Political correctness Vs Freedom of speech II

[the number 42]

How do you like that? Evo censored the thread!?? What was so awful about what was being said? Evo, lighten up - don't treat us like children, and don't go abusing your position by stopping conversations you don't like.

 

[Polly]

I second that! And it was a scintilating and energetic discussion too. Locking it would just show some of us cannot handle the truth. And truth, however unpalatable it is, is always the basis of all progress and solution. Without it we are just kidding ourselves. So give me truth, or give me ... hunger .

 

[the number 42]

I second that! And it was a scintilating and energetic discussion too. Locking it would just show some of us cannot handle the truth. And truth, however unpalatable it is, is always the basis of all progress and solution. Without it we are just kidding ourselves. So give me truth, or give me ... hunger .

Given the topic, I think it was hilariously ironic that the thread was closed. Also, I was just reading the thread on pornography, where Moonbear said to a Canadian poster who was complaining about all the interenet porn he saw:
"You could move to the US...somehow those sites all know when you have an IP address originating in the US and pixelate anything that might be considered "offensive." Do you really want that much censorship?"

I didn't know this was happening, and no, I don't want that degree of censorship. Who decides this stuff anyway? Is this anything to do with the Global Internet Freedom Act which was designed to:"...empower the US Government and its agencies to combat any attempt to restrict what can be seen or said on the internet, anywhere…To Mr Cox [Republican member of the US House of Representatives for Orange County] this is about freedom of speech - the sacred text of the First Amendment"
http://freewebhosting.hostdepartment.com/t/tomyum/local_html/netWatchdog.html
http://www.theorator.com/bills108/hr48.html

My understanding was that this was to ensure that the US government could control the internet so that material from the US could not be blocked by countries not wanting this material. Sounds like some bunch of do-gooders have got their hands on the technology in a bid for global modesty. But can anyone enlighten me on this issue? The Global Internet Freedom Act didn't get much publicity on this side of the Atlantic.

 

[Grogs]

http://freewebhosting.hostdepartment.com/t/tomyum/local_html/netWatchdog.html
http://www.theorator.com/bills108/hr48.html

My understanding was that this was to ensure that the US government could control the internet so that material from the US could not be blocked by countries not wanting this material. Sounds like some bunch of do-gooders have got their hands on the technology in a bid for global modesty. But can anyone enlighten me on this issue? The Global Internet Freedom Act didn't get much publicity on this side of the Atlantic.

Well, this is the first I've ever heard of it and reading over the text of the bill I can see why. Most of the 'internet' bills you see floating around tend to be the 'protect our children, eliminate porn, stop hackers, etc, etc.' from a concerned, but misguided Senator. This one seems to actually be about increasing internet access, although I'd say the Senator is also pretty misguided. I say misguided because once somebody blocks your IP from passing through their router, I don't know of any way to unblock it, short of hacking into the router and changing its routing tables.

Of course the fact the bill was introduced in January 2003 is pretty telling. I suspect that particular bill died in committee.

 

[the number 42]

I suspect that particular bill died in committee.

Probably true, but interesting that it never made much impact in the news - perhaps a sort of censorship in itself - as it appears to be an interesting move.

Any idea who is responsible for pixellating suspected porn on American people's behalf? In the UK we call this sort of government overprotectionism the Nanny State in action.
http://nannyknowsbest.blogspot.com/2005/02/nanny-bans-snowballs.html

 

[Grogs]

Any idea who is responsible for pixellating suspected porn on American people's behalf? In the UK we call this sort of government overprotectionism the Nanny State in action.
http://nannyknowsbest.blogspot.com/2005/02/nanny-bans-snowballs.html

I have no idea what you (or is it Moonbear?) are talking about. I've never seen evidence that any pixellation that I saw (and I don't see it often) is anything other than website owners wanting to force you to pay money to see the uncensored version. I also don't know of any way the government could do this. It would have to be done somewhere at the web server, or else by the ISP (using a proxy server.) It might be something that, say, AOL (which I wouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole) would do. Then again, if AOL was going to intercept and pixellate porn sites, why not just block them?

 

[Kerrie]

so number 42, are you intending to complain about PF policy, or do you want to start a legitimate thread of the title?

 

[Smurf]

quote from the pervious thread.https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=66052&page=2&pp=20

I think democracy is tougher than that. It has outlasted murderous attacks on free speech like the gunning down of Brann the Iconoclast on the streets of Waco, the murder of the civil rights activists, and for that matter a hundred years of Jum Crow and lynchings. Your quotation of Pax quaetitur bello is apt. Liberty like peace is always an ongoing struggle.

So now the murdering of civil rights activists proves that democracy is tough and can survive horrible rights violations. No, it means that Democracy died a long time ago, and what we have now is a steaming pile of crap that has a history of being very undemocratic. Do you see what I'm saying? The fact that we call our government a democracy after all those horrible events means nothing! The very fact that they occurred proves that it is not deserving of the name Democracy in the first place!

 

[the number 42]

I've thought I would get bumper stickers too that express my view. But I won't (anymore than I will openly discuss my political views) because it would adversely effect my relation with all these people around me, and quite frankly I wonder if I might find my tires slashed. If I can feel this way, even fear, what does this say about the direction America has gone?

Up here in the bay area, I wouldn't dare publicly express a conservative opinion. A pro-Bush bumper sticker would get me crucified.

Guys, take heart and say what you feel, if not in public then at least here on PF. I've been told that when you are in the minority be brave and remember Burk's words: "The only thing necessary for evil to triumph, is for good men to do nothing." When you have the luxury of being in the majority, be wise and remember Voltaire: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to death your right to say it". You never know when you are going to be in the minority.

Thanks for reminding me, loseyourname, that humour doesn't always translate very obviously in the written word

 

[Evo]

How do you like that? Evo censored the thread!?? What was so awful about what was being said? Evo, lighten up - don't treat us like children, and don't go abusing your position by stopping conversations you don't like.

You have been issued a warning. That thread was out of control. If you have a problem with it, you can pm me.

 

[Evo]

I am reopening the thread for those that have shown they can behave.

If this becomes another flame war, it will be closed and that will be final.