Re: Rude replies

Tech-Archive recommends: Fix windows errors by optimizing your registry

On Wed, 08 Jun 2005 13:47:16 GMT, Leythos <void@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>In article <untqnrCbFHA.4040@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
>dontemailme@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx says...
>> I believe in an absolute
>> right to free speech, and will not stand aside quietly when I see
>> someone trying to infringe on it.
>
>Free speech is about the message and getting it to the public, right?
>
>How does being rude equate to the right to free speech - since the same
>message can be presented without being rude, what does being rude add to
>the message?
>
>Why should being rude be tolerated when the message could be given
>without disrespect?
>
>(don't take these examples as directed at you): I could say "I disagree
>with you", or I could say "you're a fricking moron *** baby that's
>completely wrong" - both messages say the same thing, but one is rude
>and one is polite.
>
>As an American Military person, I served my country for your rights, and
>I love free speech, but why do people feel they have to be rude and
>disrespectful when talking with someone?
>
>--

Leythos, you do not appreciate rude speech: "Why should being rude be
tolerated ....." Yet not only do you tolerate the following, you have
advocated same on prior posts to this newsgroup:

1. Treating 5 year olds who commit acts society deems crimes in the
same manner as adults are treated - lock them up or do away with them.

2. Treating the insane who commit acts society deems crimes in the
same manner as adults are treated with one caveat - treat them with
drugs first, then lock them up or do away with them.

3. Public hangings in the town square as a means of deterring crime.

Might I suggest that you re-examine your priorties. I cannot express
my opinion of you (Leythos) better than others in this newsgroup have
done. You (Leythos) are the excrement of the human race - a piece of
sh*t.

Lou
.

Quantcast