| 24th January 2007 08:09 PM |
|
|
| Bitch |
The answer is NO, it does not. Not on the planet and not in cyberspace. FREEDOM OF SPEECH is just an idealistic theory that doesn't mean shit because as soon as someone says something that someone else finds offensive, it's CENSORED by the authorities and criticised.
|
| 24th January 2007 08:18 PM |
|
|
| Riffhard |
What happened Bitch? Someone censored you? Do tell.
Riffy |
| 24th January 2007 08:22 PM |
|
|
| LadyJane |
Bitch...you okay??
The Unholy Trinity believes in free speech.
Here at RO, you've got to go PRETTY far to get censored.
It's usually vile or just downright nasty and malicious.
And they give lots of warnings.
Feel better.
LJ. |
| 24th January 2007 08:22 PM |
|
|
| lotsajizz |
something 'bout 'fire in a crowded theater' comes to mind....
|
| 24th January 2007 08:31 PM |
|
|
| pdog |
There's freedom of speech, and then there's the freedumb who speak!
I get the feeling some idiot spoke to you...
|
| 24th January 2007 08:32 PM |
|
|
| pdog |
quote:
lotsajizz wrote:
something 'bout 'fire in a crowded theater' comes to mind....
But you can fart up a storm... ironic! |
| 24th January 2007 09:19 PM |
|
|
| glencar |
We all support freedom of speech. Except for certain assholes. |
| 24th January 2007 09:29 PM |
|
|
| rasputin56 |
Damn right! Now shut the fuck up! |
| 24th January 2007 09:29 PM |
|
|
| steel driving hammer |
We are not allowed to say The Beatles Suck on Keno's board.
But I did for many years anyhoo.
I still love Keno but freedom I hold dear. |
| 24th January 2007 10:01 PM |
|
|
| glencar |
Keno was a trip but not one that you'd still want to take. |
| 24th January 2007 10:36 PM |
|
|
| Fiji Joe |
Well...it helps to understand the parameters...the first amendment does NOT grant you the right to say whatever you want anywhere...and it has no application in a private context...and one would have to be pretty fucking selfish to think they should be allowed to say whatever they want anywhere...or at least, to think they should be allowed to say it and not be criticised and/or prevented from saying it again...censorship is purely at the discretion of the forum host...as it should be..I suppose if you don't like being censored, find a forum for your voice...or host your own forum...but screaming the right to free speech in someone else's house is whack...IMO...you live by the rules of the forum...selfish and assuming to assert otherwise...that said, I have no idea what you're talking about
I've been censored here...not my rules...so I didn't bitch...I can respect this ain't my house...and I can live by any parameters the unholy trinity sets...they're good people and they are footing the bill
[Edited by Fiji Joe] |
| 24th January 2007 10:51 PM |
|
|
| Bitch |
quote:
Fiji Joe wrote:
Well...it helps to understand the parameters...the first amendment does NOT grant you the right to say whatever you want anywhere...and it has no application in a private context...and one would have to be pretty fucking selfish to think they should be allowed to say whatever they want anywhere...or at least, to think they should be allowed to say it and not be criticised and/or prevented from saying it again...censorship is purely at the discretion of the forum host...as it should be..I suppose if you don't like being censored, find a forum for your voice...or host your own forum...but screaming the right to free speech in someone else's house is whack...IMO...you live by the rules of the forum...selfish and assuming to assert otherwise...that said, I have no idea what you're talking about
so basically you agree - it doesn't exist. I wasnt talking about any forum in particular because almost all delete, edit, modify or ask poeple to remove posts. IORR, Shidoobee, Rolling Stones.com and even here on Rocks Off, and the list goes on. Some forums have built in censorship where certain words dont get posted. I'm not arguing that it shouldnt be done, I'm just asking a valid question, does freedom of speech really exist anywhere? I dont think it does.
So if you're on an airplane and yell out there's a bomb in here then you get the gun in your face, and you deserve it. Right? |
| 24th January 2007 11:35 PM |
|
|
| Fiji Joe |
Bitch wrote:
"so basically you agree - it doesn't exist."
In prison maybe...but then again
"I'm just asking a valid question, does freedom of speech really exist anywhere? I dont think it does."
Me either...ain't nothing free..if you say something and it has consequences, it's not free...IMO, true freedom of speech shouldn't be tolerated...and in reality, it isn't...that said...you probably shouldn't subject yourself to a forum where speech is limited to what one whackjob says it is...most people know what they should or should not say...when they don't society lets em' know
"So if you're on an airplane and yell out there's a bomb in here then you get the gun in your face, and you deserve it. Right?"
Pretty much...you're free to yell it...but of course, you will pay a price..we live with what we post...it's that simple |
| 24th January 2007 11:42 PM |
|
|
| glencar |
Bitch, I was just at a website(TV-related) wherein the mods have the heaviest hands & feet I've ever seen. I think Shidddooobbbeee is a bit of a drag but I haven't had any posts excised there that I know of. This & Maxy's are teh best. |
| 25th January 2007 06:43 AM |
|
|
| corgi37 |
I blame, like i always do, the fucking Yanks.
Check trouser wearing, fake tanned, Puritan ass-wipes that they are.
P.S. My great, great Grandfather is from Oakham Mass!
The fucking Yank prick! |
| 25th January 2007 07:21 AM |
|
|
| Gazza |
quote:
Bitch wrote:
so basically you agree - it doesn't exist. I wasnt talking about any forum in particular because almost all delete, edit, modify or ask poeple to remove posts. IORR, Shidoobee, Rolling Stones.com and even here on Rocks Off, and the list goes on. Some forums have built in censorship where certain words dont get posted. I'm not arguing that it shouldnt be done, I'm just asking a valid question, does freedom of speech really exist anywhere? I dont think it does.
So if you're on an airplane and yell out there's a bomb in here then you get the gun in your face, and you deserve it. Right?
Right. And thats how it should be. Freedom of speech is all very well if you use that right responsibly. Unfortunately we live in an imperfect society where theres always enough people who cant do that. They're the problem, not the people who are saying that someone cant shoot their mouth off in any situation as they see fit. |
| 25th January 2007 08:32 AM |
|
|
| Ten Thousand Motels |
>Freedom of speech is all very well if you use that right responsibly<
Anarchy is for the Angels. Humans are too irresponsible to make it work.
[Edited by Ten Thousand Motels] |
| 25th January 2007 10:02 AM |
|
|
| Gazza |
quote:
Ten Thousand Motels wrote:
>Freedom of speech is all very well if you use that right responsibly<
Anarchy is for the Angels. Humans are too irresponsible to make it work.
Correct |
| 25th January 2007 11:04 AM |
|
|
| Trey Krimsin |
Freedom of speech does exist, but only in your own home, and if you're by yourself. Don't speak your peace too loudly, though. You might offend someone. |
| 25th January 2007 01:11 PM |
|
|
| pdog |
Freedom is what you have when you can accept the consequences of your actions.
You can think and do whatver you want, the only time you can't is when the laws of nature or the will of others is stronger. When your freewill and choices allow you the oppurtunity to express themselves, all one must do is be willing to live with the results. And from my POV, the only underlying factor is simple common sense when expressing oneself through action, communication or simples presence of being...
Pretty hipidity dippidity shit, but.... oh well! |
| 25th January 2007 02:47 PM |
|
|
| polytoxic |
Pretty heady stuff today. I guess noone felt like a Child Of The Moon appreciation thread. My two cents: Freedom of speech is a right (in certain countries anyways). Silence is a virtue.
The wiser we get the better we can strike a balance between the two.
 |
| 25th January 2007 06:44 PM |
|
|
| Ten Thousand Motels |
R.I. School Bans Talking at Lunch
Jan 25 6:22
By JUSTIN M. NORTON
Associated Press Writer
WARWICK, R.I. (AP) -- Class, from now on there will be no talking at lunch.
A Roman Catholic elementary school adopted new lunchroom rules this week requiring students to remain silent while eating. The move comes after three recent choking incidents in the cafeteria.
No one was hurt, but the principal of St. Rose of Lima School explained in a letter to parents that if the lunchroom is loud, staff members cannot hear a child choking.
Christine Lamoureux, whose 12-year-old is a sixth-grader at the school, said she respects the safety issue but thinks the rule is a bad idea.
"They are silent all day," she said. "They have to get some type of release." She suggested quiet conversation be allowed during lunch.
Another mother, Thina Paone, does not mind the silent lunches, noting that the cafeteria "can be very crazy" at the suburban school south of Providence.
Principal Jeannine Fuller did not immediately return a call seeking comment, but a spokesman for the Diocese of Providence described the silence rule as a temporary safety measure.
Spokesman Michael Guilfoyle said the school does not expect complete silence but enough quiet to keep students safe.
Lori Healey, a teacher at the school who also has a son in third grade, said "silent lunch" means students can whisper.
"They know it's not for punishment," she said. "It's for safety, and they'll be the first ones to tell you."
Stacey Wildenhain, a teacher's assistant at St. Rose, said her 7-year- old son does not mind the policy. He told her: "The sooner we eat, the sooner we can get out to play," she said.
Amanda Karhuse, of the National Association of Secondary School Principals, said that students should not run wild during lunch, but that they also should not have to remain silent.
"It seems kind of ridiculous in our opinion," she said. "Kids need that social time, and they just need time to be kids at that age."
The principal's letter also spelled out other new lunch rules, including requiring students to stay in their seats and limiting them to one trip to the trash can. Any child who breaks the rules will serve detention the next day.
Paone's 6-year-old son, Joey, said he accepts the changes, but some of his classmates were having trouble obeying the rules.
Kara Casali, who also has a 6-year-old son at the school, said the rules against talking will be tough to enforce.
"I can't imagine having a silent lunch," she said.
|
| 26th January 2007 05:33 AM |
|
|
| corgi37 |
Big news here in Oz last week was that Qantas banned a guy coming home because he wore a t-shirt with G.W.'s picture & "worlds greatest terrorist" written on it.
He is going to sue. |
| 26th January 2007 05:39 AM |
|
|
| lotsajizz |
oz long ago abandoned freedom for socialism...they're almost as bad as Europe now.... |
| 26th January 2007 09:53 AM |
|
|
| Bitch |
quote:
lotsajizz wrote:
oz long ago abandoned freedom for socialism...they're almost as bad as Europe now....
It's like this everywhere, and society is moving backwards instead of forwards. Just look at comedian Michael Richards using the word nigger and getting his ass reemed for it, yet Bob Dylan used the word nigger in the song Hurricane Carter 20(? lol, someone will correct me) years ago and no one made a big deal about it. We're too up tight now and overly critical about words. Censorship is allowing someone else to decide what is right or wrong for the majority. |
| 26th January 2007 10:06 AM |
|
|
| Gazza |
quote:
Bitch wrote:
It's like this everywhere, and society is moving backwards instead of forwards. Just look at comedian Michael Richards using the word nigger and getting his ass reemed for it, yet Bob Dylan used the word nigger in the song Hurricane Carter 20(? lol, someone will correct me) years ago and no one made a big deal about it.
well..it depends on the context. Dylan wasnt CALLING Hurricane Carter a 'nigger' - he was saying it was how certain bigoted people viewed him
"To the white folks who watched - he was just a crazy nigger
No one doubted that he pulled the trigger"
Had he been describing Carter using that word as he (Dylan) viewed him, it would have been different. Then again, someone with Dylan's history is hardly going to be using a racial insult to refer to a black person. |
| 26th January 2007 12:47 PM |
|
|
| Bitch |
I know Dylan wasnt calling Carter a nigger but the fact is he said that people did call Carter a nigger. My point is, back then (was is 20 years ago?) people could use words more easily than in today's society of polical correctness. Do you think if the song came out today it would get no criticism? Look what the Stones went thru with NeoCon or the Dixie Chicks with the anti-Bush sentiment. People take everything more seriously now than they used to. IMO. Artists should provoke controversy if they want to make an impact. ok, I'm no artist but I enjoy a variety of opinions which I why I started this topic. |
| 26th January 2007 12:56 PM |
|
|
| Riffhard |
quote:
Bitch wrote:
It's like this everywhere, and society is moving backwards instead of forwards. Just look at comedian Michael Richards using the word nigger and getting his ass reemed for it, yet Bob Dylan used the word nigger in the song Hurricane Carter 20(? lol, someone will correct me) years ago and no one made a big deal about it. We're too up tight now and overly critical about words. Censorship is allowing someone else to decide what is right or wrong for the majority.
Yeah but Bitch it has everything to do with context. Dylan was not using the word nigger in the first person. He was refering to the authorities attitude towards Hurricane Carter. Richards,on the other hand,was using the word as a direct slam against the group of black people that were disrupting his act. He was calling them out as a group of niggers. Big difference.
Riffy |
| 26th January 2007 12:57 PM |
|
|
| Riffhard |
Bad timing on my part! I see Gary has addressed this.
Riffy |
| 26th January 2007 01:02 PM |
|
|
| Riffhard |
quote:
Bitch wrote:
I know Dylan wasnt calling Carter a nigger but the fact is he said that people did call Carter a nigger. My point is, back then (was is 20 years ago?) people could use words more easily than in today's society of polical correctness. Do you think if the song came out today it would get no criticism? Look what the Stones went thru with NeoCon or the Dixie Chicks with the anti-Bush sentiment. People take everything more seriously now than they used to. IMO. Artists should provoke controversy if they want to make an impact. ok, I'm no artist but I enjoy a variety of opinions which I why I started this topic.
Political correctness is the direct result of some pansy asses(read-limp dick liberals!LOL!) who feel that we must all learn to "feel" empathy towards everyone all the time. However,remember that back in 1967 the Stones had to sing "spend some time together" on the Sullivan show. So while I agree that the whole PC culture is fucking stupid beyond words there was a time when it was worse as far as what was deemed acceptable. Rememeber the Dick Van Dyke Show? They had seperate beds for fuck's sake!
Riffy |
