Originally posted by ESB -1138There was already a thread on this bill, and the claim that it would outlaw pastors speaking against homosexuality was proved completely wrong 😉
A bill in Congress makes it a crime for pastors and churches to speak against homosexuality.How in the world is that right!? That is against our FREEDOM OF SPEECH!!This is a complete outrage!
Observation:
There is no freedom of speech, nowhere to be found is there a place where you can say absolutely anything you want. Far from it. On average you could be thrown out for saying so much as the N word. Let alone a full-blown rant that might offend someone.
Statement:
This country has no idea what it wants.
It wants a capitalist society, a society where the hardworking and intelligent get ahead and screw the deadbeats.
But it also wants a socialism, it wants a nation that handles all the problems of the poor and desitute.
It wants absolute freedom, the freedom to love, to hate, to say, to do.
But it also wants those freedoms confined, so that nobody can hurt them, exploit them, or just endanger thier life as a whole.
Conclusion:
Americans don't know what the hell they want. Freedom of speech is being able to yell theatre in a crowded fire, that's how useless and retarded the American concept of free-speech is.
Originally posted by HK47By that very same token there is not country in the world that has a true freedom of speech either.
Observation:
There is no freedom of speech, nowhere to be found is there a place where you can say absolutely anything you want. Far from it. On average you could be thrown out for saying so much as the N word. Let alone a full-blown rant that might offend someone.Statement:
This country has no idea what it wants.It wants a capitalist society, a society where the hardworking and intelligent get ahead and screw the deadbeats.
But it also wants a socialism, it wants a nation that handles all the problems of the poor and desitute.
It wants absolute freedom, the freedom to love, to hate, to say, to do.
But it also wants those freedoms confined, so that nobody can hurt them, exploit them, or just endanger thier life as a whole.
Conclusion:
Americans don't know what the hell they want. Freedom of speech is being able to yell theatre in a crowded fire, that's how useless and retarded the American concept of free-speech is.
Originally posted by HK47
Statement:
True, but no other country claims to have freedom of speech. Atleast not like we do.
A lot of western country's claim that. And freedom of speech can usually go really far, but there have to be limits unfortunately at least if you want a prospering society. Allowing people to ask others to go out and commit crimes, is just making sure society loses stability. Such things should be stopped.
Originally posted by Fire
. Freedom of thought is absolute freedom of speech is not
freedom of thought is personal, freedom of speech is social, so freedom of thought is by no means absolute.
Freedom of speech is a nice idea, but until people can learn to live together, any type of interactive freedoms will bring hard ache, but thats not to say we shouldnt try
Originally posted by Bardock42
No, I am just pretty sure that a country with lots of limitations can be worse. 1984 style.
gingercaily was talking about a country without limitations and you responded by saying "I doubt that".
Going to the opposite end of the spectrum like your doing...
Does the USSR ring a bell? Does present day China? Pretty damned restricted.
In my OPINION, it is much worse than over-censorship and government oppression. At least you have slight idea of what not to do in an oppressive government. In a lawless society, you really can't predict how to save your ass.
Originally posted by leonheartmm
freedom of speech should be given as long as SPEECH just remains speech and does not directly translate into actions which unjustifyably cause real suffering to people.
It depends what you say now doesnt it? What if my 'speech' creates actions of others?
Like, if I go into a mall and yell BOMB!!!
Or if I call up buddy Osama: "Hey Osa, old pal....I got an idea for you. PLANES INTO BUILDING!" Thats something you cant say, and shouldnt be able to say.
Originally posted by dadudemon
gingercaily was talking about a country without limitations and you responded by saying "I doubt that".Going to the opposite end of the spectrum like your doing...
Does the USSR ring a bell? Does present day China? Pretty damned restricted.
In my OPINION, it is much worse than over-censorship and government oppression. At least you have slight idea of what not to do in an oppressive government. In a lawless society, you really can't predict how to save your ass.
...what?
A lawless society has the chance of change. It can create strong communities which look out for each other. Laws and governments are not the only way for people to live together. People are able to restrict themselves.
There could be Utopian lawless societies and there are horribly Dystopian oppressive governments. So my reply to his "i don't want to think about it coz it would be the worst country ever." was very deserved, but hey, I am sure you didn't understand it anyways.
Originally posted by Bardock42
...what?A lawless society has the chance of change. It can create strong communities which look out for each other. Laws and governments are not the only way for people to live together. People are able to restrict themselves.
Then that isn't lawlessness. There would still be rules people are governed by. Rules governing a specific body of people...LAWS!!!! Cut it up...mix and match it...rationalize anyway you want to...anarchy is anarchy and I was referring to fundamental anarchy such as the lawlessness of Mexico City and the utterly random crimes that go unpunished. There will always have to be rules/laws to have a functioning society until humans can evolve a higher mind state. (Like the Vulcans from Star Trek 😄.)
There could be Utopian lawless societies and there are horribly Dystopian oppressive governments. So my reply to his "i don't want to think about it coz it would be the worst country ever." was very deserved, but hey, I am sure you didn't understand it anyways.
Utopian society cannot exist. Humans are not capable of it. Buddhist monks are the closest thing to it right now.
And yes...I did not understand what you meant because your post was a very simple, underdeveloped statement. Once I questioned that and then called you out when you belittled me...you then explained yourself.
What should I expect from a poster who posts immature crap all the time? How could I possibly know that you were actually making a statement from an intellectual standpoint? Come on dude...you basically said "teh man is teh suxors!!111!!". How was I supposed to know that you were not being legitimate in your claim other than just saying something on the topic? You know, your posts are actually good when you actually try to sound intelligent. (Which you are smart…you just choose douche baggery most of the time.)
In the end...this is ALL opinion though. You would rather "wing it" with gangsters and I would rather “wing it” with "Dystopian oppressive governments" if those were the only two choices. (And here again...we are not on the right page...I was referring to communism...actually pure communism and the mess with the USSR and China...which is closer to an anti-utopia society. I thought I would clear that up before we end up 4 posts later in the same mess as we are now.)
Originally posted by Bardock42
You are an idiot.I'd waste my breath and turn out to you that there is no true anarchy in your sense, but I won't cause you are a moron. If you want to understand what I said read it a few more times, if not, I don't care.
If I am wrong...then I am wrong.
"Waste" your time and if you are right, I will admit it.
And yes, I agree, there is not such thing as true anarchy because humans want rules...We crave rules and even in a crime stricken city, the ciminals have rules with each other.