Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bababooyee
Why is it worse that she was there?? It seems to me, if you are going to say something about someone, doing so to their face is better than not...no?
|
I agree in principle...at least as far as saying that, to me, it would still be wrong whether she was there or not. The one additional aspect though is the hurtfulness of it...seeing her sitting there with all those people and being subjected to that. Let me try an analogy here (I cringe just thinking about this cause folks always go off on my analogies)...if a bunch of KKK types celebrate the Holocaust amongst themselves at a skinhead rally, that to me is indefensible (but legal under the 1st Ammendment) but if they march into a Jewish neighborhood and force their views on the folks there, they are causing pain...to me, that's where the First Ammendment ends....speech, when it causes others pain is not a "right", at least by natural law. I would argue that while the act itself is "wrong", doing it in such a way as to hurt someone (in this case subjecting Ms Hilton to it in public) elevates the degree of "wrongfulness".