Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Rambi who wrote (21116)	8/9/2001 12:36:55 PM
From: Lane3	Respond to of 82486

Y'all stop being interesting, please No, you need to stick around. Karen

To: Rambi who wrote (21116)	8/9/2001 12:55:11 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

He used the word WE rather than I, with the implication that he was speaking for all of us there. That is the kind of presumption that others find off-putting. I can understand your preferring that the speaker not use such language. But for myself, I can just let it wash over me. What I find just as objectionable, of not more so, are speakers who speak with an even higher degree of pomposity, "I am right"ness, exclusion, etc. on philosophical or political grounds. Heard a graduation speaker a few years ago who was a rabid environmentalist/vegetarian, and his condemnation of and open scorn for those who were meat eaters, fur wearers, SUV drivers, etc. was far beyond anything I have heard any religious person say. In fact, for him it was a religion, and just as objectionable to me as if he had been a Southern Baptist preacher doing a hellfire and brimstone sermon. I am mystified as to why when a belief is said to stem from nature it's not objectionable, but when it is said to stem from God, it is, when the passion, condemnation of non-believers, etc. are of the same virulence in both cases.