUS? That is completely contrary to the tenents of the First Amendment, and frankly sounds more like rules that would be applied under a dictatorship. And yes, that means I respect every rightwing blowhard right to criticize Bill Clinton.

Teddy Roosevelt once wrote (I'm paraphasing here, but its something like)
"Its is the patriotic duty of every American to criticize ones government"