I'm an ANTZ, you're an ANTZ, kiss me!

[Kim B.]

That said too many people are buying into this whole "politically correct" business and are getting their panties in a twist every time they hear something they don't like. They label it "hate speech" or some sort of "ism". Last time I checked, most of us live in a country that guarantees freedom of speech, NOT the freedom to never be offended. Both are mutually exclusive. We can only have one or the other. As for me I choose to keep the freedom of speech. If that means some people will occasionally get offended by someone exercising that right then they need to put on their big boy underwear and deal with it.

***********

**********

It seems like too many people are getting bogged down in these type of reactions whenever someone opposes their viewpoint. It just clouds the issue at hand and does nothing to further their viewpoint. Labeling an opposing viewpoint as politically incorrect, or as you said, hate speech or some such is merely a smokescreen to cover the fact that they can't or won't defend their view with an intelligent succinct reply.

 

[DC2]

When I think about it, there is no one alive or know personally that I really hate. Suppose I have just lived long enough to structure my life that way.

May I recommend Stanton Glantz?

 

[Jay-dub]

I too, prefer not to be manipulated by the demonization and a stoked hatred for the opposition. I know first hand that it leads to no where. I'd have figured that lesson would have been learned by dealing with different viewpoints within our own community.

 

[DC2]

I too, prefer not to be manipulated by the demonization and a stoked hatred for the opposition. I know first hand that it leads to no where. I'd have figured that lesson would have been learned by dealing with different viewpoints within our own community.

Well, if you can't hate Stanton Glantz, I suspect you will never hate anyone.
As for me, I hate him so much that if I were him I wouldn't want to ever run across me anywhere.

I figure I'd pretty much have to be Jesus to not hate that piece of garbage.

I would add Ellen Hahn and Matt Myers to that list as well.
If someone deserves to be hated, I'm glad to step up and do it.

 

[Johnny Popular]

An old band I was in recorded a demo with a guy who did some of the audio engineering on the movie Antz. Other than that I don't know any real ANTZ, or even ants. Save for the fire ants in my backyard.

 

[Jay-dub]

Well, if you can't hate Stanton Glantz, I suspect you will never hate anyone.
As for me, I hate him so much that if I were him I wouldn't want to ever run across me anywhere.

I figure I'd pretty much have to be Jesus to not hate that piece of garbage.

I would add Ellen Hahn and Matt Myers to that list as well.
If someone deserves to be hated, I'm glad to step up and do it.

For me there's also the fact that there's just too many people to hate for too many reasons. Plus, I'm more motivated by anger than hate. But, neither of them are good for your health. I'm hoping blood-pressure levels cause the truly "exuberant" to... well... uh... get distracted by the issues that such high-blood pressure causes. Is that evil?

 

[Mutescream]

For me there's also the fact that there's just too many people to hate for too many reasons. Plus, I'm more motivated by anger than hate. But, neither of them are good for your health. I'm hoping blood-pressure levels cause the truly "exuberant" to... well... uh... get distracted by the issues that such high-blood pressure causes. Is that evil?

If only it were possible to drive those that seem to get off on interfering on the lives on others into an equivalence to a biological thermal runaway... But, it never seems to work out like that. The psychologically malicious seem to almost be immortal.

 

[kristin]

I have a bit of a problem with this example and synthesis. The part that makes the ANTZ in this example is not the first part, but that there is no second part. Elimination of the use of tobacco is the basis for many harm reduction approaches. This in no way supports the ANTZ agenda, or perhaps more to the point it doesn't matter how it relates to the ANTZ agenda, because they will have that agenda no matter whether we oppose what they say or have our own nuanced ideas.

Elimination of the use of tobacco is not a basis for harm reduction, it is a basis for prohibition and abstinence. Elimination of smoking tobacco is a basis for tobacco use harm reduction. "Harm reduction" is the lowering of risks of a behavior, not the elimination of the behavior. It's the insistence upon abstinence and their "end game" of the elimination of all tobacco use that has created the upside-down world we live in, where tobacco control professionals want to hide (at least) and preferably eliminate all safer tobacco options, in order to achieve their goal. That is akin to banning seat belts and airbags to eliminate traffic injuries and deaths, because then people will drive more carefully. "Harm reduction" is having seat belts and airbags to reduce risks of injury and death, not stopping people from driving altogether.