[ExI] I'll Drink to That!

[Lee Corbin]

Oh!  I just figured out an answer to my own question!
How silly.

Just now I was

> asking those who *do* have it all figured out   just
> what they themselves would allow on their cups and
> what they would not [were they Starbucks]

It's simple!  What a dunce I've been!  Here is the principle:

       You permit any group or belief to be disparaged or
       ridiculed only so long as those offended are too civilized
       to retaliate barbarously.

So... let's see....   just what message do you think that 
*really* sends to, say, Christian fundamentalists?

Or sends to anyone who envies those who have immunity from
ridicule?

Lee


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Lee Corbin" <lcorbin at rawbw.com>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2007 2:18 PM
Subject: Re: [ExI] I'll Drink to That!


> Olga points out
> 
>> http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55627
> 
> and five or so posters chimed in with her saying how ridiculous
> the protests were.
> 
> Suddenly it became not-quite-so-clear  to me when I read
> the part of the article where a critic suggested
> 
> # "Paleeze! Isn't it funny how every thing is considered hate
> speech unless it's directed at the Christian God? Starbucks
> should try putting a derogatory remark about the Muslims
> [or] Allah and see what kind of response they get."
> 
> 
> Ahem---now *clearly* Starbucks can *never* go the Salman
> Rushdie route, and I could easily think of ten things---all of 
> them discussed here---that also could *never* go on a Starbucks
> Cup.
> 
> Oh, oh!   I better be very very very very clear about what I am
> saying.  I am *not* criticizing Starbucks at all!  And of course
> I am not calling for any kind of censorship.  What I am doing
> is calling attention to a facile double-standard, and asking those
> who *do* have it all figured out   just what they themselves
> would allow on their cups and what they would not.
> 
> Lee