Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I recently heard yet another person mention "political correctness" off-handedly as if it were of no matter. "Political Correctness" is in its very essence Stalin's "Orthodox Ideology". "Orthodox Ideology" in turn is Stalin's interpretation of Marx's contrived philosophy that he referred to as "Dialectical Materialism". Stalin shortened it to "Diamat". "Diamat" is the philosophy of Soviet Communism and rooted in all good communists' profound and zealous belief that all change is "progressive" - not necessarily good - just "progressive". This dogma is contradicted by an enormous body of evidence that proves just the opposite as I am sure you realize. The failure of the former Soviet Union stands as one small part of that body.
Communism is the largest and most short-lived pseudo-religion of atheism. Communists do not believe that anything exists except "matter-in-motion". Consequently, they do not believe in any God, Spiritual Life or even any objective standard of morality. In fact, their equivalent to Judeo-Christian morality is little more than the sum total of rationalizations they employed and continue to employ to justify their incredibly destructive policies and procedures. I point this out knowing that your opponent employs a number of avowed communists on his campaign staff.
Obviously, communists assign meanings to words that are not necessarily the same as the meanings the average American Citizen understands. In this regard it is much like our own corrupted legal system that has derived a coded language of its own to deceive the people as to what they intend in terms of pursuing their own individual and collective self-interest. It’s good to remember that the ruling communists don't recognize any need whatsoever to be honest with their slave subjects. All that matters is that change occurs because change is "progressive". And change is an end in and of itself for those who express belief and/or membership in their pseudo-religion. Restated, the end always justifies the means and this is why they are able to murder millions with impunity in places like Russia, the former Eastern Bloc and China to name a few.
Today the United States stands on the brink of electing communists to power in the State and Federal governments. Many of us have been deceived by their false promises and many have turned their back on God at the communists' behest. I would like to leave you with a phrase I heard on the loud speaker of every Metro train I rode in Moscow and St. Petersburg just before it left the station (so long as it wasn't broken). “Beware the closing doors. Next stop - (the name of the next Metro Station).” For Americans I would like to substitute the word "tyranny" for the name of the Metro Station. Thank you for taking the time to read this message.
I don't see it as an issue of freedom of speech. Your speech is free as far as government restrictions are concerned. I always hear people on Internet forums complaining about a moderator infringing upon their 1st Amendment rights for being censored... I guess many don't realize that in a private setting, I don't have to respect your speech.
I hate PC talk just as much as the next guy, but don't expect me not to kick you out of my house for spouting off hateful remarks in my living room.
Is PC designed to restrict free speech and intimidate anyone who disagree with it???
uh... no
Please tell me what speech has been restricted. As to intimidation, well it has been used by both the left and the right as was indicated previously.
What would happen if Christian fundamentalist were a majority in our government and I were thrown in prison for saying that there were more similarities between Islam and Christianity than people cared to admit. Would you support this?
Everyone has a right to say what they want regardless of how argumentative/offensive/irrational it is. I am sure that 99.9% of us, regardless of political party, religious preference, creed, or race would find what the Westboro Baptist Church does to be very obscene. Personally, I would like them all to be physically harmed, but that's just me. Anyway, they do have a right to say what they are spewing, er, saying. OTOH, I would love for them to be forced to shut up.
The problem is with people. People think it's their right to not be offended. Well guess what; you're wrong. Most people who say they are offended can't even give good reason as to why they are anyway. They just want to create trouble. All people, on both sides of the coin, need to get over themselves.
I hate the PC crap that's going on too, however, I don't think it's wrong to practice a modicum of PC either.
I wouldn't call it a right wing axe when it is the left that keeps dredging up one word slip ups and turning it into a top story. Imus said nappy? And ho's? OMG, it is so obvious that he absolutely hates all black women and wants them to die!
You are simply defending Imus' unfettered right to use the public airwaves to offer, quite unnecessarily, a baseless, rude, and abusive characterization of a very particular group of individuals. Note that no one called for him to be taken off to jail. People called for him to be taken off the public airwaves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tnbound2day
It is also the left that seeks to legislate speech based on what is deemed hateful. Forget about the constitution, its no longer important.
Where do you see hate-speech legislation proposed? We do have hate-crimes laws, of course. Those are based on actions, not words. I would assume that anyone can recognize the difference there.
You are simply defending Imus' unfettered right to use the public airwaves to offer, quite unnecessarily, a baseless, rude, and abusive characterization of a very particular group of individuals.
Yes, I defend his right, and the right of his employer (network) to allow Imus to say whatever he wishes.
The problem is with people. People think it's their right to not be offended. Well guess what; you're wrong.
Quite so. It has been said that if you walk out your front door and around the town and aren't offended by something within 30 minutes, you don't live in a free society. But that's passive offense. Others are doing perfectly ordinary things that you happen to take offense at. Imus was guilty of an active offense. It is very unlikely that there is anyone anywhere who would take being referred to as a nappy-headed ho in a good way. The term is patently offensive, and was deliberately directed toward very particular people over the public airwaves. That crosses the line, and Imus was quite properly called on it.
Yes, I defend his right, and the right of his employer (network) to allow Imus to say whatever he wishes.
Neither Imus nor his employer has any right to use the public airwaves at all, except by license of the people who own those airwaves, which people are us. All of us. As license issuers, we can and do set standards and punish violations of those standards. Imus may say anything he wants while walking down a public street, but not while broadcasting over the public airwaves.
Imus has been offensive for years. Let the people speak. If people didn't listen to him he would eventually be gone. End of story.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
