ryoder 1,590 #26 November 18, 2005 QuoteIt's not a crime here. It is a crime in Austria, and I believe also in Germany and a few other countries that were dramatically affected by WWII. I don't think thinking or speaking about something like this should be a crime, but my country wasn't torn apart by Nazis, so, while I disagree, I do understand where they're coming from. It appears to me that while Austria may have shed the Nazi occupation, they are still clinging to some of it's principles by having what is effectively a thought-crime. Even nut-cases should be allowed freedom-of-speech. Allowing nitwits to spout their bullshit makes it much easier to identify the nitwits."There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
beowulf 1 #27 November 18, 2005 I am sure there will be some Jews accusing you of being and antisemite. I for one agree with you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
waltappel 1 #28 November 18, 2005 QuoteI am sure there will be some Jews accusing you of being and antisemite. I for one agree with you. That's ok--I get accused of being a racist all the time. Being called anti-Jew will hardly be a stretch. It does make me feel good, though, to know that there are others who have the presence of mind to think for themselves and the courage to speak it. edited to add: Why waste an opportunity for a good rant? I think nearly everyone that screams "racist" is either a fool or a hypocrite. Let's talk about cultural generalizations here. If someone says, "Americans are fat and lazy!", do Americans freak out? Hell no--for the most part they probably think there is a lot of truth to that statement. If someone says, "American blacks have a hostile and resentful attitude.", they are called all sorts of vile names. Why is that? Personally, I see both statements as mere generalizations. There may be some truth each statement but neither comes anywhere close to approaching 100% accuracy and no generalization ever will. Is it wrong or stupid to make generalizations? I don't think so. I see it more symptomatic of a human trait--seeking predictability in an inherently unpredictable world. One-size-fits-all rules and huge approximations are a kind of convenient filter through which to view the world. Seems neither good nor bad to me. Limiting? No doubt. Evil and vile? Anyone who thinks so hasn't seen very many truly evil and vile things IMO. Having a white person screaming about racism, though, seems quite comical to me. I'd love to see the same white person walk alone and unarmed through a ghetto on a Saturday night while conspicuously carrying an expensive camera or something similar. They would find out what *real* racism is about. It's about the kind of deep inner rage that drives someone to do bad things to someone because of their race. It can come from people of any walk of life. Calling someone who merely states some sort of generalization a racist is really weak by comparison. Screw the hypocrisy. Walt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,989 #29 November 18, 2005 >I wonder what the founding fathers would say about our idea of free speech today? They would defend it. We have this idea that the age we live in today is the worst, with the most hypocrisy, the most dire perils, the most to lose. But back in the days of the founding fathers, life wasn't all powdered wigs and polo. There was a tremendous amount of religious strife. Politics was as bad as it is today. (although most went unseen; no CSPAN or CNN to bring you up to the minute news.) So back then, you had people who thought Britain wasn't so bad, and that we should make nice - which nowadays would be like someone suggesting that we sign a truce with Al Qaeda. Surely such a person should be shot, or at least shut up, lest their offensive, insulting, false diatribes infect our fair country! But we were smart enough to draft a constitution, and then a bill of rights, that explicitly protected such speech. The founding fathers realized that such rights were critical to a free society. So I think the founding fathers were not so protected, nor so naive, that they would think that no one would use the first amendment to say things that were downright offensive. Indeed, I think they realized that it _would_ protect such speech, and that such speech was critical to the sort of society they envisioned. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jenfly00 0 #30 November 18, 2005 QuoteQuoteBut no how matter bad it was, it's ridiculous that free speech is not permitted on these subjects in those countries. I don't agree. I think we've gotten so bound up in the idea that free speech means "I can say what I want, when I want, no matter how cruel, evil, offensive or false it happens to be," that we forget the society of the time did set limits. I wonder what the founding fathers would say about our idea of free speech today? rl I'm wondering what shoes you are wearing on that slope you are on?----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JimmyD 0 #31 November 18, 2005 you act like things are not that way here, like it is different. Because it is criminal there, doesn't mene you will go to jail. Because it isn't criminal here doesn't mean you can say anything you want. Seventy years ago they killed a bunch of innocent people, their society did, now they overcompensate, at least on paper. One hundred and fifty + years ago we killed and enslaved a bunch of innocents here, our society did, now its bad for us to. Try saying the N-word out loud if you're not black and see how long you have a job. No jail, but you will pay. See? Not that different. Get off your high horse please. There is no slippery slope. Every culture has things for which you will pay a steep price when said. It is just that in our culture, there is no price needed to be paid for Bush sucks or Kerry blows. But there is a price for saying other things. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr2mk1g 10 #32 November 18, 2005 Another Voltaire moment I'm afraid. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RhondaLea 4 #33 November 18, 2005 Quote>I wonder what the founding fathers would say about our idea of free speech today? They would defend it. JimmyD has already made part of my argument for me. All I'm going to add is this: the founding fathers accorded the right of free speech to white men. Not to women, not to children, not to any people of color. The underlying documents that support our way of life were intended to uphold the rights of free, white, property-holding men over the age of 21. So I'm not quite so sure as you are. rlIf you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RhondaLea 4 #34 November 18, 2005 QuoteAllowing nitwits to spout their bullshit makes it much easier to identify the nitwits. It also gives them an opportunity to gather like minds together. And in these days of instant communication, more and more groups of people with very strange ideas about the world are finding each other. Strength in numbers. It makes me a little nervous, especially when I take note of how rabid some of these people are about their ideas. rlIf you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #35 November 18, 2005 Quote All I'm going to add is this: the founding fathers accorded the right of free speech to white men. Not to women, not to children, not to any people of color. No, they accorded that right to all citizens. Don't believe there are any qualifiers in the Bill of Rights, even if our notion of which classes of people have full rights has evolved over time. They had just exited a war where speaking ill of the king could get you executed. Their concern was much more about a heavy handed government than of people abusing their right to speak. Go a bit further back and people were executed for challenging the earth centric theory of the heavens. The Church was running things and it didn't like its dogma challenged. Curiously enough, the same is true of the current Administration. Would it be great if Shrub could jail those who dared speak ill of the war, or of intelligent design? Sorry, either you buy into free speech, or you don't. Jimmy's posting addressed none of that - you can be fired by your employer. Very different than being convicted of a crime and jailed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RhondaLea 4 #36 November 18, 2005 QuoteQuote All I'm going to add is this: the founding fathers accorded the right of free speech to white men. Not to women, not to children, not to any people of color. No, they accorded that right to all citizens. Don't believe there are any qualifiers in the Bill of Rights, even if our notion of which classes of people have full rights has evolved over time. There are no qualifiers in the Bill of Rights, just as there are none in the Declaration. But the laws and climate of the time precluded the extension of these rights to much more than half the population. There was an underlying assumption that "all men are created equal" means "all free white landowners over the age of 21." QuoteSorry, either you buy into free speech, or you don't. Jimmy's posting addressed none of that - you can be fired by your employer. Very different than being convicted of a crime and jailed. Have you ever been unemployed for an extended period? Find two people--one who has been jailed and one who has been unable to provide for their basic needs, and ask them to compare their experiences for you. It's enlightening. My own belief is that people should be able to do anything they want to do, so long as they aren't stepping on someone else. Unfortunately, the "right to free speech" as exercised today allows a great deal of damage to be done to someone without ever laying a hand on them. Verbal assault is no different or better than physical assault, and at this point, we use the right to free speech to justify exactly that. The right to free speech also allows like-minded crazies to find each other and put action into the program. At one time, David Goldberger was my hero. Now I am coming to wonder whether his choice actually created new boundaries rather than protecting the existing ones. The more "free speech" we allow, the worse things seem to get. I have the feeling that "free speech" gives a greater benefit to those who would impede individual freedom rather than to those who want nothing more than to exercise their right to go about their lawful business without interference. rlIf you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #37 November 18, 2005 Good stuff, Walt...I agree with your first post in this thread. Edited to add: Now that I read it, I agree with the second one too...wish I had the gift of written expression.My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JimmyD 0 #38 November 18, 2005 QuoteThe Church was running things and it didn't like its dogma challenged. Curiously enough, the same is true of the current Administration.Quote you talk like this is some evil saved for the church/religion, or bush. This behavior is at least cultural, if not human nature. Go look how much crap Bill Booth gets for introducing the Skyhook - THAT reminded me of the 'flat-worlders' killing the 'rounders' - cultures are very averse to new ideas. yes we do need a first amendment. but do not for a second believe that human nature has changed. And jail is not so bad if you are broke without a life. When you get out your life is still crap, but harder to do everything normal in society. I've not been but seem to know many in and out of jail now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DrewGPM 0 #39 November 18, 2005 QuoteBut the laws and climate of the time precluded the extension of these rights to much more than half the population. There was an underlying assumption that "all men are created equal" means "all free white landowners over the age of 21."l That is not the case. Yes, some of them owned slaves, but the fact is that the people who wrote the constitution wanted to get rid of it. http://www.wallbuilders.com/resources/search/detail.php?ResourceID=10 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites RhondaLea 4 #40 November 18, 2005 QuoteQuoteBut the laws and climate of the time precluded the extension of these rights to much more than half the population. There was an underlying assumption that "all men are created equal" means "all free white landowners over the age of 21."l That is not the case. Yes, they owned slaves, but the fact is that the people who wrote the constitution wanted to get rid of it. http://www.wallbuilders.com/resources/search/detail.php?ResourceID=10 Not all of them, and not even enough of them to prevail. You will note that slavery was not abolished until nearly one hundred years later, after a long and bloody war, and that it took another near-100 years for blacks to obtain legal recognition of the same rights accorded to free white men. Please consider how much "free speech" people of color were permitted during that time. Then please address the right of free speech accorded to women and children in the context of the founders view. rlIf you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DrewGPM 0 #41 November 18, 2005 They succeeded in starting the country down the path that led to total nation wide abolishment of slavery. "In fact, based in part on the efforts of these Founders, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts began abolishing slavery in 1780; Connecticut and Rhode Island did so in 1784; Vermont in 1786; New Hampshire in 1792; New York in 1799; and New Jersey did so in 1804. Additionally, the reason that Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Iowa all prohibited slavery was a Congressional act, authored by Constitution signer Rufus King and signed into law by President George Washington..." Free Blacks were accorded equal rights under the law. Slaves were not...and that was because of the slave owners in the south. Until those folks were on board, slavery could not be abolished. According the US governemnt, free blacks had equal right. society didn't accept that right away...hell there are still poeple like the Klan who don't accept it. The intention of writers of the Constitution was that ALL men are equal. i'll get back to you on the women and children thing as soon as i find the appropriate references. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites RhondaLea 4 #42 November 18, 2005 QuoteFree Blacks were accorded equal rights under the law. They were? Then what was that law that was passed back when I was a small child and why was it needed? rlIf you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SudsyFist 0 #43 November 18, 2005 QuoteAnother Voltaire moment I'm afraid. Interesting tidbit Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mr2mk1g 10 #44 November 18, 2005 I wondered if anyone would get it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DrewGPM 0 #45 November 18, 2005 There were civil rights act was in 1957 and 1964? How old are you...or are you talking about some other law? even before those Acts, blacks were equal under the law. We had racist out there who still hated blacks made it tough to actually be equal. Since not everyone in society agree with equality for blacks, we needed a law to specifically make it illegal to discriminate. http://www.usdoj.gov/kidspage/crt/backgrd.htm is a great explanation of why we needed the Civil Rights Act. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites RhondaLea 4 #46 November 18, 2005 QuoteI wondered if anyone would get it. I got it; but after years of taking it at face value, I no longer agree with it. If people can't exercise self-control, then they need to be gagged. Which reminds me...if we all have the right to free speech, where does the idea of a "gag order" fit in? rlIf you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites tbrown 26 #47 November 18, 2005 In my younger days I worked at two different jobs with two different guys who saw the camps first hand. They were American GI's whose units found and liberated the camps. They'd fought a horrible war all the way across Europe from France and been through the Battle of the Bulge. They'd thought they'd seen it all until they saw those camps. One of them in particular said he still couldn't get the smell out of his mind, and that was some thirty years later when he was telling me. They remembered things like how many of the prisoners went right on dying, evenunder American care because they were too far gone to live. And they remember what an arrogant and unrepentant bunch of SOBs the SS guards were. They'd tried to hide by wearing striped prisoner clothes, but they were easy to spot because they were obviously healthy and well fed. I don't know if either of these guys are still living now, but they told me what they saw and I believe them. Oh yeah, also used to jump with a guy at Perris long ago whose parents were both Auschwitz survivors. They weren't Jews, but were Russians deported to Auschwitz for slave labor. They even had the numbers tattooed on their wrists. This stuff really happened people, don't ever forget it. Your humble servant.....Professor Gravity ! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites RhondaLea 4 #48 November 18, 2005 I was born in 1958. Blacks were never equal under the law, because there was always some other law somewhere to undermine the rights they supposedly had. And as far as having a right to free speech, well...if no one is taking steps to see that the law is enforced, what good is it? We're drifting here. And getting back to the point, there was no free speech for women, children and people of color at the time the Bill of Rights was drafted and passed. The culture of the time took it for granted that such rights were reserved only to a few--i.e., white men--and regardless of what the words said, the actual practice was different, because the mindset was different. I maintain that the founders would be boggled at what we allow. rlIf you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GTAVercetti 0 #49 November 18, 2005 And I maintain that none of us knew them and so none of us knows what they would think about it today, so we should stop with that strain of this thread. In anycase, the 1st was created to ensure that the radical speech that was being proclaimed during that time was allowed to continue. In the context of the time, yes, it was mostly white men. But the Bill of Rights does not mention context so the 1st applies to whatever society deems is the context of the time.Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites RhondaLea 4 #50 November 18, 2005 QuoteAnd I maintain that none of us knew them and so none of us knows what they would think about it today, so we should stop with that strain of this thread. Fine. Then here's my next question: Who in the hell are we to say what the laws of Austria should be? rlIf you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 Next Page 2 of 4 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
DrewGPM 0 #39 November 18, 2005 QuoteBut the laws and climate of the time precluded the extension of these rights to much more than half the population. There was an underlying assumption that "all men are created equal" means "all free white landowners over the age of 21."l That is not the case. Yes, some of them owned slaves, but the fact is that the people who wrote the constitution wanted to get rid of it. http://www.wallbuilders.com/resources/search/detail.php?ResourceID=10 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RhondaLea 4 #40 November 18, 2005 QuoteQuoteBut the laws and climate of the time precluded the extension of these rights to much more than half the population. There was an underlying assumption that "all men are created equal" means "all free white landowners over the age of 21."l That is not the case. Yes, they owned slaves, but the fact is that the people who wrote the constitution wanted to get rid of it. http://www.wallbuilders.com/resources/search/detail.php?ResourceID=10 Not all of them, and not even enough of them to prevail. You will note that slavery was not abolished until nearly one hundred years later, after a long and bloody war, and that it took another near-100 years for blacks to obtain legal recognition of the same rights accorded to free white men. Please consider how much "free speech" people of color were permitted during that time. Then please address the right of free speech accorded to women and children in the context of the founders view. rlIf you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DrewGPM 0 #41 November 18, 2005 They succeeded in starting the country down the path that led to total nation wide abolishment of slavery. "In fact, based in part on the efforts of these Founders, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts began abolishing slavery in 1780; Connecticut and Rhode Island did so in 1784; Vermont in 1786; New Hampshire in 1792; New York in 1799; and New Jersey did so in 1804. Additionally, the reason that Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Iowa all prohibited slavery was a Congressional act, authored by Constitution signer Rufus King and signed into law by President George Washington..." Free Blacks were accorded equal rights under the law. Slaves were not...and that was because of the slave owners in the south. Until those folks were on board, slavery could not be abolished. According the US governemnt, free blacks had equal right. society didn't accept that right away...hell there are still poeple like the Klan who don't accept it. The intention of writers of the Constitution was that ALL men are equal. i'll get back to you on the women and children thing as soon as i find the appropriate references. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RhondaLea 4 #42 November 18, 2005 QuoteFree Blacks were accorded equal rights under the law. They were? Then what was that law that was passed back when I was a small child and why was it needed? rlIf you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SudsyFist 0 #43 November 18, 2005 QuoteAnother Voltaire moment I'm afraid. Interesting tidbit Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr2mk1g 10 #44 November 18, 2005 I wondered if anyone would get it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DrewGPM 0 #45 November 18, 2005 There were civil rights act was in 1957 and 1964? How old are you...or are you talking about some other law? even before those Acts, blacks were equal under the law. We had racist out there who still hated blacks made it tough to actually be equal. Since not everyone in society agree with equality for blacks, we needed a law to specifically make it illegal to discriminate. http://www.usdoj.gov/kidspage/crt/backgrd.htm is a great explanation of why we needed the Civil Rights Act. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RhondaLea 4 #46 November 18, 2005 QuoteI wondered if anyone would get it. I got it; but after years of taking it at face value, I no longer agree with it. If people can't exercise self-control, then they need to be gagged. Which reminds me...if we all have the right to free speech, where does the idea of a "gag order" fit in? rlIf you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tbrown 26 #47 November 18, 2005 In my younger days I worked at two different jobs with two different guys who saw the camps first hand. They were American GI's whose units found and liberated the camps. They'd fought a horrible war all the way across Europe from France and been through the Battle of the Bulge. They'd thought they'd seen it all until they saw those camps. One of them in particular said he still couldn't get the smell out of his mind, and that was some thirty years later when he was telling me. They remembered things like how many of the prisoners went right on dying, evenunder American care because they were too far gone to live. And they remember what an arrogant and unrepentant bunch of SOBs the SS guards were. They'd tried to hide by wearing striped prisoner clothes, but they were easy to spot because they were obviously healthy and well fed. I don't know if either of these guys are still living now, but they told me what they saw and I believe them. Oh yeah, also used to jump with a guy at Perris long ago whose parents were both Auschwitz survivors. They weren't Jews, but were Russians deported to Auschwitz for slave labor. They even had the numbers tattooed on their wrists. This stuff really happened people, don't ever forget it. Your humble servant.....Professor Gravity ! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RhondaLea 4 #48 November 18, 2005 I was born in 1958. Blacks were never equal under the law, because there was always some other law somewhere to undermine the rights they supposedly had. And as far as having a right to free speech, well...if no one is taking steps to see that the law is enforced, what good is it? We're drifting here. And getting back to the point, there was no free speech for women, children and people of color at the time the Bill of Rights was drafted and passed. The culture of the time took it for granted that such rights were reserved only to a few--i.e., white men--and regardless of what the words said, the actual practice was different, because the mindset was different. I maintain that the founders would be boggled at what we allow. rlIf you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GTAVercetti 0 #49 November 18, 2005 And I maintain that none of us knew them and so none of us knows what they would think about it today, so we should stop with that strain of this thread. In anycase, the 1st was created to ensure that the radical speech that was being proclaimed during that time was allowed to continue. In the context of the time, yes, it was mostly white men. But the Bill of Rights does not mention context so the 1st applies to whatever society deems is the context of the time.Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RhondaLea 4 #50 November 18, 2005 QuoteAnd I maintain that none of us knew them and so none of us knows what they would think about it today, so we should stop with that strain of this thread. Fine. Then here's my next question: Who in the hell are we to say what the laws of Austria should be? rlIf you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
