Hey, I have had religious slurs hurled against me!!!

Hey, I have had religious slurs hurled against me!!!

And I've been accused (on more than one occasion) of being a Christian !

One thing that I find very interesting is how upset people who support the Palestinians (not necessarily bonobo) get over these "hateful" political tracts that I post from Israelis who feel these people - self-hating Jews - are hurting their country.

You publicly declare that you support Israel, and I see no harm in that.

But; I found it very amusing funny that you -yourself- denounce the others' right to support whom they like.

I support Palestinians, and I believe strongly that am not committing a crime ,or do I?

The whole problem with the theme of this thread is that it uses an ad hominem attack - ie, 'new Jew-haters' - rather than discussing the points for and against Israel, Israeli policy, and so on.

Whenver somes offers up an ad hominem premise to justify their views it simply invites more ad hominem, with everyone ignoring the essential issues.

Put another way, whether you are Jewish, a Jew-hater, a Jew-lover, or none of the foregoing, shouldn't matter. What matters is your argument for or against Israel's policy on X, Y or Z. Each of us has a right to our own opinion about Jews, or Christians or Buddhists or whatever label or people we're talking about. No one can deny our right to love or hate someone or something. However if you can't make a cogent argument using facts it doesn't matter what your orientation is. Conversely if your reasoning is sound, it doesn't matter how you feel about Jews, etc. If you have to use 'Jewish hate' or 'left-wing' as your basic premise, you are in fact resorting to propaganda yourself.

An ad hominem fallacy consists of asserting that an argument is wrong and/or the source is wrong to argue at all purely because of something discreditable/not-authoritative about the source or those sources cited by it rather than addressing the soundness of the argument itself. The implication is that the source's argument and/or ability to argue correctly lacks authority. Merely insulting a source in the middle of otherwise rational discourse does not necessarily constitute an ad hominem fallacy (though it is not usually regarded as acceptable). It must be clear that the purpose of the characterization is to discredit the source offering the argument, and, specifically, to invite others to discount its arguments.

--Wikipedia

Since everyone on the "other" side is being allowed to continue to give me advice, I would like to thank the other posters who have PMed me saying that you were outraged at the way this thread has been handled and agreeing that I will be thrown off if I continue to disagree with the status quo - no matter how careful I am about my language. I agree with you that you will be punished if you express your feelings on the forum, but thanks for the thought.

I would love to reprint your messages of support (with no names), but I am pretty sure that that will get me bounced, if this post doesn't.

"Rules" are funny things.

I was on the school debating team, we were given a subject and then told if we were for or against it, and then they dropped the flags.

One great lesson I learned from that experience is that you are not always right and other peoples opinions may be righter than yours....... it's probably the best lesson I have ever learned.

That is touching. I bet all of the umpires were not on the other team threatening to ban you from the debate if you questioned any of their rather unusual calls.

Your many pms of support I'm sure give you great comfort But don't assume for one minute that you would be suspended IF you are able to continue this discussion in a civilized & polite manner. I have already pointed out the rules that applied to this & your other thread but I'm sure it is easier for you to hide behind your (false) misconception that he rules are somehow being applied differently to you instead of looking at yourself & your postings instead

Hey, I have had religious slurs hurled against me!!!

Jeez.

I didn't know tigers were religious.

If this isn't a hymn what is?

Tigers are mean

Tigers are fierce

Tigers have teeth

And claws that pierce.

Tigers are great

They can't be beat

If I was a tiger

That would be neat!

Tigers are nimble

And light on their toes

My REspect for tigers

Continually grows.

Tigers are perfect

The e-pit-o-me

Of good looks and grace

And quiet dignity!

Tigers are great

They're the toast of town

Life's always better

When a tiger's around!

Calvin

I think Tiggs will have that embroided into his doormat, Scea

Hey, I have had religious slurs hurled against me!!!

And I've been accused (on more than one occasion) of being a Christian !

Not by me you haven't!!!

Hey, I have had religious slurs hurled against me!!!

Jeez.

I didn't know tigers were religious.

Hey FS, how the he11 are you, nice to have you back.

Oh yeah, Tigers are believers.

^^Scea, what a nice poem/hymn.

^mr bj, that would be on huge doormat...

If this isn't a hymn what is?

Tigers are mean

Tigers are fierce

Tigers have teeth

And claws that pierce.

Tigers are great

They can't be beat

If I was a tiger

That would be neat!

Tigers are nimble

And light on their toes

My REspect for tigers

Continually grows.

Tigers are perfect

The e-pit-o-me

Of good looks and grace

And quiet dignity!

Tigers are great

They're the toast of town

Life's always better

When a tiger's around!

Calvin

It was a sad day for me when Calvin and Hobbs were retired!

Hey, I have had religious slurs hurled against me!!!

Jeez.

I didn't know tigers were religious.

Yo old friend, just in time to watch the Ireland stuff the French!!!

Moss

I'm afraid that since UG has ignored my specific warning not to continue agitating against the moderators, this thread is being closed (it has also been way off-topic for some time now, assuming (as Sabaijai points out) there ever was a reasonable topic.