Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 15:42:49 -0800 (PST) From: stheg olloydson <stheg_olloydson@yahoo.com> To: Johnson David <DavidJohnson@Siemens.com>, freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: RE: SPAM: Score 3.2: RE: SPAM: Score 2.5: Re: FreeBSD logo design competition Message-ID: <20050210234249.51131.qmail@web53909.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <9C4E897FB284BF4DBC9C0DC42FB34617641ADF@mvaexch01.acuson.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--- Johnson David <DavidJohnson@Siemens.com> wrote: > From: stheg olloydson [mailto:stheg_olloydson@yahoo.com] > > > > Well, well, well! Hit too close to home did I? I said that those > > complaining about the beastie belong to an irrational minority that > > wish to impose their religion on others. In what way is this > statement > > bigotry or anti-Christian or anti-American? > > The phrases you used were: "America's Taliban", "force their > religious > orthodoxy", "eliminate the barrier between state and church", "make > the > United States into a theocratic country", and "an irrational > minority". > If you wish to quote me, then use a real quote and not selective "sound bites": SO>Over the years, the only complaints I have ever heard have come from SO>America's Taliban. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ What is the Taliban? A group of religious fanatics that believe their interpretation of their holy book is the only one and if, necessary, it should be forced on others. So what is America's Taliban? Americans of the same ilk. Search the archives to see the source of those making this complaint. I can't help the fact they're Americans. SO>Leaving aside the question of whether or not the complainers are in a SO>position to make any sort of IT decision, one must ask what is their SO>motivation for complaining. They are simply trying to force their SO>religious orthodoxy on others. This is undeniable because that's _why_ they're complaining. SO>These are the same people trying to eliminate the barrier between SO>state and church to make the United States into a theocratic country. True, this is a leap of faith on my part, but a small leap. But I think is reasonable to assume that anyone going to the trouble to advocate that a cartoon character is an inherently evil is likely to believe a state religion is a good idea, too. SO>Therefore, these complaints can be categorized as coming from an SO>irrational minority that should be ignored. > So yes, there are some "Christians" who probably do want a theocracy > and an > elimination of the disestablishment clause. But those people are in > the very > small insignificant minority. I explicitly said that. I did NOT say that were Christians; that was you. > > I did not take offense because you merely mentioned that these people > exist. Sure you did. You are offended because you inferred by statements to mean something I didn't say. Then when I pointed that out to you, you made the same claim. > I took offense because you have magnified these people far beyond > their > petty importance. Your post was NOT about the logo contest, but the > continuation of an errnoneous and politically loaded stereotype. <snipped> I didn't magnify their importance, whoever decided to change the logo to appease them did. Of course my post was about the contest. Let me synopsize it for you since you clearly have comprehension difficulties. First, I brought up the fact that the decision to change the logo was kept secret from the community. Then I questioned the "need" for the change. (This is apparently the only part you read.) Then I questioned the method being used to pick the new logo. Then I made the argument that if "the FreeBSD Project" kowtows to one group's prejudices, why not go all the way and kowtow to all of them. > > David Johnson > Best regards, Stheg Olloydson __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050210234249.51131.qmail>