FOX News Defends Trump's Defense of Nazis/White Supremacists/Bigotry

[Baruch]

And it was 5 years before I could even tolerate The New Generation.  Or Voyager for that matter.  But I grew to love them.  DS9 can rot in the archives.

You are just jealous you can't get gay umax from Quark ;-)

[Baruch]

He was being "tolerant".

He was raised by adoptive parents ... Progressives from ... shudder ... Russia.

[fencerider]

I agree theism isn't necessary but the thought humans are special and entitled by birth to such rights is false if we owe our existence to mindless mechanistic forces that didn't intend humans or the universe to exist. We can all just agree with a wink and a nod such rights exist but we know we're just making it up out of thin air. The best fellow humans can do is grant us privileges which can be changed or revoked at any time. 

You're juxtaposing your belief upon the text. Endowed (still means the same today) is property or rights given by someone in this case at the moment of birth.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. â€" That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,

For these rights to be unalienable the author attaches them to their Creator. The government doesn't give us the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness the government is empowered to secure those rights. There is no dispute about what Jefferson meant. I agree its not intended to be religious, belief in the existence of a Creator is theistic not religious.

first of not all the founders were Christian... I think there were even a couple of atheists in that lot

but second if we are talking about the Christian god, then very definitely these rights didn't come from god. You dont have a right to life because god can kill you at anytime without any reason. You dont have a right to liberty because god accepts slavery as normal. You don't have a right to pursuit happiness because at all times you must conform with "god's preconceived notion" of proper behavior

[Baruch]

first of not all the founders were Christian... I think there were even a couple of atheists in that lot

but second if we are talking about the Christian god, then very definitely these rights didn't come from god. You dont have a right to life because god can kill you at anytime without any reason. You dont have a right to liberty because god accepts slavery as normal. You don't have a right to pursuit happiness because at all times you must conform with "god's preconceived notion" of proper behavior

The Founders were all heretics and traitors.  That is why their ancestors were exiled to N America in the first place.  Think Australia, only closer to Canada.

[fencerider]

I'm trying to imagine Canadian kangaroos, but its not working ;-)

[Baruch]

I'm trying to imagine Canadian kangaroos, but its not working ;-)

Bouncing polar bears seems ... frightening!

[Cavebear]

I liked you better when you were part of the Borg Collective!

I'm not surprised.  I was easier to attack then.

[pr126]

Let's not forget to ban some films too, whilst we at erasing history.
Winston Smith, get busy. So much to do, so little time.

Blazing Saddles must go. The Producers must go, burn the lot.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TOntf5V47Hc

[Unbeliever]

I can't post the link from this computer, but I just saw at Not the Onion that a theater in Memphis has done just that - pulled the "racially insensitive" movie Gone With the Wind. You should be able to google it.

[Baruch]

Let's not forget to ban some films too, whilst we at erasing history.
Winston Smith, get busy. So much to do, so little time.

Blazing Saddles must go. The Producers must go, burn the lot.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TOntf5V47Hc

Marxists are great as critics, but they can't do the synthesis part.  Aka ... tradition is thesis, Marxism is anti-thesis, but synthesis never gets created.  So think of it as broken dialectical materialism.  I think we should just jump to post-progressivism ... and pre-identify all present revolutionary ideologies, as tradition (in some future) and therefore evil ;-)

[Munch]

Their seriously banning gone with the wind. Because of the overly sensitive 'progressives' can't handle historical depictions of the past, its sooooo upsetting.

Hey, can we get stonewall banned next, being reminded that stonewall happened and there was a time gay people had to fight for their rights is to upsetting for me! I need to pretend gay people always had the rights they have today!

[Drew_2017]

first of not all the founders were Christian... I think there were even a couple of atheists in that lot

but second if we are talking about the Christian god, then very definitely these rights didn't come from god. You dont have a right to life because god can kill you at anytime without any reason. You dont have a right to liberty because god accepts slavery as normal. You don't have a right to pursuit happiness because at all times you must conform with "god's preconceived notion" of proper behavior

You're still confusing theism with religion (or various beliefs). One can believe we owe our existence to a Creator apart from any theological belief. Theism is a philosophical position just as atheism is. Although it took time at some point people realized the notion of slavery was antithetical to the belief all humans are born equal and are special due to the belief the universe was created for the sake of humans.

On what philosophical platform do you get on your high moral horse? From your standpoint humans are the unintended by product of the laws of physics no more special than anything else that was unintentionally caused to exist humans have no right to exist, no right to live, no right to be free, no right to be equal and we live in an amoral universe in which there is no real right and wrong or good and evil.

[Mike Cl]

Not into banning anything.  But if I had my arm twisted behind me and forced to pick a movie to ban, it would have to be Birth of A Nation (the first one).  Gone With the Wind I would not even think of banning.

[Hydra009]

I can't post the link from this computer, but I just saw at Not the Onion that a theater in Memphis has done just that - pulled the "racially insensitive" movie Gone With the Wind. You should be able to google it.

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2017/aug/29/theatre-in-memphis-pulls-racially-insensitive-gone-with-the-wind

Not into banning anything.  But if I had my arm twisted behind me and forced to pick a movie to ban, it would have to be Birth of A Nation (the first one).  Gone With the Wind I would not even think of banning.

The first wouldn't be commercially viable anymore (I hope), so banning it wouldn't be necessary or desirable.

[Shiranu]

I don't think it should be pulled, but I also think the current climate is not an appropriate time to be airing a film that does, at it's core, romanticise slavery. Perhaps giving the audience some historical context before airing the film would be a good compromise, and making sure everyone is aware this is not how the Confederate/Slave-owning South remotely looked.

Their seriously banning gone with the wind. Because of the overly sensitive 'progressives' can't handle historical depictions of the past, its sooooo upsetting.

Except it's not a historical depiction, it does fall under the, "Cult of the Lost Cause" train of thought of the South which heavily romanticises and misinterprets the actual reality of African Americans (and even white commoners themselves) of the time. If you want something that more accurately represents the reality of the South, watch, "12 Years a Slave".

It's no more a historical depiction than, "Ben-Hur".

As mentioned above, "Birth of a Nation" is a film that would be arguably banned... and for the most part, very few places will air it anymore. Yet less than 40 years ago it had a place in people's hearts as a "Classic American Masterpiece" like, "Gone With the Wind" does now. Cultures change. People change. And thus art appreciation changes. Do you know how many masterpieces have been lost to time because cultures decided they no longer appreciate that style of art? That is simply the way of the world. The internet gives those who are "outraged" over this truth a medium to cry louder than ever before, but art is like life... it is born, it lives, it dies. Perhaps as society is changing, "Gone With the Wind" has entered it's final days. And that's okay. Throwing a hissy-fit about the inevitability of death, even if it's of art, has never managed to stop death from coming.

Unlike the classic paintings, statues, etc. though... "GWtW" will likely never truly die anyways because of it's digital format, so to be so dramatic about it becomes even more ridiculous when you actually think about it.

Hey, can we get stonewall banned next, being reminded that stonewall happened and there was a time gay people had to fight for their rights is to upsetting for me! I need to pretend gay people always had the rights they have today!

This is just so blatantly misleading that even you have to have a inkling on why it's so. To compare, "Gone With the Wind" to your supposed depiction of Stonewall, then you need to therefor view Stonewall as this romantic occasion where the police and the gay community were singing Kumbiaya and, sure the gays were being denied rights... but look at how happy they were! They had their own bar, they could sing and dance, and masta-officer even let them do it so long as it didn't get out of hand!

If people viewed Stonewall that way, if there was a legitimately large segment of the population that wanted to return to this way of life because it looked so idyllic, you wouldn't in the very least be concerned about that being a misinterpretation of the LGBT community? You wouldn't be at all concerned that if that segment got their way they regress to the culture that created the actual Stonewall riots in the first place?

Seriously, think about what you are saying for one time in your life before you type.