Rest In Peace Mr. Heston.

[Chris_Xavier]

He also speaks against the gay pride movement.

So? Who made you the purveyor of morals? Who's to say he's right and you're wrong or vice versa. Whether you liked him or not, CH believed what he believed and didn't back down.

 

[HB1965]

Bull. Your comment to Fi was: "You immediately chose to see me as some bad disrespectful person because you admired this person."

Choose what you want to believe which you already have

At this point, after following your remarks on this thread, I'd say that I dislike your penchant for inventing motives for other people's posts, and also your tendency to whine about allegedly being unfairly treated when disagreed with, as well as your apparent refusal to acknowledge even the slightest value or legitimacy in any portion of an opponent's point of view.

The entirety of "you", however, I neither like nor dislike. The entirety of "you", I simply do not know.

Whine...I see. I don't invent motives. I interpret what is given to me, and what I saw was you once again finding a reason to disagree with me. If you want I'll pull up the threads for the other occasions.

I also believe that I have acknowlegded in this thread that other people have a point of view. I see the point of other people here. I do however feel that I had to defend my position. I have great respect for several here that have made their point.

 

[intothewoods]

Everyone's views on this issue are deeply personal, and equally valid. What I write here is not intended to rebut or diminish the views of others; I am simply presenting my own.

I completely agree with this, and was doing the same.

If I were Charlton Heston, I would appreciate a healthy and heated debate on these issues, even while I was sequestered with Alzheimer's, or in the wake of my ultimate demise. Not with family or close friends present, of course, but in American society overall.

If we stop discussing his words and behavior, we give Death and Disease a power they should not have. If we let them throw a black shroud over his life's work, silencing him as well as us in the process, then they've really and truly won.

I don't think there's anything wrong with a "healthy and heated debate." And I certainly wouldn't stop discussing a person aftey they die. It's the cracking a joke part (a joke that's a slam on the guy) that makes me squidgy.

 

[HB1965]

So? Who made you the purveyor of morals? Who's to say he's right and you're wrong or vice versa. Whether you liked him or not, CH believed what he believed and didn't back down.

CX, this about me disagreeing with his morals. I believe we have already established that I have a right to do this just as everyone here has a right to his/her opinion. I appaud him because he did stand up for his beliefs and remained firm.

People I am going on with Etoile here. I've had enough. If I had a dead horse emoticon I would get it out.


Everyone is welcome to their opinion. I'm sorry if I have caused offense to others.

Have a great day.

 

[00Syd]

Differing opinions on death and what death means is in no way showing disrespect or intolerance for anyone, its just a differing opinion on the importance of death.

Desert Rose, I'm sorry you are going through what you are going through, and I don't want to get into any arguments about anything, because I don't see this as an issue worth getting angry over.

Everyone sees death differently, everyone deals with death differently. I dealt with my bubbies death by recognizing that she has moved on from life, an unfair life, and thats all. I don't think I would have been able to deal with her death if I viewed it differently.

Opinions on death are very personal for every person, and if we all get offended by each others ways of dealing with it, we would probably all be constantly offended.

I do have a cavalier view of death, I know I do, and thats because, well, its going to happen. Period. Its going to happen, and its tragic for remaining family and friends, but its going to happen and nothing that I see as worth worrying about. death for me is not sacred, its death. Its natural.

 

[Chris_Xavier]

But the 2nd amendments right to bear arms was originally intended for a time when there was a very real risk that the populace would have to rise up and overthrow a tyrannical government.

For the people, by the people, based on the French Revolution and its resulting government. (I like history, what can I say)

But if anyone tried to claim that our government was infringing our right and we had the right to overthrow them now they would be thrown in jail. So having a gun isn't really helpful there, and since thats why a right to bear arms was originally thought necessary...

I have always believed/thought/was taught that the 2nd Amendment was to allow for the raising and maintenance of state militias (and not these whacko survivalist groups that are waiting for the Apocalypse). Back when the Constitution was framed the threat of Indian attacks was a very real one, especially on the frontier - everything west of the Appalachian Mountains. These militias were to help deter and if necessary repel these attacks. The federal government at that time had no income except for what was raised in levies on imported goods and the US Army was but a few scattered companies.

Today the 2nd Amendment has been expanded to include the right of an individual owning a gun simply because it was necessary that as this country expanded its borders the homesteaders felt they needed the guns to ward of those same said Indians as we invaded their homeland (revisionist history at work here).

(00syd I'm just engaging in healthy debate, not trying to imply you are wrong in what you said).

The NRA calls for the responsible use of firearms and though this may sound cliche, guns don't kill people, people do. If it weren't a gun, it would be a knife, pick ax, shovel, 2x4, kitchen knife or some other instrument perverted into a weapon of death.

 

[Chris_Xavier]

I do have a cavalier view of death, I know I do, and thats because, well, its going to happen. Period. Its going to happen, and its tragic for remaining family and friends, but its going to happen and nothing that I see as worth worrying about. death for me is not sacred, its death. Its natural.

I was once like you.. had the Peter Pan complex. Now I find that the older I get, the more I fear death. Having said that, I know quite a few older people who aren't afraid of it. Just all on how we view life.

"Life is but a dream"

 

[00Syd]

I have always believed/thought/was taught that the 2nd Amendment was to allow for the raising and maintenance of state militias (and not these whacko survivalist groups that are waiting for the Apocalypse). Back when the Constitution was framed the threat of Indian attacks was a very real one, especially on the frontier - everything west of the Appalachian Mountains. These militias were to help deter and if necessary repel these attacks. The federal government at that time had no income except for what was raised in levies on imported goods and the US Army was but a few scattered companies.

Today the 2nd Amendment has been expanded to include the right of an individual owning a gun simply because it was necessary that as this country expanded its borders the homesteaders felt they needed the guns to ward of those same said Indians as we invaded their homeland (revisionist history at work here).

(00syd I'm just engaging in healthy debate, not trying to imply you are wrong in what you said).

The NRA calls for the responsible use of firearms and though this may sound cliche, guns don't kill people, people do. If it weren't a gun, it would be a knife, pick ax, shovel, 2x4, kitchen knife or some other instrument perverted into a weapon of death.

Well, we were taught diferent things then, eh? Both of our reasons are antiquated, so, same point I guess.

And yes, people kill people, but guns make it so much easier.

 

[cherokee_dove]

The NRA calls for the responsible use of firearms and though this may sound cliche, guns don't kill people, people do. If it weren't a gun, it would be a knife, pick ax, shovel, 2x4, kitchen knife or some other instrument perverted into a weapon of death.

Thank You, Chris. The highlighted words are the difference between responsible and irresponsible people. And through out this whole thread, that quote has not once been brought up (except by You).

And side note to all reading this, we all have the right to our own opinions; and the right to voice them. But so did Charlton Heston.

And who knows, maybe one of his grandkids is into BDSM and does read these boards; you just never know if one of the family IS reading all this.

And yes, i agree with ADR and Fi; we all deal with death in our own ways; but has the world today become so full of hatred of others that we have to belittle someone who has passed on?

And i know that sounded like the church lady, but its food for thought.

And Etoile, thanks for that good laugh; it made me bust a gut laughing.

 

[callinectes]

He still should not have agreed to hold the convention in Denver. He was asked by the mayor not to come, and he and his organization did anyway.

Hmm, don't the business owners have some input on that? I am sure those that work in the tourism, rretail, estaurant, and hospitality industry were thrilled to have them there.

 

[Betticus]

Sometimes, when I'm subjected to (not you guys) crazy anti-gun nuts I find myself asking myself.. How the fuck did anyone throughout history ever die before the invention of the gun?

They make it sound like the world was some kind of peaceful wonderland full of beauty and love where butterflies and cats played together and hippies most fruity dreams all came true.

Yeah, Vlad the Impaler was just an amazing lover and Ming the Merciless was actually a childrens party clown who was gentle and humorous.



Really, it's not the gun that kills anyone. It's whoever caused the gun to discharge into the vital bits of the victim.

Saying that guns kill people is like saying that chewing gum kills babies.

 

[callinectes]

Bett, Cats kill babies, not chewing gum. Don't you know that?

 

[Etoile]

Bett, Cats kill babies, not chewing gum. Don't you know that?

http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2007/11/funny-pictures-snooze-eat-baby.jpg

 

[cherokee_dove]

http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2007/11/funny-pictures-snooze-eat-baby.jpg

LMAO

Don't know where you find the pics, but they work great.

 

[Betticus]

Damnit, it's always the cat that did it!

 

[Karen Kraft]

Yeah disrespect.

[snip]

I will not excuse him for his inappropriate behavior.

Which behavior was that -- expressing his political views without first checking with you, or being president of the Screen Actors Guild -- also without prior approval?

Or maybe it was the bad taste of participating in the Civil Rights March in 1963....

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Charlton_Heston_Civil_Rights_March_1963_2.jpg

 

[Karen Kraft]

It is an antiquated constitutional right [snip]

Shit! Someone forgot to send me the list of antiquated constitutional rights. Are there a lot of them? Do they get an asterisk, like Roger Maris?

http://www.euro-cig.com/gal_images/20060405110117.jpg

 

[00Syd]

Shit! Someone forgot to send me the list of antiquated constitutional rights. Are there a lot of them? Do they get an asterisk, like Roger Maris?

http://www.euro-cig.com/gal_images/20060405110117.jpg

They were written a hell of a while ago, and it makes sense that one of the ones thats not protecting a human, natural right would become outdated. Is it that unbelievable to think that the founding fathers weren't infallible?

 

[Etoile]

Which behavior was that -- expressing his political views without first checking with you, or being president of the Screen Actors Guild -- also without prior approval?

Or maybe it was the bad taste of participating in the Civil Rights March in 1963....

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Charlton_Heston_Civil_Rights_March_1963_2.jpg

Shit! Someone forgot to send me the list of antiquated constitutional rights. Are there a lot of them? Do they get an asterisk, like Roger Maris?

Dude, you're like, really late here.

 

[WriterDom]

They were written a hell of a while ago, and it makes sense that one of the ones thats not protecting a human, natural right would become outdated. Is it that unbelievable to think that the founding fathers weren't infallible?

I believe it is my human natural right to protect myself in my home by other means than calling the police to have them come pry my cell phone from my cold dead hand 15 minutes later. Or 25 minutes if they have just sat down in Dunkin Donuts'.

 

[Etoile]

I believe it is my human natural right to protect myself in my home by other means than calling the police to have them come pry my cell phone from my cold dead hand 15 minutes later. Or 25 minutes if they have just sat down in Dunkin Donuts'.

Human natural right is not the same as constitutional right, though - right?
*head spinning*

 

[intothewoods]

Human natural right is not the same as constitutional right, though - right?
*head spinning*

Oh lord. Are we really going down that road? Short answer? Nope, and "natural rights" hasn't been a very useful term for quite a long time now.

 

[Etoile]

Oh lord. Are we really going down that road? Short answer? Nope, and "natural rights" hasn't been a very useful term for quite a long time now.

I didn't mean to debate it - I just wanted to clarify. But yeah, I'm over this thread...need moar lolcats.

 

[Essene]

I didn't mean to debate it - I just wanted to clarify. But yeah, I'm over this thread...need moar lolcats.

Does this mean I can has cheezburger now?

 

[intothewoods]

I didn't mean to debate it - I just wanted to clarify. But yeah, I'm over this thread...need moar lolcats.

I heart your lolcats.