Free speech and dead babies

[Lincoln]

What exactly is "imposing a view"? Presenting an opposing opinion?

[CyberGnu]

So it is dictatorship to outlaw hate speech?

Well, I guess that goes well with the outcome of the last election, right?

[Lincoln]

Are people not allowed to use pictures in protests?

[Jon Miller]

but emotional arguments are considered a valid form of argument

the pictures fall under that category

it has been used, and is continued to be used

we are a visual people, we use pictures to get our points across (and now more than ever since hardly anyone reads anymore)

the argument is not abortion is wrong because dead tissue is gross

it is , abortion must be stopped because it is killing people

it creates a since of reality of the thing which is not gotten from words

it plays to peoples emotions, but every argument that has had even the slightest chance of succeeding has done that

once more, speech shold not be limited because you or anyone else disagrees with the message

Jon Miller

[CyberGnu]

Lincoln, 'imposing a view' would be to, for example, segregate schools or force a women to carry through with a pregnancy against her will.

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by CyberGnu
So it is dictatorship to outlaw hate speech?

Well, I guess that goes well with the outcome of the last election, right?

It is dictatorship to force your views on others and to not allow them the right to express themselves

Jon Miller
the democratic communist

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by CyberGnu
Lincoln, 'imposing a view' would be to, for example, segregate schools or force a women to carry through with a pregnancy against her will.

or ending a life

or not allowing people to speak in a public forum

Jon Miller
(the last is what this is an example of here)

[Lincoln]

Well then these people are not imposing their views then. They are simply presenting them in picture form in the marketplace of ideas.

[CyberGnu]

Are people not allowed to use pictures in protests?

As long as the pictures have something to do with the subject, I don't mind.

But as I said, using pictures of concentration camps to protest the fur industry would not be a political protest... It would be art.

[Jon Miller]

but they do have something to do with the subject

they are pictures of the dead

Jon Miller

[CyberGnu]

It is dictatorship to force your views on others and to not allow them the right to express themselves

So you consider hate-speech laws fascist?

[Jon Miller]

to some extant (and arguably the extant they are now), yes

Jon Miller

[CyberGnu]

but emotional arguments are considered a valid form of argument

the pictures fall under that category

it has been used, and is continued to be used

we are a visual people, we use pictures to get our points across (and now more than ever since hardly anyone reads anymore)

the argument is not abortion is wrong because dead tissue is gross

it is , abortion must be stopped because it is killing people

it creates a since of reality of the thing which is not gotten from words

it plays to peoples emotions, but every argument that has had even the slightest chance of succeeding has done that

So your argument is that people are idiots, and we therefore need to tailor the arguments to fit them?

And you are defending this?

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by CyberGnu


As long as the pictures have something to do with the subject, I don't mind.

But as I said, using pictures of concentration camps to protest the fur industry would not be a political protest... It would be art.

they have jsut as much to do with the subject

as a picture of a dead jew in a concentration camp has to do with the holocaust

it is saying, this is more than just numbers, this is real

Jon Miller

[DinoDoc]

I give up.

Originally posted by CyberGnu
But as I said, using pictures of concentration camps to protest the fur industry would not be a political protest... It would be art.

What does that have to do with the subject at hand?