|
You know what would be really cool? If, just occasionally, you could come across an artist with wisdom commensurate with their talent. Sadly, though, what you most often find, as here, is cleverness as a poor substitute. ...or maybe you generally tend to disagree with what I most often find. Well, I think it is nice and brilliant. It made me think that I have allowed people since too long time to put glue in my brain, (does it make sense in English? I'm trying to learn it.). "I have allowed since too long time to put glue in by brain" edit: I have, for too long, allowed glue to be put in my brain Very nice turn of phrase as understood though, Lullofish I don't always disagree,Invictus, but that's another matter. Thank you very much, G. D. I think I could write on my profile that I use Clipmarks because peolpe here help me to improve my English! This cartoon speaks of an unfortunate (but necessary in my opinion) truth. While I wish the world were a different place, I can't sit back and pretend it is. And in this world of violently different beliefs and ideologies, the terms in the above cartoon are often mutually exclusive. Sad, but true. And in this world of violently different beliefs and ideologies, the terms in the above cartoon are often mutually exclusive.Indeed: "I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" (Patrick Henry, 1775) I agree with knslyr completely... And Kore7, as much as that phrase was heroic and timely in 1775 - it doesn't apply well in 2006. If you go for the absolute meaning of the quote - you get death! And thus to quote ksnlyr... "Sad, but true". RecordSage said: [Correction] RecordSage said:Which is exactly what happened to thousands of American soldiers who have died throughout history for the sake of our continued liberty. Are you implying they were foolish to choose to die for these ideals? The safest thing to do would be to surrender to the Islamist terrorists, convert to their religion, and obey their will. They would be happy and, being on their side, you and your family would finally be safe from Islamist terrorism. What's stopping you? America is the land of the free, and the home of the brave. Not the land of the safe, and the home of the timid. If your priori... The clip is good example of how the left is never willing or able to secure freedom, But they are good at wasting time while enjoying it. Kore7, I don't know if you're saying what you're saying for effect or you actually believe this stuff (which is really hard for me to believe). The soldiers died to keep America America, which is what I firmly believe it should be. I'm not looking for security from your perspective, I'm looking for security from mine. I'm a citizen of this country and there are a number of reasons, security not being one of them. The last thing I'd want to do is convert to islam, again for many reasons. The thing that you're so persistently insist on missing is that your brand of war on the islamists will not yield you 'liberty' as you call it. It will yield you death and my question to you is - if y... Not the land of the safe, and the home of the timidIf we were the home of the timid, we certainly would not be the home of the brave. We are precisely the land of the free and home of the brave, BECAUSE we are not the land of the safe and home of the timid. If we were the home of the timid, we certainly would not be the home of the brave.CORRECTION: If we were the home of the timid, we would not be land of the free. Here's a Christian perspective on this question: There is no way to peace along the way of safety. For peace must be dared. It is the great venture. It can never be safe. Peace is the opposite of security.... Peace means to give oneself altogether to the law of God, wanting no security, but in faith and obedience laying the destiny of the nations in the hand of Almighty God, not trying to direct it for selfish purposes. Battles are won, not with weapons, but with God.From Dietrich Bonhoeffer, theologian and anti-Nazi plotter (link) "In the late 1930s he wrote about the necessity of "risking" peace and "daring" a loving presence to others – words which seem to fly in the face of his later justification of assassination". This is from Bonhoeffer's web site. And let's not forget that he was executed by the nazi's after shuttling between a number of concentration camps. The concept is noble - the problem is that it ends in death, not in victory. So he dared and he died. Pacifism is a strange concept. It is actually the use of force against justice, ethics, moral obligation, love, compassion, peace, security, prosperity, dignity, and hope. Bonhoeffer again: "When Christ calls a man, he bids him come and die." Or, Jesus: "Take up your cross, and follow me, for whoever wants to save his life will lose it." (I think this is right, I'm quoting from memory here.) The point being, from a Christian perspective, there are more important things than physical survival. Enbar, the insanity of your comment, is that it flies in the face of civilization itself. It's not that I don't respect your view, I do very much. But taken to it's logical end , it is the support and toleration of evil. God is no pacifist and does not expect that of us. it flies in the face of civilization itself.True. But consider: "we proclaim Christ crucified, a stumbling-block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles... God’s foolishness is wiser than human wisdom, and God’s weakness is stronger than human strength.... God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong." (I Cor. 1.23-27) I have a hard time seeing the application of this to our topic. I tend not to read Bible verses out of context, so I referred back to the entire Chapter to try and obtain some context and relevance to support your position. I do not see it. In fact, I kind of see the opposite ( not supporting pacifism ), in that the word "shame" implies misuse. The chapter isn't about pacifism, it's about the wisdom of the world and how the scandal of the Cross violates and confounds it. You say can't accept Christ's example of willing self-sacrifice (as Flannery O'Connor called it, "the bleeding stinking mad shadow of Jesus") because it "flies in the face of civilization itself." Paul answers that it is civilization, not Christ, that has to change. On topic, what I found so humorus about the cartoon was the simple truth of it. The US citizens have in many ways had their liberty, justice, freedon, and equality taken ransom by the Bush administration. All the while, the citzen are accepting of it prolly cuz the glue fumes... Off topic, speaking of out-of-context, willhelm said:Funny, I thought you were speaking of the right-wingers. Their willingness to imprison, infringe upon privacy, due process, look the other way on coporate/ government scandals/ineptitude, all for the sake of the best market prices for (oil or) its country's citizens' ego (or god?). How much further until we are in a police state? Countdown to the rapture... Teajay, typical invective I expect from you, socratoad, and eg. I wish you guys could be more like JK and Enbar. Sometimes a picture speaks a thousand words... I don't know how to do the quote boxes (yet) but I agree with teajay1111 on, that to me the picture more or less represents: Quote:- "Their willingness to imprison, infringe upon privacy, due process, look the other way on corporate/ government scandals/ineptitude, all for the sake of the best market prices for (oil or) it's country's citizens' ego (or god?). How much further until we are in a police state?" -End quote |
View the Top Clips from June 20, 2006
Embed This Clip In Your Site...
|
|
|
|
