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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (346832)	1/23/2003 4:51:45 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769667

Did he? Well, I guess I cannot go back, now that they are gone. Certainly, that would alter the equation, offensiveness- wise. (I still think that the punishment is too harsh). The funny thing is that JLA is one of the moderates on the issue of homosexuality, and has himself protested inflammatory language about it, and suggested a live and let live attitude. The use of the epithet was only tangentially related to gays, I am sure. Oh well, you snooze, you lose, I guess I cannot make a thorough examination of the matter at this point. I just wonder if the ill- will generated by all of this does not markedly exceed the very tiny contribution to hate that one might allege of the original provocation.......

To: epicure who wrote (346832)	1/23/2003 5:16:32 PM
From: MulhollandDrive	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

the fact that gays and lesbians have embraced the word queer to describe themselves removes that word from the "epithet" lexicon. by definition. you are very presumptuous to think you can decide what is or what is not offensive to gays. and the fact that you were able to prevail upon si to have his post deleted only means that you were successful in obtaining a mindless, kneejerk reaction to that word. you never did answer my hypothetical... according to si a hetero person can not use the word queer in a post when referencing supposedly gender (as jla is not available and apparently nobody bothered to ask him specifically what he meant this as yet has not been established) but even so.. for sake of argument based on principle is it ok for a homosexual to reference someone as "peace queer"? if the word queer is patently offensive wrt to gender preference....how do you suppose we handle organizations like Queer Nation... hate speech??