5 ms·

Don't wrestle with a pig in mud because the outcome is the same whether you win or lose, you'll get all muddy, waste your time, and the pig will enjoy every min

by maeon3 14y ago

Don't wrestle with a pig in mud because the outcome is the same whether you win or lose, you'll get all muddy, waste your time, and the pig will enjoy every minute of it. http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/wrestle_with_a_pig http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/wrestle_with_a_pig

oconnore 14y ago
I don't think it matters whether WBC 'wins' or loses, as long as the families are protected.
- maeon3 14y ago
  It is their right to picket and claim that the reason the tragedy happened is because of homosexual behaviour in this country. They are trolls, and interacting them in any way shape or form only feeds them. There is no solution to the problem. They are cancerous cells living in the collective not hurting anything, just reproducing. They aren't breaking any laws, and to deny them their rights because their message is wrong is not the answer. Maybe the solution is to lure them into committing a crime so the white blood cells can neutralize them.
  - objclxt 14y ago
    > "There is no solution to the problem" Sure there is - it's just that the solution isn't very palatable to people who support the first amendment. You make hate speech illegal. If, for example, the Westboro Baptist Church were to visit the UK and picket a funeral with the same language as they do in the US they'd quickly be arrested (although it's all hypothetical, because church members are already banned from entering the UK for extremism).
    - protomyth 14y ago
      I would rather deal with the weirdos than pass speech restriction laws.
      - ahelwer 14y ago
        Has hate speech ever affected you? Does it even have the potential to?
        protomyth 14y ago
        Uh yep, it has had the potential to affect me. Grew up on a reservation as a white biological child of a native american (blood quotas) of a different tribe than the reservation. So, yeah. Despite a certain websites cute version "wasicu" really does have a pretty bad meaning. Having said that, my opinion is no less valid than if my Dad had not decided to move us from the west coast at a young age. Either you commit and actual crime or we are legislating mind control and weird interpretations of words. Given the "code words" discussions that came up in the 2012 election, I am pretty sure the Cardinal De Richelieu[1] would be right at home prosecuting hate speech. 1) "If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him."
  - oconnore 14y ago
    It's also within the scope of the first amendment to drown out their chants with motorcycles, to create human walls to distance them from the proceedings, and to conduct the ceremony on private property where there is no trespassing allowed. I'm not saying that we should throw them in jail, or that the first amendment should be weakened, but I am saying that there are creative, legal methods to protect the families from being exposed, and I hope that the community exercises them. Perhaps I misinterpreted Anonymous' intentions, but I assume that the response will be along these lines.
  - argumentum 14y ago
    Allowing to picket/speak IS the solution to the problem. They will continue to alienate themselves, reduce the chances of of the younger church members making friends/other contacts in the real world etc. Eventually, once the media stops broadcasting their every move, they will be reduced to the man/woman on a soapbox you see outside your university cafe.
svmegatron 14y ago
Respectfully, I don't think your analogy holds. I think the situation here is more akin to keeping a muddy pig out of a concert hall.
- maeon3 14y ago
  Perhaps the solution is to tell the mourners that we live in a terrible world, and you'll have to grow a thick skin. The best we can do is warn the mourners that mentally ill people are coming to laugh at your tragedy.

by maeon3 14y ago

oconnore 14y ago

I don't think it matters whether WBC 'wins' or loses, as long as the families are protected.

maeon3 14y ago
It is their right to picket and claim that the reason the tragedy happened is because of homosexual behaviour in this country. They are trolls, and interacting them in any way shape or form only feeds them. There is no solution to the problem. They are cancerous cells living in the collective not hurting anything, just reproducing. They aren't breaking any laws, and to deny them their rights because their message is wrong is not the answer. Maybe the solution is to lure them into committing a crime so the white blood cells can neutralize them.
- objclxt 14y ago
  > "There is no solution to the problem" Sure there is - it's just that the solution isn't very palatable to people who support the first amendment. You make hate speech illegal. If, for example, the Westboro Baptist Church were to visit the UK and picket a funeral with the same language as they do in the US they'd quickly be arrested (although it's all hypothetical, because church members are already banned from entering the UK for extremism).
  - protomyth 14y ago
    I would rather deal with the weirdos than pass speech restriction laws.
    - ahelwer 14y ago
      Has hate speech ever affected you? Does it even have the potential to?
      - protomyth 14y ago
        Uh yep, it has had the potential to affect me. Grew up on a reservation as a white biological child of a native american (blood quotas) of a different tribe than the reservation. So, yeah. Despite a certain websites cute version "wasicu" really does have a pretty bad meaning. Having said that, my opinion is no less valid than if my Dad had not decided to move us from the west coast at a young age. Either you commit and actual crime or we are legislating mind control and weird interpretations of words. Given the "code words" discussions that came up in the 2012 election, I am pretty sure the Cardinal De Richelieu[1] would be right at home prosecuting hate speech. 1) "If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him."
- oconnore 14y ago
  It's also within the scope of the first amendment to drown out their chants with motorcycles, to create human walls to distance them from the proceedings, and to conduct the ceremony on private property where there is no trespassing allowed. I'm not saying that we should throw them in jail, or that the first amendment should be weakened, but I am saying that there are creative, legal methods to protect the families from being exposed, and I hope that the community exercises them. Perhaps I misinterpreted Anonymous' intentions, but I assume that the response will be along these lines.
- argumentum 14y ago
  Allowing to picket/speak IS the solution to the problem. They will continue to alienate themselves, reduce the chances of of the younger church members making friends/other contacts in the real world etc. Eventually, once the media stops broadcasting their every move, they will be reduced to the man/woman on a soapbox you see outside your university cafe.

svmegatron 14y ago

Respectfully, I don't think your analogy holds. I think the situation here is more akin to keeping a muddy pig out of a concert hall.

maeon3 14y ago
Perhaps the solution is to tell the mourners that we live in a terrible world, and you'll have to grow a thick skin. The best we can do is warn the mourners that mentally ill people are coming to laugh at your tragedy.