So again, I ask you, why do you insist on choosing to be inflammatory while it is so much easier to choose not to? If you choose to opt out of having that inflammatory inscription, the memorial wouldn't be any less important, nor would it be any less effective. Furthermore, it wouldn't instigate. I see very little value in what you are arguing for.
No, you were arguing that omitting certain phrases such as "Murdered by Muslim Terrorists" would be hiding the truth. Your inconsistency lies in your explanation that you were able to infer all of those things mention when you were talking about the Vietnam Veteran's Memorial.There are lots of words and phrases that have multiple meanings and each one is applied to the context that it belongs to. For example "Gay". It has two different meanings. That is what I did. How I apply each one is consistant.
You were very inconsistent.
Now if you respond with "Well I didn't say that omitting that phrase would be hiding the truth", then I gotta ask you, why are you so adamant about including the phrase in the inscription?
The problem is that it will offend, regardless of whether you think it should. And also the my point about fueling the extremists.It may not matter to you. It does to the father. Try looking at it from his point of view. Since it is about his son I think that we should respect his wishes. Since either phrase is the truth and it should not offend anyone but the terrorists what is the problem?
I don't mind going round and round in the discussion. What I'm really interested in actually is how you came to your position. If there's one thing you should know about me, it's that I'm only interested in conversation. I don't really come here to debate (on occasion I do, but for the most part), I come here to see how people work, how they think.Ugh. I can see this whole arguement going round and round and round. How about we just agree to disagree on this?