stlchic

Posts by santonacci


User's Posts | User's Topics


Forum Topic Date Replies
The Lounge in light of the terror attack in Paris... Jan 15 2015
13:51 (UTC)
3
Original Post by kikt:

Not sure what nature has to do with it, but I think Christianity and democracy aren't a great pairing either. Hence the idea of secular states.

What in the blazes are you talking about?

The Lounge in light of the terror attack in Paris... Jan 14 2015
18:36 (UTC)
11
Original Post by gotborked:

I heard just our ambassador showed up.  Honestly, it seems like something that would've been right in Michelle's wheelhouse.

1.  We have ambassadors for a reason.

2.  The logistics of getting the FLOTUS over to France with 36 hours notice would still be complicated and expensive.  People criticize her when her husband takes her out to a fancy restaurant, for crying out loud.

3.  As was noted elsewhere:  "The other thing that's galling about this whole "debate"?  It makes the tragedy there about us and our own derangement, like a bunch of selfish ***holes."

Because goodness knows a country can't really stand up for freedom and do a quality photo op unless the US is involved.

The Lounge in light of the terror attack in Paris... Jan 14 2015
16:03 (UTC)
14
Original Post by catwalker:

One of my first thoughts when I saw the original picture of the world leaders marching was "how in the hell did they let those leaders get together out in the open in one place". Then when I heard all the flack they were giving Obama about not attending, I thought there's no way the secret service would allow him to be out in the open.

 

He would have gotten flack no matter what he did.

If he was there:  "Of course, Obama makes it all about him, and wastes taxpayer money on a photo op...."

As it is, I doubt if any of his critics have considered what would need to be done to get the POTUS all the way to a Paris demonstration on 36 hours notice.

And while I admire the mass demonstration, the one with the leaders was obviously for show - like the leadership of Turkey or Russia has any business marching in support of freedom of the press.

The Lounge in light of the terror attack in Paris... Jan 12 2015
22:35 (UTC)
52
Original Post by theviewfromhere:

aside: is the concept of professional ethics really that foreign?

No, but I think the idea that an accreditation agency can completely enforce them is slightly naïve.  An accreditation agency will only have as much authority as the public gives it - you mentioned "transparency and teeth" - what does that mean?

Would this just be another independent non-governmental agency that has a rating system that everybody trusts, or will it have actual authority to levy punishment?  What form is that punishment?

How can you be sure, even with the greatest transparency, that the withdrawal of an accreditation wouldn't be the result of a personal grudges?  What makes this magical agency to stick to just "qualifications and ethical practice"?

The problem with agencies is that they're run by humans beings.  Is the accreditation agency accredited?

The Lounge in light of the terror attack in Paris... Jan 12 2015
14:33 (UTC)
90
Original Post by theviewfromhere:

not all accreditation is equal.

I totally agree.

What would make your media accreditation agency different?

The Lounge in light of the terror attack in Paris... Jan 12 2015
14:33 (UTC)
91
Original Post by pavlovcat:

I would think, working in the social services sector, you'd understand what a farce accreditation can be.  In my experience, accrediting agencies are just another bureaucratic machine.  They create laundry lists of easily measurable, but often irrelevant, standards for organizations to jump through and do virtually nothing to actually ensure the service they provide is of high quality. 

I can totally relate to this.  Even though suppliers I work with are all "accredited" through a 3rd party registrar, who are themselves "accredited", my employer still has to schedule our own separate audits of all these suppliers to make sure they live up to our standards.

The Lounge in light of the terror attack in Paris... Jan 10 2015
17:52 (UTC)
110
Original Post by theviewfromhere:

jesus. i have no problem with satire. i love satire. i just said it's not honourable or heroic, and it isn't journalism. it's cheap entertainment, and when it's aimed at a marginalized group of people, it's **** mean.

i haven't said that outlets like charlie hebdo shouldn't exist. i'm just saying we might want to think about how much stock we put in them.

did you look at the link about why the cbc isn't republishing the cartoons? representations of the prophet mohammed--satirical or otherwise--are offensive. one of the tenets of islam is that the prophet is not to be represented visually. i'm glad the cbc made that choice. it's a public broadcaster in a country that values diversity. i believe that muslim citizens and residents are entitled to the same degree of respect as anybody else. that is all.

charlie hebdo made it their mission to take the piss out of everybody. fine. great. whatever. it's cool, it's a legitimate choice, but it's not heroic.

From what I've read, the prohibition on depictions of the prophet is not found in the Koran itself, but in Hadith, which are prophetic traditions, and the "purpose" behind it is to discourage idolatry.  What I found interesting that the strict adherence to it is mainly by Sunni Muslims.

And it's not like there have never been depictions of Mohammed prior to satire cartoons, and, apparently, they haven't always been banned.  How do US muslims view the SCOTUS north frieze? The prophet is right there in full idolatrous glory.  

And while I acknowledge that there is a vast difference between art and crude satire, it's a fine line between cultural sensitivity and trying to shelter a particular group from anything they find offensive.

Fundamentalist Muslims also find homosexuality horribly offensive, that doesn't mean we should start banning pride parades or rethink marriage equality.

The Lounge in light of the terror attack in Paris... Jan 08 2015
22:22 (UTC)
144
Original Post by lysistrata:

I'm also, of course, not the first person to wonder why these cartoons are persecution while "The Book of Mormon" and Piss Jesus are hilarious and high art.

Well, I'm going to agree with this guy and say that the Mormons were just clever enough to capitalize on an opportunity.  It was quite brilliant, actually.

And plenty of people decided to go the outraged victim route with Piss Christ.

ETA:  Not that I think the cartoons are persecution - just observations on differing reactions to perceived blasphemy.

The Lounge in light of the terror attack in Paris... Jan 07 2015
21:59 (UTC)
207
Original Post by cajunrider:

The New York Daily News, the London-based Daily Telegraph, and the Associated Pressare either pixelating or completely deleting photos of Charlie Hebdo cartoons depicting Mohammad in their most recent articles.

It appears that the terrorists win this round.

Nothing is ever truly deleted anymore.  A quick search in google images has plenty of copies of the offensive toons.

So, not quite a win, unless the terrorists plan on taking down the internet.

The Lounge Two NYC LEOs executed in their car: Wenjian Lu and Rafael Ramos Jan 03 2015
14:06 (UTC)
13
WHile I agree that money drives almost evertthing in media and politics, you're still dodging the point - so I guess my note about the needed conversation not happening is still accurate. Whatever Sharpton's motives are, the police being used as a revenue stream through invented stops and broken windows policies was a known problem even before Ferguson and Eric Garner. And while it does disportionately affect minority neighborhoods, nobody is immune to it - all you have to do is go 3 miles over the speed limit in a cash strapped municipality, and you have a $150 ticket (my personal experience). And if the person stopped simply can't pay the fine, the result is an arrest warrant and jail time. There are real reasons why people are angry, and you can't just write it off to a "media agenda."
The Lounge Two NYC LEOs executed in their car: Wenjian Lu and Rafael Ramos Jan 03 2015
04:26 (UTC)
15
Original Post by santonacci:

Original Post by amwick:

"THe rolling stone? Didn't they report that rape? This swing on this depends on where you find the report. "

Yes, but i don't beleive Taibbi wrote about the rape, so I don't see how that's relevant. And, as noted by others, the police being used as a revenue stream is well known regardless of where the report is.
The Lounge Two NYC LEOs executed in their car: Wenjian Lu and Rafael Ramos Jan 02 2015
14:34 (UTC)
25
Original Post by amwick:

Meanwhile reports of LEOs being shot at are coming in from NC, CA and FL.   Police have said that they are  definitely slowing down. 

Yeah - but I doubt it's going to prompt the conversation that it should.

The Lounge The Interview Dec 29 2014
14:16 (UTC)
39
Original Post by catwalker:

I'm wondering a bit if Sony didn't somehow enable the hack so it could get more people to watch it than would have before the hack and refusal to release it. 

Well, that would mean that Sony deliberately compromised the personal information (ss #'s, bank account information, passwords, etc) of its employees merely to get moderately better numbers on a movie release.

And if so, that's a bigger story than NK, IMO.

The Lounge Ferguson grand jury has reached a decision *Update* No indictment, rampant looting Dec 29 2014
13:25 (UTC)
9

A needed bright spot and a shout out to Nomo to note that Librarians are awesome....

The Lounge The Interview Dec 28 2014
15:29 (UTC)
49
Original Post by kevinatthebrook:

I'd be interested in hearing what you all think the reaction would be if teh shoe were on the other foot.

 

Like if a movie were made about the asassination of an American President?

As I recall, while the most passionate criticisms of it were from Republicans, Hillary Clinton had some strong opinions of it as well.  However, I don't believe anybody issued formal threats over it.  (Although I'm sure there were plenty of people on questionable message boards who posted some standard over the top, impotent rhetoric.)

I had the same reaction to that I have for this one:  I wasn't interested in it until people starting making a bunch of noise.  My secondary reaction:  It' s a movie - if you don't like the subject, don't watch it.

ETA:  If one were made focusing on our current POTUS, my reaction would be similar to the reaction when I read posts on other forums fantasizing about his assassination, or saw Nugent's stage rant against Obama and Hillary - face palm, chuckle, get on with my day while hoping the secret service is getting its act together.

The Lounge I don't think Beyonce is all that Dec 27 2014
21:13 (UTC)
32
Original Post by nomoreexcuses:

I have a gay friend who joked to me that I would be carted off and never heard from again if I said anything bad about Beyonce. So I suppose I'm tempting fate. Or her mafia. One or the other.

 

Be careful.....they will find you.....

The Lounge One Word! Dec 27 2014
14:14 (UTC)
27

Peaceful

The Lounge At what age did you know everything? And at what age did you figure out that you knew nothing at all? Dec 27 2014
14:10 (UTC)
3

I knew everything at 15, and figured out actually knew nothing when I had my first child at 28.

Now I know it's a 50/50 mix of the two, although the past year has done a pretty good job of educating me about things I knew nothing about in January.

The Lounge Missouri Rep. files bill saying women must get consent from partner to have an abortion Dec 23 2014
18:09 (UTC)
14
Original Post by trh:

Original Post by santonacci:

Original Post by trh:

So Thonx saying everyone should enter into a contract before conceiving adds to the discussion but me saying the contract should be a Marriage is trolling?

I have to agree that both of you are trolling.

thonx suggesting contracts at least implies that the woman actually has some input and say in the requirements.

Are you saying women don't have any input or say in marriage? I disagree.

No, in your scenario women aren't getting an input or say on the circumstances of when they get married and have a baby if you're imposing conditions on both.

The Lounge Missouri Rep. files bill saying women must get consent from partner to have an abortion Dec 23 2014
17:32 (UTC)
18
Original Post by trh:

So Thonx saying everyone should enter into a contract before conceiving adds to the discussion but me saying the contract should be a Marriage is trolling?

I have to agree that both of you are trolling.

thonx suggesting contracts at least implies that the woman actually has some input and say in the requirements.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Allergy Remedies
Is It Possible to Go Natural?
The side effects of allergy medications keep some people from using them. Natural remedies can be a great alternative, but some are more effective than others.