The term "PC" should be renamed

"Politically correct"?? No wonder the term itself gets so much hate.

It's another example of good intentions gone bad. A half-baked idea takes form and establishes roots in society, and instead of helping, it just serves to further divide people and bring on ridicule. It's a matter of common knowledge that there are insensitive people out there who will say or do anything to hurt the feelings (or physically hurt) specific groups. But rather than have someone (or several "someones") get together and coin a nifty new phrase... perhaps people should roll up their sleeves and look for the root cause of the problem as well as some probably solutions.

It IS wrong to mock of make fun of other races, ethnicities, sexual orientations, religions, etc, etc. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. It IS wrong to fly a Nazi flag for no other reason than to piss off and hurt specific groups of people, some of which may have very personal painful memories associated to those unfortunate and tragic times. Those who may want to draw a parallel between a Nazi flag and any other kind of flag are playing semantic games. They also know better. The Nazi flag was flown back when there was a Nazi movement going on, and a world war to go along with it. The movement was obliterated, and therefore serves no current use, other than the aforementioned intent to piss off or hurt someone. Is it wrong? Bet you ass it is.

Same thing can be said for other things. I think the Confederate flag being flown in a state Capitol is wrong too. Just my opinion... everyone else can have their own. Just ask yourself.... what possible use or motive might there be for it?

On the other hand, humans need to use their brain to discern (very important word there) between the right, wrong, and the absurd. Wanting to go back and ban episodes of the Dukes of Hazzard because of the General Lee? Please. It's like being back in grade school.

Going back to "PC". I think it goes way overboard. Never having been a racist, I never knew the term "black" to describe people of dark colored skin was offensive. At some point, it became a bad word and got replaced with.... umm.... "African American". Wonderful. How about those blacks who are NOT African NOR American? Guess we'd have to research that a little farther, no? Then again... a term like "nigger" is obviously offensive, and has been since any of us can remember. So why use it? Why defend it? Black is black... and white is white.... excuse the pun.

We also like to use the term "challenged" in order to... umm... soften the effect of a descriptive term or condition. I'm surprised we still use the term "fat", and haven't changed to "weight-challenged". Some things are what they are. If used constructively, there should be no objections.

This is a little bit of a rant, and I won't be able to stay on here much this weekend to engage in arguments and counterarguments.... but I thought the point needed to be made.

I thought you meant personal computer needed to be renamed, never mind.....

It should just be 'c' as in "comply" because that's what it means to me

A flag is a flag and any flag can offend another person. Rather than banning them I merely argue that we tolerate them for better or worse. You also seem to be against most good comedy which makes for a rather bland world.

PC is merely a contemporary form of control. It limits and restricts possibilities and puts us in a straight jacket of niceness.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TitoFan

Going back to "PC". I think it goes way overboard. Never having been a racist, I never knew the term "black" to describe people of dark colored skin was offensive. At some point, it became a bad word and got replaced with.... umm.... "African American".

---

Maybe this is true in Puerto Rico, but in America blacks being called black isn't offensive to anybody except the extremely old who still prefer the term Negro. Anybody who goes around and refers to all black people as "African American," in order to try their hardest (while failing on a colossal scale) to be politically correct is a complete and utter liberal waste of life and probably has black guys at their houses beastfucking their gfs/wives while they're outside protesting in some lame ass anti-confederate flag march.

"Black pride," "Black power," etc. Think about it... phrases of empowerment begin with black.

I've always looked at pc as just not being an asshole but it turned into over compensation that is pretty damn insulting when you think about it. I used 'African American' once to guy and got clowned for about 3 days. You can't put a stranglehold on being a decent human being to not come off a douche. No black man in his right mind is putting forth a motion to ban a 30-40 yr old television show that features a confederate flag, leave that to the politician.

It seems like everything today is politically incorrect. Its gotten to the point that one has to be careful in everyday language even when its just benign everyday English. Practically every noun, verb, adjective or metaphor insults someone. Its a Nanny planet. These days everybody needs a parade or day. I guess that's just a natural progression from everybody needing a ribbon or trophy. Shit telling the truth as a public servant these days is frowned upon. I had to tell my supervisor the other day that if he didn't like my opinion he shouldn't have asked for it. The internal workings of simple units in government are a toxic dumping ground for dishonesty and everyman for himself. Oops I forgot woman and herself. It hilarious to drive by these same people coming out of church every Sunday.

Yeah I get it that all Muslims aren't terrorists but all terrorist are Muslims.

Don't get me started on this one. There should not be any law against "hurting one's feelings".

Fucking FACT.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust

Don't get me started on this one. There should not be any law against "hurting one's feelings".

F**ing FACT.

---

This is true and as the most hypersensitive butt hurt member we have EVER had on the forum, it has been yourself that has led that charge. So now we have a bunch of old women all fawning over you, and each other, all afraid to rock the boat and say anything that might upset each other. It's pathetic.

"ooh dear mods please tell these Brits to not be so rude"

"ooh mods please can you ban this member"

"ooh mods why are the Brits allowed to get away with being so rude"

How dare you! this and f**ky s**cy spoilt, throw the toys out the pram melodrama, but if anybody remarks on it, you whimper, cower and lash out instead of taking it like a man and moving on.

Hope that didn't hurt your feelings. Tosser.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greenbeanz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust

Don't get me started on this one. There should not be any law against "hurting one's feelings".

F**ing FACT.

---

This is true

---

Why THANK you, you little brown noser. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust

Don't get me started on this one. There should not be any law against "hurting one's feelings".

Fucking FACT.

---

Unless it's the Keep it real Act!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gandalf

A flag is a flag and any flag can offend another person. Rather than banning them I merely argue that we tolerate them for better or worse. You also seem to be against most good comedy which makes for a rather bland world.

---

If the only way you can be a good comic is by offending others maybe you should look for new material.

I'll continue to disagree on the flag bit. Rather than taking the "any flag can offend another person" approach, I'll continue to say let's ask what the purpose of the flag is. National flags and state flags have obvious uses. Flags of past and buried organizations whose sole purpose of existence was to kill and/or torture other human beings have no practical use whatsoever. If you openly display and fly them, you're purposely attempting to taunt/ bait/ offend/ provoke other human beings. A government with balls would say "NO... you can't do that. End of story."

What regime is solely about murdering and killing? Surely there must be something more to a regime. Japan kept the same flag. Should we ban that? The US drones and invades every half decade. Where's the flag ban? Your standards do not add up.

Am what comedy does not offend? How does that work? Frank Skinner was full of shock in a routine I watched a while ago. Very funny too. Should we just ban it? Do you want people to watch bland PC comedy and only that?

If you're comparing the Nazi flag to the country flags of both Japan and the U.S....... maybe we really shouldn't be having this conversation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TitoFan

If you're comparing the Nazi flag to the country flags of both Japan and the U.S....... maybe we really shouldn't be having this conversation.

---

That is the problem with the PC crowd. They just want to shut down the discussion. What distinguished imperial Japan from Nazi Germany? I see a lot of obvious similarities. Can you honestly not see them? They were war time allies occupying nations and carrying out genocide. Yet one flag is evil and the other is just dandy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gandalf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TitoFan

If you're comparing the Nazi flag to the country flags of both Japan and the U.S....... maybe we really shouldn't be having this conversation.

---

That is the problem with the PC crowd. They just want to shut down the discussion. What distinguished imperial Japan from Nazi Germany? I see a lot of obvious similarities. Can you honestly not see them? They were war time allies occupying nations and carrying out genocide. Yet one flag is evil and the other is just dandy.

---

Last time I checked, Japan was still a country and as such has its own flag. Germany ALSO has its own country flag, and it looks nothing like the Nazi flag. Keep reaching, though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TitoFan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gandalf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TitoFan

If you're comparing the Nazi flag to the country flags of both Japan and the U.S....... maybe we really shouldn't be having this conversation.

---

That is the problem with the PC crowd. They just want to shut down the discussion. What distinguished imperial Japan from Nazi Germany? I see a lot of obvious similarities. Can you honestly not see them? They were war time allies occupying nations and carrying out genocide. Yet one flag is evil and the other is just dandy.

---

Last time I checked, Japan was still a country and as such has its own flag. Germany ALSO has its own country flag, and it looks nothing like the Nazi flag. Keep reaching, though.

---

You say one cannot, for example, compare the Japanese flag and the Nazi flag. I simply question why not and you seem unable or unwilling to answer that question. The PC response is to close down debate by saying, 'we should never talk about it, you are being extreme'. If you think as I do that a flag is just a flag, then surely all flags exist equally as flags. If you think flags have greater meaning as you seem to do, then I am simply asking you what distinguishes the flag of Imperial Japan and that of Nazi era Germany. If the Nazi flag is so bad based on the regime of Nazi Germany, then how can you deflect the flag of Japan when Japan was an equally hideous regime occupying nations, stealing resources, and carrying out genocide? I think it is a valid observation and yet the flag of Japan isn't being banned or frowned upon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gandalf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TitoFan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gandalf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TitoFan

If you're comparing the Nazi flag to the country flags of both Japan and the U.S....... maybe we really shouldn't be having this conversation.

---

That is the problem with the PC crowd. They just want to shut down the discussion. What distinguished imperial Japan from Nazi Germany? I see a lot of obvious similarities. Can you honestly not see them? They were war time allies occupying nations and carrying out genocide. Yet one flag is evil and the other is just dandy.

---

Last time I checked, Japan was still a country and as such has its own flag. Germany ALSO has its own country flag, and it looks nothing like the Nazi flag. Keep reaching, though.

---

You say one cannot, for example, compare the Japanese flag and the Nazi flag. I simply question why not and you seem unable or unwilling to answer that question. The PC response is to close down debate by saying, 'we should never talk about it, you are being extreme'. If you think as I do that a flag is just a flag, then surely all flags exist equally as flags. If you think flags have greater meaning as you seem to do, then I am simply asking you what distinguishes the flag of Imperial Japan and that of Nazi era Germany. If the Nazi flag is so bad based on the regime of Nazi Germany, then how can you deflect the flag of Japan when Japan was an equally hideous regime occupying nations, stealing resources, and carrying out genocide? I think it is a valid observation and yet the flag of Japan isn't being banned or frowned upon.

---

(patiently)

I answered your question, Miles. I told you Japan's flag is its country flag, just like Germany has its own country flag. The Nazi flag is not Germany's country flag. It has no use... therefore it is not needed as anything other than an instrument of provocation against other human beings. Even you should be able to grasp that simple concept.

It doesn't make much sense really. You say that an offensive flag is not okay, but then you say the Japanese flag is okay. How about saying that to victims of genocide in China, or people who have been occupied? Or the 'comfort' women of this country that still have a hard time being understood by the Japanese government? How can the Japanese flag not be equally as offensive to these people as the Nazi flag is to a Jew? How? Did the Nazi's all die in the war and the new flag erased the past? It was the same German people. The same Japanese people.

I reconcile that with the view that a flag is just a flag. However, you seem to be ascribing different rules to different flags. Okay, maybe Japan changed, but what about flags of occupation today? How would an Iraqi feel about a British flag? Not similar to the Nazi flag and the Japan flag? I'm not having a go, but if you don't want to offend you would have to ban a bloody lot of flags and there would be a lot less good comedy! ;D

I don't think you should ban anything, but if you can not see the difference between a flag that the German people themselves do not want to be associated with, and a flag that represents a country, then you are not really interested in having a debate.

They twist language so that even dissent becomes terrorism, yet government creates terrorism!


So now that this is understood then perhaps some can see that many of those who turn simply disagreement or the ability to be offended into an automatic assumption that the person who voices this dissent, is being politically correct, are just as guilty of twisting language themsleves. Behind a keyboard people get a sense of immortality and invulnerability in which to admit a flaw in ones argument, a false supposition, or a error of judgement is seen as a weakness. I am as guilty of it as anybody else and it can soon become a war of egos. This though is a forum about boxing and martial arts, with some non boxing boards provided courtesy of the Guv up there behind the curtain twiddling his golden locks and scratching his goaty beard. It is not our own personal blog or website and so common courtesy dictates that restraint must sometimes be used. There has been a huge amount of leeway and freedom shown and though personal insults amongst the Brits are sometime missed by those not living here, seem to have been there since day one. It's banter, what blokes do.

That said the general public who end up here should not be alienated by huge sweeping generalisations and stuff that is offensive for the sake of it. There is a time and a place.


Right now you may throw a stool through the window and let the punch ups resume ;D

That was a very good quote. Surely I don't need to break it down for you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gandalf

That was a very good quote. Surely I don't need to break it down for you.

---

That actually was a good quote, I didn't even notice it until it was in bold. Also, your theory is worthy of being on one of those conspiracy docs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gandalf

That was a very good quote. Surely I don't need to break it down for you.

---

:vd:

Nazi flags should be displayed in museums and shown in documentaries.
Other than that it has no practical, constructive use whatsoever.
Its being deployed in public places or private property where it can be seen by others and deemed offensive should be prohibited.
My opinion and I'll continue to stand by it.

Have a nice day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TitoFan

Nazi flags should be displayed in museums and shown in documentaries.
Other than that it has no practical, constructive use whatsoever.
Its being deployed in public places or private property where it can be seen by others and deemed offensive should be prohibited.
My opinion and I'll continue to stand by it.

Have a nice day.

---

Alright well that leads me (just playing Devil's Advocate here) to ask....

"How much offense does something have to cause in order for it to be grounds for removal?"

....is there a way to quantify offense? Or is it qualitative and it's simply a matter of how many folks find it offensive?

Anyway, the Supreme Court precedent in 'The National Socialist Party of America vs Skokie, Illinois' flies in the face of your beliefs. I mean I would like for people to abide by the Golden Rule, but some folks are just assholes for no other reason than they want to be and they like everyone else in this country are allowed to express themselves.

Free Speech is something I just figure that people know and accept, but apparently that concept is more difficult than I thought....it does involve lots of patience, mental clarity, and a great deal of restraint.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Kabong

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TitoFan

Nazi flags should be displayed in museums and shown in documentaries.
Other than that it has no practical, constructive use whatsoever.
Its being deployed in public places or private property where it can be seen by others and deemed offensive should be prohibited.
My opinion and I'll continue to stand by it.

Have a nice day.

---

Alright well that leads me (just playing Devil's Advocate here) to ask....

"How much offense does something have to cause in order for it to be grounds for removal?"

....is there a way to quantify offense? Or is it qualitative and it's simply a matter of how many folks find it offensive?

Anyway, the Supreme Court precedent in 'The National Socialist Party of America vs Skokie, Illinois' flies in the face of your beliefs. I mean I would like for people to abide by the Golden Rule, but some folks are just assholes for no other reason than they want to be and they like everyone else in this country are allowed to express themselves.

Free Speech is something I just figure that people know and accept, but apparently that concept is more difficult than I thought....it does involve lots of patience, mental clarity, and a great deal of restraint.

---

It's no good banning anything. Know your enemy. Far right groups have threatened to March all over Europe in places heavily populated by Jewish Holocaust survivors like Golders Green in London and usually they do not turn up or a group of thirty or so are met by hundreds of counter demonstrators. In my younger days I marched with the anti-nazi league in London, Birmingham, Glasgow, Milan, etc and it was important to stand up to bully boys ( even if that meant throwing a few punches if they tried to intimidate and attack, pacifism rarely works) and to show that when they attack minorities that the underdogs will stick together in solidarity. When Mosely and the British Union of Facists marched in 1936 the Police allowed it but the few thousand that turned up in the battle of Cable street in the East End were met not just by the large Jewish Community there, but also the Irish, Trade Unionists, Working class dockers and even housewives. About 100,000 people it is estimated, all united and turned over trucks etc and all though the Police surrounded and protected Mosely and the fascists to protect their right to march, Irish Catholic housewives emptied chamber pots and bowls of old vegetables onto them.

LET THEM SKINHEAD FUCKERS WITH THEIR nAZI FLAGS march like nitwits and Heil Hitler---
they are their own judge, jury and executioner.
give cunts enough rope and they hang themselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greenbeanz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Kabong

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TitoFan

Nazi flags should be displayed in museums and shown in documentaries.
Other than that it has no practical, constructive use whatsoever.
Its being deployed in public places or private property where it can be seen by others and deemed offensive should be prohibited.
My opinion and I'll continue to stand by it.

Have a nice day.

---

Alright well that leads me (just playing Devil's Advocate here) to ask....

"How much offense does something have to cause in order for it to be grounds for removal?"

....is there a way to quantify offense? Or is it qualitative and it's simply a matter of how many folks find it offensive?

Anyway, the Supreme Court precedent in 'The National Socialist Party of America vs Skokie, Illinois' flies in the face of your beliefs. I mean I would like for people to abide by the Golden Rule, but some folks are just assholes for no other reason than they want to be and they like everyone else in this country are allowed to express themselves.

Free Speech is something I just figure that people know and accept, but apparently that concept is more difficult than I thought....it does involve lots of patience, mental clarity, and a great deal of restraint.

---

It's no good banning anything. Know your enemy. Far right groups have threatened to March all over Europe in places heavily populated by Jewish Holocaust survivors like Golders Green in London and usually they do not turn up or a group of thirty or so are met by hundreds of counter demonstrators. In my younger days I marched with the anti-nazi league in London, Birmingham, Glasgow, Milan, etc and it was important to stand up to bully boys ( even if that meant throwing a few punches if they tried to intimidate and attack, pacifism rarely works) and to show that when they attack minorities that the underdogs will stick together in solidarity. When Mosely and the British Union of Facists marched in 1936 the Police allowed it but the few thousand that turned up in the battle of Cable street in the East End were met not just by the large Jewish Community there, but also the Irish, Trade Unionists, Working class dockers and even housewives. About 100,000 people it is estimated, all united and turned over trucks etc and all though the Police surrounded and protected Mosely and the fascists to protect their right to march, Irish Catholic housewives emptied chamber pots and bowls of old vegetables onto them.

---

Both your points are well taken. However, let's construct an entirely hypothetical situation:

A man murders the whole family of someone away at work, and is convicted. He serves his prison term, maybe getting out a little early through good conduct or other such B.S. He then decides to move next door to the murdered family's father, and for the hell of it has a flag made with the pictures of each of the victims, each with a big red "X" through their faces. He then decides to fly this flag in his own front yard, in plain view of his neighbor and the other neighbors.

How do we quantify that offense? Other than the victim's father/husband, his friends and family, who else will find it offensive enough to warrant authorities to demand the murderer take it down? What about the murderer's right to Free Speech and expression? How is this any different to someone flying the Nazi flag when there's millions of Jews who were touched either personally or very closely by this tragic holocaust?

Why is it necessary that decisions have a numeric criteria attached to them? As much as we've progressed in the field of computers and artificial intelligence... we still cannot completely program the complexities of human emotions, nor can we expect to have a perfect playbook for every decision that must be made.

People will always try to push the envelope. If you've ever been a parent, you know how children will constantly push that envelope to test just how far they can get away with stuff. Then they'll do it again... just to make sure the response (and limits) are repeatable.

As ludicrous as my example of the murderer may sound, what is so different between that and the Nazi flag? I've already asked (and not received a good answer) what possible useful purpose flying a Nazi flag has. None. Miles, of course, goes off on his tangents trying to comically equate that flag with the country flag of Japan. Thus, no real argument there. But back to my question.... what useful purpose does flying this flag have? We can't just run and hide behind the 1st Amendment every time a controversial issue pops up. Someone's got to exhibit a good set of "cojones" and say... you know what... screw what the Amendment says. You're not interpreting it the right way and therefore you cannot do that. Period.

It doesn't have to serve a useful purpose. We don't have the first ammendment here.
As a Jew who has family members killed in the holocaust there is no need to give me an allegorical story. I still support the right for people to be offensive. Just don't be surprised when that offense becomes intimidation that I will fight back and good people who know what that feels like join in and help. When fascists flying the Nazi flag want to burn the Talmud then I am not going to fuel that fire by making them feel that they are being persecuted and that I am the one trying to censor other people.

I'll choose to go against the grain and popular opinion here and continue to believe people should be held accountable for behavior that is solely meant to be offensive and provocative. We as human beings (some, of course) have shown on many occasions that we're incapable of behavior that is acceptable to society. Why, then, the need to accommodate these assholes? No. At some point the buck stops here, as they say, and let the chips fall where they may.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TitoFan

Both your points are well taken. However, let's construct an entirely hypothetical situation:

A man murders the whole family of someone away at work, and is convicted. He serves his prison term, maybe getting out a little early through good conduct or other such B.S. He then decides to move next door to the murdered family's father, and for the hell of it has a flag made with the pictures of each of the victims, each with a big red "X" through their faces. He then decides to fly this flag in his own front yard, in plain view of his neighbor and the other neighbors.

How do we quantify that offense? Other than the victim's father/husband, his friends and family, who else will find it offensive enough to warrant authorities to demand the murderer take it down? What about the murderer's right to Free Speech and expression? How is this any different to someone flying the Nazi flag when there's millions of Jews who were touched either personally or very closely by this tragic holocaust?

Why is it necessary that decisions have a numeric criteria attached to them? As much as we've progressed in the field of computers and artificial intelligence... we still cannot completely program the complexities of human emotions, nor can we expect to have a perfect playbook for every decision that must be made.

People will always try to push the envelope. If you've ever been a parent, you know how children will constantly push that envelope to test just how far they can get away with stuff. Then they'll do it again... just to make sure the response (and limits) are repeatable.

As ludicrous as my example of the murderer may sound, what is so different between that and the Nazi flag? I've already asked (and not received a good answer) what possible useful purpose flying a Nazi flag has. None. Miles, of course, goes off on his tangents trying to comically equate that flag with the country flag of Japan. Thus, no real argument there. But back to my question.... what useful purpose does flying this flag have? We can't just run and hide behind the 1st Amendment every time a controversial issue pops up. Someone's got to exhibit a good set of "cojones" and say... you know what... screw what the Amendment says. You're not interpreting it the right way and therefore you cannot do that. Period.

---

Well see your example can be classified as "harassment" and of course could be remedied with say a restraining order and the father would have just cause to fear for his own life seeing how that hypothetical person killed his family members.



Comically equate with the flag of Japan??? Dude, Japan wasted 22,000,000 Chinese in the Second Sino-Japanese War which included 17,000,000 civilians. And that was JUST China. I don't mind Japanese folks waving that flag if they want to...now Chinese people probably don't much care for it, but it's the same flag that ships flew during the attack on Pearl Harbor....still not offended by the flag, the actions yes, the flag no.


I don't much care for illegal immigrants showing up to immigration rallies waving Mexican flags....because it's stupid AND it's counterproductive. They're free to do it, but they're stupid for doing it. If they want to be Americans wave the American flag....it'll endear more people to your cause....and if they don't want to be American then they are free to leave or remain here lawfully until their Visa expires and go back to where they want to be.

I REALLY despise lefties waving Communist flags all the time, but hey, they can do what they want because banning those flags would be exactly what a Communist would do to anyone waving an American flag...the liberty offered by this nation should be stronger than anything attempting to attack it. I'm free to be offended, I'm free to NOT be offended, I have the personal choice, I can turn my back, I can avert my gaze, I can embrace something, or I can fight back with my own views....It is my liberty to do so.

Regardless of a country's past, its flag is its flag and there is really nothing that can or should be done about it. Do we really want to revisit each country's past and reassess who gets to keep its flag and how doesn't? What country cannot be accused of any wrongdoing in past armed conflicts by another party? Just because I don't agree with Miles' assessment of the U.S. and how wrong it's been regarding past invasions and the like... doesn't mean the rest of the world agrees with you and me.

The other examples? Mexicans should be free to wave their flags, as again they represent their own country. Whether it's done in the proper context or not, is besides the point. Communist flags represent a political ideology. It's not hurting or offending you, who happen to have other beliefs.

None of these examples match the desire or "need" to wave a Nazi flag.

Because people change and we all in the West should have the right to be asshole. When Fascists March against something as laughable as the Jewification of Britain and then ignorantly co-opt something that for many of them would have been abhorrent in the Palestinian flag, then it is good that they get to parade their ignorance. Isreal is a secular state, and there are many Jews in Britain who are right at the forefront in fighting for the rights of Palestinians. Many of the Fascists grandparents fought the German Nazis as British soldiers, so they don't really have a patriotic leg to stand on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TitoFan

Regardless of a country's past, its flag is its flag and there is really nothing that can or should be done about it. Do we really want to revisit each country's past and reassess who gets to keep its flag and how doesn't? What country cannot be accused of any wrongdoing in past armed conflicts by another party? Just because I don't agree with Miles' assessment of the U.S. and how wrong it's been regarding past invasions and the like... doesn't mean the rest of the world agrees with you and me.

The other examples? Mexicans should be free to wave their flags, as again they represent their own country. Whether it's done in the proper context or not, is besides the point. Communist flags represent a political ideology. It's not hurting or offending you, who happen to have other beliefs.

None of these examples match the desire or "need" to wave a Nazi flag.

---

I don't know, I'm not suggesting we revisit every flag, I'm NOT for censorship regardless of the feelings people have.


Mexicans are free to wave their flags....to do it while wanting to be counted as LEGAL AMERICAN CITIZENS is pretty fucking stupid....but yeah they fly their flags. It offends me, but I'm not going around trying to ban it, they just look dumb to me is all. Have pride in where you are from, but also show some respect for where you are is my general rule that I personally follow.

Communist flags represent and ideology? Well Nazi flags represent political ideology as well sooooo I guess thanks for helping my argument :-\ . National Socialism is horrible, and hey Socialism is IN THE TITLE, imagine something with socialism in there being "bad" and leading to massive death and destruction....I mean really :rolleyes:



I say fly whatever flag you want to fly. On property you own, on vehicles you own, on buildings you own, in places where other people agree with you....it shouldn't be an issue.