|
Originally Posted by Bart
The question is: where do you draw the line between creativity and intent to commit a criminal act? I don't see it as a separate issue; I see it as part of the same issue.
Actually Bart, I'm impressed you're advancing this particular viewpoint. How quick we can be to stereotype others. I also respect all of the viewpoints argued in this thread, even if "at the end of the day" I don't agree with all of them. What would be scary would be if nobody were arguing about it at all! Cheers, Fredd |
Originally Posted by Scandalous
I'm thinkin' you are way out on a limb on this one but maybe I'm just old fashioned and never really got overly sexually excited by descriptions of terrorist acts. Since I'm a little slow on these modern sexual issues and you are much more sexually progressive than me please explain to me which sex act "9/11/05 BE READY TO DIE" describes.
Plus, even if it is, as you say, merely lyrics glorifying sexually brutalizing women, not glorifying terrorist acts, shouldn't singing about sexually brutalizing women be in some way contradictory to working as a TSA screener? I'm curious about how you think....... say a white supremacist, skinhead was singing songs about murdering Jews and n#%$#@%, but only on his off time, and he was a model employee while he was on the clock? Would this person be an appropriate candidate for a TSA screener? Would he be more appropriate for the job if his references to murdering Jews and n#%$#@% were purely sexual in nature and not actually about really murdering them? My thinking is, this is America, anyone ought to be able to say anything they want. But if they express opinions completely opposite to what is alleged to be an important security job (even if in reality TSA does little for security) these opinions should be taken into account. If the TSA had its act together, a neo-Nazi on the job would pose no greater threat than a non-neo-Nazi on the job; and any one acting out on racist/religionist prejudices would face corrective action, up to and including termination, regardless of their non-criminalized affiliations (specifically those outside the office). |
Originally Posted by GUWonder
Weak but useful analogy for trying to illicit a visceral reaction of rightful repulsion. If a teacher-historian was writing a book about a Roman emperor's childhood and that included mentions of child sex would you suggest that said author be tossed out of school if it was not an advocacy of such repulsive acts?
I love playing reducto ad absurdum games too! :p |
Originally Posted by Fredd
To fall into the cunning trap of responding to your terrific analogy, oh absolutely would I toss her or him on her or his toga, and I'd confiscate the grapes in his/her desk while I was at it! :D
I love playing reducto ad absurdum games too! :p |
Originally Posted by Fredd
If the individual was fired summarily without "due process," one can rightly complain that he was denied it. If the individual was fired after "due process," one can argue that the decision was incorrect. That's what I meant by two separate issues.
Actually Bart, I'm impressed you're advancing this particular viewpoint. How quick we can be to stereotype others. I also respect all of the viewpoints argued in this thread, even if "at the end of the day" I don't agree with all of them. What would be scary would be if nobody were arguing about it at all! Cheers, Fredd Thanks for your comments and insights. Still, I'm curious about your view of where the line should be drawn between creative art and speech that communicates intent...or should it be drawn at all? |
scarey times when TSA is looked to as a measuring stick for anything. on my way to 99
|
as a us citizen and frquent international travel i actually have fear to put my thoughts on TSA and the 'job' they do in a place they may have access to!!
|
Originally Posted by Dovster
Undoubtedly "9/11/05 BE READY TO DIE" is merely a new way of expressing "69".
Originally Posted by GUWonder
collapse from orgasm?
:rolleyes: |
Originally Posted by cAAl
I see. So when Osama bin Laden gave the green light for September 11, he really was just trying to get Mohammed Atta and Co. laid?
:rolleyes: |
Originally Posted by GUWonder
9/11/05 not 9/11/01. Context.
|
Originally Posted by Dovster
Exactly. 9/11/01 is a reference to history. 9/11/05 is a threat.
|
Originally Posted by GUWonder
9/11/05 not 9/11/01. Context.
What about blowing up the Tube in London? Would that also be secret rap code for copulation? |
Originally Posted by cAAl
I see. So the notion of flying airplanes into buildings in 2001 was something to be taken literally, but circa 2005, it is just a giant sex metaphor? :confused:
What about blowing up the Tube in London? Would that also be secret rap code for copulation? |
Originally Posted by cAAl
I see. So the notion of flying airplanes into buildings in 2001 was something to be taken literally, but circa 2005, it is just a giant sex metaphor? :confused:
What about blowing up the Tube in London? Would that also be secret rap code for copulation? It should be obvious that "blowing up the Tube" refers to a Swedish vacuum pump such as found in Austin Powers' bag in the first movie in that series. :D So such a reference would be related to copulation. Remember, everything in rap refers to sex, unless it also refers to killing. :rolleyes: Or maybe the lyrics about capping asses with 9s (mm pistols) allude to gay sex. I am not a rap connoisseur, so perhaps I am mistaken... |
Wait, aren't the TSA screeners at-will employees? If so, the TSA can fire him for no reason at all...
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:46 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.