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.
originally posted by: DBCowboy
originally posted by: GuidedKill
originally posted by: Allaroundyou
a reply to: DBCowboy
WTF lol After I read your second sentence I was rolling around laughing and crying. You make a good point but to put it the way you did is funny. You get a star sir. Was that the name of your band in college?
His band name used to be dicking bimbos cowboy..but he had to shorten to DBCowboy for forum rules.
Correct me if I’m wrong but it was originally you, bill and bill in the dicking bimbos cowboy correct?
All true.
I played the air guitar.
originally posted by: nightbringr
originally posted by: DBCowboy
originally posted by: nightbringr
originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: nightbringr
Child porn is an infringement of under-aged minors rights.
Are you for infringing on the rights of a minor?
Of course not. I'm simply asking the 'no censorship at ANY cost ' OP if she would allow it.
Infringing on another's rights is not a protected right.
I see! So you DO agree that type of thing should be censored.
Too bad the OP doesn't agree.
originally posted by: DBCowboy
originally posted by: nightbringr
originally posted by: DBCowboy
originally posted by: nightbringr
originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: nightbringr
Child porn is an infringement of under-aged minors rights.
Are you for infringing on the rights of a minor?
Of course not. I'm simply asking the 'no censorship at ANY cost ' OP if she would allow it.
Infringing on another's rights is not a protected right.
I see! So you DO agree that type of thing should be censored.
Too bad the OP doesn't agree.
Do I want infringement of rights stopped?
Of course.
If you see it as censorship, then that's on you.
originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: nightbringr
Justice.
censorship
ˈsensərSHip/
noun
1.
the suppression or prohibition of any parts of books, films, news, etc. that are considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security.
"the regulation imposes censorship on all media"
2.
(in ancient Rome) the office or position of censor.
"he celebrated a triumph together with his father and they held the censorship jointly"
originally posted by: nightbringr
originally posted by: DBCowboy
originally posted by: nightbringr
originally posted by: DBCowboy
originally posted by: nightbringr
originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: nightbringr
Child porn is an infringement of under-aged minors rights.
Are you for infringing on the rights of a minor?
Of course not. I'm simply asking the 'no censorship at ANY cost ' OP if she would allow it.
Infringing on another's rights is not a protected right.
I see! So you DO agree that type of thing should be censored.
Too bad the OP doesn't agree.
Do I want infringement of rights stopped?
Of course.
If you see it as censorship, then that's on you.
I absolutely call the banning of images that infringe on the rights of those who cannot consent to give permission censorship.
What the hell do you call it?
Ps. If if makes it easier in on you, don't think of it as a bad word in this case. Child open is the one and only case censorship SHOULD be allowed. If you cannot see that you and the OP have massive issues.
originally posted by: Incandescent
a reply to: LesMisanthrope
There must be at least a few caveats on freedom of speech if we are to maintain a civilised society. 100% unrestricted freedom of speech is not logically a good idea. For example, what if somebody in the US wants to do a speaking tour of universities about becoming jihadists. Would you really be all for somebody advocating for people being allowed to promote and network fellow jihadists to promote the killing of Westerners and non-believers on campus?
originally posted by: nightbringr
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
originally posted by: nightbringr
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
originally posted by: nightbringr
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: theantediluvian
The conflating of child pornography and stolen passwords with free speech is lazy.
Then why not answer the question instead of lazily avoiding it? If there is one place where censorship SHOULD be allowed, is to protect those most vulnerable in society. Do you disagree?
I do disagree. By making people victims of speech you only weeken them to it. There are not victims to speech.
Censorship also covers images. Don't be obtuse, you understood my question.
You then disagree with the censorship of underage porn? Just so I understand.
There are two types of people who say child porn is free speech, advocates for censorship and people busted for child porn.
You think child porn is free speech? Just so I understand.
Child pornography is not speech, in my opinion. It is contraband, the product of despicable crimes. If you want to call child porn speech, and the criminalization of its dissemination and production censorship, be my guest.
On the other hand, there was an artist in Finland who made an art piece which contained child porn, which she readily found on the internet. The piece was meant to bring awareness to the availability of child pornography. Her show was cancelled and the work confiscated by Finnish authorities. I disagree with that decision.
Thats a tough line to walk.
So you would disallow it for some, but not for others who are trying to 'educate'. Since this ladies that you would allow would be considered 'art', I would assume it would be open for all to see? In an art gallery or such where it could be photographed, uploaded to the web and then downloaded millions of times until it is no longer art.
You might as well just say you would allow it.
originally posted by: Kurokage
This again, how many threads about the same subject are you going to have??
You might have an excellent command of the written word but most of your threads are just that, a well written thread but your arguments have no substance. You seem to just leave a thread and start another when your arguments are shown to be hollow. We get the usual comments that words can't hurt people, you refuse to go to a link that backs up a quote or different view to you, and your opinion that freedom of speech is all or nothing even if that means paedophilia, Nazism, and jihadists and any other scum of the earth get to have a voice. You are blinkered, blinded and unbending by your own loyalty to a concept.
we live in a society were freedom of speech is becoming limited to where it's allowed, because corporations, and individuals own "space" like the internet and other places that don't allow that "freedom". So how is it free, when it's controlled where it can be used?
originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: LesMisanthrope
Putting words in my mouth now!
What's my "ilk" then?
And as usual no real argument, just a snarky comment. You do the same everytime!?!
originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: LesMisanthrope
Putting words in my mouth now!
What's my "ilk" then?
And as usual no real argument, just a snarky comment. You do the same everytime!?!
originally posted by: nightbringr
a reply to: Kurokage
Don't take what she says to heart. She already said she disagrees with the her friend having their child porn 'art' being taken away from them.
Her agenda here is frighteningly obvious and repugnant.