Do we really have freedom of speech?

Are we talking about freedom of speech ?, or are we talking about your wisdom ? lets stay on the subject .

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Both. But mostly we're talking about your failing to prove your claims about the U.S. vs other countries.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Well, I share some of your frustrations about the modern PC world we live in. But society's standards do shift over time. I used to make jokes about homosexuals, but these days I tend not to. Why? I suppose because I've known enough of them to understand how it feels from their point of view, i.e. not very funny. When I was a child, we used to make jokes about people of other races that we wouldn't dream of making today. Again, it's about having learnt enough to be able to see their point of view. So perhaps we've grown a bit in terms of politeness - and there is no doubt that politeness does cramp what you can say!

(But I do, still, I'm afraid, make jokes about people who are fat, even though there are pressure groups now weighing in (hahaha) to outlaw that as well. But younger people think I'm terribly rude and unfair......Oh well.... )

The UK had a debate recently about a Blair-inspired law to prohibit being rude about people's religions. The idea was thrown out, I think rightly, because it was pointed out that a religion is a voluntarily adopted belief system, that must expect to be challenged by those who do not subscribe to it. Unlike, say, being black, which is an accident of birth, or being Indian, which is an accident of culture. Or being homosexual which, whatever its causes, is a state you can't do much about. So I'm not really surprised that the state over time enshrines some of these basic politenesses in law. And as a European, I am conscious of where unpleasant rabble-rousing has sometimes led in history. So I have no trouble buying the idea of a limited trade-off between total freedom and peace in our streets.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Doesn't mean you are a loser. Does mean that you don't have the common courtesy to learn to communicate in the language of the country you want to live in.

(And BTW you can speak any language you want here. But if you are going to complain about how you're a "better American" or something because you decided to come here, you should do it in a way that doesn't demonstrate that you don't care about the US. People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.)

 

Correct - that alone does not make him a looser. However, making bold, senseless statements and refusing to acknowledge that he spoke out of turn when he can't substantiate them does. He said people living in the U.S. had fewer freedoms than those in many other countries (unspecified) and one in particular in Africa (also unspecified). And that you could tell the amount of freedom citizens had purely by the number of laws a country has - that more laws equals less freedom - despite the fact that many of the U.S. laws are actually what *protect* many of our freedoms.

So, taken all together, yes he IS a real looser.

 

looser, less tight.
loser, not a winner.

 

Yep, you're right, Leo - my bad.

In fact though, *both* work for this jerk since he is so loose with the truth!

 

you gave me an alleged case number.
it returned zero results with a google search.

 

Is google the final answer , I directed you to the Illinois pollution board , and if you are not capable, that is your problem, I give you a filing number. Some day I will publish my data and how unscrupulous the government is and that is including the Federal Highway Authority .

 

1) PC does not punish isolated words. It punishes words in context.
2) It doesn't matter how cheerful the hearts of the Aryan Brotherhood hit squad - their use of the word "nigger" is a serious public safety problem.
3) Most of the censored and punished speech in the US is censored and punished by conservative authoritarians, mainly (in the US) Christian. If the only examples you can think of involve "liberals" somehow behaving in an authoritarian manner (while remaining "liberal" in your odd vocabulary), you are overlooking the major aspects of the problem of regulated and punished speech in the US.

Poor baby, so picked on by the "liberals". Sure you aren't over-reacting to stray invective, taken as evidence a lack of free speech because you can't restrict it?

Feeling insulted is not evidence of having been insulted, when you're an idiotic bigot to begin with. Also, insult is not hatred. Contempt, even, is not hatred. Speech is not "hate speech" because it is insulting, even if it is - instead of having nothing to do with you personally, like "gay marriage". Speech is not "hate speech" because ignorant bigots feel overlooked or picked on for their ignorance and bigotry - such traits are chosen, mutable, voluntary targets of insult and contempt.

What you have described is a spoiled child's version of "hate speech" - the version of someone who doesn't know what's going on, doesn't care, and wants people to respect them and not insult them regardless of the damage they do with their opinions and behavior. This has nothing to do with "conservative" ideology, unless the connection is through political immaturity and factual ignorance.

But they don't, necessarily, or even usually. If racial at all (and in the US few quotas have been explicitly racial) they often redress part of an existing racial discrimination. In the large fraction in which one race is favored (and all others disfavored) rather than one race being disfavored (and all others favored), the race favored is usually the "US white" race.

The quota system in most frequent use in the US (since gender discrimination is seldom quota based) is tribal - based on family relations, membership in a genetic and ethnic clan. The setting aside of class places for the children of alumni in the better colleges, for example, is almost universal. This is coincidently racist, of course; sometimes deliberately, sometimes unaware - on the part of the discriminators, that is.

Another common quota system is by family religious affiliation. A third would be by geography. Both of those are often racist; again, often deliberately, sometimes unaware - on the part of the discriminators, that is.

If there were no effectively racial discrimination, next year's entering freshman class at the most prestigious US private colleges would be almost entirely yellow by race, with some Jews forming the majority of the meager white representation. Would you regard that as a well-selected class, given the principles and goals of a liberal arts education?

 

Wise guy here is more of your freedom.
A Pennsylvania man, who says his outhouse works just fine, is being ordered to install a septic system. The man told Lancaster Online that the septic system could cost him thousands.

The man, 77-year-old Wilson Huyett, told the website that Salisbury Township told him he has to replace the outhouse with a septic system that consists of three underground tanks, a pump and a "three-trench sand mound." Though he doesn't know the official cost yet, Huyett is estimating the project will make him $20,000 lighter.

Huyett, who lives on a farm where his nearest neighbor is a quarter-mile away, insists that his current low-tech system is just fine. "You can't smell nothing," he told the paper. "I put lime in it. Lime will kill anything."

[Related: Tiger escapes circus, wanders into restroom]

Salisbury Township supervisor Lester O. Houck told Lancaster Online that the township is required to enforce state Department of Environmental Protection regulations "whether we like it or not."

Huyett, who has lived on the property since 1958, said that he spoke to sewage enforcement official Bob Mohn about the issue. In an email to the website, Mohn wrote that Huyett's outhouse violates Pennsylvania law.

"The DEP regulations do not care whether it is one person or a family, nor does age or financial concerns make a difference," Mohn wrote. "The township's responsibility is to assure the waters of the Commonwealth are not jeopardized.

 

So? Tossing in bits and pieces of local problems from somewhere has nothing to do with you not proving your original claims. <shrug>

 

where do i begin.
in my opinion the guy is complaining about the cost, not that he has to do it.
if you have grown up with an outhouse like i did you would appreciate indoor plumbing when the weather turn freezing ass cold.
FYI, all dwellings inside city limits MUST be connected to the city sewer.
also, there are laws that regulate outhouses, location being one of them.
BTW, outhouses do not emit odors, the bacteria in feces prevents it.

 

Well, this is defined according to your country
If you said here overthrow the Communist Party, Then they will ask you to tea................haha

 

What ever the guy complains , he wants to be left alone , the government is FORCING him to spend his money
Don't give me your reasoning the point here is freedom, The guy is there since 1958 and is 1/4 of a mile from the other plot .

 

You must be retarded I never mentioned AFRICA . I mentioned Costa Rica and Uruguay . You probable mentioned Africa because you lack of knowledge were the two mentioned country are located .
For your information , Costa Rica did not have military force ,

 

From the description of what would be required to bring his setup to code, he is low to the water table near a stream or aquifer - hence the proscription of open pit outhouse setups, and the complexity and expense of the required system.

The problem is the lack of freedom of decision on the part of the government agent - he should be able to grant waivers to small and non-polluting setups that are only technically in violation of regulations.

The freedom to defecate in the public freshwater lakes, streams, and aquifers, has long been revoked by all industrial societies governed with even minimal competence.

 

it doesn't matter if he was there since the dawn of time and ten million miles from "another plot".
outhouses MUST be located in certain places, period.
regardless of what you think, you just can't go out and build one where ever you want even if it's your own land.
10 to 1 says he is violating fresh water supplies with his outhouse.
furthermore i'll bet his land is sitting on top of a shallow aquafir.
it's the only thing i can think of that would force the septic tank installation instead of relocating the outhouse.

 

I was half-right and half wrong (and I'm not nearly as retarded as you). Here's what you posted:

Please don't be so coke there is Costa Rica, Which is more democratic then the USA and if you talk about freedom , you don't have much freedom because you have laws coming up your arse . I was in other south American country which have more freedom then in the USA. Go out and see and travel there are other country beside USA.

You did mention Costa Rica BUT you never said Uruguay, instead you said "other South American country" - which is what proves you are the retarded one here. How were we expected to get Uruguay out of that????? And since you chose to say "other South American country" that probably means you aren't aware that Costa Rica is in Central America.

Where were you educated - in a salt mine in Siberia?

And buy the way, what the heck is "so coke" supposed to mean??????

 

Better than giving his neighbors dysentery.

Weren't you recently going after someone because they were being noisy?