independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Sat 22nd Jul 2017 9:55pm
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Politics & Religion > Imagine there's no flags
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 1 of 3 123>
Reply   New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Author

Tweet     Share

Message
Thread started 06/22/17 10:25am

7thday

avatar

Imagine there's no flags

John Lennon sang "Imagine there's no countries" which is a tall order, but not out of our reach, I think. We could start by having a worldwide day off from work where everyone burns their flags in huge bonfires and we all adopt one world flag with an astronaut's photograph from the moon of the earth with the Eastern continents on one side and the Western continents on the other side. Then we have a World Party every year to mark the day we all burned our flags.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #1 posted 06/22/17 10:39am

SuperFurryAnim
al

avatar

We already have Christmas.

I am a Real American!
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #2 posted 06/22/17 4:16pm

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

it was a foolish idea he would not have EVER subjected himself to. He was an anti-religious bigot too...

Gemini rising on the 7th day... 21,138
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #3 posted 06/22/17 4:44pm

Dasein

OnlyNDaUsa said:

it was a foolish idea he would not have EVER subjected himself to. He was an anti-religious bigot too...


Lennon's issues with organized religion are not unfounded; and, I don't know if it is fair to cast
him as an "anti-religious bigot."

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #4 posted 06/23/17 8:44am

2freaky4church
1

avatar

Only, get that brain looked at.

"2freaky is a complete stud." DJ
"2freaky is very down." 2Elijah.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #5 posted 06/23/17 1:48pm

7thday

avatar

OnlyNDaUsa said:

it was a foolish idea he would not have EVER subjected himself to. He was an anti-religious bigot too...

John Lennon was very familiar with the Bible according to most of his biographers. However, he was quite critical of it. He thought Jesus' disciples were a bunch of dummies for instance. And he hated Bob Dylan's song "Gotta Serve Somebody" so much he wrote a song called "Serve Yourself".

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #6 posted 06/23/17 6:50pm

TrivialPursuit

I burn a flag every 4th of July. So I'm in.

"Despite everything, no 1 can dictate who u r 2 other people." - Prince |
http://bit.ly/unboxingprince
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #7 posted 06/23/17 8:52pm

13cjk13

avatar

OnlyNDaUsa said:

it was a foolish idea he would not have EVER subjected himself to. He was an anti-religious bigot too...

Sounds like he was a good friend of yours. He obviously told you a lot about himself. cool.

Matthew 5:38-39
“You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #8 posted 06/24/17 2:37pm

DiminutiveRock
er

avatar

Dasein said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

it was a foolish idea he would not have EVER subjected himself to. He was an anti-religious bigot too...


Lennon's issues with organized religion are not unfounded; and, I don't know if it is fair to cast
him as an "anti-religious bigot."


He always manages to say the wrong thing.


trolls

"When you have people who don't know about science standing in denial of it and rising to power - that is a recipe for the complete dismantling of our informed democracy" - Neil de Grasse Tyson
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #9 posted 06/25/17 1:20pm

IanRG

DiminutiveRocker said:

Dasein said:


Lennon's issues with organized religion are not unfounded; and, I don't know if it is fair to cast
him as an "anti-religious bigot."


He always manages to say the wrong thing.


trolls

.

Or respond to obvious bait threads. Pro flag burning and wanting world government is only ever raised on the internet to upset those from the right.

.

This short thread demonstrates that nothing will be gained from working to get rid nations: You have had the representativies of the left use this to attack the right, the representative of the right to use it to attack a repesentive of the left, the anti-christian use it have a go at religion and then personal attacks on anyone who disagrees with the views of posters. In other words, they all stay in their groups and attack the other and not one of them is doing as representatives of a national group. People group and attack people - they do it based on many things and we wont stop just because the OP does not like how one group formed and sustains itself

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #10 posted 06/26/17 11:01am

Dasein

What in the world are you talking about, Ian?

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #11 posted 06/26/17 12:01pm

E319

I was gonna respond to the OP for what an idiotic idea that is but then I read Ian's response (he's right) and decided not to... sorta.

Black day, stormy night/No love, no hope in sight...
Don't cry, he is coming/Don't die, without knowing...
The Cross.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #12 posted 06/26/17 12:20pm

Dasein

I don't think the OP is idiotic at all; it certainly is quixotic but that's not the same.

Ian's post is odd because his premisses do not clearly justify his conclusion as I'm still confused
as to why he thinks this thread is a reason we ought not make any effort with uniting all of humanity
under one banner for the sake of peace, even to the detriment of nationality. I don't think it is fair
to cast 7thday's proposal as "pro flag burning . . . to upset those from the right" when 7thday gives
us the context for justifying the flag burning (eliminating arbitrary human categories that mostly
serve to separate us rather than unite us as there is nothing in my DNA which indicates I'm a US
citizen or that Ian is an Aussie).





[Edited 6/26/17 12:23pm]

[Edited 6/26/17 12:24pm]

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #13 posted 06/26/17 2:06pm

E319

Dasein said:

I don't think the OP is idiotic at all; it certainly is quixotic but that's not the same.

Ian's post is odd because his premisses do not clearly justify his conclusion as I'm still confused
as to why he thinks this thread is a reason we ought not make any effort with uniting all of humanity
under one banner for the sake of peace, even to the detriment of nationality. I don't think it is fair
to cast 7thday's proposal as "pro flag burning . . . to upset those from the right" when 7thday gives
us the context for justifying the flag burning (eliminating arbitrary human categories that mostly
serve to separate us rather than unite us as there is nothing in my DNA which indicates I'm a US
citizen or that Ian is an Aussie).





[Edited 6/26/17 12:23pm]

[Edited 6/26/17 12:24pm]


The thing is... This idea of uniting all humanity....Do you guys watch the news? There's only ONE that's gonna unite all of humanity. Until that day comes, we mere humans ain't gonna be able to do it. Don't you guys see all the differences and divisions that exist in our own cities and countries??? Now just expand that to the entire world. The thought is extremely unrealistic and naive and a pointless exercise that will only bring out further division and anger... The exact opposite effect the OP thinks it would.

[Edited 6/26/17 14:07pm]

Black day, stormy night/No love, no hope in sight...
Don't cry, he is coming/Don't die, without knowing...
The Cross.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #14 posted 06/26/17 2:46pm

IanRG

Dasein said:

What in the world are you talking about, Ian?

.

It is obvious.

.

The question is about getting rid of countries in stages starting with burning flags. This is a standard and well known bait because the OP is knows this will rile the right wing - and it did. The representative of the right wing took the bait. His response riled the left wing and the anti-Christian. Then it just devolved into attacks. The whole thread has only proved that we cannot live in peace even without any reference to countries.

.

The purpose of getting rid of countries in Imagine is:

.

Imagine there's no countries, It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for, And no religion too
Imagine all the people living life in peace

.

People form groups to attack other groups whether it is in the school yard, by race, by political preferences etc. etc. The thread's existence and responces proved you don't need nations to not live in peace.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #15 posted 06/26/17 3:02pm

IanRG

Dasein said:

Ian's post is odd because his premisses do not clearly justify his conclusion as I'm still confused
as to why he thinks this thread is a reason we ought not make any effort with uniting all of humanity
under one banner for the sake of peace, even to the detriment of nationality. I don't think it is fair
to cast 7thday's proposal as "pro flag burning . . . to upset those from the right" when 7thday gives
us the context for justifying the flag burning (eliminating arbitrary human categories that mostly
serve to separate us rather than unite us as there is nothing in my DNA which indicates I'm a US
citizen or that Ian is an Aussie).

.

As ever you leap to conclusions about what others have said without ever understanding what they have said. Ducci would be appalled.

.

It is simply not believable that you, as person who lives in the USA, does not know that people inspiring others to burn the flag is a red rag to a bull comment in the eyes of the US right. I say this as someone not from the US and not from the right.

.

This is a bait thread and not a case of requiring the "Don't feed the troll" emoticonn. It has nothing to do with DNA or uniting humanity - I can be unitied with all the people of the world who are against war without getting a single one of those people to get rid of their flag or even national, cultural or geographical identity.

.

My conclusion is justified by this thread - without reference to countries at all there is no peace in this thread because there are groups of left wing and groups of right wing and they fell in line with their political leanings and attacked each other - Just what this bait always leads to.

[Edited 6/26/17 15:06pm]

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #16 posted 06/26/17 3:14pm

IanRG

E319 said:

Dasein said:

I don't think the OP is idiotic at all; it certainly is quixotic but that's not the same.

Ian's post is odd because his premisses do not clearly justify his conclusion as I'm still confused
as to why he thinks this thread is a reason we ought not make any effort with uniting all of humanity
under one banner for the sake of peace, even to the detriment of nationality. I don't think it is fair
to cast 7thday's proposal as "pro flag burning . . . to upset those from the right" when 7thday gives
us the context for justifying the flag burning (eliminating arbitrary human categories that mostly
serve to separate us rather than unite us as there is nothing in my DNA which indicates I'm a US
citizen or that Ian is an Aussie).





[Edited 6/26/17 12:23pm]

[Edited 6/26/17 12:24pm]


The thing is... This idea of uniting all humanity....Do you guys watch the news? There's only ONE that's gonna unite all of humanity. Until that day comes, we mere humans ain't gonna be able to do it. Don't you guys see all the differences and divisions that exist in our own cities and countries??? Now just expand that to the entire world. The thought is extremely unrealistic and naive and a pointless exercise that will only bring out further division and anger... The exact opposite effect the OP thinks it would.

[Edited 6/26/17 14:07pm]

.

John Lennon's idea was not idiotic, it was naive. The OP's idea was not idiotic, it was a bait. I think the OP got the effect they wanted as the right riled and the left attacked.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #17 posted 06/26/17 3:26pm

Dasein

E319 said:

Dasein said:

I don't think the OP is idiotic at all; it certainly is quixotic but that's not the same.

Ian's post is odd because his premisses do not clearly justify his conclusion as I'm still confused
as to why he thinks this thread is a reason we ought not make any effort with uniting all of humanity
under one banner for the sake of peace, even to the detriment of nationality. I don't think it is fair
to cast 7thday's proposal as "pro flag burning . . . to upset those from the right" when 7thday gives
us the context for justifying the flag burning (eliminating arbitrary human categories that mostly
serve to separate us rather than unite us as there is nothing in my DNA which indicates I'm a US
citizen or that Ian is an Aussie).





[Edited 6/26/17 12:23pm]

[Edited 6/26/17 12:24pm]


The thing is... This idea of uniting all humanity....Do you guys watch the news? There's only ONE that's gonna unite all of humanity. Until that day comes, we mere humans ain't gonna be able to do it. Don't you guys see all the differences and divisions that exist in our own cities and countries??? Now just expand that to the entire world. The thought is extremely unrealistic and naive and a pointless exercise that will only bring out further division and anger... The exact opposite effect the OP thinks it would.

[Edited 6/26/17 14:07pm]


I'm not arguing against the quixotic nature of the post; I'm arguing against it being considered
"idiotic" and Ian's claim that this "short thread demonstrates that nothing will be gained from
working to get rid nations" as there is nothing in this thread that is a clear and necessary indi-
cation that working to obtain global peace, which I consider to be the OP's intention due to the
context of the Lennon song "Imagine," is futile or an attempt to bait people from the right.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #18 posted 06/26/17 3:27pm

2freaky4church
1

avatar

I smell Alt-Right on E319

"2freaky is a complete stud." DJ
"2freaky is very down." 2Elijah.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #19 posted 06/26/17 3:37pm

Dasein

IanRG said:

Dasein said:

What in the world are you talking about, Ian?

.

It is obvious.

.

The question is about getting rid of countries in stages starting with burning flags. This is a standard and well known bait because the OP is knows this will rile the right wing - and it did. The representative of the right wing took the bait. His response riled the left wing and the anti-Christian. Then it just devolved into attacks. The whole thread has only proved that we cannot live in peace even without any reference to countries.

.

The purpose of getting rid of countries in Imagine is:

.

Imagine there's no countries, It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for, And no religion too
Imagine all the people living life in peace

.

People form groups to attack other groups whether it is in the school yard, by race, by political preferences etc. etc. The thread's existence and responces proved you don't need nations to not live in peace.


How did the OP "rile the right wing"; what is an indication of that specifically? Where is the example
of this thread's "anti-Christian" view? Where are the attacks? How is this thread proof that we can-
not live in peace even without any reference to nationality?, for it does not necessarily follow that 7th-
day's thread creation where s/he suggested we unify humanity under one earthly nation and the
ensuing disagreement over her/his idea means it necessarily follows that humanity is then incapable
of living in peace without any reference to nationality. An ideological difference is often the prelude to
no peace, but it doesn't necessarily prove the incapability of peace's existence. For example: I dis-
agree with you ideologically, but we are not at war and there is not no peace between us.

I think you put the cart before the horse with your criticism. I will ignore your other posts as I believe
this reply is sufficient for anything else you've had to say so far.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #20 posted 06/26/17 3:39pm

IanRG

Dasein said:

I'm not arguing against the quixotic nature of the post; I'm arguing against it being considered
"idiotic" and Ian's claim that this "short thread demonstrates that nothing will be gained from
working to get rid nations" as there is nothing in this thread that is a clear and necessary indi-
cation that working to obtain global peace, which I consider to be the OP's intention due to the
context of the Lennon song "Imagine," is futile or an attempt to bait people from the right.

.

But the OP knowingly proposed a step that is well known by all as a red flag to a bull to the right. Clear bait.

.

You can have world peace two ways: we work together respecting and encouraging or differences or we work together by denying our differences. The first is hard, the second is not possible.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #21 posted 06/26/17 3:49pm

Dasein

IanRG said:

Dasein said:

I'm not arguing against the quixotic nature of the post; I'm arguing against it being considered
"idiotic" and Ian's claim that this "short thread demonstrates that nothing will be gained from
working to get rid nations" as there is nothing in this thread that is a clear and necessary indi-
cation that working to obtain global peace, which I consider to be the OP's intention due to the
context of the Lennon song "Imagine," is futile or an attempt to bait people from the right.

.

(1) But the OP knowingly proposed a step that is well known by all as a red flag to a bull to the right. Clear bait.

.

(2) You can have world peace two ways: we work together respecting and encouraging or differences or we work together by denying our differences. The first is hard, the second is not possible.


(1) What are you talking about? Just because there's smoke, doesn't mean there's a fire: you have
heard of fog, right? My point is just because something appears to be similar to something else does
not mean the thing is actually the something else. It could be "clear bait"; but, it could also quite
justifiably be "clearly not." You're making too much of an assumption based upon what is "well
known" and unfairly criticizing the OP.

(2) I reject your either/or presentation for there being world peace. Also, some could argue, with
some justification, that the idea of obtaining world peace via "work{ing} together respecting and
encouraging or {sic} differences" is just as quixotic as the OP.



[Edited 6/26/17 15:49pm]

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #22 posted 06/26/17 3:49pm

IanRG

Dasein said:

IanRG said:

.

People form groups to attack other groups whether it is in the school yard, by race, by political preferences etc. etc. The thread's existence and responces proved you don't need nations to not live in peace.


How did the OP "rile the right wing"; what is an indication of that specifically? Where is the example
of this thread's "anti-Christian" view? Where are the attacks? How is this thread proof that we can-
not live in peace even without any reference to nationality?, for it does not necessarily follow that 7th-
day's thread creation where s/he suggested we unify humanity under one earthly nation and the
ensuing disagreement over her/his idea means it necessarily follows that humanity is then incapable
of living in peace without any reference to nationality. An ideological difference is often the prelude to
no peace, but it doesn't necessarily prove the incapability of peace's existence. For example: I dis-
agree with you ideologically, but we are not at war and there is not no peace between us.

I think you put the cart before the horse with your criticism. I will ignore your other posts as I believe
this reply is sufficient for anything else you've had to say so far.

.

Oh please!

.

Burning the flag does not rile the right wing! You need a new flag for yourself with a completely different planet

.

You only joined the thread to make your anti-Christian point.

.

The attacks, try reading back: Bigot, get someone to look at your brain, don't feed the troll, the immediate taging of someone as being alt right or friend of bigots.

.

"Living life in peace" means more than not war: It includes not being subjected to the intolerances shown here by both sides.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #23 posted 06/26/17 3:54pm

IanRG

Dasein said:

IanRG said:

.

(1) But the OP knowingly proposed a step that is well known by all as a red flag to a bull to the right. Clear bait.

.

(2) You can have world peace two ways: we work together respecting and encouraging or differences or we work together by denying our differences. The first is hard, the second is not possible.


(1) What are you talking about? Just because there's smoke, doesn't mean there's a fire: you have
heard of fog, right? My point is just because something appears to be similar to something else does
not mean the thing is actually the something else. It could be "clear bait"; but, it could also quite
justifiably be "clearly not." You're making too much of an assumption based upon what is "well
known" and unfairly criticizing the OP.

(2) I reject your either/or presentation for there being world peace. Also, some could argue, with
some justification, that the idea of obtaining world peace via "work{ing} together respecting and
encouraging or {sic} differences" is just as quixotic as the OP.

.

You are convincing no one that asking people to burn the flag is said in pure innocence with no knowledge that this riles people.

.

Being quixotic is not a problem for me. I am quixotic in many of stuggles for social justice and fairness for the poor. However, I would NEVER seek to remove their identity as step to make their lives better.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #24 posted 06/26/17 3:59pm

Dasein

IanRG said:

Dasein said:


How did the OP "rile the right wing"; what is an indication of that specifically? Where is the example
of this thread's "anti-Christian" view? Where are the attacks? How is this thread proof that we can-
not live in peace even without any reference to nationality?, for it does not necessarily follow that 7th-
day's thread creation where s/he suggested we unify humanity under one earthly nation and the
ensuing disagreement over her/his idea means it necessarily follows that humanity is then incapable
of living in peace without any reference to nationality. An ideological difference is often the prelude to
no peace, but it doesn't necessarily prove the incapability of peace's existence. For example: I dis-
agree with you ideologically, but we are not at war and there is not no peace between us.

I think you put the cart before the horse with your criticism. I will ignore your other posts as I believe
this reply is sufficient for anything else you've had to say so far.

.

Oh please!

.

Burning the flag does not rile the right wing! You need a new flag for yourself with a completely different planet

.

You only joined the thread to make your anti-Christian point.

.

The attacks, try reading back: Bigot, get someone to look at your brain, don't feed the troll, the immediate taging of someone as being alt right or friend of bigots.

.

"Living life in peace" means more than not war: It includes not being subjected to the intolerances shown here by both sides.


I'm not arguing that the concept of burning the flag doesn't rile the right wing. I'm arguing against
you making it seem as if that was the intention of the OP.

I said nothing in this thread that was specifically negative about Christianity in and of itself. I merely
stated that Lennon's issues with organized religion are not unfounded: do you think organized religion
is wholly innocent when we survey the groaning of the world? Of course not!

The word "bigot" was not used against anybody in this thread, which counters your argument that
the thread in and of itself is proof that there can be no world peace regardless of reference to county;
Freaky suggesting that Only have his head examined was not uttered with ill-will - it was a joke; tag-
ing someone with a political identification does not mean this thread is an indication that the attempt
of global peace via one earthly nation is futile . . .

I think what you are really chafing at is the song "Imagine" which is critical of organized religion. But,
John Lennon said the following:


"If you can image a world at peace, with no denominations of religion -- not without religion but
without this my-God-is-bigger-than-your-God thing -- then it can be true."









— John Lennon

[Edited 6/26/17 16:07pm]

[Edited 6/26/17 16:08pm]

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #25 posted 06/26/17 4:04pm

Dasein

IanRG said:

Dasein said:


(1) What are you talking about? Just because there's smoke, doesn't mean there's a fire: you have
heard of fog, right? My point is just because something appears to be similar to something else does
not mean the thing is actually the something else. It could be "clear bait"; but, it could also quite
justifiably be "clearly not." You're making too much of an assumption based upon what is "well
known" and unfairly criticizing the OP.

(2) I reject your either/or presentation for there being world peace. Also, some could argue, with
some justification, that the idea of obtaining world peace via "work{ing} together respecting and
encouraging or {sic} differences" is just as quixotic as the OP.

.

You are convincing no one that asking people to burn the flag is said in pure innocence with no knowledge that this riles people.

.

Being quixotic is not a problem for me. I am quixotic in many of stuggles for social justice and fairness for the poor. However, I would NEVER seek to remove their identity as step to make their lives better.


Asking people to burn their country's flag whilst uttering:

"We could start by having a worldwide day off from work where everyone burns their flags in
huge bonfires and we all adopt one world flag with an astronaut's photograph from the moon of
the
earth with the Eastern continents on one side and the Western continents on the other side.
Then we have a World Party every year to mark the day we all burned our flags.
"

. . . and framing it as an attempt to mischievously rile people from the right is to practice poor reading
comprehension and a willful ignoring of context.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #26 posted 06/26/17 4:48pm

IanRG

Dasein said:

IanRG said:

.

Oh please!

.

Burning the flag does not rile the right wing! You need a new flag for yourself with a completely different planet

.

You only joined the thread to make your anti-Christian point.

.

The attacks, try reading back: Bigot, get someone to look at your brain, don't feed the troll, the immediate taging of someone as being alt right or friend of bigots.

.

"Living life in peace" means more than not war: It includes not being subjected to the intolerances shown here by both sides.


I'm not arguing that the concept of burning the flag doesn't rile the right wing. I'm arguing against
you making it seem as if that was the intention of the OP.

I said nothing in this thread that was specifically negative about Christianity in and of itself. I merely
stated that Lennon's issues with organized religion are not unfounded: do you think organized religion
is wholly innocent when we survey the groaning of the world? Of course not!

The word "bigot" was not used against anybody in this thread, which counters your argument that
the thread in and of itself is proof that there can be no world peace regardless of reference to county;
Freaky suggesting that Only have his head examined was not uttered with ill-will - it was a joke; tag-
ing someone with a political identification does not mean this thread is an indication that the attempt
of global peace via one earthly nation is futile . . .

I think what you are really chafing at is the song "Imagine" which is critical of organized religion. But,
John Lennon said the following:


"If you can image a world at peace, with no denominations of religion -- not without religion but
without this my-God-is-bigger-than-your-God thing -- then it can be true."

— John Lennon

.

As I said: You are convincing no one that asking people to burn the flag is done in pure innocence of how it riles people. Your attempt at framing my comment as "practic[ing] poor reading comprehension and a willful ignoring of context" fails when you look at what was said and apply it if, for example, the OP said "We could start by having a worldwide day off from work where everyone celebrates denying their racial heritage round huge bonfires on the lawns and we all adopt two racial identities - one for the eastern continents and one for the western continents. Then we have a World Party every year to mark the day we all denied our separate cultures".

.

That you term your anti Christian stance carefully does not change that you only came here to attack religion.

.

The word bigot is used to attack the idea. The use of this word lead to attacks against that person. The use of humour is that it should be humourous. "Get a brain" type comments are attacks not jokes - you know this in your profession. Do you really think Freaky does not think ill of Only's ideas? Of course not!

.

I quoted the words from Imagine about nations - He clearly states:

.

Imagine there's no countries, It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for, And no religion too
Imagine all the people living life in peace (emphasis added)

.

The word denomination is not in the song and you are quoting an interview in Playboy 9 years later where he stepped back from his original words (you probably sourced this from Wikipedia). It starts with "no heaven", so his softening is simply not believable as an original intent.

.

I am not chafing about your attacks on organised religion, I just pointed out that you used the thread to push your anti Christian agenda - and this was one of the examples in this thread of what prevents people from "living life in peace", not group, national, cultural or geographic identities. I am pointing out that a bait thread is a bait thread and asking people to burn the flag is a clear bait.

[Edited 6/26/17 17:06pm]

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #27 posted 06/26/17 5:42pm

Dasein

IanRG said:

Dasein said:

.

As I said: You are convincing no one that asking people to burn the flag is done in pure innocence of how it riles people. Your attempt at framing my comment as "practic[ing] poor reading comprehension and a willful ignoring of context" fails when you look at what was said and apply it if, for example, the OP said "We could start by having a worldwide day off from work where everyone celebrates denying their racial heritage round huge bonfires on the lawns and we all adopt two racial identities - one for the eastern continents and one for the western continents. Then we have a World Party every year to mark the day we all denied our separate cultures".

.

That you term your anti Christian stance carefully does not change that you only came here to attack religion.

.

The word bigot is used to attack the idea. The use of this word lead to attacks against that person. The use of humour is that it should be humourous. "Get a brain" type comments are attacks not jokes - you know this in your profession. Do you really think Freaky does not think ill of Only's ideas? Of course not!

.

I quoted the words from Imagine about nations - He clearly states:

.

Imagine there's no countries, It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for, And no religion too
Imagine all the people living life in peace (emphasis added)

.

The word denomination is not in the song and you are quoting an interview in Playboy 9 years later where he stepped back from his original words (probably sourced from Wikipedia). It starts with "no heaven", so his softening is simply not believable as an original intent.

.

I am not chafing about your attacks on organised religion, I just pointed out that you used the thread to push your anti Christian agenda - and this is an example of what prevents people from "living life in peace", not group, national, cultural or geographic identities. I am pointing out that a bait thread is a bait thread and asking people to burn the flag is a clear bait.

[Edited 6/26/17 16:51pm]


Hahahah!

There is nothing in the OP, presented as a reflection on Lennon's "Imagine," which itself is not con-
ceived by the listening public as anything other than a musing of eliminating human-made barriers
to global peace, which suggests s/he is purposefully making an overt attempt to antagonize the right;
you are importing your own sensitivities about being religious into the OP's intention.

There is nothing here that is specifically "anti-Christian"; you're putting words in my mouth and im-
porting my past criticisms of Christianity into this thread. You have no privileged access into what
motivates my responses - or anybodye else's, for that matter.

You must simply try harder; the old Ian would be most unhappy with these horseshit posts.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #28 posted 06/26/17 6:15pm

IanRG

Dasein said:

Hahahah!


There is nothing in the OP, presented as a reflection on Lennon's "Imagine," which itself is not con-
ceived by the listening public as anything other than a musing of eliminating human-made barriers
to global peace, which suggests s/he is purposefully making an overt attempt to antagonize the right;
you are importing your own sensitivities about being religious into the OP's intention.

There is nothing here that is specifically "anti-Christian"; you're putting words in my mouth and im-
porting my past criticisms of Christianity into this thread. You have no privileged access into what
motivates my responses - or anybodye else's, for that matter.

You must simply try harder; the old Ian would be most unhappy with these horseshit posts.

.

Nice try, nothing achieved. It is really childish to add the schoolyard "Ooh! but you are" style responce in your last sentence.

.

Nothing you have said here adds anything new to what has already been said. You know flag burning has strong symbolism and riles people (and it did). It is perfectly reasonable to assume that so does the OP. You know your opening comment here was, and I quote it in full:

.

"Lennon's issues with organized religion are not unfounded; and, I don't know if it is fair to cast him as an "anti-religious bigot."

.

Nothing about nations, nothing about human-made barriers, nothing about living life in peace, nothing but your agenda. You really need to reflect before you post.

.

You are convincing no one that asking people to burn the flag is done in pure innocence of how it riles people. In doing so you are missing that, other than responding to your specific statements, I have been discussing the topic - flag burning as a step to getting rid of nations - and my opinion that this will not lead to everyone living life in peace. This is clearly demonstrated by people attacking people in this thread and elsewhere in reality whenever it is done without reference to a national identity. The only way people will leave each other in peace is by respecting, encouraging and supporting all people's individual and group identities. This means being proud to be a whatever without prejuduce or violence whilst allowing all others to be proud of their identity and fully expecting no prejudice or violence back.

.

Please try to understand not all threads are just about your battle with religion.

[Edited 6/26/17 18:18pm]

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #29 posted 06/26/17 6:54pm

Dasein

Wait: so you can make dumb ass comments about what "Ducci" would do, but when I give it back
to you, I'm being childish? Fuck outta here, Ian . . .

The OP presents burning a nation's flag as a prelude to raising one flag unifying all of humanity, not
as a pretense to rile the right as you so stupidly suggest. And I've no battle with religion in this
thread (which is it with you - religion or Christianity? - pick one). I was mostly criticizing the depic-
tion of John Lennon as being an "anti-religious bigot" and criticizing the thread against being seen
as "idiotic" whilst showing that it is not a demonstration that people cannot live together in peace
without reference to nationality. Yet, this thread is a perfect demonstration that if you make any
type of anti-organized religious comment, Ian will get butt-hurt. Why? Because Ian happens to
participate in an organized religious practice where he is endowed by God with special powers in
discerning true motivation. Like I said: Fuck outta here, Ian . . .

Please try to understand that not all of my posts are just about your dumb-ass interpretations of
my supposed "battle with religion" especially since Only was the first one to mention religion in the
first place and the context of the song "Imagine" is one that is anti-organized religion anyways. To
continually frame my posts that are critical of religion as being "anti-Christian" is just fucking stupid.

Please try harder; the old Ian would chafe at these ridiculous posts where you are clearly grasping
for straws. And what do you do? Lurk until I make a peripheral comment about religion and then
spring to life?!?!

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 1 of 3 123>
Reply   New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Politics & Religion > Imagine there's no flags