The culture of Rape, Bill Cosby Story

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

it is true that you don't get it, but it likely ain't your fault.  what you call free speech, isn't.  sorry, but you haven't bothered to learn the differences 'tween US freedom and yours.  

 

hmmm.

 

probably easiest to provide a link

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-11254419

 

to folks in the USA, we realize that it is the speech that offends that is requiring protection.  simply because we, the majority, dislike or even loathe the message, does not mean that we should limit the speaker.

 

"those who won our independence by revolution were not cowards. they did not fear political change. they did not exalt order at the cost of liberty. to courageous, self-reliant men, with confidence in the power of free and fearless reasoning applied through the processes of popular government, no danger flowing from speech can be deemed clear and present unless the incidence of the evil apprehended is so imminent that it may befall before there is opportunity for full discussion. if there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."

 

you don't get it.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

 

Wait. How is my free speech not like yours? In fact i can say what the **** i want, about what the **** i want without less restritcitons than you do, without fearing a goverment agent knocking on my door. I can tell a police officer to **** off with out getting arrested. ****, you are living in a police state that can bring you into prison without much of an offense.

 

I think you are being ironic but i can´t tell, because your link is useless and doesn´t prove anything. :>

 

 

Really? Here in the Netherlands, it's a crime to insult public servants like police officers. I'm also not allowed to publish anything insulting regarding the royal monarchs.

 

Which is a good thing considering how rude you Dutch can be    And please dont say this is something you actually want to do ?

[Bartimaeus]

And please dont say this is something you actually want to do ?

It doesn't have to be something you "actually want to do" for it to be something you want to be ABLE to do if you don't think royalty should be any more exempt from insults than the regular joe (or if you can envision a scenario...or if there's actually been one already...where it seemed appropriate for you to do so).

Edited July 9, 2015 by Bartimaeus

[Blarghagh]

I've actually done both already.

[BruceVC]

 

And please dont say this is something you actually want to do ?

It doesn't have to be something you "actually want to do" for it to be something you want to be ABLE to do if you don't think royalty should be any more exempt from insults than the regular joe (or if you can envision a scenario...or if there's actually been one already...where it seemed appropriate for you to do so).

 

 

Nah, that's just some pseudo-justification for people who don't want to be civil and maintain a level of decorum

 

Both those things should be banned in the interest of  a more peaceful environment. If people can't live without insulting policemen or the Dutch royalty than they should just immigrate 

I've actually done both already.

 You .......you....anarchist   

[Bartimaeus]

Nah, that's just some pseudo-justification for people who don't want to be civil and maintain a level of decorum

 

Both those things should be banned in the interest of  a more peaceful environment. If people can't live without insulting policemen or the Dutch royalty than they should just immigrate

LOL

 

R00fles!

Edited July 9, 2015 by Bartimaeus

[Meshugger]

Just sowing some seeds here:

 

[BruceVC]

Just sowing some seeds here:

 

 

I don't think you can really control that...what would be the definition of " lively debate " 

 

The more reasonable solution is simply to just prohibit certain topics or words but not in a draconian way. Like these forums are moderated 

[Meshugger]

lol

[BruceVC]

lol

Meshugger you thrive on this website, I can't think of why you would want to make yourself more depraved?

 

You'll be happy in my world, trust me 

[Gfted1]

All pedophiles, Gfted1? Did you mean all active pedophiles, or actually any and everyone who happens to feel attraction to children?

That's a interesting question. Active pedo's? Of course. Inactive pedo's? Hmm, that's a tough thought experiment. An "inactive" pedo hasn't actually acted on the impulses but only thought about it? We cant prosecute thought crime and I wouldn't want to. Now if an "inactive" pedo somehow insinuated that they were attracted to my kid, but "would never do anything", they would probably still get a knuckle sandwich. Im a flawed human being.

[Bartimaeus]

Funny, after I posted that, I had an idle thought: "Wonder if he's a dad..." Regardless, that's fair enough. I don't think any pedophile, active or inactive, would ever say anything like that, though: would be totally weird and unsettling for all parties involved. Much more likely, they don't tell you and you never know.

Edited July 9, 2015 by Bartimaeus

[Amentep]

You just have a different approache, instead of legal, it´s public shaming, say something against the wars the US have started in the last 50 years...you are probalby, anti-american etc, and will  be shamed into ground.

Or elected to public office as a Democrat.

 

[BruceVC]

Funny, after I posted that, I had an idle thought: "Wonder if he's a dad..." Regardless, that's fair enough. I don't think any pedophile, active or inactive, would ever say anything like that, though: would be totally weird and unsettling for all parties involved. Much more likely, they don't tell you and you never know.

 

Barti you seem nervous about something....do you have some sexual deviancy you feel you need to share with us ? 

[Ganrich]

 

lol

 

Meshugger you thrive on this website, I can't think of why you would want to make yourself more depraved?

 

You'll be happy in my world, trust me 

I think most of us that disagree with you on a regular basis on these forums are pretty copasetic in not drinkIng Jim Jones' magical elixir.

[Bartimaeus]

Barti you seem nervous about something....do you have some sexual deviancy you feel you need to share with us ?

R00fles!

[BruceVC]

 

 

lol

Meshugger you thrive on this website, I can't think of why you would want to make yourself more depraved?

 

You'll be happy in my world, trust me 

I think most of us that disagree with you on a regular basis on these forums are pretty copasetic in not drinkIng Jim Jones' magical elixir.

 

 

 

 

lol

Meshugger you thrive on this website, I can't think of why you would want to make yourself more depraved?

 

You'll be happy in my world, trust me 

I think most of us that disagree with you on a regular basis on these forums are pretty copasetic in not drinkIng Jim Jones' magical elixir.

 

Yes but I would obviously think of you guys and what entertains you, my world would be full of really annoying and pushy feminists and SJ warriors that keep making you feel guilty and then end up really  embarrassing themselves and or completely contradicting themselves 

[Malcador]

I don't think you can really control that...what would be the definition of " lively debate " 

 

The more reasonable solution is simply to just prohibit certain topics or words but not in a draconian way. Like these forums are moderated

Ok, how do you do that in a non-draconian way ?

[Blarghagh]

Non-draconion like this forum? Our leader pretends to be a dragon!

[Malcador]

Oh, thought he was advising that for the world at large.

[BruceVC]

 

I don't think you can really control that...what would be the definition of " lively debate " 

 

The more reasonable solution is simply to just prohibit certain topics or words but not in a draconian way. Like these forums are moderated

Ok, how do you do that in a non-draconian way ?

 

 

Well yes you are correct the reality of non-draconian is subjective

 

And when I say " my world " I mean a really popular forum that is very busy that I was in charge of 

 

So I would have the same rules as this forum, I wouldn't ban anyone because I feel even the controversial people like Oby add balance and to be honest I can't recall meeting anyone on these forums that warranted banning? I have never understood why some people really get annoyed by Oby...he is too much of a exaggeration to be taken seriously, you can't get angry with someone who you don't really know. It lacks conviction for me. Plus sometimes his theories make me really laugh as they are so bizarre. Remember that one about the lost tribe of Caucasians living in the mountains somewhere   

 

But I wouldn't allow posts of a similar nature that  luzarius created  about how the LGBT community destroyed Bioware because I see this as subtle hate speech

 

I wouldn't have the "hot girls thread " but there would be a dedicated " Adult Section "  that caters for all tastes 

 

But otherwise all other forum  content would be acceptable  

[Gromnir]

 

You just have a different approache, instead of legal, it´s public shaming, say something against the wars the US have started in the last 50 years...you are probalby, anti-american etc, and will  be shamed into ground.

Or elected to public office as a Democrat.

 

<cue rimshot>

 

is (not) worth noting that in a poll conducted by nobody reputable, fully 1/2 of american democrats would support a limit on hate speech.

 

democrats.

 

*snort*

 

in any event, we will observe that our most frequent disappointment regarding free speech is not that bigots and lunatics get to spew hate freely but rather that most americans do not use their speech rights to respond to the villains. americans, while less passive than most, is far too willing to stand idly by while their fellow human beings is tormented by evil men.

 

there ain't no active duty to respond to hate, but surely there is a moral obligation to do so.  we all too often see americans fail to live up to such obligations.  we wait for a hand-picked collection o' pundits to gather in a climate-controlled tv studio, miles and days removed from any actual bigotry and hate, to calmly debate the the issues facing american society.  three minutes o' quasi-scripted dialectic ensues before the inevitable commercial break.  are your clothes as clean as they can be?  matthew mcconaughey drives a lincoln, and so should you.

 

sitting at home, having watched the battle o' tin knights with paper swords, we cheer democracy and free speech and america. hurrah.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited July 9, 2015 by Gromnir

[BruceVC]

 

 

You just have a different approache, instead of legal, it´s public shaming, say something against the wars the US have started in the last 50 years...you are probalby, anti-american etc, and will  be shamed into ground.

Or elected to public office as a Democrat.

 

<cue rimshot>

 

is (not) worth noting that in a poll conducted by nobody reputable, fully 1/2 of american democrats would support a limit on hate speech.

 

democrats.

 

*snort*

 

in any event, we will observe that our most frequent disappointment regarding free speech is not that bigots and lunatics get to spew hate freely but rather that most americans do not use their speech rights to respond to the villains. americans, while less passive than most, is far too willing to stand idly by while their fellow human beings is tormented by evil men.

 

there ain't no active duty to respond to hate, but surely there is a moral obligation to do so.  we all too often see americans fail to live up to such obligations.  we wait for a pundits to gather in a climate-controlled tv studio, miles and days removed from any actual bigotry and hate, to calmly debate the the issues facing american society.  three minutes o' quasi-scripted dialectic ensues before the inevitable commercial break.  are your clothes as clean as they can be?  matthew mcconaughey drives a lincoln, and so should you.

 

sitting at home, having watched the battle o' tin knights with paper swords, we cheer democracy and free speech and america. hurrah.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

 You see Gromnir you are in a very fortunate position to be able to intellectualize hate speech so you defend its usage even though you don't like it

 

I live in a country where we haven't got to that point yet and people are very much effected by  words . So we ban hate speech and certain words and its makes perfect sense

 

The truth is certain  words do matter  and truly hurt some people in a palpable and psychological way. So why allow them?

[Meshugger]

Truth hurts and should be banned. It's better manufacture a truth that corresponds to imaginary ideals.

Edited July 9, 2015 by Meshugger

[Gromnir]

 

 

 

You just have a different approache, instead of legal, it´s public shaming, say something against the wars the US have started in the last 50 years...you are probalby, anti-american etc, and will  be shamed into ground.

Or elected to public office as a Democrat.

 

<cue rimshot>

 

is (not) worth noting that in a poll conducted by nobody reputable, fully 1/2 of american democrats would support a limit on hate speech.

 

democrats.

 

*snort*

 

in any event, we will observe that our most frequent disappointment regarding free speech is not that bigots and lunatics get to spew hate freely but rather that most americans do not use their speech rights to respond to the villains. americans, while less passive than most, is far too willing to stand idly by while their fellow human beings is tormented by evil men.

 

there ain't no active duty to respond to hate, but surely there is a moral obligation to do so.  we all too often see americans fail to live up to such obligations.  we wait for a pundits to gather in a climate-controlled tv studio, miles and days removed from any actual bigotry and hate, to calmly debate the the issues facing american society.  three minutes o' quasi-scripted dialectic ensues before the inevitable commercial break.  are your clothes as clean as they can be?  matthew mcconaughey drives a lincoln, and so should you.

 

sitting at home, having watched the battle o' tin knights with paper swords, we cheer democracy and free speech and america. hurrah.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

 You see Gromnir you are in a very fortunate position to be able to intellectualize hate speech so you defend its usage even though you don't like it

 

I live in a country where we haven't got to that point yet and people are very much effected by  words . So we ban hate speech and certain words and its makes perfect sense

 

The truth is certain  words do matter  and truly hurt some people in a palpable and psychological way. So why allow them?

 

ban hate speech does not stop hate.  it is our belief that banning hate speech has a tendency to increase hate.  regardless, ban hate speech does not in any way solve the larger problems that created the hate.  open and vigorous debate at least has the possibility o' curing problems.

 

also, what if the folks spewing hate is right?  what if we label folks and history proves that they were correct.  hell, maybe they is wrong, but if they can't speak because their message offends, how much speech is chilled? is not many decades past that american blacks marching and protesting were considered disruptive.  why can't the homosexuals just use their votes to bring about change instead o' their silly parades?  those folks who disagree with US foreign policy is clearly communists and we need to shut-em up and blacklist 'em and whatnot.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

ps bruce is the one who is lucky.  you got the opportunity to bring about real change at a time when it genuine matters.  the other day, when the Court ruled in favor o' same-sex marriage, we saw folks cheering 'cause the Court had defended an "underrepresented minority from the tyranny o' the majority."  is not the role o' the Court to be swayed by polls, but even bruce observed that the majority o' the US public is actual favoring same-sex marriage.  were no tyranny by the majority.  what we had were the Court being impatient with the indifference o' the majority... which hardly makes for a profound battle cry, eh?

 

your problems in your country is open and notorious and raw, just as ours were not so long ago.  in a sense, we envy you 'cause now is the time when you can bring about real change.  by comparison, our social evils is massive and entrenched and largely kept to the shadows.  example: blacks didn't get the same home ownership advantages decades ago, which has led to endemic wealth disparity.  ok, fix that.  fix it with a march on washington or protests?  how?  

 

get it right.  learn from mistakes and do it right.  Gromnir is envious o' your opportunity.

Edited July 9, 2015 by Gromnir

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

 

You just have a different approache, instead of legal, it´s public shaming, say something against the wars the US have started in the last 50 years...you are probalby, anti-american etc, and will  be shamed into ground.

Or elected to public office as a Democrat.

 

<cue rimshot>

 

is (not) worth noting that in a poll conducted by nobody reputable, fully 1/2 of american democrats would support a limit on hate speech.

 

democrats.

 

*snort*

 

in any event, we will observe that our most frequent disappointment regarding free speech is not that bigots and lunatics get to spew hate freely but rather that most americans do not use their speech rights to respond to the villains. americans, while less passive than most, is far too willing to stand idly by while their fellow human beings is tormented by evil men.

 

there ain't no active duty to respond to hate, but surely there is a moral obligation to do so.  we all too often see americans fail to live up to such obligations.  we wait for a pundits to gather in a climate-controlled tv studio, miles and days removed from any actual bigotry and hate, to calmly debate the the issues facing american society.  three minutes o' quasi-scripted dialectic ensues before the inevitable commercial break.  are your clothes as clean as they can be?  matthew mcconaughey drives a lincoln, and so should you.

 

sitting at home, having watched the battle o' tin knights with paper swords, we cheer democracy and free speech and america. hurrah.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

 You see Gromnir you are in a very fortunate position to be able to intellectualize hate speech so you defend its usage even though you don't like it

 

I live in a country where we haven't got to that point yet and people are very much effected by  words . So we ban hate speech and certain words and its makes perfect sense

 

The truth is certain  words do matter  and truly hurt some people in a palpable and psychological way. So why allow them?

 

ban hate speech does not stop hate.  it is our belief that banning hate speech has a tendency to increase hate.  regardless, ban hate speech does not in any way solve the larger problems that created the hate.  open and vigorous debate at least has the possibility o' curing problems.

 

also, what if the folks spewing hate is right?  what if we label folks and history proves that they were correct.  hell, maybe they is wrong, but if they can't speak because their message offends, how much speech is chilled? is not many decades past that american blacks marching and protesting were considered disruptive.  why can't the homosexuals just use their votes to bring about change instead o' their silly parades?  those folks who disagree with US foreign policy is clearly communists and we need to shut-em up and blacklist 'em and whatnot.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

 So this is the part you are misunderstanding and most Americans don't agree with it 

 

You right,  banning hate speech doesn't stop hate speech. But I believe you can never stop some people discriminating...that's just the way the world is. There will always be someone who hates gays or gays or resents successful women

 

But thats not our goal for me  in South Africa, we just want to remove its usage from civil society so we don't have to hear it. This of course has other positive  consequences of certain words becoming socially unacceptable and I promise you people just don't use them even in public

 

Of course this positive effect doesn't resonate with everyone but as I said I am not concerned with bigots