thanksMidnightBlue said::biglaugh: Good comeback!
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
thanksMidnightBlue said::biglaugh: Good comeback!
Nope, i agree. I'm sure we'll also agree on how inappropriate it is to bring "god" into such ceremonies as well.buddy said:An I the only one who sees the obvious hypocracy in this?
If the person being remembered believed in God, then why would it be inappropriate to mention Him in the ceremony? I think that you are trying to make a relation that does not exist.mr.guy said:Nope, i agree. I'm sure we'll also agree on how inappropriate it is to bring "god" into such ceremonies as well.
And if the person being remembered believed in peace and justice? If she spoke out forcefully against capital punishment, against the war in Iraq, and in favor of non-violence and equal rights for all people, isn't it just as appropriate to mention those things? Or should the person's beliefs and convictions only be mentioned when they're the same as yours?BUDDY said:If the person being remembered believed in God, then why would it be inappropriate to mention Him in the ceremony? I think that you are trying to make a relation that does not exist.
The person in question did not merely state his opinion about the issues; he wrote a vicious and obviously untrue attack on liberals that included the assertion, "You obviously want terrorists to run down our streets killing us." And while my comment about his intelligence (which was conditional on his really believing that) has been deleted, his initial attack, which was certainly at least as inflammatory, has been allowed to stand. So what's your beef?BUDDY said:Some one mentioned that a poster was "not a very smart person" for making remarks that are their own personal opinion. In reference to the incident which is the subject of this thread, how can one be categorized in this way when they are stating their own personal opinion, when these gentlemen at the funeral did the exact same thing. Is it not hypocrital to do so? It appears that some are swayed more by the subject matter of the opinion given, than my any real simblance of truth within the message. What I am saying is, that it is hypocrital to call someone names for stating their opinion, when you are good and ready to accept as truth the opinion of these men at the funeral.
Mr. Guy,mr.guy said:Ahh...our problem is your understanding of what is hypocritical.
No, you called him incompetent because you disagreed with his statement. Personally, I do too, but that is not the point. If Bush had gotten up after hearing all those things said about him, and stated that those people were incompatent (or even used your term) what do you think the headlines this morning would have been. My only point is that freedom of speech is free and people can say just about whatever they want, whenever they want. However, that does not mean that calling someone to task on their decisions, publicly for all to hear, at a funeral for someone else, is right. It also doesn't mean that calling someone a dumb*** because they stated their opinion, is not hypocritical considering the subject of this thread. If you feel that you have been the victim of vicious and untrue attacks, and you feel that you have to call names because of it, fine. As for me, I will use President Bush and Mrs. King as an example the next time someone attacks me. Just shake their hand, smile and walk away.MidnightBlue said:The person in question did not merely state his opinion about the issues; he wrote a vicious and obviously untrue attack on liberals that included the assertion, "You obviously want terrorists to run down our streets killing us." And while my comment about his intelligence (which was conditional on his really believing that) has been deleted, his initial attack, which was certainly at least as inflammatory, has been allowed to stand. So what's your beef?
If he had chosen to disregard what would have been a carefully prepared and well rehearsed speech in favour of coming out swinging verbal punches, all he would have done was confirmed the opinions of the people who already think he's a complete half wit. And can you imagine the media coverage of that...'Bush Turns King Funeral Into Political Debate.'BUDDY said:His comments were what memorials are supposed to be for; recalling the struggle and fight that she so proudly carried on after the murder of her husband. He could have very easily chosen to respond to these politically based attacks against him, but instead he was the bigger man and recalled who she was.
Frubals to you as soon as I can!CaptainXeroid said:A funeral/memorial service is for speaking well of the dearly departed. Anyone who would politicize such an event has ABSOLUTELY NO CLASS.:tsk: Shame on those who did! :tsk:
I am confused. You mean the lady forsaw her own death, and dicussed with the reverend what to day on the orbitrary???Quoth_The _Raven said:If he had chosen to disregard what would have been a carefully prepared and well rehearsed speech in favour of coming out swinging verbal punches, all he would have done was confirmed the opinions of the people who already think he's a complete half wit. And can you imagine the media coverage of that...'Bush Turns King Funeral Into Political Debate.'
One assumes the reverend knew her reasonably well, and under the circumstances would probably not go about turning the funeral of a friend into the opportunity to have a dig at the president if she wouldn't have approved of him doing it. For all anyone knows, he could have been worded up well in advance by the lady herself. Not like she died all of a sudden during her daily jog round the block.
As a Democrat, all I can say is I apologize for those of us who still maintain some sense of dignity.Darkdale said:Democrats have no class. Anyone remember the Wellstone funeral? Just shake your head, pity them, and keep on trucking.