Going up?
Moderators: Tunnelcat, Jeff250
Going up?
Corner stone is being set for the new Freedom Tower (I would have used the word "laid" but you know where that would lead). If I was going to play the liberal ideolgy here, I would have to say it was a bad idea to build the Freedom Tower as it is a un-necessary provocation to all our enemies. Instead I would recommend a giant underground structure where we could all hide.
-
Testiculese
- DBB Material Defender
- Posts: 4689
- Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2001 3:01 am
No doubt. Something like the Statue of Liberty makes sense because it symbolizes liberty. But the new freedom tower doesn't symbolize anything that I'm aware of other than "we got our building back." I mean, yeah, it shows our indominitable spirit or rebuilding or something, but freedom? C'mon. I'd have loved if they'd called it something like the "Hey Osama! Try that again!" tower. 
I also don't consider the U.S. to be all that free compared to other places. If you wanted to call it, "run by the people tower", fine (though after the last election, "run by The Electoral College Tower" may be more fitting, but it's starting to lose its catchyness) . But "freedom tower?" Maybe if after a gay wedding they let people drive by it at 11mph over the speed limit in a van, while the people in the back seat smoked weed and performed sodamy with eachother while the windows were down. Naturally, this would be done in a large enough group for it to be considered a sodamy parade, and no permit would be required.
Goob, what you're describing is license, not freedom. Freedom requires a certain responsibility attached to it; for example, the freedom to own a firearm comes with the responsibility to use that firearm wisely. License, as in your sodomy example, carries no responsibility and is inherently self-serving. Our nation has always stood for freedom, but it does not advocate license, at least up to this day. With recent events, though, I'm no longer as sure on that last part.
Regarding the rebuilding: Good. Let's throw it in their faces that they've done absolutely nothing to harm us. Osama, you've failed. Of course, I would have preferred the giant middle finger, but that wouldn't fit in with the rest of the skyline
.
Regarding the rebuilding: Good. Let's throw it in their faces that they've done absolutely nothing to harm us. Osama, you've failed. Of course, I would have preferred the giant middle finger, but that wouldn't fit in with the rest of the skyline
.free·dom
1. The condition of being free of restraints.
...
9.A right or the power to engage in certain actions without control or interference
This, we do not have. The only definition for license that I found that remotely corresponds to your definition is â??excessive freedomâ??, (I think it was the last definition too) but we will get in arguments all day defining that first word. To me, I correlate excessive with creating victims. I have no problem denying someone certain freedoms that create victims: murder, rape, etc. But I have always have had a problem with these victimless crimes. If someone smokes a joint at home, where is the victim? If two consenting adults think it would be fun to put this thingy there, where it the victim? If two gay guys, want to get married, again, where is the victim? Perhaps with the windows being down, I may have gone overboard
You can delude yourself all you want, but certain groups, deny freedoms from other groups, simply because they think its ichey. "License" may very well also be denied, but so is freedom.
1. The condition of being free of restraints.
...
9.A right or the power to engage in certain actions without control or interference
This, we do not have. The only definition for license that I found that remotely corresponds to your definition is â??excessive freedomâ??, (I think it was the last definition too) but we will get in arguments all day defining that first word. To me, I correlate excessive with creating victims. I have no problem denying someone certain freedoms that create victims: murder, rape, etc. But I have always have had a problem with these victimless crimes. If someone smokes a joint at home, where is the victim? If two consenting adults think it would be fun to put this thingy there, where it the victim? If two gay guys, want to get married, again, where is the victim? Perhaps with the windows being down, I may have gone overboard
You can delude yourself all you want, but certain groups, deny freedoms from other groups, simply because they think its ichey. "License" may very well also be denied, but so is freedom.
That was the definition I was referring to. My post was actually a reference to a discussion in a high school theology class about two years ago. (It's amazing what you remember .) Obviously, you have your views, and I have mine, but I don't want to clutter this thread with a drawn-out discussion. Suffice it to say that the United States has a great deal more freedom, by any definition, than many other countries in our world. I'm also glad that the World Trade Center is finally being rebuilt, as I see it as a sign of renewal and healing.
.) Obviously, you have your views, and I have mine, but I don't want to clutter this thread with a drawn-out discussion. Suffice it to say that the United States has a great deal more freedom, by any definition, than many other countries in our world. I'm also glad that the World Trade Center is finally being rebuilt, as I see it as a sign of renewal and healing.
Hey you guys are lucky in that you won't have to face this monstrosity every day. It's an ugly, vile injustice to the city's appearance and skyline. It's a contorted glass-and-steel behemoth that looks poised to collapse in a violent torrent of shattering glitz and glamour. It is totally out of place in New York. If I were to ascend to the top of this putrid translucent scrapheap I would vomit not from vertigo but from the nausea induced by the steaming pile of crap upon which I would be standing.
And don't even mention the name. :puke:
And don't even mention the name. :puke:
