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.

 

Tasteless jokes are now a crime?

page: 4
6
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 12:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by LoneGunMan

Oh man that Jason Rouse routine was very sick...and very funny.


Agreed.... they took it off youtube i think....had to find it elsewhere... my friend was actually there and also his band toured with jason over here(uk)

download festival et al.



If someone goes too far (remember Andrew Dice Clay?) they will just go away into obscurity. If you don't like it then don't watch/read/listen to it.
All too easy.


And that is exactly the point.... do NOT watch it...
If you know you'll be offended... simple, don't watch.

What about the Aristocrats??
Now that was crazy...

But actually doing and saying things at work, in public or out of hatred and spite is different... and should NOT be tolerated.

[edit on 23/1/09 by blupblup]




posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 12:19 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by GENERAL EYES
So what you're saying is that this Nation is better off under the rule of bigoted, rude, sensationalistic and trashy people than it is under people who conduct their greivences with a higher degree of class, tact and social conscience?


I am unclear how you got from having a right to express opinions to being ruled by people with opinions...

Actually, I suspect the work of a shill, as this is a classical move from the manual, but I will continue to give the benefit of the doubt. For now (I will read further).

As for Obama, sticks and stones. Why does someone expressing an opinion also equate to the rest of us having no brains and agreeing with the opinion? Do you really believe Obama was hurt by this idiot's views, really?

Defamation, etc., my nether orifice.

[edit on 1/23/2009 by Amaterasu]



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 12:32 PM
link   
I think the fact that he's a city worker, if i interpret that correctly as a governmental worker is the reason behind his dismissal. Someone in his position, as they are a publicly funded body has to show no bias when it comes to their work. Information that they may have that, such as this tasteless 'joke' and evident racism show that his views are incompatible with his position. I don't think it's an attack on freedom of speech, i mean we're not throwing him in jail for this.



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 12:38 PM
link   
The true measure of freedom of speech is when someone says something that is offensive to you. It may offend your religion. It may offend your view on politics. It may offend one of your treasured opinions like affirmative action.

But you only really believe in freedom of speech when you recognize that the person has the right to make such statements and you will defend his right to make such statements.

Otherwise you are a hypocrite. You only believe in freedom of speech as long as you agree with what's been said.



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by GENERAL EYES

Originally posted by RFBurns
What was irresponsible about this fella putting up some picture and a quote about having a happy James Earl Ray day? Its only a picture, and a few words.



Yeah. Only a picture and a few words. I follow you.

Hitler used the same tactic. And I suppose you're going to tell me nothing came about because of those "only pictures and words" either?


Um... Hitler didn't just post the propaganda on his personal webspace... It was plastered all over the streets, and pumped into the classrooms. It was broadcast and financed and supported.

But one guy saying his thoughts on his space (which you are under no obligation to visit) is hardly something to get your panties in a wad about, let alone a threat to the mythical "national security."

I think we humans overall are trustworthy enough that we will not have lightbulbs going off reading his tripe. He has a right to express it, and we have the right to deem it tripe.

At least he is owning his opinions.


Really. I'd love to spell it out for you all day...

If you're racially intolerant, I could care less. Really, I could care less.

But why not keep that stuff on Stormfront and away from social networking sites? The key word there being SOCIAL - not ANTI-SOCIAL.



Because the whole point of a social network is to express one's opinions.

How whacky a thought that if you have "certain" opinions, you should withdraw from society.



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 12:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Wildbob77
 


Not exactly. I don't believe it should hurt people. And it is easier then you think.

What if you have a preacher and someone runs around saying that they are a womanizer, a bad speaker, and got his credientials online. It could be funny, in jest, etc. It could hurt this man's hard earned reputation, cause conflicts with his wife, keep people from attending the church and causing the church to lose money.

While on the surface it may seem innocent, the repercussions can be much broader.



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Venit
 


No one should be able to get fired from their JOB just because they expressed their opinion. That goes against freedom of speech in it's very simplest form. This man didn't refuse to do work, the quality of his work was not changed by his expression. There's nothing wrong with what he did.



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wildbob77
The true measure of freedom of speech is when someone says something that is offensive to you. It may offend your religion. It may offend your view on politics. It may offend one of your treasured opinions like affirmative action.


"It" just is. The one offended has chosen to take the staic isness of the expressed opinion and choosing to offend over it.

There are surely other choices - like rolling one's eyes, shrugging one's shoulders and saying, "What tripe!"

But I see you are still clear on the concept that as Humans, we have rights, and specifically to the expression of our opinions. [smile]



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by GENERAL EYES
The Thought Police are Coming!

About flipping time!

When Freedom of Speech becomes an excuse to be a bigoted ass - I have to step back and think about the greater good of the Nation as a whole.

Glad they opened up a position for someone who isn't a complete embarassment to the workforce and job title.


*edit to thought police myself.

[edit on 1/22/09 by GENERAL EYES]


I'd rather have all speech protected than merely popular and/or polite speech. That's way too subjective, and allows whomever is in charge to decide who to persecute.



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 01:03 PM
link   
Hate speech? Bias crime?

Biggest load of crap in history.

Since the beginning of "civilization" people have hated, misunderstood, mistrusted, disliked others and expressed that fact in ways much worse than speech.

The act of speaking or expressing opinion (no matter how wrong or reprehensible) are not crimes.
For any person to think they have the right to regulate anothers thoughts or opinions is ludicrous.

The politically correct idea that you can stop racism is foolish and childish. Tha actual act of legislating or forcibly policing somebodys speech is just another step in the curtailment of our freedom as citizens of a "free" country.

Keep it up.
One of these days you will find that suddenly one of your opinions is a crime and it will be because you paved the way for it.

This joker who did the "James Earl Ray Day" crap is a reprehensible person but he does have the right to his moronic opinion. If you can take his right to expression away then somebody else can take away yours.

Don't be a lemming.



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 01:05 PM
link   
reply to post by badgerprints
 


So you honestly think people have the right to say absolutely anything they want??

Anything?



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 01:12 PM
link   
reply to post by blupblup
 


Except screaming "fire" or "bomb" in a public place for no reason. YES. We shouldn't be dictating what people can and can not say.



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by blupblup
reply to post by badgerprints
 


So you honestly think people have the right to say absolutely anything they want??

Anything?


There are slander and libel laws that prevent people from saying or writing things that are not true and are just intended to hurt someone.

If a person is expressing an opinion then that's his/her opinion even if I view that opinion as rubbish.



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 01:23 PM
link   
reply to post by TasteTheMagick
 


No....seriously.

I could list sooo many things that people should not and hopefully cannot say.

Can a guy walk up to a woman and say i want to rape you?

Or walk up to a guy in a wheelchair and call him a f****** cripple?

Seriously.... there are many, many i could list but it's a little warped to do so....

[edit on 23/1/09 by blupblup]



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 01:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wildbob77
There are slander and libel laws that prevent people from saying or writing things that are not true and are just intended to hurt someone.

If a person is expressing an opinion then that's his/her opinion even if I view that opinion as rubbish.


Then exactly what defines hurt someone?
if someone joked about hanging, and i had relatives who knew people that were hung... I'd be offended!!

this is the point... who decides what is offensive?


[edit on 23/1/09 by blupblup]



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 01:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by blupblup
reply to post by badgerprints
 


So you honestly think people have the right to say absolutely anything they want??

Anything?


There are limits to what you can say- you can't incite riots/cause panic, you can't slander/or commit libel. Aside from these things I believe people have the right to be as rude, obnoxious, offensive, tasteless as they want to be. There is no right to not be offended or to not have to deal with jerks. Now I do believe with rights come responsibilities(and consequences if abused). The reason for this is because our founding fathers didn't want the government silencing unpopular/critical speech. It's a very slippery slope once you start doing things in the name of "what's good for us."

"Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies, The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." — C.S. Lewis



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 01:34 PM
link   
reply to post by BlueRaja
 


I agree with most of it, that's not the point.
It is that people could just go round saying anything in "the name of comedy" like the two i mentioned to tastethemagick above....

I could say either, and then say I'm just joking?



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 01:35 PM
link   
reply to post by blupblup
 


I've had that said to me on a number of occasions...it's a pretty common thing right now. If the woman has a problem with it she can say it was a threat to her and get the police. It depends on how they guy says it. If someone calls a man in a wheelchair ANYTHING, he's got the right to do so. If the other guy finds it offensive...so what? Sticks and stones.



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 01:37 PM
link   
reply to post by TasteTheMagick
 


I'm glad i live where i do then.... I'm glad people don't have the right to spout hate and insult people just for the sake of it.

What a sad state of affairs.....



As i said, those were the least severe of my examples... i will not say the others...

[edit on 23/1/09 by blupblup]



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join