It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

In Defense Of Censorship

page: 3
19
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 4 2017 @ 09:43 AM
link   
a reply to: iTruthSeeker

I think a lot of it like the example you gave is manufactured or political partisan crap in nature. Facts don't matter a lot of the time. They need to keep people riled up about something to help fund whatever cause they have.




posted on May, 4 2017 @ 09:56 AM
link   
a reply to: FauxMulder

To me the more popular issue was hypocrisy.

Some of those who defended Trump's conversation with Billy Bush were suddenly upset about Colbert's comments about Trump. Some of those who attacked Trump over his conversation with Bush were defending Colbert's comments. Both sides were stuck in the rut of accusing the other of hypocrisy and flipping their positions, while ignoring that they themselves had done the very same thing.

I don't often see people calling for complete and total unrestricted protection of speech, but it happens now and then. What's far, far more disturbing (and somehow more prevalent) to me to see, particularly on ATS, is the comments calling for "silencing" those who would talk negatively about the President.
edit on 4-5-2017 by Shamrock6 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 4 2017 @ 09:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: FauxMulder

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: FauxMulder

I can get along with anyone who has differing views so long as they believe in free speech, since that's what allows us to have differing opinions in the first place.


Absolutely. How boring would this world be if we all agreed on every little thing?


But I cannot get along with someone who advocates or makes room for censorship.


I think censorship has it's place. Like the examples I gave in the OP, the workplace for one. ATS is another. We accept it as a stipulation for employment / using the site. If I wanted a completely uncensored experience I would go to the cesspool that is 4Chan. I think ATS is a much better environment for debate / conversation. A children's TV show is a good place to have censors in place. I don't want my 5 year old hearing about sex and cuss words and such.
.


It was censorship that made 4chan into a cesspool. Everywhere else has banned their type of speech to a point that there was no other place to express themselves. It's not free speech that makes it ugly.

ATS is better place for debate, but that's not because they have censors in place. If those censors were gone tomorrow I don't think we'd all be flinging slurs and obscene language at each other.



posted on May, 4 2017 @ 10:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: RainbowPhoenix
a reply to: dfnj2015




In other words, just respecting someone else is not good enough. Allowing me to be disrespectful means you are respecting me.



Well then you create the problem of being disrespectful via your spoken word by being an intolerant A-hole then expect to be respected in return despite your own lack of respect??? Did I get that right?


I'm not advocating this position. I'm just saying I've heard people say that unless you respect their intolerance, you are being intolerant. I see the self-referential-you-are-a-hypocrite-unless-you-agree-with-me argument all the time.


It's a funny thing
I accept and understand why some people believe in evolution while I think it's absurd
I have not seen any (that I can remember) that can accept that I believe in creation

It doesn't matter what a person believes, why can't people just say, whatever floats your boat and move along
Accept they have a different opinion, it's like atheist fundamentalists who want to beat you down
Not saying that there are no creationists that are a little arrogant and fundy, just doesn't help people getting along
We are all different

Now, let's draw the line against abusive and violent people, common sense prevails.


We can agree that physical violence is breaking secular law.

I think the whole anti-political correct sentiment is over the top. Nobody is advocating make laws to enforce political correctness. I think most people who believe in PC are doing it under the idea that it is desirable to be kind and considerate to other people's beliefs if they are different than your own. But I have heard it argued countless times that NOT allowing me to be political incorrect means you are not respecting my right to have an opinion. One case is focused on the person being spoken to and the other case is focused on the person doing the speaking.

I happened to think evolution is science fact. But I also accept the notion that an omnipotent God can create the Universe in any amount of time, including 3 seconds ago, including all the fake carbon dating and fossil evidence. So if you believe in creationism, as long as you believe in an omnipotent God, what difference does evolution make? I would argue anyone who says one single word against evolution is showing a complete lack of faith in their own God's powers.


and I agree in principle
It's not a reason to show contempt
You are welcome to what you believe is science
Politically correct or not, we have to live together
We have to try to get along, we have to accept, respect, disagree and live with each other to find peace
Isn't finding peace what it is all about



posted on May, 4 2017 @ 10:01 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope




ATS is better place for debate, but that's not because they have censors in place. If those censors were gone tomorrow I don't think we'd all be flinging slurs and obscene language at each other.

You seriously believe that? I've seen posts that are awful right before they get censored and sometimes with posters banned.



posted on May, 4 2017 @ 10:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: LesMisanthrope




ATS is better place for debate, but that's not because they have censors in place. If those censors were gone tomorrow I don't think we'd all be flinging slurs and obscene language at each other.

You seriously believe that? I've seen posts that are awful right before they get censored and sometimes with posters banned.


Yes, I seriously believe that. Anymore questions?



posted on May, 4 2017 @ 10:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Interesting. So you think TV should not be regulated and allow them to be like HBO, where the children are watching?


TV content should be regulated by good parenting, not the government. At the very least, all televisions should include "time of day" and "channel restrictions" (some already do). Just like before, you had to go to a friends house who's parents allowed them to watch the "good stuff," play violent video games and eat junk food, unless of course, you are already being raised in that type of environment.

The question remains, when is bad parenting bad enough that it needs to be censored?



posted on May, 4 2017 @ 10:05 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

LOL no more questions "teacher".
Anyway I think you are mistaken. This site will turn into another 4chan or heaven forbid Godlikeproductions.



posted on May, 4 2017 @ 10:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

LOL no more questions "teacher".
Anyway I think you are mistaken. This site will turn into another 4chan or heaven forbid Godlikeproductions.


Let me ask you, if the censors were gone tomorrow would you start throwing slurs and other epithets at others?



posted on May, 4 2017 @ 10:07 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Probably not.
Any more questions, "student"?



posted on May, 4 2017 @ 10:07 AM
link   
a reply to: Deaf Alien

Nope. I rest my case.



posted on May, 4 2017 @ 10:08 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

What case? Do I speak for everyone here? Wow. I must be prettty powerful.



posted on May, 4 2017 @ 10:12 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

You might be right. The majority of members here are pretty good. But I have seen some pretty bad threads just before they get the 404. And some pretty stupid comments before they are removed. An argument can be made they bring the quality of the site down. It's a fuzzy line really. I can see both sides of the argument. I like to look at things on a case by case basis though. I wouldn't want to blanket say everything goes or everything like _____ is not OK.

The few times I ventured into 4chan was pretty disgusting. I would never call for them to be censored though. Maybe it was just the certain links I followed. I just stay away and it's a non issue for me.
edit on 4-5-2017 by FauxMulder because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 4 2017 @ 10:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6

Well put. Political hypocrisy is the worst, it shows that some people have blind loyalty to the little R or the D. They're chosen leader can do no wrong. But I will say many people here are consistent in their views. When the US launched missiles at Syria, there was a whole lot of Trump supporters making threads criticizing him, angry even about the fact they voted for him.



posted on May, 4 2017 @ 10:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: FauxMulder



Thanks for the complement.


But I must point out that if you go to work anywhere, you usually sign documentation, a contract of sorts that acknowledges your limits to free expression in the workplace as well as an understanding that the employer can/will fire you at their discretion.


Really? I've never seen one in my 66 years. Not that I've been involved with a high publicity position. Could you post an example of that portion of a contract, if it isn't too much of a bother, that is?



posted on May, 4 2017 @ 10:31 AM
link   
There is no such thing as completely free speech - not a single place on earth. Quite rightly, some speech will land you in jail or with some other punishment.



posted on May, 4 2017 @ 10:34 AM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

I'd have to look at any employment application to be sure. . .



posted on May, 4 2017 @ 10:35 AM
link   
a reply to: FauxMulder

A private entity, including your employer, can violate your First Amendment rights and be sued for it under certain circumstances. If you attend a politically rally on your own time and it is antithetical to your boss' political beliefs and he fires you for it, you can sue him for that.

Having said that, the problem with all of these free speech threads is that we eliminate rationality. No one thinks an employee at McD's has the right to validly point out that someone is a fat ass. What is truly important is political speech. Colbert has an absolute right to say what he said as long as it does not violate his employer's wishes or FCC rules. I don't agree with it, but he has the right to believe and say it.

Anne Coulter has the right to her opinions as well. She had been properly invited to expound on those opinions and was denied that opportunity by a group of miscreants and a week kneed University administration.

Wether you agree with her or not, you are irrational if you believe that it was a good thing for democracy and the idea of free speech to have that opportunity denied.



posted on May, 4 2017 @ 10:35 AM
link   
In defense of censorship.

Read any given thread on ATS.

Anyone of them.

Debate is the art of censorship.

One to ponder.

Who doesn't like censorship now?



posted on May, 4 2017 @ 10:45 AM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Censorship is for those who want to avoid debate.

No idea is above challenging.




top topics



 
19
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join