Hello All Religious Debaters! I hope you had a wonderful Mother's Day. First, let me explain who I am. I am the brother of someone who registered and posted on this BB recently. She told me a story about her experience here which I found hard to believe. Not because I doubted her word, my sister is the most honest person I know, but because I found it hard to believe that such a thing could happen in this day and age on the internet. Anyway, I came here to check out what she told me and found it to be true. I'd like to share her experience with you and get your feedback as it concerns issues of free speech and open-mindedness even in the face of differences of opinion. My sister tells me that after coming across this sight by chance and reviewing some of the recent posts, a few days ago, she decided to register and address some points of debate using the words of Jesus Christ. Right or wrong, in her humble opinion, she felt that God's word was lacking in this debate especially since He, through His Word delivered by Jesus Christ, had addressed current issues which were being discussed here in pure and simple truth a couple of centuries ago. She told me that, as tempting as it was to use her own words, she felt that noone could say it better than God. So, that is what she set out to do. To include what she considers to be the pure and simple truth of life into this debate. She told me that she posted only the Word of God, the words that Jesus Christ himself spoke while on this earth. From what I can see that IS all she did. Her posts were met with quite a bit of animosity. One person criticized the posts because they apparently could not comprehend the point or the relevancy of Christ's words. Another referred to her as "Themaniac" and called for all other posters to ignore her posts and not to respond. Such animosity, in and of itself, is not that surprising to me given the current values, mentality, mind-set, closed-mindedness, fear of the unknnown and whatever-have-you of the average human being. It is almost to be expected today in this power-hungry society in which we live. We're the shit, right? Hey, I've been there myself! In contrast, my sister happens to think that Jesus Christ is the poop and that he's given us all the answers. Right or wrong, I believe she's entitled to share the message with others, don't you? What came next is the thing that really boggles my mind... She was banned from posting on this BB. When she first told me this, I told her that maybe it was a misunderstanding and encouraged her to re-register if she felt it was important. Later, she told me that she did re-register, under a different but similar name. She then told me that she posted a couple of sentences under her new member name (in the words of Jesus Christ) in response to someone named Tony, but that when she came back to see if they responded, her post was deleted. Thinking that maybe the deletion was a mistake, she tried to post the response again and found out that her privileges had once again been taken away by an administrator or moderator on this board. Pretty scary stuff as far as I'm concerned. I'm mean, how would you like it if you happened to hold an anti-christ position and were not allowed to share your message with others because they didn't want to hear it? I look forward to hearing your responses. Sincerely, Brian [This message has been edited by Brian (edited May 14, 2000).]
Hello Brian and The Word, Welcome to the strange land of exosci, I don't say that flippantly either. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! I'm sorry to read that your sister felt victimised in her approach to this group here. There are a number of personalities in this place and I have mentioned to them before that it would be better to welcome new people rather than attack them for their differences. Sure if you disagree then tell them so, but there are ways and there are ways of going about this. With regards to the bar on her posts she actually e-mailed me and asked for some advice on this. I took the occurrence to be nothing more than a technical hitch and have experienced similar myself. It was interesting to note that another member e-mailed me and reported the same problems. I have had discussions with the administrator of this site in the past and he does not strike me as a person who would act in a way to discriminate against an individual. If you would like I will ask him for an explanation on your sisters behalf in the section used for asking these things. Getting back to the people here. Mostly they are non believers, (I know that sounds strange for a religious discussion) on the whole they are fairly normal Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! and sincere in what they think and believe. I come here to try to share with them what it is that I think the Lord needs them to hear, and what He wants to say to each of them personally. Its sometimes a tough place and hard questions are asked, not to mention hostile attitudes aroused. But at the end of the day most people are fairly nice to each other and either agree to disagree or ignore each other. Once again I would like to welcome Theword and thank her for her heart felt concern for the people of this place. Please tell her to preserver. Allcare Tony H2o To others in this place. Please do not insult or abuse anyone who is new to this place. Although we do not all share the same views I think it only fair that we welcome others and welcome the way they present what they have to say. (unless of course its crude, rude and vulgar).
Brian, I have taken the liberty of asking the system administrator to explain the situation. You will find my question to him under "Site Feedback" section. Dave's a nice guy and should come up with a plausible excuse.......whoops that should read answer Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Allcare Tony H2o [This message has been edited by Tony H2o (edited May 15, 2000).] [This message has been edited by Tony H2o (edited May 15, 2000).]
Brian: I am sorry to hear about your sister. I was one who tried to warn her that she wasn't furthering her cause unless it was to make people think she was nuts. I am a Christian myself with a background in psychology. She exhibited all the classic signs of one who is caught in religious delusion. If she has had counciling before I recommend that she return, if she hasn't I recommend that she get professional help. I get in funny moods myself and post weird things but it is all in jest. Your sister acted like a martyr when confronted with her behavior. The bulk of the people here acted no differently to her than any normal person would when confronted with her behavior. We have some odd posters but there is at least a thread of sanity in them and I am sorry to say that your sister gave us no clue that she was the slightest bit sane. Under the circumstances I would have done exactly what the administration did. Please have her get help if you love her. Yours Sincerely, Adlerian
Alderian, Thanks for your response. Let me get this straight, O.K.? She came on here and posted the Word of God in response to some debate points. Based on that, you made the following statement. "She exhibited all the classic signs of one who is caught in religious delusion." Just what are the classic signs that you are referring to? You go on to say that she "acted" like a martyr when confronted with her "behavior" - what behavior are you referring to? The posting of the Word of God? You deemed her to be insane because she posted the Word of God? Since you've offered some cheap, knee-jerk reactionary advice, let me offer some to you. Go back to school so that you might learn that your diagnostic methods are abnormally weak. You say that you get in "funny" moods yourself and post "weird" things in jest. I take it that you don't take the Word of God as seriously as some people and don't see a place for it in a religious debate? O.K. - you're entitled to your opinion but so am I, so is my sister and so is everyone else who participates here. You do know that all she posted were the Words of Jesus Christ, right? In your Christianity, you consider the Words of Jesus Christ to be weird? Has anyone else ever told you that you have a tendency to blow things out of proportion? Under the circumstances, if it were up to you, you would have banned her also. Well, given the truly outrageous satanic rantings of Dude and others who have been allowed to post here, the banning of the Word of God stinks of one-sided censorship, for sure. We all have our opinions and our unique way of expressing them, eh? Brian
zapper, I don't know who you think my sister is but I know you've got her confused with someone else, for sure. She is very respectful of others and does not use foul language. She registered just days ago as Theword and posted nothing but the Word of God. For this, she was banned. I hope you've got it straight now.
Brian-- I cannot comment to Theword's inability to communicate with the site. Otherwise, though, Theword's words spoke for themselves. However, I'm perfectly willing to repeat the experiment. At the next topic post which hints at something I don't like, I'll register under a different name and post exclusively snippets of odd philosophers, writers, and artists of history whose work comprises the essence of truth. I won't strive to be relevant. I won't answer anyone's inquiries directly, and if I acknowledge them at all, it will be with even more obscure and less relevant excerpts. Now, despite the fact that no real debate will get done in that topic, I will assert that I am wronged when people get irritated at my tactics. Frankly, I had just thought Theword had abandoned the board, finding few willing takers. So I can't speak about anyone being "banned." But, regarding the suggestion of reducing hostility at this board: You know, we've put each other through a whole lot of crap together, and I know that I for one am not going to have months of the same; for almost a year we've been acrimonious, getting more and more civil as time goes by: compare the huge "Evolution" thread against some of the short ones we engaged back near the turn of the year. I, for one, choose not to return to that mudslinging simply to accommodate a new person. (Don't get me wrong, I still find myself in the quagmire, but I'm not going to jump in just because someone wants to restart the "Is-not, Is-too" part of a discussion which we all know leads us nowhere). I personally had decided to cast my lot with the "ignore" group shortly after my last combative response to Theword. But at least one discussion has already been derailed by Theword's irrelevance. If I were to consider Tony's plea for civility, I'm left considering that irrelevance to be rude. --Tiassa Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! ------------------ We are unutterably alone, essentially, especially in the things most intimate and important to us. (Ranier Maria Rilke) [This message has been edited by tiassa (edited May 15, 2000).]
tiassa, Why is it that you cannot comment on the ban? There is no assertion of wrong-doing other than the ban itself. There was no intention on the part of Theword to be irrelevant even though you did not comprehend the relevancy (BTW - I've read some of your posts - IMHO "obscure" would apply in many cases - sometimes even outright "rudeness") and, sorry about what's happened here in the past but that is irrelevant in this case since there has been no mudslinging on the part of Theword. Given the above, it would not be much of a stretch to say that your comments are irrelevant to this topic at hand. Should I consider your comments to be rude? I look forward to the time when you might be able to comment on the ban. Thanks, Brian (edited to correct spelling) [This message has been edited by Brian (edited May 15, 2000).]
Brian-- It is not my place to comment on Theword's difficulties with the site because I do not own the site. I do not set the rules. You want my comment on the ban? I think it sucks, technically. But, frankly, I have no sympathy. These things take time to work out in any society, and, frankly, Theword was not conducive to the mission I've heard defended. It's quite fine if someone wants to go around spewing Biblical quotes for lack of anything better to say. Would you like a blow-by-blow? * Theword's first four points at this board were all quotes. This would be fine, except the basis of validity of those very quotes were, in part, at issue. If I say that two theories assert truth, we might as well stop the determination of truth because one person noticed that one theory asserts truth. * I might point to May 10, when Theword interrupted a cosmology discussion with Biblical passages about hypocrites. Unhappy with the response, Theword laments: "If I have spoken wrongly, testify to the wrong; but if I have spoken rightly, why do you strike me?" At this point, I defer to my May 11, 2:47 pm post. After that post, I hadn't heard from Theword again. But the damage is done; at least one thread is stopped cold. But I've offered my advice to Theword. She knows how to behave properly, I would assume. After all, she knows how to turn on a computer. As I advised before, I'm perfectly willing to carry out Theword's experiment. I will post excessive and irrelevant snippets, and then complain when people don't like what I have to say. In fact, I will ask them why they're attacking me so needlessly. And then I'll run to my family and ask for their help. I mean, come on. You can consider my comments as rude as you would like. However, instead of feeling sorry for your sister or yourself, you might want to take this moment to consider a simple premise: Since what we're arguing over at this forum, when our time isn't wasted by irrelevant sniveling, is often the basis of our faiths (it really does seem that many people here are quite familiar with basic Judeo-Christian assumptions), it seems quite ineffective to hold up articles of that faith (e.g.--The Bible) as evidence of the faith. In the case of Theword's first post in the A Matter of Trust post, relevance doesn't come simply because the word "trust" occurs in the passage. If Theword had been more genuine and less inclined to impulse, she might have bothered to address how that passage applies to matters of trust and faith. As it is, any relevance one might establish rhetorically between Theword's regurgitation of Biblical wisdom and the subject at hand merely begs the original question. What kills me even more is that I had to include secondary posts within the thread because I was disappointed with the posts from Frank and Pash (sorry, guys, that was my own fault for not expressing the question better Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! ). And then she bothers piping up with the verses. So I reassert my advice to Theword: "If you really can't see the counterproductivity of [her] conduct, that's not my problem." As a matter of fact, her disruptive conduct at this board is so much "not my problem" that I'm willing to say that it's something she'll have to take up with God, and if she closes her eyes, covers her ears, and pretends long enough ... she probably won't have to take it up at all until then. You might want to tell your Sis, then, that she ought to include what scant thoughts of her own she has confidence in. If you or she feels that people did not comprehend her relevancy, she ought to try debating methods more contemporary to A) this forum, and B) reality. thanx, Tiassa Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! ------------------ We are unutterably alone, essentially, especially in the things most intimate and important to us. (Ranier Maria Rilke)
Brian - This forum is 'Religious Debate', not 'Soapbox hour'. If your sister wants to post her ideas, comment on others, or (gasp) argue with somebody, fine. If she's just going to arrogantly put forth somebody elses ideas without analysis or relevency, it becomes rather annoying. As for the ban, I don't know if she's earned it quite yet, but she was well on her way by bothering a large group of users. She wasn't banned for her views, she was banned for the way in which she put them forth. If somebody came up to you on the street and started lecturing you about the glories of satan, or a god other than your own, and wouldn't actually debate it with you, would you let them go on until they were done, or tell them to shut up and stop bothering you? FyreStar
I post here a copy of reply to Dave W in site feedback. Dave W, Thanks for addressing the situation. I do however have a concern about the "troublesome user" ban. Could you please explain what constitutes "troublesome user". From what I saw the person refered to was simply trying to express herself in words that meant a great deal to her. She was trying to use excerpts that were relevant in the context of what was being discussed. Sure some may not have agreed with her methods and I also found it difficult in one discussion to discern exactly what was being said. Having said all that I am dissapointed that we as a whole group would rater show anamosity and hostility to an individual that may or may not be having trouble expressing themself, rather than that I would have expected that we try and draw that person in and get them to open up in a gentle way. Personally I think we have all missed a wonderful oportunity to be commpassionate to another individual, and as corny and lame as this may sound it saddens me greatly. It saddens me because I believed that most of the individuals in this place were above that kind of behaviour, I don't care if your a wiccan, witch, satanist, Christian, Jew, JW, SDA, WHATEVER! We are all prone to making mistakes in what we say here, we all express ourselves in unique ways, we are gloriously human and a very diverse group of personalities, and we all hope and expect to a degree that people will at least try to listen to what we are saying and try to go beyond the words and understand what we mean. So Dave W please do explain what constitutes a "troublesome user" as I expect that we should all be branded as such from time to time. I know this is your site and all Dave and that final say is yours, but i do not understand how these decisions are made. Did a number of people complain directly to you? quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this BB to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law. You agree not to post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you or by this BB. Although this BB does not and cannot review the messages posted and is not responsible for the content of any of these messages, we at this BB reserve the right to delete any message for any or no reason whatsoever. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Personally I did not see anything offensive or vulgar in what Theword posted. As I said above I know its your site and you have final say on posts, you even mention that you can delete posts for no reason whatsoever. Fair enough its your place, but I could see nothing regarding "troublesome user" and what constitutes one. Sorry to keep on about it Dave it just kinda sticks in my throat a bit. Honest regards and sincerity Tony H2o Honest regards and sincerity Tony H2o [This message has been edited by Tony H2o (edited May 15, 2000).]
ok, i dont think that she should be kicked off unless she jsut stared cursing at everyone and some other stuff, but everyone is entiled to his/her own oppinion. evan if they are less intellegent than i.(kinda hard to beileive that some people can accually stoop way down there huh) but thats all i gotta say.... ------------------ when christianity ruled the world, it was called the dark ages. -dexter (nimrod242 :aol sn)
tiassa, Thanks for your reply. First, so that it is not lost in the rest of your two lengthy responses worth of window dressing, I'd like to highlight your most relevant response to the question at hand: Thanks for addressing the issue. ******************************************** Next, I will take this opportunity to comment on some of the other stuff: I think you can do better than that. You seem to believe that it is your place to comment at length about drug laws which you did not set, right? Your sympathy was not asked for. Nor is it needed. But thanks for setting the record straight. It is impossible to work anything out when the mind is closed and the method of communication is non existent for one party. I can see how you feel that way since the message was lost on you. As I mentioned in my initial post, Theword believes that there is nothing that could be better said than the words of Jesus Christ. You do not believe this to be true. So, what we have is a difference of opinion to which you are both entitled. I really didn't need or want you to summarize a blow-by-blow since I had already checked out the exchanges for myself. But since you took the time to post your thoughts I did read it and I must say that your interpretation of what transpired lends great insight into your character. In turn, if you say that two theories assert truth, we might as well stop the determination of truth because you are not open to the possibility that there might only be one truth. Your perception of an "interruption" and your focus on the word "hypocrites" is quite telling on your part. Being somewhat familiar with the scripture, I understood the message and its relevance when I saw it in context of the discussion. If I might deal with it here: Just as cosmology is being discussed on this board, during the time of Jesus Christ, people posed similar cosmological questions to Him. The response that Theword posted was the response that Jesus Christ gave about such matters. In His response, He reproved those learned and intelligent men who were able to read indications about the processes and structure of the universe but who claimed not to be able to read indications of God's coming kingdom in the signs that Jesus offered through his life, deeds and teachings. Gee, I didn't see where Theword said that she was unhappy? What I did see was a similarity in the path that the discussion took here to the path that the discussion took between man and Jesus Christ when He was here. You see, the reaction to Jesus' words here was no different than the reaction that man had to His words when He was here on earth. He pointed out to those who criticized or made fun of His words that they did so without truly making an effort to listen and to understand the truth which He spoke. Some lashed out from ignorance then and some lash out from ignorance now. Damage? And whose decision was it to stop that thread and continue it in another? Wow, Theword must be a pretty powerful person if she was able to make you do something against your will through cyberspace! Come on, tiassa, you can do better than that. Excessive? I know you don't make the rules but, please, enlighten us if you can as to the excessiveness threshold on this board. I point you to the multiple lengthy posts in the Drug-War thread which include excessively lengthy quotes (IMHO - excessively lengthy relative to those posted by Theword). Would those in the Drug-War thread qualify as excessive? You know, I'm inclined to post some scripture here about seeing a splinter in someone else's eye while having a log in your own but I'll refrain for the moment. As for the relevancy of Theword's posts, well, I've already addressed that above. That's a nice piece of fiction there, tiassa. As I explained in my initial post which I would have hoped that you took the time to read and understand before making snide remarks (I see a pattern emerging), for the record, my sister told me about what happened here. Period. She did not ask for my help. I found what she told me to be almost unbelievable so I came here to check this sight out of my own volition. That's another nice piece of fiction, tiassa, and I see another pattern developing. Let me say the only people I feel sorry for right now are those here who leaped and continue to leap to wild assumptions and conclusions about others in a state of almost perfect ignorance. What that has to do with the issue of the ban is beyond me - Theword was sharing what Jesus Christ had to say in response to certain issues under discussion - if you don't believe in Jesus Christ, find His words to be invalid and are hell-bent on keeping it that way, then skip it. Uh, sounds like you might be taking things a little too personally. I see that you spend much time on this board - probably a significant part of your life. Perhaps you are becoming possessive? Maybe you should give it a rest for a while. There was much more relevance to the passage than merely the word "trust" - at this point if you are so inclined, rather than having it come from me, I suggest that you re-read it to see if you can come up with something better. Really tiassa, "counterproductivity" and "disruptive behavior"? Forgive me but "Thou dost protesteth too much" - It's evident throughout your response here that you DO have a problem - specifically with the Word of God. On the other hand, my sister believes that noone can address certain issues better than Jesus Christ did. So, what we are left with is a difference of opinion. Big deal. As for your final complaint about relevancy, well, I think I've spoken enough for now about the relevancy of the quotes. Thanks again, Brian [This message has been edited by Brian (edited May 16, 2000).]
Brian-- You can do better, I think. Let me try to explain it to you. As a cyber-citizen I do not own this private-property website, the discussion forums of which are provided for us for free. On the other hand, as an American system, I do own the laws. As to my position to object to them, they do not reflect my views, and they do not reflect what I feel are the central principles of A) our Declaration of Independence, and B) our Constitution. How's this for a cheapshot? Perhaps you should consider that I might possibly be familiar with the Book which Theword allows to speak for her. You might also consider that I have dismissed its practice as useless, namely because of its practicioners, but that is truly another debate, indeed. And then you should consider the possibility that maybe, just maybe, if there really is one truth, yours might not be it. It's a challenging perspective to live with; the biggest problem I can see to it is that people generally assume that if you admit that your own truth is not entirely definite, you apparently need to adopt theirs. That, too, is a separate issue. Would you mind please telling me what hypocrisy has to do with cosmology? Please? None of Theword's posts offered much for commentary, context, or perspective. That leaves me to assume what ... that I'm reading it the same as she? In that case, I have a firm argument for irrelevance. I don't take your meaning. You see, if a thread gets too far off its central theme, nobody ever gets back to it. Theword bombards the post with drivel and nobody's interested. In political circles, it's called filibuster. In commercial circles, it's soon to be legally called terrorism, if Congress gets its way. Here at Exosci, it's simply annoying and counterproductive. How simple could this be ... perhaps they're on topic? Not just plagiarisms? Personal commentary that offers a perspective? I'll say it gently: If you care to advise my psychological condition, please do me two favors first: 1) Become qualified. 2) Shoot yourself. Ordinarily I would let a pathetic shot like that go, except that I'm wondering if you expect to win any sense of respect from anyone at this forum with your hostility? I protesteth too much? Try this: Get Bent! Two points here: I do have a problem with simpleminded religious viewpoints that refuse to account for the fact that people might read the same sentence differently; I will remind you again that Theword had ample opportunity to make any contextual clarifications she needed, and any failure to derive her references specifically is her own damn fault. Secondly, and I will say this very simply: You brought it up! It seems the good doctor should give due consideration to his own remedies. Oh, and one more thing ... It seems to me that you're buying into one of the cheapest assumptions I've ever gotten sick of hearing from the Christian rank. Really, it does more legitimate considerations of Christ's message injustice. Truth be told, I'm utterly prepared for my studies to show that Christ is The Way. Or the teachings of the Koran, or of Buddha, or the Triune Goddess, or just a formless blob of proto-matter. Unless I'm horribly misinterpreting you, there seems evident some sentiment that indicates that You, sir, are not prepared for the possibility that Christ is merely A Way, much less the idea that Christ has nothing to do with The Way. Oh, and as to what that has to do with the ban? That, ultimately, is left to Dave, but since you seem to want a guess or something, I would say that repeated postings of subjective material bearing dubious relevance to the topic at hand can, under certain circumstances, constitute the appearance of harassment. As I said, I could whip out my own little library of truths and confound many a thread with sundry, barely-relevant (at best) "Truths". Believe me, I could make that experience even more obnoxious. But of all the hideous time that I spend here, of which you seem to disapprove, I'm generally smarter than to waste that time polluting other peoples' ideas with such petty distractions. --Tiassa Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! ------------------ We are unutterably alone, essentially, especially in the things most intimate and important to us. (Ranier Maria Rilke)
I think that this Word of God thing might very well be catalogged under 'spamming'. I perceived it as some kind of prophetic rantings that actually made no sense at all. If somebody wants to say something on this board they are of course welcome to do so as long as it is relevant one way or an other. Just quoting something, be it the bible or Nietzsche is fine as long as there is some commentary along with it. Otherwise it is just taking away space from other posters on the server. ------------------ I err, therefore I exist !
Plato, Love your new sig! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! ------------------ I am; therefore I think.
Boris, I'll explain the change sometime in the determinism/indeterminism thread... ------------------ I err, therefore I exist !
I jumped in kind of late here, but this thread got me to thinking. I haven't seen Lori around. Have I just been not reading the right threads? She's very intelligent when she isn't getting ticked off. Regarding use of this site as a soapbox, as mentioned several posts ago, that's exactly how I view the Friday Night Sermon, but I don't want to see it taken off the site. I just choose not to read it. (Sorry, ISDAMan Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!) If TheWord posted something that we don't agree with, and if there is nobody with a civil, intelligent rebuttal, we aren't obligated to read any more posts by this person. By the same token, if there is a civil, intelligent rebuttal but TheWord comes back with rudeness and/or stupidity, we are not obligated to get the last word in. Just walk away. I've done that with posts that, IMO, amounted to arguing with a brick wall. If the poster cannot take having his or her ideas challenged, even attacked, they need to decide if the concept of Free Speech is really for them. We won't like everything we hear, but that's life. Yes, it will piss us off from time to time, but this isn't the Land of the Care Bears, the sun isn't always shining, and people don't agree on everything, but I think we've all figured that out by now. (If you haven't, I want whatever you're smoking! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!) If we violate the TOA of the site, then I support banning, as these were terms we all agreed on before registering. If we didn't read the TOA, too bad. The best way, however, to avoid being banned is to remember that on the other end of your connection is a living, breathing human being. Post as though you were talking to them in a restaurant or on a park bench. The anonymity of the internet is not a license to be rude (good gravy! I'm sounding like Miss Manners!). To paraphrase something that was said about the rise to power of the Nazis in the '30s, "The Internet has given us a free hand so that we may see what manner of men we are." ------------------ I may not agree with what you have to say, but I will fight, kill, and die for your right to say it.
