Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Carnage
I guess the question could be more like, "How far do we go to try and not offend anybody?"
It's not realistic to think that nobody will be offended to anything we do. There are people out there who will have relatives that were killed in the Atlanta fire of 1917 - the namesake of the Atlanta Flames which became the Calgary Flames. If they find having a team named after than event offensive, are we now obligated to change our team name?
There is intelligence, and there is just trying to please everybody - something that isn't achievable anyways.
In this specific case, if the number in that poll holds with a larger sample size, I think it is worth considering that some people are making mountains out of what should be a mole-hill.
Just my thoughts though...  |
I guess if "they" ever become a protected group? I think there's an obvious distinction between a minority group that was historically treated like they were and the group you mention.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814
You would think homelessness would be at the centre of every election campaign based on how much both the left and the right bring it up when the other side's perceived stupid issues are at play.
Yet it never is.
|
The homeless were badly treated here during the Super Bowl. But not enough *really* care, which is sad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RyZ
It seems more like a small, fringe group of people here are trying to decide matters for everybody and the number clearly isn't very large. 9-10% of a population simply is not a large enough number to "upset the apple cart".
|
I guess this was my original point - to me 10% is still a large group of people that care, certainly enough that I think *I* should consider their opinion on this.