leviathan13 Posted August 12, 2010 Share Posted August 12, 2010 We do, however, with historical events what we do is form an opinion based on as many sources as possible. Holocaust denial is anathema to me as there is plenty of evidence, including physical, visual as well as first hand testimonies. Even video footage can be interpreted in numerous ways. This is one example which springs immediately to mind and engendered a debate as to whether Bush wiped his hand on Clinton's shoulder or gave him a friendly pat. A more obvious example would be the conspiracy theories that abound about 9/11, even when the events unfold on live TV, there are still people who are not prepared to believe what they saw or have interpreted the 'facts' in a wholly different manner. I think that the holy scriptures are slightly different however for a variety of reasons, however, that is a whole other debate. Quite so and I would certainly not go out of my way to watch anything that would distress me or depicted graphic violence. I never mentioned anything about censorship however, but people taking amateur footage of the kind of event referred to in the OP, then posting it on the internet for people to watch for some form of gratification is just abhorrent, as far as I'm concerned. How are scriptures different? They're all about individual interpretation, why do you think there are so many religions and divisions within them. And everyone has jumped to the conclusion that IamChiChi is some sort of sexual deviant who wants to watch it for gratification. At no point as he given any indication that that is the case, so I think people have got their knickers in an almighty twist for no reason other than total overreaction! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suffragette1 Posted August 12, 2010 Share Posted August 12, 2010 How are scriptures different? They're all about individual interpretation, why do you think there are so many religions and divisions within them. And everyone has jumped to the conclusion that IamChiChi is some sort of sexual deviant who wants to watch it for gratification. At no point as he given any indication that that is the case, so I think people have got their knickers in an almighty twist for no reason other than total overreaction! I think that the scriptures (without going into a very long debate about, so will precis) are different as there is a lot of ambiguity, contradiction and metaphor; there may be a lot lost in translation and differing translations can totally alter meanings, which is why they lend themselves more to different interpretations, which is slightly different to historical records reporting fact or reading someone's journals or personal papers and other primary source materials, studying artefacts etc. As for IamChiChi, perhaps if s/he had said 'it helps me to contextualise the event if I can use visual sources to inform my views' there would have been a slightly different response. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bassman62 Posted August 12, 2010 Share Posted August 12, 2010 To say only Indian people mistreat women is racist.Very true mistreatment of women is also a major part of islam as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leviathan13 Posted August 12, 2010 Share Posted August 12, 2010 I think that the scriptures (without going into a very long debate about, so will precis) are different as there is a lot of ambiguity, contradiction and metaphor; there may be a lot lost in translation and differing translations can totally alter meanings, which is why they lend themselves more to different interpretations, which is slightly different to historical records reporting fact or reading someone's journals or personal papers and other primary source materials, studying artefacts etc. As for IamChiChi, perhaps if s/he had said 'it helps me to contextualise the event if I can use visual sources to inform my views' there would have been a slightly different response. Or maybe if people weren't so quick to assume that everyone is a paedophile, and they are guilty until proven innocent, and actually thought for more than a split second about it, he wouldn't have to explain himself. Maybe he thought you were all rational people who could think rationally instead of jumping straight to the most horrendous assumption. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bassman62 Posted August 12, 2010 Share Posted August 12, 2010 Please DON'T put the link to said video on here. Remember - this is a family forum. Spoilsport...............: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suffragette1 Posted August 12, 2010 Share Posted August 12, 2010 Or maybe if people weren't so quick to assume that everyone is a paedophile, and they are guilty until proven innocent, and actually thought for more than a split second about it, he wouldn't have to explain himself. Maybe he thought you were all rational people who could think rationally instead of jumping straight to the most horrendous assumption. My bold - huh? He was asked why he would want to watch it, fair enough, don't make such statements on a public forum if you don't want to be asked questions as to why. If he is curious to watch such stuff then have other posters not got a right to be curious as to why he is curious? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leviathan13 Posted August 12, 2010 Share Posted August 12, 2010 My bold - huh? He was asked why he would want to watch it, fair enough, don't make such statements on a public forum if you don't want to be asked questions as to why. If he is curious to watch such stuff then have other posters not got a right to be curious as to why he is curious? And he explained why he was, but the battle raged on as people weren't satisfied. Why were you curious as to why he was curious? Was it because you thought he had a hidden agenda? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suffragette1 Posted August 12, 2010 Share Posted August 12, 2010 And he explained why he was, but the battle raged on as people weren't satisfied. Why were you curious as to why he was curious? Was it because you thought he had a hidden agenda? No, I'm just nosey and seem to have an unquenchable thirst for information and knowledge. Yeah, I know, curiosity killed the cat etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leviathan13 Posted August 12, 2010 Share Posted August 12, 2010 No, I'm just nosey and seem to have an unquenchable thirst for information and knowledge. Yeah, I know, curiosity killed the cat etc. So why is it ok for you to be curious and not him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suffragette1 Posted August 12, 2010 Share Posted August 12, 2010 So why is it ok for you to be curious and not him? Because of the precise nature of the type of footage he said he watched, which is graphic and he claims enhances/enriches his knowledge, I thought that we'd already established that? Blimey, it's all getting a bit metaphysical now. Are you his spokesperson? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.