Boy, that is an ugly thread. There's not a bit of logical thinking going on in the vast majority of posts, and the few that do lay out an actual argument are ignored.
What's even more disturbing is the large number of posts saying "they got what they deserved." The only time I make that sort of comment is when a guy soliciting children is chased down and trapped by a group of Catholic schoolgirls— dang, where DID I put the link to that story? Anyway, it's unreasonable to explicitly state that sarcasm— even sacrasm designed to elicit a forceful response, which is what this article claims (though the transcript doesn't back it up)— deserves physical retaliation.
1 Comments:
Boy, that is an ugly thread. There's not a bit of logical thinking going on in the vast majority of posts, and the few that do lay out an actual argument are ignored.
What's even more disturbing is the large number of posts saying "they got what they deserved." The only time I make that sort of comment is when a guy soliciting children is chased down and trapped by a group of Catholic schoolgirls— dang, where DID I put the link to that story? Anyway, it's unreasonable to explicitly state that sarcasm— even sacrasm designed to elicit a forceful response, which is what this article claims (though the transcript doesn't back it up)— deserves physical retaliation.
Or so I was brought up to believe. Gah.
-B. Durbin
Post a Comment
<< Home