T1B

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/305 ... ban03.html

I'm hoping these stupid fucks come to their senses quickly!

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Why don't the just stop keeping score so they have no reason to boo?




fucksticks........

Diego in Seattle wrote:http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/305 ... ban03.html

I'm hoping these stupid fucks come to their senses quickly!

OK, I'll play. How the fuck is this idiocy "liberalism"?

liberalism= "feel-good" egalitarianism ??

or tell us why it is not ??

Wolfman wrote:liberalism= "feel-good" egalitarianism ??

Lemme see, on one hand we have your definition. Which is an essentially useless pile of steaming shit spewed forth from the bowels of El Rushbo's overly relaxed sphincter. On the other hand, I have Webster's definition.

Merriam-Webster wrote:Liberalism= a political philosophy based on belief in progress, the essential goodness of the human race, and the autonomy of the individual and standing for the protection of political and civil liberties

How about we go with the dictionary folks and just pretend you never posted? Sound good?

I thought so.

Alright, now back to Diego's original premise of "Liberals Gone Wild". You've seen the definition of liberalism. Now tell me how the fuck this jibes with this prohibition on booing.

Mace wrote:...the banning of reading newspapers during the introduction of the opponents

Are you kidding me?

Now that's messed up. So what are they going to do stop it? Search everyone before they enter the gym and confiscate a harmless newspaper? Eject any and all persons observed doing it?

Please explain to me how this rather humorous show of disdain for the team that's not yours is offensive in any manner whatsoever.

That's some girlie men you have up there in Ioway as school admins, Mace.

I kind of lean on the liberal side of things but this is too much. I'm all about people having the freedom to say what they want. Booing and the European equivalent, whistling, have been common practices at games for I don't know how long. Because one person or a small group of people might be offended, we have to change the rules or laws to make them feel comfortable at the expense of the rest of us.

I wouldn't call it "liberalism" per se, but I can see how folks would associate the notion of banning statements that hurt people's feelings with liberalism. It falls into the well-supported stereotype of some liberal individuals pushing heavily for feel-good, self-esteem, let's-not-hurt-any-group's-feelings goofiness, like the idiocy of banning "hate speech" on college campuses, which was pushed by liberal college administrators.

There's got to be a happy middle ground between banning booing/foam fingers and having irate parents, players, and fans assaulting people....

OK---
I give--the situation is not due to the "liberals"
it is due to the feel good egalitarians !!

or will I have to wait for Rush Limbaugh to tell me
how to think ??

ahh--- remembering what the word "gay" meant for centuries !!

Mike, no middle ground is needed.

Booing, finger waving, paper reading, chanting, etc .... -- ok
Assaulting people -- not ok

What am I missing ... ?



RACK Mace.



If all else fails, why not execute all infants at birth so that nobody has to experience what a downer life is.

poptart wrote:Mike, no middle ground is needed.

Booing, finger waving, paper reading, chanting, etc .... -- ok
Assaulting people -- not ok

What am I missing ... ?

Maybe the fact that booing and chanting have been known to escalate into fights? Especially in venues where low ticket prices mean an NBA level of security is not present. You know, like in my neck of the woods just this past weekend.

http://www.rnews.com/TopStory_2004.cfm? ... ry_type=18

And before you blame this on our "permissive" society or some other knee jerk response, I suggest you take a good long look at the history of sport in this, and other countries. I'm pretty sure banning booing isn't the ticket, but Mike is right to understand that there is a middle ground that needs to be found between the legitimate interest of free speech in support of ones favorite team and the legitimate interest of the school to protect it's students from violence and abuse.

What 'middle ground' do you propose, Bri' .... ?

maybe allow booing in the first half
of a basketball or football game or for
first 4 1/2 innings of baseball ??
Hockey might pose a problem with 3 periods
--perhaps allow booing for the first two periods
on odd days and only the first period on even days ??
I'm sure some liberal--- ooops----
feel good egalitarian will come up with a proper
middle-ground !!

poptart wrote:What 'middle ground' do you propose, Bri' .... ?

I'm not proposing anything specific. I'm simply pointing out that Mike was correct. Like any other educational issue, real solutions need to come from the parents, students and teachers affected, not from people 3000 miles away from the games being played.

One possible solution:

Play the games in front of closed circuit TV cameras at a neutral site and allow no spectators on the premises. Show the game on large screen TVs at both schools, without any fans from the other school present. Then each group of fans can do whatever they want without offending anybody from the other side.

Yeah. That should work.

Some schools, including those in the South Puget Sound League, prohibit students from painting their faces.



"I agreed to no more face painting, not no more painting."


Sin,

Nothing that a good population thinning plague wont cure.Too many do-gooders.

BSmack wrote:

poptart wrote:Mike, no middle ground is needed.

Booing, finger waving, paper reading, chanting, etc .... -- ok
Assaulting people -- not ok

What am I missing ... ?

Maybe the fact that booing and chanting have been known to escalate into fights? Especially in venues where low ticket prices mean an NBA level of security is not present. You know, like in my neck of the woods just this past weekend.

http://www.rnews.com/TopStory_2004.cfm? ... ry_type=18

And before you blame this on our "permissive" society or some other knee jerk response, I suggest you take a good long look at the history of sport in this, and other countries. I'm pretty sure banning booing isn't the ticket, but Mike is right to understand that there is a middle ground that needs to be found between the legitimate interest of free speech in support of ones favorite team and the legitimate interest of the school to protect it's students from violence and abuse.

And yet when I ask you to tell us specifically what middle ground you propose, you say you have nothing specific to suggest.

That leaves us with two possible conclusions.

1. You're too stupid to know what the 'middle ground' should be.

2. There IS no middle ground.


Either way you should have just kept your hole shut, you hand-wringing asswipe.

I'm thinking that physical violence between fans, between fans and players, between fans and officiating crews, and between players and officiating crews is a no-no.

Violence between players depends on the sport. In hockey, it should be mandated.

I'd also like to see it in golf, bowling, and fishing.

You guys talking about politics?