RIP Stan Lee
- Thread starter UCFWayne
- Start date
If you haven't seen this, below is an editorial from Stan Lee in a 1968 edition of Stan's Soapbox in Marvel comics that followed the assassinations of JFK and MLK.
Stan Lee wrote:
Let's lay it right on the line. Bigotry and racism are among the deadliest social ills plaguing the world today. But, unlike a team of costumed super-villains, they can't be halted with a punch in the snoot, or a zap from a ray gun. The only way to destroy them is to expose them -- to reveal them for the insidious evils they really are. The bigot is an unreasoning hater - one who hates blindly, fanatically, indiscriminately. If his hang-up is black men, he hates ALL black men. If a redhead once offended him, he hates ALL redheads. If some foreigner beat him to a job, he's down on ALL foreigners. He hates people he's never seen - people he's never known - with equal intensity - with equal venom.
Now, we're not trying to say it's unreasonable for one human being to bug another. But although anyone has the right to dislike another individual, it's totally irrational, patently insane to condemn an entire race - to despise an entire nation - to vilify and entire religion. Sooner or later, we must learn to judge each other on our own merits. Sooner or later, if man is ever to be worthy of his destiny, we must fill our hearts with tolerance. For then, and only then, will we be truly worthy of the concept that man was created in the image of God - a God who calls us ALL - His children.
Pax et Justitia, Stan.
I can't imagine a more timely bit of wisdom -- and it was written in 1968.
Stan Lee wrote:
Let's lay it right on the line. Bigotry and racism are among the deadliest social ills plaguing the world today. But, unlike a team of costumed super-villains, they can't be halted with a punch in the snoot, or a zap from a ray gun. The only way to destroy them is to expose them -- to reveal them for the insidious evils they really are. The bigot is an unreasoning hater - one who hates blindly, fanatically, indiscriminately. If his hang-up is black men, he hates ALL black men. If a redhead once offended him, he hates ALL redheads. If some foreigner beat him to a job, he's down on ALL foreigners. He hates people he's never seen - people he's never known - with equal intensity - with equal venom.
Now, we're not trying to say it's unreasonable for one human being to bug another. But although anyone has the right to dislike another individual, it's totally irrational, patently insane to condemn an entire race - to despise an entire nation - to vilify and entire religion. Sooner or later, we must learn to judge each other on our own merits. Sooner or later, if man is ever to be worthy of his destiny, we must fill our hearts with tolerance. For then, and only then, will we be truly worthy of the concept that man was created in the image of God - a God who calls us ALL - His children.
Pax et Justitia, Stan.
I can't imagine a more timely bit of wisdom -- and it was written in 1968.
I'd have a hard time finding a single person to disagree with that. (except for atheists who would scoff and laugh at the last sentence and proceed to ridicule him and call him a moron for saying such a stupid thing...and then maybe ridicule all Christians)
I'd love to agree with you, fab. That should be the case.
But while we all 'talk the talk,' we rarely 'walk the walk.' How many times a day do we talk about 'those Libs' or "those Conservatives' or 'those disrepectful NFLers' or 'those fundamentalist Christians' or 'those immigrants' or 'those inner city thugs'---or, or, or,...pick your group.
Stan had it right. The future of our country depends on a renewed focus on how much we're all alike and share common goals for our country instead of vilifying those who are different
dont you vilify people in this forum daily for having a different view? lol
I think it's just a small piece of the puzzle. I don't think it's going to happen in our lifetime and will most likely get worse.
The one silver lining to the Trump Presidency is that a whole lot of people across the country have gotten sick to their stomachs seeing how pathetically low and disgusting party politics has gone.
Maybe it will lead to a new era of cooperation. Yeah, I know, I know, that's pretty damn naive of me, but one can hope.
I can agree with your first statement but don't agree with your second. Politicians seem to be doubling down and only digging in harder. Negativity, lies, disingenuous statements, hyperbole, fear, race baiting, smearing, etc. have proven to be a very good tactics. Social media has only served to compound the issue.
It is impossible to have a discussion about policy without lumping people into groups. You can't have an productive discussion without it and you can't target fixes without being able to classify the issues. It's very frustrating to try to have an honest discussion with some people when they call you a bigot (or a racist) just for grouping people together that exhibit a common deleterious behavior or tragic situation. You're doing this so that you can then discuss how you can change your ways or make a difference but you never get that far.
We need to be able to have honest discussions and get past turning being offended into hatred in order to effect actual change.
There is a huge difference between an honest discussion of deleterious behaviors or tragic situations and ones where posters resort to vilifying a broad group of people with a few casual keyboard taps.
The thread here on the 'invasion' of 'illegal immigrants' heading towards our border from Mexico is one recent example of carefully selected words designed solely to elicit a negative reaction to the asylum seekers.
And you can't have honest discussions with carefully selected, disingenuous descriptions such as asylum seekers.
Oh, so they're not seeking asylum in the U.S. after all?
What's their deal then? Are they going to be applying for student visas?
This has been discussed 100 times on here with you...it's all about economics.
It's also been discussed 100 times (for anyone bothering to read) that IF it's really all about economics then these so-called "asylum seekers" are not going to be approved by Immigration Services, right? RIGHT?
Or do you think those softies put in charge by the Trump Administration are going to feel sorry for their economic plight and cave?
Why do we want them to exercise our system when they can stop in Mexico where they were already granted "asylum"? It's an organized ruse. If they come here, apply and legally go through the process, I don't have a problem with that.
Nice to know that if YOU were fleeing from Nicaragua that you'd happily choose Mexico over the United States.
Tell me again who is being disingenuous in this honest conversation we're having.
Huh? These people have every right under the United Nations Refugee Convention to seek protection by applying for refugee status. The United States, Mexico, the UK, and most other nations around the world have all agreed to this. There's nothing "rusey" or illegal about this in any way, shape, or form.
But the fact that a person can apply as an asylum seeker doesn't mean the country that they've applied to will accept them. That's why this whole "invasion" business was such nonsense from the get-go. But it served its purpose: It fired up the Trumpsters to get off their butts and vote so it worked to perfection.
Guess what? That's exactly how it works.
But is that their intent?
https://fox5sandiego.com/2018/11/13/video-shows-group-climbing-on-border-fence/
sure they can apply for refugee status, but not all will qualify by the un rules. also by the un rules they can apply at the first stable nation, which was mexico. hell even mexico said they would accept them. also mexican culture is probably alot closer to their home culture so assimilation would be much easier on them.
but you obviously arent letting those fact get in the way of your narrative. you are either trolling or willfully ignoring these facts.
Awww, it's SO SWEET of you to sit here and make their life decisions for them. Last I checked, it's perfectly 'legal' for them to apply for refugee status with the United States. As I have said -- over and over again -- we have the right to deny them (and given the climate, probably will deny them in the unlikely event they make it all the way to our border.) But that doesn't mean they can't maintain hope and try for the U.S., right?
What "facts" am I supposedly ignoring? Can they apply for refugee status in Mexico? Yes. But is it their right to hold out hope that they might be accepted by the United States? Yes.
You are grousing about the mere fact these people...gasp!...WANT to come here. Whether a person is a legit asylum seeker or a devious "economic immigrant" cleverly disguised as one, God forbid that we should allow them to APPLY, right guys?
Does the fence on the border have signs on it that say (en espagnol), "To apply for economic asylum, please climb fence and enter first."?
Guess it's a given that those folks are all going to climb fences and 'invade' us if they don't get their way, right guys?
At some point you'd think you'd stop and reflect a moment on what you're typing before posting this kind of racist crap.
Stan Lee wrote: "Now, we're not trying to say it's unreasonable for one human being to bug another. But although anyone has the right to dislike another individual, it's totally irrational, patently insane to condemn an entire race - to despise an entire nation - to vilify and entire religion."
You are condemning this group of Nicaraguans fleeing their country who hope to apply for refugee status in the United States. Your response is essentially "Well, THEY should all stay in Mexico." Why is that? What gives you the right to grouse about 'them' when 1) neither you or I have a clue what they have--or haven't--gone through; 2) we have Immigration Services with trained professionals who determine whether an asylum seeker is "legit" or not; and 3) the likelihood of any one of these folks being granted asylum in the climate that Trump has created is slim to none.
Next, you are vilifying this group of Nicaraguans fleeing their country by implying that if they aren't granted asylum, they'll all "jump the fence" and illegally enter the country. This isn't racist thinking? The notion they'll stay in Mexico if they are denied entry to the U.S. is impossible to believe? They're all a bunch of 'illegal immigrants' just waiting for act?
You are condemning this group of Nicaraguans fleeing their country who hope to apply for refugee status in the United States. Your response is essentially "Well, THEY should all stay in Mexico." Why is that? What gives you the right to grouse about 'them' when 1) neither you or I have a clue what they have--or haven't--gone through; 2) we have Immigration Services with trained professionals who determine whether an asylum seeker is "legit" or not; and 3) the likelihood of any one of these folks being granted asylum in the climate that Trump has created is slim to none.
Next, you are vilifying this group of Nicaraguans fleeing their country by implying that if they aren't granted asylum, they'll all "jump the fence" and illegally enter the country. This isn't racist thinking? The notion they'll stay in Mexico if they are denied entry to the U.S. is impossible to believe? They're all a bunch of 'illegal immigrants' just waiting for act?
And that is some serious twisting and mental gymnastics.
I have not condemned any group. Just because you type it, doesn't make it true.
I did not say "THEY should all stay in Mexico." Just because you type it, doesn't make it true. This is what I said...
which also covers your second point of Immigration Services. The 3rd point is contradictory to your 2nd since we have laws and rules that determine whether these economic asylum seekers are granted entry or not, Trump doesn't make that determination.
I did not vilify any group. The article is pointing out the fact that SOME of these "asylum seekers" are CURRENTLY and already crossing the border by going over or under the fence. How is any of this racist?
The stuff you post has got to be some of the most disingenuous stuff I've ever seen in the water cooler. It's amazing.
Whatever you say, fab. Guess I'm just one of those word-twisting libs who sees racism where it doesn't exist.
I can agree with you here. I've been married to a Hispanic woman for 26 years. I'm obviously a racist and hate Hispanics.
If I've treating you unfairly, I'm man enough to apologize. But you've yet to address the post I quoted when I referred to "racist crap." What was the intent of this post below?
Was it an innocent joke that wasn't meant to imply all those Nicaraguans who've fled their country will become 'fence climbers' when they get to the border? It sounded that way.
LOL, no. That was not my intent.
Your posts were implying that all those folks in the caravan were all going to try to go through the process to come to the US legally. It was simply my way of saying that this was untrue because there were people already attempting to circumvent the fence. I'm sure there are some in the caravan that want to go through the process correctly but equally, there are those that will try to enter illegally.
Not a problem.
Although, I still truly don't understand why you would consider the remark racist. Is it because you assumed that I didn't like Hispanics?
something is wrong with that guy, but that is typical of leftists.
wish there were more reasonable liberals on here to converse with. leftists are just as insufferable as far right people.
wish there were more reasonable liberals on here to converse with. leftists are just as insufferable as far right people.
Of course it is. This guy thinks that opposing illegal immigration means you're racist.
Your post left the impression that if the caravan didn't get inside the U.S. legally, they'd do it illegally. One of the most disgusting aspects of this story is the President's "invasion" comments and the act of deploying the military to our border. The underlying message is those people are fixin' to get in here one way or another.
havent they said multiple times that if they cant get in legally through asylum they will come in illegally?
