I found Dan's title obvious, though I admit if it had been... or I thought it had been... what you believed it to mean, I guess it would be tacky.
But offensive? That's a little much given the nature of RR and his family.
And I think you missed the point of the challenges being made to your post.
For all those saying how we have to remain silent out of respect for the grieving family of those that have died, where does that line of respect end?
Do we ALL have to be silent for a week when Saddam Hussein dies? Even if just out of respect for his family? If not, why not?
Does or Doesn't his murder of many citizens (his own and others) make him less worthy of respect? Well Reagan helped him do it, encouraged him to do it, in order to control Iran and radical Islamic insurgents in the region. It seems that as much as you'd be for criticizing Hussein you should be for criticizing Reagan.
Some may debate RR's full role with respect to Hussein, but that is besides the point, if it is a person's opinion that he had a full role, why shouldn't that person be able to criticize the man once he dies... or celebrate his death as I suspect many will when Hussein dies, with NO RESPECT for the family.
Shall we all mourn the passing of those who have beaten gays to death, if not just remaining silent out of respect for their families?
Hmmmmm. Well how about those who vocally blamed gays for their own deaths, just because they were gay, without a care for their grieving families? Doesn't it seem just a bit hypocritical if such a person or his family asked for such consideration when they granted none?
Well that is RR and his family. They did not show mercy or consideration for the victims of AIDs. At first RR blamed gays and blocked funding in research, dooming many people (straight and gay) to an early death.
And once he became "concerned", he was more concerned that the US be considered the discoverer of the cause of AIDs, and actively hindered French research, which doomed many more to an early death.
Ironically, many died under the same conditions that RR would come to suffer... dementia and pneumonia. For all those looking for a just God or Gods, perhaps that was a billboard. If he had not blocked research in to care for gays and then AIDs patients, perhaps they would have had more info to keep him alive longer (at least the pneumonia part).
And you have claimed some sort of affinity with the suffering of that family because you have alzheimers in your family. First, have you known no one with HIV?
Second, don't you find RR's family less appealing (at least Nancy) when she only began backing stem cell research (ie turned traitor) when RR became ill. Gee maybe if in the 80's he had gotten HIV, or more fitting their son, perhaps we would have had them praising AIDs research and gays instead of bashing gays and dooming the HIV infected to a torturous death.
I don't think RR or his family deserve any respectful silence, because they not only supported the deaths of countless numbers of people from war and disease, but they (and especially RR) gave no respect to thos dead or their families.
I think when Hussein dies I'll start a nice thread so that everyone can say how we have to be silent out of respect for him, and see how many feel that is justified.
And I'd just love to hear what all you respectful people have to say about Reagans support of Saddam Hussein, since we just had to lose over 700 of our own and kill 9000+ Iraqis, to remove him. What a monster and all those mass graves. How many were under Reagan? Whoops. Guess that wasn't "communicated" to the US properly at the time.
This message has been edited by holmes, 06-11-2004 07:51 AM
holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)
™ Version 4.2