New dress code in Iran: Jews and Christians must wear badges - Page 2

MaggieL · 05-19-2006, 09:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by footfootfoot

Let's not forget the homosexuals..

By all means, let's not. Note pink triangle on Gwennie...my shirt was in the wash that day.

footfootfoot · 05-22-2006, 10:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaggieL

By all means, let's not. Note pink triangle on Gwennie...my shirt was in the wash that day.

BADGES? We don't need no stinkin' badges!
(couldn't resist)

MaggieL · 05-19-2006, 09:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by footfootfoot

What I meant was "Never again, but only as far as jews are concerned, everyone else who is being murdered is on their own."

Their first priority is *self*-defense. which makes sense to me. If you fail to defend yourself, you won't be able to help anyone else. Who came to help the Jews when Hitler turned the ovens on?

05-19-2006, 09:29 PM

That's what I love about the Celler - the variety of people who post here. Like Wolf is the only pagan conservative I've encountered on line, never mind real life. Maggie is the only gay (transgered? bi-sexual?) republican I've met on line, IRL.

And UT wanted to ban me for losing my temper and posting all red caps? Oh, well. Rock on everybody!

BigV · 05-19-2006, 05:13 PM

Never underestimate the power of human stupidity. -- Lazarus Long

05-19-2006, 05:14 PM

Time for sanctions.

Flint · 05-19-2006, 07:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rkzenrage

Time for sanctions.

No, wait! I'm sorry! . . .

. . . I'm sorry you looove Maggie so much!

MaggieL · 05-19-2006, 05:16 PM

I probably would not have bothered to start a thread if I'd realized there already was one...assuming that one was started first. But I'm not going to open every thread here with a nondescript title just to find out what's in it. Especially since the AG Romper Room arrived

I figure if you can't be bothered to make the subject meaningful, the writing *in* the thread probably isn't very cogent either.

footfootfoot · 05-19-2006, 10:23 PM

That's the problem with *self*. It is a fairly limited concept. It has it's time and place, but it is largely over rated.

Many cultures don't put as high a premium on self as we do in the U.S. Selves make for good consumers. Selves can be threatened and can be encouraged to live in a state of fear.

I heard a person on the news recently objecting to being labeled a "consumer". She maintained that she was a citizen. A citizen is part of a larger social group. It is possible to put the concerns of the group ahead of the concerns of the self. Where we want to close that circle of group, choose who to exclude, is what allows us to create an easily exterminable "other".

If my mission statement doesn't include coming to the aid of others in distress, why would I be likely to add that paragraph when the brownshirts come marching down my block to grab my neighbor, whose dog craps all over my lawn?

Maybe I'm rambling a bit, I don't mean to be contentious but I don't recall saying let's hold out for a more principled solution to the problem.

I'm pretty much at the end of my patience with terrorists/carbombers etc. If nuking them would solve anything I'd be all for it. But it wouldn't solve a thing.

As they say, fighting for peace is like fucking for virginity.

MaggieL · 05-20-2006, 07:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by footfootfoot

That's the problem with *self*. It is a fairly limited concept. It has it's time and place, but it is largely over rated.

Can't agree with you there..."self" plays a huge role in the conceptual framework of any self-aware being--for obvious reasons.

Trying to sell the idea that self-interest is bad is the memetic tool of collectivists, who wish to gain control over your personal power and direct it to thier own ends.

"Never again" is the fervent slogan adopted by the Jews in support of their own self-defense in memory of what happened when they neglected it. Criticism of it for not including others strikes me as "holding out for a more principled stand". I just think they have a very focused primary goal, and for good reason.

Oh, by the way...check the other thread on the original topic for a post from UT pointing out that the original story about Iranian law now appears to be questionable.

05-23-2006, 09:04 AM

The only thing false about the story is that Jews and Christians will have to wear different colors... they WILL have to wear badges.

"It's absolutely factually incorrect," he told The New 940 Montreal.
"Nowhere in the law is there any talk of Jews and Christians having to wear different colours."

MaggieL · 05-23-2006, 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rkzenrage

They WILL have to wear badges.

Can we get a reference for the badges? We don' need no steeking...

05-23-2006, 09:36 AM

Some idiot tries to put a badge on me will get a shot in the puss.

wolf · 05-23-2006, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaggieL

Story here.
In a break with Nazi tradition, no pink triangles for gays...I guess they just go directly to the stonewall stage. (As in "pushing stone wall over on")

They don't need badges for gays, since under Islamic law they are immediately put to death.

MaggieL · 05-23-2006, 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wolf

They don't need badges for gays, since under Islamic law they are immediately put to death.

Yes...the prefered method of execution is "stoning"; a stone wall is pushed over on the victim and they are crushed to death. The Taliban sometimes used mud walls and a bulldozer.

05-19-2006, 05:13 PM	#5
BigV Goon Squad Leader Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Seattle Posts: 27,063	Never underestimate the power of human stupidity. -- Lazarus Long __________________ Be Just and Fear Not.

05-19-2006, 05:16 PM	#8
MaggieL in the Hour of Scampering Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Jeffersonville PA (15 mi NW of Philadelphia) Posts: 4,060	I probably would not have bothered to start a thread if I'd realized there already was one...assuming that one was started first. But I'm not going to open every thread here with a nondescript title just to find out what's in it. Especially since the AG Romper Room arrived I figure if you can't be bothered to make the subject meaningful, the writing in the thread probably isn't very cogent either. __________________ "Neither can his Mind be thought to be in Tune,whose words do jarre; nor his reason In frame, whose sentence is preposterous..."

05-19-2006, 10:23 PM	#9
footfootfoot To shreds, you say? Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: in the house and on the street-how many, many feet we meet! Posts: 18,449	That's the problem with self. It is a fairly limited concept. It has it's time and place, but it is largely over rated. Many cultures don't put as high a premium on self as we do in the U.S. Selves make for good consumers. Selves can be threatened and can be encouraged to live in a state of fear. I heard a person on the news recently objecting to being labeled a "consumer". She maintained that she was a citizen. A citizen is part of a larger social group. It is possible to put the concerns of the group ahead of the concerns of the self. Where we want to close that circle of group, choose who to exclude, is what allows us to create an easily exterminable "other". If my mission statement doesn't include coming to the aid of others in distress, why would I be likely to add that paragraph when the brownshirts come marching down my block to grab my neighbor, whose dog craps all over my lawn? Maybe I'm rambling a bit, I don't mean to be contentious but I don't recall saying let's hold out for a more principled solution to the problem. I'm pretty much at the end of my patience with terrorists/carbombers etc. If nuking them would solve anything I'd be all for it. But it wouldn't solve a thing. As they say, fighting for peace is like fucking for virginity. __________________ The internet is a hateful stew of vomit you can never take completely seriously. - Her Fobs

05-19-2006, 09:29 PM	#4
marichiko Guest Posts: n/a	That's what I love about the Celler - the variety of people who post here. Like Wolf is the only pagan conservative I've encountered on line, never mind real life. Maggie is the only gay (transgered? bi-sexual?) republican I've met on line, IRL. And UT wanted to ban me for losing my temper and posting all red caps? Oh, well. Rock on everybody!

05-19-2006, 05:14 PM	#6
rkzenrage Guest Posts: n/a	Time for sanctions.

05-23-2006, 09:04 AM	#11
rkzenrage Guest Posts: n/a	The only thing false about the story is that Jews and Christians will have to wear different colors... they WILL have to wear badges. "It's absolutely factually incorrect," he told The New 940 Montreal. "Nowhere in the law is there any talk of Jews and Christians having to wear different colours."

05-23-2006, 09:36 AM	#13
rkzenrage Guest Posts: n/a	Some idiot tries to put a badge on me will get a shot in the puss.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)