Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
Yes, it seems sensible for a nation to have laws that establish a clear line as to what is acceptable and what is not, especially when it comes to potentially racist opinions and rallies.
The point is that yes, freedom of speech is desirable.
However, so is the right to live your life without fear of negative action from others.
If the former will lead to the latter, then there need to be checks and balances.
Exactly.
And I am sure most people are happy to sacrifice a tiny bit of their "freedom" so that we can live in a safe enviroment, which is what ordered society is all about - total freedom would be anarchy, those checks and balances are vital to insure the protection and safety of as many people as possible.
Well I'd say B. Let them voice their opinion...as stupid as many mind find it, if they get even more people to follow it, well then that is their choice, if people commit bad deeds bevcause of it that#S also the responsibility of the people that did it not the once that talked aboot it, I think everyone should have the right to voice their opiniopn, I believe only personal insults shouldn't be tolerated.
Hmmm give them choice B.....I have seen some crazy things in DC gay rights parade(not crazy by itself however people went out of their way to be outlandish) million man march I know perhaps the premise was different for these however free speech none the less as long as the "rules" are maintained in the process.
Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
It is though, if they are directly inciting the consequences.
Lemme take another approach to getting my point across.
Originally posted by FeceMan
Issue:
Far-right-wing Nazi supporters plan to stage a rally in the city center = ( [B]PUBLIC*CF) tomorrow, giving voice to their violent, racist views.[/B]
No where in this scenario does it say that the group will call FOR violence against a specific person or group. Simply spread hateful rhetoric. Rhetoric, I might add, with which few who attend such rallies in support of the cause aren't already familiar. But, most of the calls for violence by these groups occur at PRIVATE rallies...on back-water farms and in private homes and buisness. Why PRIVATE? Because to do so in PUBLIC is AGAINST THE LAW in the US.
Knowing that is the situation, Option B is the more correct option, in terms of United States LAW. Option B is deceptive however, because the question in the original post itself is flawed. But, Option B is the most constitutional.
I'm not arguing that these people, sharing their views won't CAUSE violence at some point. But, they can not specifically call for violence, publically. But, that's America. I'm not saying it isn't ****ed up...but that's the way it is.
Originally posted by FeceMan
Of course, the game has turned against me, manipulating my decision into saying that "racists comments in public are not allowed." Civil rights has been changed to "unheard of" instead of "rare."I hardly think that banning racist, Nazi-tacular rallies qualifies for the former statement.
Could you explain this game to us, as I am personally unfamiliar.
Also, are you saying that this game says that option B is the right way to go?
Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
Could you explain this game to us, as I am personally unfamiliar.Also, are you saying that this game says that option B is the right way to go?
From what I can tell--and I just began--the game may favor a more liberal society and has the issue of vast generalization.
Originally posted by FeceMan
The game is called NationStates. Basically, you design a country and take a short questionnaire that helps form the country to your ideals. After that, you are given an issue every day that gives more detail on your personal stances. You can range from ulta-leftist to hyper-conservative, or anywhere in between.From what I can tell--and I just began--the game may favor a more liberal society and has the issue of vast generalization.
Humm..sounds like a cool game. But, if the point is to create a country in your own image, then how can they penalize you by rigging the game? So, it sounds cool, but it sucks if you can't make your OWN country.
Originally posted by Bardock42
Well I'd say B. Let them voice their opinion...as stupid as many mind find it, if they get even more people to follow it, well then that is their choice, if people commit bad deeds bevcause of it that#S also the responsibility of the people that did it not the once that talked aboot it, I think everyone should have the right to voice their opiniopn, I believe only personal insults shouldn't be tolerated.
We do not want charismatic leaders causing the mistakes of the past to be repeated Bardock - do we? 😕