Bingo! Because that is how he chooses to react. We are not the arbitors of proper response to a childs death. He did what he wants and she did what she wants.
There's no tone here; it's just us. And I admitt to a selfish motive for prolonging this. I need a personal framework within which to try and understand the thinking that dictates what her response to this tragedy should be. A woman who is an avowed anti-war activist loses her son in the war. How should she behave..what exactly is the protocal here?. She takes to the streets in her anguish to protest the war by asking for an audience with her elected representative. And thats wrong..why? People choose up sides and determine for themselves what her proper rights and behaviours should be. Exploiting her sons death?? Sorry I just don't get how that can be. Unless you feel she wants money or fame more than she wants her son. By that logic; anyone against the war has no standing if a person who loses a son has no standing. Then every one who protests the war is exploiting something. And there is no such thing as personal convictions.
Wayne Parham Messages: 18835 Registered: January 2001
Illuminati (33rd Degree)
If your wife used the death of your child to promote a Rebublican agenda, how would you feel? Not only would you have lost a child, but you would suffer the media frenzy going over and over the matter, with your wife taking a side that you despise.
Cindy Sheehan isn't the only one affected by her actions. She and those behind her have exploited her son and discounted the feelings and wishes of the rest of her family.
I think it was a selfish move on her part and I think the political parties have jumped in to take advantage of the propoganda.
Wayne Parham Messages: 18835 Registered: January 2001
Illuminati (33rd Degree)
The tone I am speaking of is the public tone. I don't normally involve myself in these kinds of discussions. But I do see them on the various media outlets, and that's what I'm talking about.
I think he is dead. And, I talk about exploiting while he was alive. I know that many don`t like it, but his mother has the right to said something about it, alone or through political party, movement,media, whatever. Of course, some people wish her silent...
Wayne Parham Messages: 18835 Registered: January 2001
Illuminati (33rd Degree)
I think one of the people that wants her silent is her husband.
I don't think either political party really wants her silenced, because I think they're both getting their voices heard. It has become an opportunity to polarize the public and promote political agendas.
That's what I mean by exploitation. I think this family is being used for media attention and political gain.
I know what you mean't, thats why between us we can mirror the public tone and see where people and the public differ. After the Schiavo thing it became obvious that someway the public has become an arbitor of personal behaviour instead of just spectators with opinions. That to me is bizzare in a bad way. It is almost like the Pilgrims portrayed in the Scarlett Letter; how they decide in committe how people are allowed to behave in their private lives. That was the whole purpose of the 60's rebellion. To refute that concept. While this discussion may be tireing it is valuable in a positive way. It has allowed us to see into the issue without the clouds of perception filtered through spin and propoganda. To me anyway. Someday we may have to act on these opinions ourselves.
O'Kay so it isn't Cindy that is exploiting her son it's the media? I have purposefully not followed this event in the news because I want my own perspective. Where does the husband claim he is upset by her actions and what exactly does he complain about?
Posting Rules
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Get a T-Shirt!
