Massassi Forums Logo

This is the static archive of the Massassi Forums. The forums are closed indefinitely. Thanks for all the memories!

You can also download Super Old Archived Message Boards from when Massassi first started.

"View" counts are as of the day the forums were archived, and will no longer increase.

☖ Forums → Discussion Forum → Justice is served!
12345678
Justice is served!
2006-02-21, 5:19 PM #41
Originally posted by Centrist:
I admit the law detracts from freedom of speech, but expressing certain radical viewpoints (e.g., KKK) needs to be illegal.

I hereby declare that any viewpoint which contradicts lowering taxes, kicking out illegal immigrants, reducing the size of government, and kicking the **** out of anyone who threatens us is a radical viewpoint and will be dealt accordingly. Continued expressions of these viewpoints will mean long prison sentences and in extreme cases, death.

Long live the Empire.
Code to the left of him, code to the right of him, code in front of him compil'd and thundered. Programm'd at with shot and $SHELL. Boldly he typed and well. Into the jaws of C. Into the mouth of PERL. Debug'd the 0x258.
2006-02-21, 5:34 PM #42
I think freedom of speech shouldn't be carried to lengths as to which people who for unforeseen circumstances are not aware of something and are reached by a source that knows full well that it is telling the exact opposite of the truth. In other words... don't lie to ignorant people.
Nothing to see here, move along.
2006-02-21, 5:35 PM #43
There's an electrical engineering professor at my university who's a Holocaust denier and recently made national news for supporting the Iranian president's comments on the Holocaust. He can't be fired because he has tenure, but that hasn't stopped a lot of students here from insisting that the university get rid of him. These people really believe that we ought to suspend the First Amendment just because they're offended, and that kind of attitude is more dangerous in my opinion than denying an event that every intelligent person in the world knows happened.
If you think the waiters are rude, you should see the manager.
2006-02-21, 5:37 PM #44
Originally posted by JediGandalf:
I hereby declare that any viewpoint which contradicts lowering taxes, kicking out illegal immigrants, reducing the size of government, and kicking the **** out of anyone who threatens us is a radical viewpoint and will be dealt accordingly. Continued expressions of these viewpoints will mean long prison sentences and in extreme cases, death.

Long live the Empire.

Or we could create a law which specifically defines what will be considered a radical extremist expression/action. Then it wouldn't so arbitrary.

I'm kind of being a devil's advocate here. I'm certainly not in favor of anything like the Sedition Acts, but I don't blame Austria either.
Historians are the most powerful and dangerous members of any society. They must be watched carefully... They can spoil everything. - Nikita Khrushchev.
Kill one man, and you are a murderer. Kill millions of men, and you are a conqueror. Kill them all, and you are a god. - Jean Rostand.
2006-02-21, 5:40 PM #45
Look... if some one dropped a nuke on the U.S. and 70 years later some idiot starts denying it for whatever reasons... don't you think this idiot should be SHOT????

EDIT: *holds shotgun waiting for the first person who says no*
Nothing to see here, move along.
2006-02-21, 5:49 PM #46
Originally posted by Centrist:
Or we could create a law which specifically defines what will be considered a radical extremist expression/action. Then it wouldn't so arbitrary.

I'm kind of being a devil's advocate here. I'm certainly not in favor of anything like the Sedition Acts, but I don't blame Austria either.

There's nothing arbitrary about that. If you do not favor lower taxes, you will be arrested.

See where I'm going? Laws can be changed. Look at the laws throughout this nation. They bend and flex and fold. Given the authority and support, I can drum up a law arbitrarily defining that anti-conservative thinking shall be punishable. So long as I'm given the authority, there is nothing stopping me from revoking speech freedoms in the name of "protection against hate."

Edit: On second thought.
Code to the left of him, code to the right of him, code in front of him compil'd and thundered. Programm'd at with shot and $SHELL. Boldly he typed and well. Into the jaws of C. Into the mouth of PERL. Debug'd the 0x258.
2006-02-21, 5:51 PM #47
Freedom of speech does not mean you can go around spouting BS. Heck... I'd never die or fight for something like that.
Nothing to see here, move along.
2006-02-21, 5:54 PM #48
YES, IT DOES.

Freedom of Speech is most important for unpopular ideas. Popular ideas don't need protecting, because no one will atempt to silence them.
2006-02-21, 5:55 PM #49
Originally posted by SF_GoldG_01:
Freedom of speech does not mean you can go around spouting BS. Heck... I'd never die or fight for something like that.

This is exactly what freedom of speech is. I have every right to spout off bull****. Problem is that people get offended and ***** about it and want "daddy" to come make them feel better. Guess what, you're going to get offended in your life. Deal.
Code to the left of him, code to the right of him, code in front of him compil'd and thundered. Programm'd at with shot and $SHELL. Boldly he typed and well. Into the jaws of C. Into the mouth of PERL. Debug'd the 0x258.
2006-02-21, 5:56 PM #50
Originally posted by Wuss:
YES, IT DOES.

Freedom of Speech is most important for unpopular ideas. Popular ideas don't need protecting, because no one will atempt to silence them.


Look... men fought and died so you could have a right to speak... they never imagined they would have idiots who would deny facts to just to use their right, and at the same time their words could hurt the innocent. :mad:
Nothing to see here, move along.
2006-02-21, 5:57 PM #51
Originally posted by SF_GoldG_01:
Look... if some one dropped a nuke on the U.S. and 70 years later some idiot starts denying it for whatever reasons... don't you think this idiot should be SHOT????

EDIT: *holds shotgun waiting for the first person who says no*


No, and if you think someone ought to be shot for being wrong, then I'm glad I'll never have to live under a government that you're a member of.

Originally posted by SF_GoldG_01:
Look... men fought and died so you could have a right to speak... they never imagined they would have idiots who would deny facts to just to use their right, and at the same time their words could hurt the innocent. :mad:


How does Holocaust denial "hurt the innocent"? It's a laughable belief, and the best way to combat it is to let it out in the open to be shot down by those who know better.
If you think the waiters are rude, you should see the manager.
2006-02-21, 6:01 PM #52
[QUOTE=Michael MacFarlane]No, and if you think someone ought to be shot for being wrong, then I'm glad I'll never have to live under a government that you're a member of.



How does Holocaust denial "hurt the innocent"? It's a laughable belief, and the best way to combat it is to let it out in the open to be shot down by those who know better.[/QUOTE]

I don't think some one should be shot for being wrong... I think some one should be shot for saying wrong things, knowing full well that its wrong with the intention to mislead others... maybe not shot, but atleast punished.
Nothing to see here, move along.
2006-02-21, 6:02 PM #53
[QUOTE=Michael MacFarlane] How does Holocaust denial "hurt the innocent"? It's a laughable belief, and the best way to combat it is to let it out in the open to be shot down by those who know better.[/QUOTE]

Just imagine some one who was in a concentration camp reading that his life was a lie...
Nothing to see here, move along.
2006-02-21, 6:02 PM #54
It is pretty ironic (and I'm about to make gross generalisations here) that only a few days ago the western world was telling the muslims not to get so worked up and that the cartoons were all part of freedom of speech, and now a westerner goes to jail for holocaust denial.
If nothing else I can see how it can breed anti-semitism, it says the Jews get special laws that the other religions don't.
2006-02-21, 6:04 PM #55
Originally posted by SF_GoldG_01:
Just imagine some one who was in a concentration camp reading that his life was a lie...


So? He knows better, and so does everyone else. He might be offended, but our constitution doesn't guarantee freedom from offensive statements.
If you think the waiters are rude, you should see the manager.
2006-02-21, 6:04 PM #56
I just think its not fair that millions of people have to put up with crap like this... I am speaking of those who were part of the holocaust.
Nothing to see here, move along.
2006-02-21, 6:05 PM #57
[QUOTE=Michael MacFarlane]So? He knows better, and so does everyone else. He might be offended, but our constitution doesn't guarantee freedom from offensive statements.[/QUOTE]

Yes, but shouldn't the offense have justifiable foundations?
Nothing to see here, move along.
2006-02-21, 6:06 PM #58
Originally posted by SF_GoldG_01:
Look... men fought and died so you could have a right to speak... they never imagined they would have idiots who would deny facts to just to use their right, and at the same time their words could hurt the innocent.


I must have missed that part in the Constitution.

[QUOTE=The Bill of Rights]Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.[/QUOTE]

Where does it say "unless you deny the facts?" :confused:


And speaking of denying the facts... aren't you the one that denies all evidence of evolution? That's a pretty unpopular opinion (at least, in some circles). Some people would accuse you of attempting to mislead others and using your logic, would want you to be punished. I know there is a big difference between hate speak and debating scientific theories, but the Constitution protects both.
2006-02-21, 6:10 PM #59
Originally posted by Wuss:
I must have missed that part in the Constitution.



Where does it say "unless you deny the facts?"


And speaking of denying the facts... aren't you the one that denies all evidence of evolution? That's a pretty unpopular opinion (at least, in some circles). Some people would accuse you of attempting to mislead others and using your logic, would want you to be punished. I know there is a big difference between hate speak and debating scientific theories, but the Constitution protects both.


Read my post closely: I'm attacking people who are misleading knowing full well that their declarations are wrong or incorrect.

I may mislead people, I may not... my intentions and the extent of my knowledge are doing what it can to find the truth, ergo, one of the reasons I'm not discussing evolution at this moment and also I am not on trial here.
Nothing to see here, move along.
2006-02-21, 6:14 PM #60
Originally posted by SF_GoldG_01:
Read my post closely: I'm attacking people who are misleading knowing full well that their declarations are wrong or incorrect.

First of all, you don't know he was being intentionally misleading. He probably actually thought the holocaust didn't happen. Second, so what? Even if they do know, you know what that's called? Lying. And that's not a crime, and it never should be, because freedom of speech lets you lie all you want for whatever reason. That's why it's called freedom of speech...
Bassoon, n. A brazen instrument into which a fool blows out his brains.
2006-02-21, 6:15 PM #61
Originally posted by SF_GoldG_01:
Read my post closely: I'm attacking people who are misleading knowing full well that their declarations are wrong or incorrect.

I may mislead people, I may not... my intentions and the extent of my knowledge are doing what it can to find the truth, ergo, one of the reasons I'm not discussing evolution at this moment and also I am not on trial here.

Ok. I can play by your rules. The next time you lie to me about a subject, I will ban you. You purposefully mislead me in an ignorant subject and I will take action.
Code to the left of him, code to the right of him, code in front of him compil'd and thundered. Programm'd at with shot and $SHELL. Boldly he typed and well. Into the jaws of C. Into the mouth of PERL. Debug'd the 0x258.
2006-02-21, 6:17 PM #62
Originally posted by SF_GoldG_01:
Yes, but shouldn't the offense have justifiable foundations?


Uh... what?

Originally posted by SF_GoldG_01:
Read my post closely: I'm attacking people who are misleading knowing full well that their declarations are wrong or incorrect.

I may mislead people, I may not... my intentions and the extent of my knowledge are doing what it can to find the truth, ergo, one of the reasons I'm not discussing evolution at this moment and also I am not on trial here.


You can't presume to know the intent of David Irving, Arthur Butz, or any other Holocaust denier. For all we know, these guys actually believe the things they're saying.
If you think the waiters are rude, you should see the manager.
2006-02-21, 6:17 PM #63
Originally posted by SF_GoldG_01:
Read my post closely: I'm attacking people who are misleading knowing full well that their declarations are wrong or incorrect.

I may mislead people, I may not... my intentions and the extent of my knowledge are doing what it can to find the truth, ergo, one of the reasons I'm not discussing evolution at this moment and also I am not on trial here.


I didn't want to derail the thread or attack you; I was just trying to draw a parallel. ;)

What if someone were to honestly believe that the Holocaust didn't occur? Would they be free from punishment then, since they don't know that their "declarations are wrong or incorrect?" How would we test that?
2006-02-21, 6:20 PM #64
[QUOTE=Michael MacFarlane]
You can't presume to know the intent of David Irving, Arthur Butz, or any other Holocaust denier. For all we know, these guys actually believe the things they're saying.[/QUOTE]

Exactly, a lot of these guys are incredibly suspicious of most types of evidence because they firmly believe in a Jewish conspiracy. To them, nearly all the evidence of the holocaust is some clever plot. That's why it probably took Eichmann's own handwriting to convince David Irving.
2006-02-21, 6:34 PM #65
Quoted from Professor Deborah Lipstadt of Emory, whom Irving once sued for libel in Britain:

Quote:
I am not happy when censorship wins, and I don't believe in winning battles via censorship… The way of fighting Holocaust deniers is with history and with truth.
If you think the waiters are rude, you should see the manager.
2006-02-21, 8:09 PM #66
[QUOTE=Dj Yoshi]The one you're expressing seems stupid enough.[/QUOTE]


See how efficient I am?
2006-02-21, 10:53 PM #67
Originally posted by JediGandalf:
Ok. I can play by your rules. The next time you lie to me about a subject, I will ban you. You purposefully mislead me in an ignorant subject and I will take action.

It's like you're fishing for it now...ah well, I can play your game. I love you.
omnia mea mecum porto
2006-02-21, 11:06 PM #68
Originally posted by Centrist:
Or we could create a law which specifically defines what will be considered a radical extremist expression/action. Then it wouldn't so arbitrary.


No law could be that comprehensive.

Also, the law itself consists of the arbitrary opinions of its legislators.
"it is time to get a credit card to complete my financial independance" — Tibby, Aug. 2009
2006-02-21, 11:20 PM #69
Originally posted by SF_GoldG_01:
Look... men fought and died so you could have a right to speak... they never imagined they would have idiots who would deny facts to just to use their right, and at the same time their words could hurt the innocent. :mad:



YEAH. THEY FOUGHT AND DIED SO THAT YOU WOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO HAVE AN OPINION AND VOICE IT NO MATTER HOW STUPID IT WAS?

You idiot.

SEE THAT. ITS NOT ONLY AN OPINION, ITS A FACT.

Besides, you live in Mexico. You don't get to talk about freedom Mr.LEGAL STEROIDS.
2006-02-21, 11:24 PM #70
Originally posted by SF_GoldG_01:
Read my post closely: I'm attacking people who are misleading knowing full well that their declarations are wrong or incorrect.



The following are now illegal under the stupid Regime:

Comedy
Novels
Science Fiction
Satire
Sarcasm
Story Telling
Going against popular opinion
2006-02-21, 11:26 PM #71
Originally posted by Rob:
The following are now illegal under the stupid Regime:

Going against popular opinion


You'd be locked up for a thousand years.
"it is time to get a credit card to complete my financial independance" — Tibby, Aug. 2009
2006-02-22, 8:52 AM #72
Originally posted by Freelancer:
No law could be that comprehensive.

Also, the law itself consists of the arbitrary opinions of its legislators.


I didn't mean something comprehensive. I'm simply alluding to Austria's anti-Nazi law. And after a law like this has been voted on by whomever is going to establish it, it is no longer considered arbitrary. Whatever has been specifically declared as illegal (holocaust denial for example) is illegal by law and not because someone said so.
Historians are the most powerful and dangerous members of any society. They must be watched carefully... They can spoil everything. - Nikita Khrushchev.
Kill one man, and you are a murderer. Kill millions of men, and you are a conqueror. Kill them all, and you are a god. - Jean Rostand.
2006-02-22, 9:53 AM #73
Well, it's pretty much the same thing as "someone saying so." Law is law because someone said so. Law is simply another layer of arbitration.
"it is time to get a credit card to complete my financial independance" — Tibby, Aug. 2009
2006-02-22, 10:43 AM #74
Originally posted by Freelancer:
Well, it's pretty much the same thing as "someone saying so." Law is law because someone said so. Law is simply another layer of arbitration.


Exactly. Calling something "illegal by law" is circular. It's essentially the same thing as saying "It's illegal because it's illegal."
If you think the waiters are rude, you should see the manager.
2006-02-22, 3:33 PM #75
Originally posted by Freelancer:
Well, it's pretty much the same thing as "someone saying so." Law is law because someone said so. Law is simply another layer of arbitration.

Well, not really arbitrary, but I see what you mean. I still say there's limits to freedom of speech, but deciding what exactly those are is not easy to say.

*bows out of argument*

[quote=Michael MacFarlane]
Originally posted by Centrist:
I didn't mean something comprehensive. I'm simply alluding to Austria's anti-Nazi law. And after a law like this has been voted on by whomever is going to establish it, it is no longer considered arbitrary. Whatever has been specifically declared as illegal (holocaust denial for example) is illegal by law and not because someone said so.
Exactly. Calling something "illegal by law" is circular. It's essentially the same thing as saying "It's illegal because it's illegal."[/quote]
You missed my point. What I mean is, a law should say something like public expression of holocaust denial is illegal, and not something vague/comprehensive such as public expression of hatefull speech is illegal. If it were left vague, the decision of what is hatefull is left up to the judge's arbitrary decision, and if more specific, there is less chance that the government will be able to misuse the law as people fear it will.
Historians are the most powerful and dangerous members of any society. They must be watched carefully... They can spoil everything. - Nikita Khrushchev.
Kill one man, and you are a murderer. Kill millions of men, and you are a conqueror. Kill them all, and you are a god. - Jean Rostand.
2006-02-22, 3:47 PM #76
Originally posted by Freelancer:
No law could be that comprehensive.

Also, the law itself consists of the arbitrary opinions of its legislators.

No, it consists of the decision of court justices.
D E A T H
2006-02-22, 4:42 PM #77
Originally posted by Centrist:
What I mean is, a law should say something like public expression of holocaust denial is illegal

But WHY?
Bassoon, n. A brazen instrument into which a fool blows out his brains.
2006-02-22, 5:29 PM #78
Don't take my example out of context.

And Wolfy already answered why.

Edit: Just so it's obvious, Wolfy responded right after Emon the first time he asked why and his response had nothing to do with Emon's OOC quote.
Historians are the most powerful and dangerous members of any society. They must be watched carefully... They can spoil everything. - Nikita Khrushchev.
Kill one man, and you are a murderer. Kill millions of men, and you are a conqueror. Kill them all, and you are a god. - Jean Rostand.
2006-02-22, 5:32 PM #79
Wolfy didn't give an answer as to why holocaust denial should be illegal at all. In fact he referred to it as a slippery slope to other sorts of govt. censorship
2006-02-22, 5:39 PM #80
What I want is a good reason why I shouldn't be able to run around saying whatever I want. Why limit free speech? What does it gain?
Bassoon, n. A brazen instrument into which a fool blows out his brains.
12345678

↑ Up to the top!