RE:Bad
by jacqueline fiona franklin on Jul 17, 2007 01:31 AM Permalink
From the earliest of times,man has worn tattoes..whether permanent or temporary (such henna, which I understand carries some degree of significance on the subcontinent) Ritual tattooes are still freuquently worn (Among women,particulalrly among nomadic tribes in India and elsewhere) Either way, this gentleman clearly is not " a beast", nor some back-street ruffian...The tattoo is also, not ostentatious,it would not be seen under normal circumstances,so can hardly offend the sensibilities of more sensitive folk..It is also worn as a memorial,Does your God have nothing more pertinent to add on the matter of the (presumably,Unadorned?) humans who behaved worse than beasts, who killed this man's father? Shame on you, sir,for your peculiar moral barometer, if this is all that offends you about this matter..
RE:Bad
by Web Monkey on Jul 17, 2007 12:19 AM Permalink
Who are you to say that? What make you "suppose" something? Who told you / where is it written? What is your qualification to judge what is good and what is not?
Please keep your immature thoughts and beliefs to yourself. If someone is happy with a tattoo you have no business to comment on it, unless you can prove it scientifically. It just takes a bit of common sense to judge what kind of comment is appropriate in certain situation. You are immature and incapable of reacting according to the situation. Your prejudice and lack of common sense will not help you in future. Think twice before you speak.
RE:Bad
by preetam j on Jul 16, 2007 11:47 PM Permalink
what do u mean its bad? I think its none of ur business to say that its a sign of beast. May be it is for you, don't generalize.
