Je suis Charlie

Old Jan 9th, 2015, 09:19 AM
  #121  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 12,820
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
France doesnt have free speech, there are all kinds of limitations on speech in France. Cameron and Merkel are just putting on a show for the foolish masses
FrankS is offline  
Old Jan 9th, 2015, 09:24 AM
  #122  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
So, FrankS is probably not a Pastafarian.
Caliban is offline  
Old Jan 9th, 2015, 09:27 AM
  #123  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 12,820
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I like Pasta...

and btw France and Germany still put people in prison for publicly saying that Nazis werent as bad as the history textbooks say
FrankS is offline  
Old Jan 9th, 2015, 09:29 AM
  #124  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 12,820
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
& a Muslim in France isnt free to openly question the accused genocide of Armenians in 1916-7

You call that free speech?
FrankS is offline  
Old Jan 9th, 2015, 09:35 AM
  #125  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 17,801
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Please, no more biblical exegesis from you, FrankS. That's what the Lounge is for.

Je suis Charlie. And bravo, French Special Forces.
NewbE is offline  
Old Jan 9th, 2015, 09:42 AM
  #126  
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 23,813
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 1 Post
<I>a Muslim in France isnt free to openly question</I>

Are you implying that Christians and Jews have more rights?
kerouac is offline  
Old Jan 9th, 2015, 09:50 AM
  #127  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 49,521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I don't know about free speech in France, but in the US it is so important that it is the 1st Constitutional Amendment. The right to be critical of one's government and to express one's viewpoint. However, there are numerous restrictions of this right. I understand how minority and historically abused groups like Jews, blacks, women, and now Muslims can be tempted to do something about it. But unfortunately the way to handle this, for terrorist Muslim groups, is currently to kill the messenger.

FrankS I'm not sure what you are saying, is it that because Charlie Hebdo cartoonists work was inflammatory to Muslims that it justified the murders? Or that it caused them? It's one thing to recognize that it caused them, another to support the way to handle it.
nanabee is offline  
Old Jan 9th, 2015, 10:05 AM
  #128  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 12,820
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
FrankS I'm not sure what you are saying, is it that because Charlie Hebdo cartoonists work was inflammatory to Muslims that it justified the murders? Or that it caused them?<<

1)Im saying the cartoonists provoked these muslims, which neither justifies or caused the murders.
2)Im also saying the hypocritical French system of hate speech laws contributed to the injustice which further provoked the terrorists
3) Im also saying only fools would think they are supporting free speech, when they are only supporting a small lewd subset of speech
FrankS is offline  
Old Jan 9th, 2015, 10:12 AM
  #129  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,159
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
4) I'm saying I'm right, everybody else is wrong - as per usual.
willit is offline  
Old Jan 9th, 2015, 10:16 AM
  #130  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
But, Frankie, I can call you Frankie, can't I? But Frankie, that very thing is the essence of free speech. You do not get the right to limit a right because in your view something is lewd or sinful or foolish. You now confirm the hypothesis stated elsewhere in the thread that you define free speech as speaking of things you approve of. Case closed. Troll elsewhere.

Oh, sorry about the "Frankie". It is definitely uncalled for, but it is free speech.
Caliban is offline  
Old Jan 9th, 2015, 10:23 AM
  #131  
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 23,813
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 1 Post
<I>in the US it is so important that it is the 1st Constitutional Amendment.</I>

What is kind of a shame that it was not important enough to be in the constitution itself but just an amendment.
kerouac is offline  
Old Jan 9th, 2015, 10:30 AM
  #132  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Kerouac: This is discussed in American History 101 all the time. The Constitution was written in compromise to get all 13 colonies to join. Some felt that a long list of rights was not basic to the document, while other framers felt that certain rights were essential. The Constitution considers amendments to be integral parts of the whole Constitution. Thus, the Bill of Rights as 10 amendments was reatifieds and added, leaving the original document "pure" but including the rights we now enjoy. I only wish that the second amendment was written a bit more clearly.
Caliban is offline  
Old Jan 9th, 2015, 10:35 AM
  #133  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,396
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
<i>What is kind of a shame that it was not important enough to be in the constitution itself but just an amendment.</i>

kerouac, the main body of the U.S. Constitution has a set of articles that primarily define the roles and responsibilities of the 3 branches of government. The first 10 amendments, which were included at the same time as the main body of the Constitution was enacted, specify a set of rights and liberties. There's no distinction made between the authority of the main body of the Constitution and the various amendments.
DonTopaz is offline  
Old Jan 9th, 2015, 10:51 AM
  #134  
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 23,813
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 1 Post
I just always wonder why the US constitution is not rewritten and modernized like other countries do from time to time. Then there would not be those annoying amendments about prohibition, women's rights and slavery issues.
kerouac is offline  
Old Jan 9th, 2015, 10:52 AM
  #135  
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 23,813
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 1 Post
Oh, and maybe the second amendment could be eliminated since it is completely outdated and refers to bygone times.
kerouac is offline  
Old Jan 9th, 2015, 11:09 AM
  #136  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 57,091
Received 5 Likes on 3 Posts
France doesnt have free speech, there are all kinds of limitations on speech in France. Cameron and Merkel are just putting on a show for the foolish masses>>

yes, that's called democracy.

like free speech, it's clearly a concept that you have trouble understanding, Frankie.
annhig is offline  
Old Jan 9th, 2015, 11:16 AM
  #137  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 3,468
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
FrankS on Jan 9, 15 at 12:29pm
& a Muslim in France isnt free to openly question the accused genocide of Armenians in 1916-7,

You call that free speech?>

FRANKS - because your posts are all over the board, we can't determine WHAT you mean by free speech. I've asked you three times. You've responded to all of my posts, but NEVER answer the question. I don't know what YOU mean by Free speech.

I can only assume that you have a different understanding of what Free Speech is from what the rest of the civilized world is talking about when they speak of Free Speech.

I can't figure out a way to explain my difficulties in responding to your questions.

Unless of course you don't want to have any actual discourse, you just want to spout your philosophies to the rest of us, the ignorant masses, so that we can be saved by your particular sect or denomination. Clearly, from your own posts, you understand that others who call themselves Christians just as you do don't believe in the apocryphal nature of your sect. Sorry. But rambling in circles doesn't add or detract from this site, but it does clearly let the rest of the world (Fodor's World anyway) what kind of person you are, and what kind of poster you are.

I personally am bored today, and knowing your philosophies and proclivities, decided that I would spend some time today poking the bear. Been awhile since I got to sit around and poke an internet bear, but it has been fun.
apersuader65 is offline  
Old Jan 9th, 2015, 11:21 AM
  #138  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 3,468
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
kerouac on Jan 9, 15 at 1:51pm
I just always wonder why the US constitution is not rewritten and modernized like other countries do from time to time. Then there would not be those annoying amendments about prohibition, women's rights and slavery issues.

Have you seen how divided this country is lately? There is absolutely no chance of a cleaned up document coming, unless of course we fall into another Civil War. I do not, personally anyway, discount the possibility of that in fact occurring in my lifetime given the nature of politics here.
apersuader65 is offline  
Old Jan 9th, 2015, 11:25 AM
  #139  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 12,820
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
apersueder,

Again in English please, and try to be factual. I feel you are doing your best to insult me, but I cant understand your vile intent well enough to get upset.
FrankS is offline  
Old Jan 9th, 2015, 11:31 AM
  #140  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 15,426
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 4 Posts
"I just always wonder why the US constitution is not rewritten and modernized like other countries do from time to time."

Be careful what you wish for. There is no guarantee that a new document would eliminate the things any of us do not like nor that it would include the things many of us find essential.
Nikki is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Your Privacy Choices -