^ One badly taken picture will do that for you in a quick minute. You could be insanely popular and issuing out your own disclaimers in your blog in no time. Bonus if you happen to have anything that looks like something you could beat the co-workers with like a cell phone.
Kantgirl: Just say "I'm feminine and I'll punch anyone who says otherwise!"
Halla74: Think your way through the world. Feel your way through life.
Cimarron: maybe Prpl will be your girl-bud
prplchknz: i don't like it
Hitler believed he had the moral authority to decide what was good for the individual and what wasn't. Are you a Nazi, Jonnyboy? I assume you take the same bleeding heart approach to reality shows and all sorts of other possibly "damaging" vocations.
When dealing with unknowns it is only reasonable to - if you want to evaluate a situation holistically - to have them assume normalized values. Thus we have to presume the negroes mentioned in the article came from normal lower-/middle-class upbringings, and who would say no to the job if the thought of doing it caused them some kind of emotional distress. Because I said so.
I do not assume to know their motivations, nor do I assume that I am in the best position to know what is ideal for them. I do not speak from a position of certainty, but from one of caution and concern for the suffering of my fellow man. You are correct, these specific individuals could have no qualms about being a part of this wedding ceremony, and it could be that having a wedding ceremony like this causes no suffering whatsoever; I hope that is the case.
I'm not sure what you mean by a holistic evaluation or about assumptions being appropriate here. When evaluating a situation where one must assume anything, his conclusions are to be considered only as likely as his assumptions. Furthermore, if there is more than one possibility, it behooves him to consider every one which has a reasonable likelihood of occurring (not just the most likely one), and consider his conclusions holistically.
Let us assume that you and I enter into a bet. We will flip 3 coins, and if anything other than 3 heads come up I will pay you 100 dollars; but if 3 heads do come up, you pay me 30,000 dollars. By your logic, we should only consider the most likely scenario, which is you receiving 100 dollars. However, we have left out what happens if the 3 heads do come up. By considering every possibility, you would realize that the expected value of this bet is -3,662.5 dollars, and that it is greatly skewed in my favor.
That being said, the only reasonable thing to do in a situation such as this is to interview those involved. When it is possible to know something, it is probably best to withhold judgment until that something is known. If you look at my post, you will see that I made no definitive judgments (save for what is addressed below).
Originally Posted by SmileyMan
Who's to say they haven't healed in these specific negroes? Are you against satire, Jonnyboy? Because you are attacking part of the foundation upon which it rests, sir.
As I pointed out before, the implications of a person's actions are not always limited to himself or those close to him. It is my understanding that racial tensions are still simmering in South Africa, and doing something like this is unlikely to not cause some issues; however, I will confess to not knowing this with certainty.
I absolutely love satire, but this wedding was not satire.