- #36
wolram
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
- 4,446
- 558
All i can say is that do gooders do not want the responsibility to make a decision, they are weak and cowardly, they will support any law written or not.
I am not really sure what you mean by this term 'do gooder'. I mean, I know what I mean by it, but the way you use it makes little sense. To me, a 'do gooder' is more referring to discrete acts by an individual.wolram said:All i can say is that do gooders do not want the responsibility to make a decision, they are weak and cowardly, they will support any law written or not.
Of course it's applicable. How does the preference of country factor in?misgfool said:Isn't this also applicable to Soviet Union or any other dictatorship? I would still prefer to live in a western democracy than the USSR.
Yes but you shouldn't have to leave to enjoy your peace. You have a right to it there.misgfool said:Now that is a silly argument. I have also the liberty to exclude myself from your company should you be such a yelling jerk.
Ivan Seeking said:Here in the US, the right to free speech is fundamental but with limits. For example, you can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater, but you can yell "theater" in a crowded fire station.
DaveC426913 said:Of course it's applicable. How does the preference of country factor in?
DaveC426913 said:(Forgive me for opening the racial example can-o-worms, but...)
DaveC426913 said:In the 60's, blacks wanting to eat in "regular" restaurants were told: "if you don't like it, no one's taking away your right to leave."
You can see that their rights are indeed violated despite the fact that they could merely go elsewhere.
wolram said:To the mentors ,I know you have thought long and hard about closing this thread, i all so know you have powers to discriminate from what is right from wrong, i hope you will allow this debate to continue as i think human resonsability is important.
jimmysnyder said:Multiquote as many people's posts as you want, but quote the last one.
misgfool said:I'm not sure about the 60's as I hadn't materialized yet, but if I remember correctly entrepreneurs have the right to choose their clients. Of course any reasonable one doesn't say no to money.
To open a can of worms means to discuss an unpleasant topic.misgfool said:However, I'm not an english native and could only identify this "can-o-worms" as
The Can-O-Worms is an odourless, user friendly system that allows anyone to participate in recycling...
Really?
In the US, almost all businesses are considered places of http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/42/12181.text.html. If your business falls under this category, then you do not have the right to refuse service to anyone on the basis of race, creed, national origin, or a few others I can't recall.misgfool said:I'm not sure about the 60's as I hadn't materialized yet, but if I remember correctly entrepreneurs have the right to choose their clients. Of course any reasonable one doesn't say no to money.
DaveC426913 said:I am not really sure what you mean by this term 'do gooder'. I mean, I know what I mean by it, but the way you use it makes little sense. To me, a 'do gooder' is more referring to discrete acts by an individual.
"You should stop using zat word. I do not sink it means what you sink it means."
-Inigo Montoya
mgb_phys said:I think it's a divided by a common language thing.
In UK English - a do gooder is a self appointed authority who wants to restrict what you can do for your own good, the "won't someone think of the children" effect.
So a common headline is: council 'do gooders' ban children from throwing snowballs (in case they get hurt). It also applies to groups calling for censorship of TV / films etc.
It's normally used as a derogatrary term.
Wizard of Oz said:Back where I come from there are men who do nothing all day but good deeds. They are called phila... er, phila... er, yes, er, Good Deed Doers.
Ralphie: I want an official Red Ryder, carbine action, two-hundred shot range model air rifle!
Ralphie's mother: No, you'll shoot your eye out.
I had to read this sentence twice, as the first time I read "flush".misgfool said:...and I can tell you that sailors didn't bother to blush after 16 weeks of boot camp.
"Are You a Do-Gooder? Examining Freedom of Speech" is a scientific study that investigates the concept of freedom of speech and how it relates to individuals who are considered "do-gooders" or those who seek to promote social justice and advocate for marginalized groups.
Freedom of speech is a fundamental human right that allows individuals to express their opinions and ideas without fear of censorship or punishment. It is important to study because it can impact the way we communicate and interact with others, as well as shape our understanding of social issues and power dynamics.
The study used a combination of qualitative and quantitative research methods, including surveys and interviews, to gather data from individuals who identify as "do-gooders" and those who do not. The data was then analyzed and compared to identify any patterns or differences in attitudes towards freedom of speech.
The study found that individuals who identify as "do-gooders" tend to have a more nuanced understanding of freedom of speech and are more likely to support the rights of marginalized groups to express their opinions. They also tend to be more aware of the potential harm that can be caused by hate speech and the importance of creating inclusive and respectful spaces for communication.
The findings of this study can be used to inform discussions and debates about freedom of speech, particularly in relation to social justice issues. It can also help individuals and organizations better understand the perspectives of "do-gooders" and how they can promote inclusive and respectful communication in their own communities and workplaces.