LDotter Note on Why No Schiavo Threads

Lucianne.com ^ | LComStaff

[AmericanMade1776]

Comments on the Schiavo story have now become repetitive, argumentative and increasingly ugly. Posters are losing their privileges for attacking and spamming. We feel we are serving our readers by posting articles but not allowing threads for comment. By doing this we save our members from themselves and preserve their ability to post.If subject is introduced on threads that are not about the Sciavo story they will be deleted.

[atomicpossum]

Read the threads on the Schiavvo subject and you will see there is no open discussion unless everyone agrees that Terri should have the feeding tube re-inserted.

You voice your opinion, they voice theirs. That's freedom of speech. You may be insulted by others, even abused, but you aren't being silenced. It's rough voicing an opinion, especially one that other people may be strongly opposed to. I understand that you may be insulted, but that's one of the costs of freedom.

On other issues, FR may have much more a unanimity of opinion-- it appears this is one with major rifts. It should be expected that it would be a blast furnace to stick your face into.

[Steel Wolf]

When Hillary is POTUS in 2008 it won't be because of the "lynch mob mentality" you describe.

It will be because the GOP has demonstrated that they are not worth the support we have been giving them.

Great plan! Rather than increase our representation, and hence our influence over the government, why don't we just go sulk instead! That way, instead of occasionally losing battles, we'll constantly lose them!

Yeah! That'll show 'em!

[G.Mason]

I'm afraid I will have to pass on that one.

Ancient vocabulary usages are not in the small arsenal of weaponry I use to fend off creatures of the nether world.

I will, however, keep a lookout for "ilk" while hoping it doesn't spread. ;)

[cajungirl]

We agree.

A war is not won by making every battle the battle that is the only one that matters.

[NoControllingLegalAuthority]

I don't believe forbidding people to write "for their own good" is in the spirit of American liberty. It is what is referred to as "prior restraint" and assumes we cannot be allowed to take responsibility for our words or actions lest we do the wrong thing.

It reminds me of "The Village" movie wherein the line "those about whom we do not speak" kept coming up. It is the same kind of nonsense. There was a lot of speaking about the unspeakable in the movie.

People can post articles speaking about the unspeakable but it's going to be wrong for the average person to speak about the unspeakable...'for their own good.'

[Balding_Eagle]

I've gotten flamed for posting Schiavo threads where, by posting an article, I'm prsesumed to endorse the content and share the authors opinion.

I wish they would add a 'reply to posted article' button. Many times I've blasted the poster, simply because there isn't any easy way to direct the blast to the articles writer.

[McGavin999]

Happy Easter, he is risen.

I think more of your ire should be directed at the democrats and the 8 or so republicans who refused to act in the Florida legislature. After all, they are the one who make the law as established by the Constitution. The executive in charge by the Constitution to UPHOLD that law.

[cajungirl]

"prior restraint" is a long, time honored weapon in the mommy arsenal as in "if you bring that up one more time, you will not go to the movies" . Or "if you ever say that or anything like that, I will wash your mouth out with soap". Actually prior thought restraint is also used with impunity by mothers,,,"Dont even think about doing that"

Mothers are ignoring the law, in droves.

[null and void]

Both of these have serious repercussions. This reminds me of the McCain-Feingold debate. When I stepped up and said the GW Bush was not living up to his Constitutional duty you all called me (and many others) all kinds of names, told us we didn't belong in the party and that it was a brilliant political move. Then you said we were stupid because the Supreme Court would fix it.

So what happened? Oh yeah, we were right and you were WRONG.

Sort of like this time, except now someone is being murdered.

Soon we will have 'death courts', modeled on our traffic courts.

Same mind set:

You're here, therefore you must be guilty [dead].

Cops [doctors/heirs/'experts'] never lie.
Bye bye...

[MWS]

In fact, that is how wars are lost - throwing all of one's forces into battles that, while important, are not vital to winning the war itself.

Don't let the overly emotional people get to you. This has been difficult on a lot of people who have gotten themselves very emotionally involved in this matter. Not to say that it is bad that they got emotionally involved in a case like this one - it's hard not to. It's just that when the situation does not go the way one truly believes that it should have, it hurts and feels personal.

Don't let them get to you.

[elhombrelibre]

I agree with you about www.luciane.com. I visit the site, but you don't get much discussion there. It's often got some good catches posted, so it's worth going to. But you come back here if you want to talk about the subject. And no, Buckhead would not have succeeded there. The site is too priggish. Probably he'd have been pulled for being too esoteric or not pithy enough.

[G.Mason]

Oh ... excuse me. I was petting my dog

You were saying?

[null and void]

I wish they would add a 'reply to posted article' button. Many times I've blasted the poster, simply because there isn't any easy way to direct the blast to the articles writer.

Hmmmmm...

[elhombrelibre]

I don't believe Trixie is Jewish, though I suspect that's a joke. I believe her husband is. I'm sure I saw that once in one of Jonah's columns.

[cajungirl]

It is not the emotional part that gets to me, it is the effort to intimidate. If one doesn't do what the poster is enhorting one to do, if one doesn't share the very same opinion, not only is that person, me, bullied, intimidated, demonized, but accused of being part of a people who want to kill and are on the side of the devil.

And sometimes it feels like a mob is forming and you have to be part of the mob or you are gonna be demonized even more.

I know people are upset about this, I am. But forcing a kind of group think is scary to me. During a revolt, I am unlikely to follow a leader unless I am of the same mind. I think there is alot of difference in thought even when we all agree this woman should not be where she is now.

[SamAdams76]

By doing this we save our members from themselves and preserve their ability to post.

So let me get this straight...Lucianne.com is preventing their members from posting in order to preserve their ability to post.

Well....OK, then.

[G.Mason]

"I wish they would add a 'reply to posted article' button. Many times I've blasted the poster, simply because there isn't any easy way to direct the blast to the articles writer."

Perhaps I am missing your point, but is it possible to single out the author of the original article, thereby referencing your "blast" to them?

I'm certain the most lame amongst us will understand to whom you are directing the "blast".

[null and void]

Try posting to this new screen name: "The Author of the Article"

[elhombrelibre]

I believe the phrase "eating their own" comes from Carlye's history of the French Revolution. Once the radicals started killing other radicals they were said to be "eating their own." I believe it's the title of one of the chapters in the book. I also remember the great communicator using the phrase but I've forgotten the context.

[cajungirl]

yep, she won't let them talk to each other, only to her. For some reason this amuses me because it reminds me of a mother trying to keep the peace.

Gotta go make breakfast. Eng muffin with real butter, orange marmalade, a huge glass of OJ and some Cafe Au Lait.

Back later, this thread is sane I do believe.