|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2007 6:17 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 4:16 pm
Ugh. So it's perfectly okay for lifers to parade around with pictures of "aborted babies" and use cheap scare tactics, but it's not okay to run pro-choice cartoons?
Censorship disgusts me, but this is worse than outright censorship; it says this double-standard is okay, and it's not.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 5:11 pm
The fact that a viewpoint is censored should not only alarm pro-choicers, it should be alarming to everyone else. Censorship doesn't help people. It oppresses and represses. Logic is the way to truth, not censorship.
It wasn't long ago that we got the newspaper back, we only order the weekend service which includes the sunday paper.
So I flip through the sunday comics and I can't help but notice that the artists are like, anywhere from 5-10 or even 20 years behind the rest of the world when it comes to ideas and characters. Too many of them espouse pretty conservative values.
Opus is the only comic that strikes me as being "with the times" and not only that, also funny.
I think, but don't know for sure that newspapers cater to an older, conservative audience who has mostly quiet, lazy, low-key days and thus unlimited time to relax in order to read the whole thing.
Younger generations are "doing" TV and especially internet for their source of the 'happenings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 5:49 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 5:57 pm
It makes me think of this and how secular views are underrepresented in our "liberal" media.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2007 7:41 pm
Talon-chan It makes me think of this and how secular views are underrepresented in our "liberal" media. Don't kid yourself. Every time you read about how 'liberal' the media is, it's just a strawman argument so they can justify being off the deep end, no matter what their opinion is. Everything outside the mainstream uses this argument. It's just sickening how well it seems to WORK when Fox is concerned.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2007 3:42 pm
rolleyes I think it's the "aborted" BABEH pictures that should be censored.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 04, 2007 11:51 pm
Not to derail the thread, but I do actually think censorship is a good thing in genderal. I don't think political views should be censored, so these cartoons shouldn't be, but I think for example that freedom of speech should not protect hate speech.
I think hate speech oppresses and represses, and I wish it could be censored. <3
Back on topic: They censored a political view ey? Charmed I'm sure. rolleyes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 05, 2007 2:31 pm
Well, depends on the kind of "censorship." Technically, if citizens boycott or speak out and a company/person/whatever decides to censor itself, it's not so bad. But legal censorship of something just because it offends certain people freaks me out.
That's why it's so tricky. I'd LOVE for hate speech to be censored*, BUT I also think that it's dangerous to censor anything just because people don't like it. So for now, let them have their hate speech bullshit. It's their opinion. But I also have a right to say that their opinion is complete crap.
*AT LEAST: People should start treating sexist and homophobic slurs like they do the n-word or anything anti-semetic. Kids say people say things like "You're a f**!" and nobody cares, but they all FREAK if you use the n-word. It's hypocritical. If you can't make fun of one group without being socially ostracized, why is it okay with a different one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 12:49 am
*Provides the definition of hate speech that I'm working with.*Quote: Hate speech is a controversial term for speech intended to degrade, intimidate, or incite violence or prejudicial action against a person or group of people based on their race, gender, age, ethnicity, nationality, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, language ability, moral or political views, socioeconomic class, occupation or appearance (such as height, weight, and hair color). The term covers written as well as oral communication and some forms of behaviors in a public setting. It is also sometimes called antilocution and is the first point on Allport's scale which measures prejudice in a society. I'm not saying hate speech should be censored specifically because it offends people. I'm saying it should be censored because it is designed to degrade, intimidate, and incite violent/prejudicial action. It's not because it's merely upsetting, it's because it marginalizes, degrades, and intimidates groups of people based on things they cannot (or should not) have to change aboyt themselves, such as race, gender, age, ethnicity etc. Hate speech is more then a crap opinion. It's oppressive, and harmful in the real world. I mean, that might just be my opinion, and I might be wrong, but in my mind allowing this kind of speech and behaviour is scarier to me then legally enforcing censorship.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 5:28 am
Celria I mean, that might just be my opinion, and I might be wrong, but in my mind allowing this kind of speech and behaviour is scarier to me then legally enforcing censorship. How about the way it is handled in Denmark? You can say whatever you want without being censored, but you might be fined or put in jail for it. Danish penal code Whoever publicly, or with intention to disseminating in a larger circle makes statements or other pronouncement, by which a group of persons is threatened, derided or degraded because of their race, colour of skin, national or ethnic background, faith or sexual orientation, will be punished by fine or imprisonment for up to 2 years. Sec. 2. When meting out the punishment it shall be considered an especially aggravating circumstance, if the count has the character of propaganda.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 7:15 am
Celria *Provides the definition of hate speech that I'm working with.*Quote: Hate speech is a controversial term for speech intended to degrade, intimidate, or incite violence or prejudicial action against a person or group of people based on their race, gender, age, ethnicity, nationality, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, language ability, moral or political views, socioeconomic class, occupation or appearance (such as height, weight, and hair color). The term covers written as well as oral communication and some forms of behaviors in a public setting. It is also sometimes called antilocution and is the first point on Allport's scale which measures prejudice in a society. I'm not saying hate speech should be censored specifically because it offends people. I'm saying it should be censored because it is designed to degrade, intimidate, and incite violent/prejudicial action. It's not because it's merely upsetting, it's because it marginalizes, degrades, and intimidates groups of people based on things they cannot (or should not) have to change aboyt themselves, such as race, gender, age, ethnicity etc. Hate speech is more then a crap opinion. It's oppressive, and harmful in the real world. I mean, that might just be my opinion, and I might be wrong, but in my mind allowing this kind of speech and behaviour is scarier to me then legally enforcing censorship. To me, censorship is scarier. The government has enough control of our lives already. I'd rather it be censored by the disgust of the listeners, rather than the actions of the government. There are bigots out there, and sometimes their hate speech makes me feel awful (I'm Jewish), but... I believe it's their right to say whatever they want... and my right to counterprotest, argue, whatever. I am pretty extreme in my support for free speech, though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 8:49 am
Quote: It's not because it's merely upsetting, it's because it marginalizes, degrades, and intimidates groups of people based on things they cannot (or should not) have to change aboyt themselves, such as race, gender, age, ethnicity etc. Hate speech is more then a crap opinion. It's oppressive, and harmful in the real world You'll be hard-pressed to demonstrate such a connection between "insult against an individual" and "oppressive and harmful to an entire group." Many of us think it is just obvious and doesnt need any explanation, but really it does (in much the same way pro-lifers assume a fetus has a right to life means abortion is banned... but it really does need more explanation than that) "You fat b*****d!" Is intendted to upset someone based on their physical appearance and birth status - one is difficult to change, the other cannot change but is no longer of social importance. It is quite a leap (without justification) that most people make that this means the speaker wishes harm upon all fat people and all illegitimate children. Perhaps it is our society's relative comfort with overweight people... and our complete lack of concern with illegitimacy that makes such a statement harmless to a group (though harmful to the individual). Perhaps in a country where race, age, gender, ethnicity truly doesn't matter (sort of like illegitimacy), such "hate speech" would simply cease to exist? Further... the way you seem to word it would mean that any insult that in any way singles out any physical feature on a person would be hate speech... which seems to extend far beyond what the law intends when banning hate speech.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 11:36 pm
@adabyron: That sort of thing sounds like what I'm talking about. You can say it, but there are consqunces. Consequences as harsh as imprisonment sounds like censorship to me.
@Talon-chan: Well, I think most cases of hate speech in mass media, such as the internet or addresses to large groups (Like say, that Kramer guy from seinfeld yelling '******' a bunch of times at a comedy festival') would be able to be counted as oppressive and harmful to an entire group, because it's not just an individual who hears it, it'd be everyone who saw the clip, and was black.
There have been cases in my life where people have used "You fat b*****d" on me individually, and they must mean fat is a generic insult, and not be insulting my physical features, because I tell you, I'm skinny as a goddamned rake. (He also told me when I questioned him about it that he just hates fat people because apparently they're all lazy ******** be told, I'd much rather a world where these things don't matter. Where people don't insult and degrade people not because of laws, but because they just don't want to insult or degrade people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 13, 2007 7:28 pm
Censorship is such a dirty word. :
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
