 | | Freedom of Protest, was Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) Nick's point is that there is a difference between "restrict someone's right to act like a jerk" AND "restrict someone's right to act like a jerk anywhere they please. The Supreme Court has held up "free speach zones" - especially on college (...) (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) I have to disagree - horrible though it was, there was more to Nazism than just hate... Adn does it really matter WHY millions were killed? I like your EB MOCs, Lenny, and I think that this one may have crossed the line in polite society, but (...) (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) And what is "inappropriate"? Who decides? You? Some would argue it is inappropriate that women are permitted out in public unveiled. Sure, Nazism is a horrible, evil thing, but should we restrict someone's right to act like a jerk if they want (...) (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) The general theory of Nazism is based on hate, whereas the general theory of communism is based on peace. It was one madman (Stalin) who transformed the USSR into a machine that killed 30 million Russians. And again, don't forget that ALL (...) (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) Snide comments can have premises? I thought they were just mean. Rosco, are your snide comments generally based on true premises? (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) I don't believe that speech was included at the time of the BoR for society-at-large censorship, but rather protection from vengeful governing bodies like royalty or Congress. As I stated earlier, there were no neo-nazis in the late 18th (...) (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) Uh, isn't that pretty much what I wrote? Dave! (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) "requires protection" All speech is protected, but only some speech needs to be protected. -Lenny (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) Once again, you have crystallized my thoughts exactly, Paul..er Dave! [1] (...) Exactly. "polite", "civil", "responsible", "respectful". They are all qualities of a good citizen; a good person for that matter. (...) Yes, tactics are certainly (...) (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) Yes (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) On the contrary--the only speech that requires protection is that which society-at-large finds suitable for censorship. (...) Unless you're equating "offensive" artistic expression with slander, this point is irrelevant. Likewise, arguments (...) (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) Just because one should be free to speak their mind, doesn't mean that should be able to at the expense of other's pursuit of Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness, which is the basic premise of the Constitution. We "bother with it" because (...) (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) I'd like to clarify this, if I may. John, from our long history of debate, I sense that you'd agree that people have the right to air their views publicly, no matter how ignorant or hateful those views are, but according to the nature of our (...) (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) Do you mean if everyone is perfect, why bother with laws? I guess you wouldn't need them. Then again, everyone isn't perfect, so I have no idea what your point is. (...) And I'm saying that responsible, considerate people who hate Jews (...) (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) Whoa - if everyone is always responsible, civil, and unoffensive, why even bother with freedom of speech? Freedom of speech is there specifically to protect behavior people might find offensive, like neo-Nazi marches through Jewish (...) (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) The issue to me is two fold: 1. This MOC is potentially deeply offensive, and 2. It isn't funny. When I saw it the first thing I thought up was Kevoh's comic - but the difference between Kevoh and Richie is that Kevoh is funny. It is obvious (...) (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) Nathan has a good point. The issue isn't depicting a terrible scene or time in LEGO, its making light of a terrible scene or time in LEGO. Although, maybe I shouldn't (URL). :) (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) This MOC tries to be funny on a subject that is certainly less than funny. And no, I don't find other Brickshelf finds such as suicide bombers and (URL) this> funny at all. I find those grossly inappropiate. Depictions of genocides in the (...) (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) Hey all, (Note the FUT-off-topic-debate). I'm a bit nervous about jumping into this because there are already strong opinions expressed on both sides by people I respect, but here goes. I have to admit confusion: A MOC based on a fictional (...) (19 years ago, 8-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX) !
|
