That goal! OMG, that goal! That was amazing!
Brazil just got ousted! 
Posts by The Postman
-
-
Quote from Bic-B@ll
gearbox won a kickball game on a bad call
Gearbox got CS:CZ yanked from it in a bit of unfairness that resulted from Valve not paying attention to the development of the game.
It went like this:
"Awesome game, guys!"
"Awesome game, guys!'
"Awesome game, guys!"
"Awesome game, guys!'
"Awesome game, guys!"
"Awesome game, guys!'
"Awesome game, guys!"
"Awesome game, guys!'
"Oh wait this isn't what we wanted at all. Sorry, we're giving it to another company! Ciao!"
-
Quote from RD
I am in favor of the freedom to burn all symbols, including your flag. But it is discriminative to yourself and all americans to only allow the burning of your own symbol. It is, in plain simpleness, a sign that your values are inferior to values that support violence to get respect. In even simpler terms: you admit that the freedom of speech is a logical fallacy. So you either ban it, because equal is still better than inferior, or you respect freedom.
Btw your ad hominems are useless. Youre not arguing with me, your arguing with the freedom of speech
My ad homs have weight because you are a moron, RD. Through and through. This isn't an argument of world-wide freedom of speech. This is an argument of free-speech in the US. Nothing more. Strictly within that ballpark and you're injecting your usual omg-muslims crap into the conversation for no reason with no bearing. There is no logical fallacy here. There is only you trying to inject something into a conversation where it has no place.
-
Quote from RD
It has bearing, but you have to think outside the political correct prison surrounding your mind to get it.
Oh fuck you and your "prison" bullshit. You think UFOs carry religious scrolls or some stupid shit. If anything you need medication. Heavy medication.
Anyhow on to your drivel:
My argument this entire time has been over your attempted correlation between burning a Koran or some meandering anecdote about the Islamic cartoons and an ammendment that effects just the US and deals with a US symbol only. It has no bearing on anything outside the US. If someone in Tikrit torches an American flag we cannot arrest him/her because of the action (if this ammendment had gone through and all). However if someone from our government torched a Koran it looks incredibly bad for our foreign PR but it's also seen as a direct conflict with our very own Muslim citizens.
Now what is your argument against flag burning. Just flag burning. No UFOs, no Korans, no woe-is-Denmark. Just flag-burning.
Quote from FletchThe flag is a symbol for our freedom to speak and act freely, even if it might offend somebody else. Thus it is a symbol whose strength is that allows itself to be destroyed. It's called a paradox. Some people are simple minded and don't understand that it's a paradox. This scares them, so they write flag burning amendments to prevent themselves from having to think.
Exactly. My point on allowing flag burning. It was just political cock-waving at this stage.
-
Quote from RD
Thats what i thought your reasoning boiled down to: because a religious symbol invokes a stronger response, it should get more respect. What does burning a flag prove?
No. Not at all. My point is that one is national the other is not. The flag burning ammendment only effects people in the US. The burning of a Koran or some-such other symbol effects more than just any one nation.
Then again my point this entire retarded conversation has been that you're injecting bullshit into an argument where it simply does not have any bearing at all. It still has no bearing and will never have any bearing.
-
Quote from Taylor
To be honest, I couldn't give a shit if people can or cannot burn flags. But I can't help thinking about this being a rather pointless thing to try and do, anyway. Maybe I'm being flippant, but isn't flag burning usually a sign of defiance? So isn't this playing into their* hands a bit? "I don't agree with the government so I'm going to burn a flag," "oh no, don't burn a flag, the government doesn't agree with it.
* Flag burning people, obviously.
The whole ammendment was basically just cock-waving by the neo-con Republicans in America going LOOK AT US PROTECTING THE FLAG FROM COMMUNAZIATHEISTS!
-
Quote from RD
Now youre answering a question i didnt ask.
No, I'm answering exactly what you've asked. Repeatedly, emphatically.
Quote from RDIf there are americans that find it offensive their flag is burned, it doesnt matter to you does it? You would speak out in favor of the freedom to protest.
What's national matters to a nation. I've said this repeatedly.
Quote from RDBut if there are religious folks in your country whose symbol is burned, it suddenly matters and you oppress those who wish to protest. The question is why? The only logical conclusion is that you expect atheists to be more tolerant than believers, which is positive discrimination.
Burning or destroying a religious symbol anywhere invokes strong response ANYWHERE in the world. You can do so in America, but it does nothing to help the scenario elsewhere in the world. The GOVERNMENT cannot do it because it is a direct attack on the religious values and rights of her citizens. The CITIZENS can (unless it's a burning cross because that has racist connotations) and it just looks as moronic as some jackass torching a flag.
-
Quote from RD
You still havent answered why a religious symbol would be more important, other than saying its religious and that a religion crosses borders.
This is about a law in the US on US soil dealing with a US symbol. It is more important here than anywhere else because it deals with the US.
The religious symbol is NOT a national symbol and its importance can be felt anywhere there are followers of that religion.
Goddamn man, do I need to draw diagrams with stick figures?
-
-
Quote from RD
Why is a symbol that is more pertinent, less important than a symbol that is less pertinent?
Context, RD, context.
-
Quote from killertomato
postman forgot...
postman's been busy with work and life.
Anyhow, closing thread, starting the voting process!
-
Quote from Johnny
TRAITOROUS LIES
YOU...YOU COMMUNIST!
-
Quote from Skjalg
Who said anything about a flag having borders? If I were in sweden and saw someone dragging the norwegian flag down in the mud Id be pissed!But okay, I get the picture, since its a religious item its no-touchy since a religion obviously demands more respect than a nation. [/sarcasm]
Flags don't have borders, ammendments to the US constitution do. God, Fletch was right, I do need to repeat to myself "They're all 14, they're all 14..."
-
I got bored very fast of running A or B and stuck with my TFC, thank you very much.
-
Quote from RD
Why is a symbol pretaining to a nation less important than a symbol not pretaining to a nation?
Because a symbol pretaining to a nation, within that nation is more pertinent to that nation. A religious symbol has no national boundaries.
-
Quote from RD
Again, the same answer: one is a religious symbol and the other isnt. And again, the same question for you: why is a religious symbol more important than a symbol representing other values?
National. Pretaining to a nation.
Religious. Not pretaining to any one nation.
There.
-
Quote from RD
Still the same answer: one is a flag, and one isnt. It doesnt answer the question mate.
Yes it does. Thoroughly.
Quote from RDWhy do you place one above the other? They both represent a culture and its values.
One is a domestic issue of national importance and the other is a non-state issue of religious importance. Now you're just being obtuse.
Quote from RDBluh blah blah bleh omg persecution of christians or some other stupid shit
Where do you get this shit? Do you just channel dead crazy people or what?
-
Somewhere an icky place in my brain almost thinks that this shit was engineered by right-wing Christian fundamentalists over here so as to usher in their supposed rapture. Boy are they going to be pissed when it doesn't happen.
-
Quote from RD
hurrr
Let me carve out the operative words:
National
Religious
A flag is a national symbol to the people of a nation. Having a national law against something of national importance (perceived or otherwise) is inherently different.
A religious symbol is a matter to the people of that religion. It is an extra-state entity with no bearing on a nation's laws unless that nation is a theocracy.
Do you have any idea about the difference between domestic policy, nation-states and religious entities? These two things have. no. fucking. bearing. on each other.
-
Quote from RD
There is actual correlation. I know that a flag isnt a koran, but why is one superior to the other?
Other than the means of destruction there is no correlation since the two are completely different subjects. One is a national symbol the other is a religious artifact.
Quote from RDWhat you are suggesting is nothing less than accepting your role as slave in your own country.
What the fuck are you on about? Seriously.
