Free speech....clampdown or not?

Raggamuffin wrote:

phildidge wrote:

Who claimed anyone is obliged to laugh at something they do not personnally find funny?

Nobody claimed they had no sense of humour either.

Not even what I said.

Yes you did.

In reality many people do have a sense of humour failure and in reality. If we cannot laugh at ourselves. Then people will always lack a sense of humour.

Syl wrote:Why ruin a debate by dissecting ONE word and trying to put a different slant on what you meant.
Rags isn't lying, she commented on what you said, and what you said was people who dont laugh... lack a sense of humour....which means they are without one.

I couldn't laugh at Carrs joke, not because I find it cruel or un pc, and not because I lack a sense of humour, but because it's just not funny to me, or I suspect the majority of people.

Would a joke about pregnant women being prescribed  thalidomide and producing deformed offspring be funny to some I wonder?

phildidge wrote:

Syl wrote:Why ruin a debate by dissecting ONE word and trying to put a different slant on what you meant.
Rags isn't lying, she commented on what you said, and what you said was people who dont laugh... lack a sense of humour....which means they are without one.

I couldn't laugh at Carrs joke, not because I find it cruel or un pc, and not because I lack a sense of humour, but because it's just not funny to me, or I suspect the majority of people.

Would a joke about pregnant women being prescribed  thalidomide and producing deformed offspring be funny to some I wonder?

Really?

You are telling me what I mean by a word, even after me explaining exactly what I meant?
I am jnot ruining anything and have explain what i meant, so why are you now sticking your nose in to further fuel something you are completely wrong on. You nor rags get to deicde what I meant.

Do you understand that?

Syl wrote:

phildidge wrote:

Really?

You are telling me what I mean by a word, even after me explaining exactly what I meant?
I am jnot ruining anything and have explain what i meant, so why are you now sticking your nose in to further fuel something you are completely wrong on. You nor rags get to deicde what I meant.

Do you understand that?

Well then use a word with the correct meaning to what you are trying to say in future to avoid further confusion.

phildidge wrote:Also, my point was in regards to people being able to laugh at themselves and those not able to lacking a sense of humour. But hey ho, as usual people try to twist something the other says.

"If we cannot laugh at ourselves. Then people will always lack a sense of humour."

See how badly Rags actually tries to twist what I had said

Hey ho

Syl wrote:

phildidge wrote:Also, my point was in regards to people being able to laugh at themselves and those not able to lacking a sense of humour. But hey ho, as usual people try to twist something the other says.

"If we cannot laugh at ourselves. Then people will always lack a sense of humour."

See how badly Rags actually tries to twist what I had said

Hey ho

It depends what the so called joke is, why should people laugh at themselves if the joke is cruel...should they be considered to have no sense of humour (lack one) if they dont find it amusing?

Syl wrote:I often smile at Andy's little odes too....so no Didge, you have taught me nothing .

Off out to enjoy the good weather...have a good day. x