Character education

[Beet]

"Sir" or "Madam" is certainly not necessary. However, any half-decent student would use "Mr.," "Mrs.," or "Miss."

I agree, though it still shouldn't be required.

Wow, we have some wing nuts on this board.

Who are you calling  a wing nut?

[Beet]

"Sir" or "Madam" is certainly not necessary. However, any half-decent student would use "Mr.," "Mrs.," or "Miss."

I agree, though it still shouldn't be required.

So kids should be allowed to address their teachers by first names without their permission? This is the moral decay of this nation right here.

How is that an issue of morality? Respect, maybe, but morals?

Some teachers do not mind being called by a nickname relating to your first name. As with anyone, the polite thing is to call them as they want to be addressed. But not doing so is bad form, not a display of "moral decay of this nation" or some crap like that.

Alcon, this is a guy who loves mowing down 300 innocent civilians in a hail of machine gun fire. His need to throw around the word "moral" once in a while is only a knee-jerk part of identifying with the right. I wouldn't take it too seriously.

[Beet]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Except what you say about me is false, what I say about you is true. You have not denied it. If you want my views on abortion consult my debate with Brambila over this.

[Beet]

Hah, yeah supporting allies is consistent with wanting to do what the leader of that country does. Okay, Nice work there

If you support him in power, then you have to face the consequences of that support. Period.

[Beet]

Was FDR wrong to embrace the Soviets during World War II?

Would FDR have have put a picture of Stalin up prominently on his wall? If Jake wants to support a U.S. ally, how about Tony Blair? How about Howard? How about Koizumi? Why choose Karimov?

[Beet]

Um, Jake has a picture of Karimov on his wall?

Obviously they didn't have message boards in 1944, and even if they did, FDR probably wouldn't be on one. If you can think of a better parallel to profile picture I would like to hear it.

[Beet]

Um, Jake has a picture of Karimov on his wall?

Obviously they didn't have message boards in 1944, and even if they did, FDR probably wouldn't be on one. If you can think of a better parallel to profile picture I would like to hear it.

I have signatures turned off, so I didn't know what you were talking about.

Nevermind then. Didn't mean to hijack the topic. Suffice it to say I don't understand why people nitpick at tiny little things which are barely about (or arent' really about) 'morality' and act all indignant when they willfully disregard the gargantuan moral issues affecting the world.

[Beet]

Um, Jake has a picture of Karimov on his wall?

Obviously they didn't have message boards in 1944, and even if they did, FDR probably wouldn't be on one. If you can think of a better parallel to profile picture I would like to hear it.

I have signatures turned off, so I didn't know what you were talking about.

Nevermind then. Didn't mean to hijack the topic. Suffice it to say I don't understand why people nitpick at tiny little things which are barely about (or arent' really about) 'morality' and act all indignant when they willfully disregard the gargantuan moral issues affecting the world.

Because respect for your elders is the foundation of a polite society.

That doesn't really answer the question.

[Beet]

Hah, yeah supporting allies is consistent with wanting to do what the leader of that country does. Okay, Nice work there

If you support him in power, then you have to face the consequences of that support. Period.

So having a picture of him in my signature means I support what he does. Okay, by the same token, you showing a Democratic avatar means you support all of their policies.

Avatars are a part of the site, duh. Karimov is a little-known third world dictator whose picture you prominently started displaying right around the time of the Andijan massacre. Figure it out.

[Beet]

And what exactly differentiates the two? Both show support for something by displaying it here. Obviously, you support the platform of the Democratic Party to the letter, just like you alledge that I support all of President Karimov's policies.

Do I really have to spell it out? I have the Democratic avatar here because it's a feature of the message board to tell people which party I identify with. Just because I identify with a party doesn't mean I agree with all their positions.

On the other hand, you picked Karimov's picture out of an infinite number of possible choices, he's a little-known dictator with a very low profile who most Americans don't have a clue about. The one time he made it on the news here in America was because of the Uzbek democracy movement and the Andijan massacre. It was exactly around that time you started posting his picture up. I can see no possible reasonable expectation of what one should expect from your actions other than the assumptions I made. Now you have had a gazillion posts to clarify your position, and I would welcome it if you did.

[Beet]

Hah, yeah supporting allies is consistent with wanting to do what the leader of that country does. Okay, Nice work there

If you support him in power, then you have to face the consequences of that support. Period.

So having a picture of him in my signature means I support what he does. Okay, by the same token, you showing a Democratic avatar means you support all of their policies.

Avatars are a part of the site, duh. Karimov is a little-known third world dictator whose picture you prominently started displaying right around the time of the Andijan massacre. Figure it out.

Were these protestors Muslim extremists?

Don't think so. Not that there aren't muslim extremists in almost any country including Uzbekistan, but in this case I believe they were just ordinary protestors. Anyways, Hamas is generally considered extremist yet they have been welcomed to participate in elections.

[Beet]

Manners are all a matter of context. No single formula works (nor should it) in every situation.