| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Willem
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 6306
Location: wasteland style
|
 Posted: Tue Nov 02, 2010 6:55 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
I love you too, dear.
It's still totally unrelated. Two cases where the court screwed up. That's the connection. The troll shouldn't have been jailed, the three teens shouldn't have gotten away with it (though I wouldn't really support throwing them in jail, fyi).
It still doesn't have anything to do with all of this. Do you really need to compare the two to feel the suitable amount of outrage? Do you really need to compare one extreme with another? No. It's obvious that the troll got too hard a punishment. To compare it to the abuse case makes you no better than a common tabloid. I'm sure a Daily Mail cover saying "THREE HOODLEMS GET OFF SCOT FREE WHILE TROLL IS JAILED. BROKEN BRITAIN!" wouldn't be too farfetched. If the Daily Mail gave a shit about freedom of speech, of course.
_________________
attitude of a street punk, only cutting selected words out of context to get onself excuse to let one's dirty mouth loose |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Willem
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 6306
Location: wasteland style
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 02, 2010 6:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mizike wrote: | | Willem wrote: | | Most modern constitutions include the freedom of speech, no? I think the American obsession with freedom of speech comes from the years of propaganda during the cold war in the same way that Americans love to talk about "freedom" and "liberty". |
Yeah, they include such clauses, but Kilgore is spot-on in that the US is the most aggressive in defending it. Our libel laws make it virtually impossible for a media outlet to lose a case and we don't pass absurd bans on minarets and headscarves.
Say what you will about the hubbub in New York City and Park51, the impediments have all been public relations issues, not legal. |
Oh certainly. I wouldn't deny that. I'd argue that minarets, headscarves and the Cordoba Center issues would fall under freedom of religion, but yeah.
_________________
attitude of a street punk, only cutting selected words out of context to get onself excuse to let one's dirty mouth loose |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thy Brilliance
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 3251
Location: Relative
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 02, 2010 6:59 pm Post subject: A PROFOUND INSIGHT INTO THE MALADY |
|
|
People die everyday.
Idiots make the news. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WheelsOfConfusion
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 11223
Location: Unknown Kaddath
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 02, 2010 7:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Willem wrote: | | WheelsOfConfusion wrote: | | This might be due to the fact that the freedom of speech is explicitly written into the Bill of Rights, the first amendments to pass and considered totally fundamental. These protections were there at the beginning, in other words. Many other countries weren't starting from a clean slate. |
Most modern constitutions include the freedom of speech, no? I think the American obsession with freedom of speech comes from the years of propaganda during the cold war in the same way that Americans love to talk about "freedom" and "liberty". |
I don't think it has anything to do with the Cold War, strong tendencies to be paranoid about protections for speech go further back than that. It anything, I think the Cold War did more to chill free speech than any other period since we got our constitution. Rather, I think the lengths the American system goes to for protecting speech are the product of the special way our nation came about, with a set document as The Constitution created almost at the beginning (after the old system failed less than two decades in), being drafted and approved by the most lionized figures of our history. In most other nations, the "constitution" didn't refer to a single document but a whole collection of laws from legislative to common that had been accumulating for centuries. Most of early the single-document-type of constitutional development was practiced in the US while it was still a collection of English colonies.
I think this helped contribute to the aggressive defense of the basic "Bill of Rights" protections that you find in the US; the attitude that it's all there from "the start" in plain English. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thy Brilliance
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 3251
Location: Relative
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 02, 2010 7:09 pm Post subject: At least the media outlet is a monopoly |
|
|
| Mizike wrote: | | Willem wrote: | | Most modern constitutions include the freedom of speech, no? I think the American obsession with freedom of speech comes from the years of propaganda during the cold war in the same way that Americans love to talk about "freedom" and "liberty". |
Yeah, they include such clauses, but Kilgore is spot-on in that the US is the most aggressive in defending it. Our libel laws make it virtually impossible for a media outlet to lose a case and we don't pass absurd bans on minarets and headscarves.
Say what you will about the hubbub in New York City and Park51, the impediments have all been public relations issues, not legal. |
I too miss the days when people were killed for dissent with authority. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mizike
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 5120
Location: Iowa City
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 02, 2010 7:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| tinkeringIdiot wrote: | BWAHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
asshat |
_________________
Scire aliquid laus est, pudor est non discere velle
"It is laudable to know something, it is disgraceful to not want to learn"
~Seneca |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thy Brilliance
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 3251
Location: Relative
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 02, 2010 8:48 pm Post subject: Clearly emotional trauma from being raped by the 80s |
|
|
You're bitching at me for agreeing with you.
ok. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Vox Raucus
Joined: 31 Oct 2007
Posts: 1219
Location: At the Hundredth Meridian
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 03, 2010 1:00 am Post subject: Re: Clearly emotional trauma from being raped by the 80s |
|
|
| Thy Brilliance wrote: | You're bitching at me for agreeing with you.
ok. |
No, he's bitching at you for being an asshat. Learn to read.
_________________
I come from Downtown, born ready for you / Armed with skill and determination / And grace, too |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Highlord
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 555
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 03, 2010 2:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Willem wrote: | | It's obvious that the troll got too hard a punishment. |
I think the troll shouldn't be getting a punishment at all. The court in the autism torture case clearly made the wrong call by being lenient in application of the law—the court for the facebook troll is applying something that shouldn't be law at all.
_________________
There is a luxury to self-reproach. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Willem
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 6306
Location: wasteland style
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 03, 2010 2:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
That's what I meant, of course.
_________________
attitude of a street punk, only cutting selected words out of context to get onself excuse to let one's dirty mouth loose |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Highlord
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 555
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 03, 2010 2:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Willem wrote: | | That's what I meant, of course. |
It's sadly not a belief that everybody holds, preferring instead the right to not have one's feelings hurt.
_________________
There is a luxury to self-reproach. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thy Brilliance
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 3251
Location: Relative
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 03, 2010 3:35 am Post subject: Re: At least the media outlet is a monopoly |
|
|
| Thy Brilliance wrote: | | Mizike wrote: | | Willem wrote: | | Most modern constitutions include the freedom of speech, no? I think the American obsession with freedom of speech comes from the years of propaganda during the cold war in the same way that Americans love to talk about "freedom" and "liberty". |
Yeah, they include such clauses, but Kilgore is spot-on in that the US is the most aggressive in defending it. Our libel laws make it virtually impossible for a media outlet to lose a case and we don't pass absurd bans on minarets and headscarves.
Say what you will about the hubbub in New York City and Park51, the impediments have all been public relations issues, not legal. |
I too miss the days when people were killed for dissent with authority. |
Example 1:
http://blogs.forbes.com/oliverchiang/2010/11/02/supreme-court-considers-videogame-free-speech-rights/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mr Gary
Joined: 30 Apr 2009
Posts: 6166
Location: Some pub in England
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 03, 2010 3:52 am Post subject: Re: A PROFOUND INSIGHT INTO THE MALADY |
|
|
| Thy Brilliance wrote: | People die everyday.
Idiots make the news. |
Even drunken fools & old clocks strike the right time twice a day. You need to up your batting average.
Quoth the epigram.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bart
Joined: 22 Jul 2006
Posts: 1567
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 03, 2010 5:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I am in fact surprised that something posted in a comments section in fact turns out to be more or less true. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dogen
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 9514
Location: Bellingham, WA
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 03, 2010 7:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| WheelsOfConfusion wrote: | I don't think it has anything to do with the Cold War, strong tendencies to be paranoid about protections for speech go further back than that. It anything, I think the Cold War did more to chill free speech than any other period since we got our constitution. Rather, I think the lengths the American system goes to for protecting speech are the product of the special way our nation came about, with a set document as The Constitution created almost at the beginning (after the old system failed less than two decades in), being drafted and approved by the most lionized figures of our history. In most other nations, the "constitution" didn't refer to a single document but a whole collection of laws from legislative to common that had been accumulating for centuries. Most of early the single-document-type of constitutional development was practiced in the US while it was still a collection of English colonies.
I think this helped contribute to the aggressive defense of the basic "Bill of Rights" protections that you find in the US; the attitude that it's all there from "the start" in plain English. |
I was gonna be like, "but Canada has a single-document Constitution, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms," but then I remembered that they've only had it since the 80s, so maybe you're right. I've never really thought about it.
_________________
"Worse comes to worst, my people come first, but my tribe lives on every country on earth. I’ll do anything to protect them from hurt, the human race is what I serve." - Baba Brinkman |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
