Tweet
Originally posted by The Mad Monk
View Post
-
I know that people aren't being jailed, but isn't FCC an abomination that violates the american constitution ?With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Steven Weinberg -
This is similar to proposed legislation in Canada. The big difference is, our government (which enjoys wedge issues), named the act Protecting Children from Internet Predators Act, and claimed anyone against having warrentless searches "...can either stand with us or with the child pornographers". The bill includes no mention of children or predators except in the short title of it, but does allow for government authorized fishing.Originally posted by Dauphin View PostThere's nothing wrong with the dream, my friend, the problem lies with the dreamer.Comment
-
Err, exactly how does the FCC's mere existence violate the Constitution?Originally posted by BlackCat View PostClick here if you're having trouble sleeping.
"We confess our little faults to persuade people that we have no large ones." - François de La RochefoucauldComment
-
Maybe because it violate free speech ?Originally posted by Lorizael View PostWith or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Steven WeinbergComment
-
No. The mere existence of the FCC does not violate free speech. In fact, in some cases the FCC's existence facilitates free speech. Now, the FCC does engage in censorship, and an argument can be made that some of that censorship violates the First Amendment, but the FCC itself is not a violation of the Constitution.Click here if you're having trouble sleeping.
"We confess our little faults to persuade people that we have no large ones." - François de La RochefoucauldComment
-
I don't have any problem with FCC administering the network etc, but they shouldn't have a say on content. That is certainly an violation of the constitution.With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Steven WeinbergComment
-
"beeping" out "bad" words are actually the most stupid thing that ever have hit america.With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Steven WeinbergComment
-
QFTOriginally posted by BlackCat View Post
If there is no sound in space, how come you can hear the lasers?
){ :|:& };:Comment
-
Even if it's showing nipples at a football game ?Originally posted by Hauldren Collider View PostQFT
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Steven WeinbergComment
-
This may be a bit of an overstatement, but I wholeheartedly agree with the sentiment. As I've said elsewhere, I pretty much only agree with limitations on free speech when there is imminent lawless action.Originally posted by BlackCat View PostClick here if you're having trouble sleeping.
"We confess our little faults to persuade people that we have no large ones." - François de La RochefoucauldComment
-
YesOriginally posted by BlackCat View PostEven if it's showing nipples at a football game ?If there is no sound in space, how come you can hear the lasers?
){ :|:& };:Comment
-
I am very critical of the US when it deserves it but more than willing to say when you get it right (or more right than us as the case may be).Originally posted by OzzyKP View PostUSA
Now your Court just has to figure out corporations and political action groups aren't people..."I have never killed a man, but I have read many obituaries with great pleasure." - Clarence Darrow
"I didn't attend the funeral, but I sent a nice letter saying I approved of it." - Mark TwainComment
-
"I have never killed a man, but I have read many obituaries with great pleasure." - Clarence Darrow
"I didn't attend the funeral, but I sent a nice letter saying I approved of it." - Mark TwainComment
-
It seriously scares me that laws that were defined for much more serious issues (such as radical muslim clerics calling for war on the infidel which, let's be honest, this is why the racial incitement to violence laws come from). This is some little kn*bhead who said some sh*t on the internet like a million idiots before him. I find this a very, very slippery slope to go down in terms of this prosecution. I mean, by the sounds of it, a visit from the police would've been enough to sort this one out, not a custodial sentence.Originally posted by Dauphin View Post
I worry where our country is going. In theory some flippant comment that one of us British posters make on here could be construed in the same way. From my understanding there was no persistent harrassment - it was a one-off act of stupidity. And gross stupidity at that. But since when was that a crime? Flimsy laws that were meant to deal with much more significant issues being used for this crap. I find it alarming.Speaking of Erith:
"It's not twinned with anywhere, but it does have a suicide pact with Dagenham" - Linda SmithComment
-
Even a visit from the police is way to much for my liking. Unless he's inciting violence, just call him a **** en masse and ignore him in future.Comment
Comment