Can you spot the gay soldier??

My post was not directly related to you (altough I did quote you).


The thing I tried to point out is that It seems that many of the people, who are upset with the use of a picture on a internet forum to point out the absurdity of don't ask don't tell, are also the people who couldn't understand the outrage over the whole Quran burning. IMHO that is hypocritical.

If you are upset with the use of this picture than you should also be upset with the burning of the Quran. Since both are symbolic gestures. Actually using this picture has a point (showing the hypocracy that Gay men and woman die for a country which forces them to lie about themselves), and the burning the quran bit was just ot get attention.

If you disagree with the burning the quran than I do not mind you having a problem with the use of this picture, otherwise it is hypocritical. IMHO

 

Disagree. No book-burning is equivalent to a human life.

And I still think book-burning is stupid.

 

He's not saying book burning is equivalent to the soldiers dying. He's saying the symbolic gesture of book burning is equivalent to the symbolic gesture of using that picture. There's a big difference between those two statements.

 

Yes book burning is not a equivalent to a human life. Who is saying that it is equivalent? Killing a person is much worse than Burning any book.

A picture of coffins on a Internet forum used to make a point is also not equivalent to a human life.

 

And I'm saying that using the imagery of dead soldiers to politicize an issue is worse than the imagery of burning a book. Any book.

 

In that we disagree.

 

I find this point of view cold-hearted and cruel. Somewhere out there are parents, siblings, spouses, children, and friends of the deceased who would be hurt and angered that the sacrifice of their loved ones has been boiled down to a douche bag attempt to make a political point on the internet.

There are other, better ways to make and support an argument than this.

 

Personally I do not get upset over burning a book, or posting a picture of (anonymous soldiers). However in both cases I can see why other people do get upset. And If a family member ,of one of the shown deceased soldier, on this site comes forward and says that they find it offensive I'm sure MC Mark would apologize.

But stating that posting a picture on the internet is worse than going on international television and Burn the holy book of Millions of people IMHO is absurd.

But lets just agree to disagree, You feel posting a picture on the internet is worse than Burning a holy book, and I disagree.

 

I'll agree to disagree, but you're not accurately representing what I said. "Putting a picture on the internet" is not the issue. Putting a picture on the internet whose subject matter consists of dead soldiers, with the stated intent of making a shocking and controversial point is the issue.

There's a pretty large difference between those two statements.

 

Burning the bible/koran/flag is usually a protest against the institutions behind those symbols. An "anonymous" picture of dead soldiers dehumanizes those individuals and is, IMO, more offensive. A stock photo of coffins becoming a 'meme' to illustrate a point just seems callous, and I don't like it. Sure it's powerful -- but, for the wrong reasons. Kind of like the pisschrist didn't really spark a debate about the ideas behind christianity.

Don't know how this became a debate over which is worse. I don't think Lynus was super cool on the book burning stunt, though he may have defended it on the basis of free speech. And I don't think he's suggested coffin pictures should be banned -- though, like me, I suspect he thinks they're in very poor taste.

 

You summed it up nicely, thanks.

I didn't comment on the book-burning, though I'd support it as free speech and nothing more.

And while I don't think coffin pictures should be banned, I do think they're damn near the peak of bad taste.

 

But what's your argument for mc mark's post being in bad taste? You say that it is offensive to the soldiers' families, but it seems to me that your speaking for those families would constitute poor taste in the same vein.

 

there is one person in the USA that could stop the discharges. Is that who you are talking about?

 

Yes. You missed it. I also think your post should be repealed.

If you cannot figure out what my argument is for his post being in bad taste, then some combination of these three things occurred:
1 - You didn't read what I wrote.
2 - You didn't comprehend what I wrote.
3 - You're being deliberately difficult for the sake of carrying on an asinine argument.

I'll say it once again:
Using the image of dead soldiers to make a political point on a controversial issue is insensitive, callous, cruel, cold-hearted, disrespectful, and just plain chickens**t cowardice, especially when there are many, many other avenues that may be taken for the point to be made, none of which include disrespecting the dead.

I'm not speaking for the families; I am empathizing with them. Because we do not know whose remains are interred in those caskets means that the only thing that we do know for sure is that those American soldiers are you and me; they are us. That mc mark can so blithely and flippantly justify his thoughts of such an image, and act with such complete and utter disdain for the concerns others have expressed, and then disregard and dismiss those concerns with snide comments as having to be somehow steeped in hatred or discrimination is the very definition of intolerance and insensitivity, and using such below-the-belt tactics speaks either to an inability to construct a valid argument or very low character.

I've seen mc mark's ability to construct valid arguments. Frankly, I'm disappointed.

 

It's a good thing you put that "with a few exceptions" comment in there. Otherwise one might think you completely forgot/ignored the conversation from a couple days ago where you seemed to acknowledge that you were purposefully being inflammatory.

 

Could you actually articulate this in more detail, please? Though I get where you think he is being disrespectful (though I disagree) I can't understand how you could possible arrive at cowardice. It seems to me that "chicken**** cowardice" would be more like backing down in the face of your challenges out of fear of offending you, assuming he really believes in the point that caused him to post the images in the first place. How is he demonstrating fear in the face of a challenge by posting the images? I mean, assuming concern about constructing valid arguments applies anybody besides mc mark.

Thanks.