DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**thierabess** · 08-02-2012, 08:36 AM

However, you cannot hide behind 'free speech' as a means of causing undue suffering, or for the purpose of causing commercial or reputational damage to an individual.

Whose fault is it if some people have thin skins? For instance, if merely pointing out that a certain individual is a pathetic loser for vacationing alone in Vegas, if that causes some pussy "undue suffering" then that's the least of his problems.

Finally, artistic expression in the UK, at least on television and radio, is a lot more lenient than in the US. Oddly, this doesn't apply to video games where it's the other way around (UK games have age restrictions), and quite frankly I think censorship is a bigger problem in both countries than the principle of allowing harmful speech or not.

Good point. But I think we can identify religion as the single underlying cause behind America's censorial attitude towards television and Art.

Christianity continues to warp America's attitude towards sexuality. Nudity is discouraged in public. Art that criticizes religion is deprived of funds or exhibition. Just last year, Christian conservatives managed to get the National Gallery to pull David Wojnarowicz's (fairly tame) film because it contained religious iconography. And they don't stop there. Not merely content with censoring art that might be construed as blasphemous, religious conservatives have successfully deprived any form of the Arts of public funding, so what you get in America is art that is largely commercial pop-culture for the masses, neutered corporate-sponsored installations, or more post-modernist crap auctioned off to rich private collectors.

Here we have a perfect example of how granting too much of one freedom can diminish others. The first amendment was never intended to provide religion with the sort of special status and power it enjoys today. America's greatest president (and incidentally, my namesake) Thomas Jefferson made it clear, along with Madison, that freedom from religion is the only way to ensure freedom and social harmony for every citizen. We have an obligation to reduce religious influence in public affairs.

Britons are also protected by various Human Rights treaties, which Americans are not, as well as the European Convention,

True enough, though I doubt most brits and people like DM want to hear most of their rights are protected by a European Convention.

for the purpose of having a dig at Britain. It seems you're still upset about Trafalgar.

Fixed. The Prussians saved Britain's collective asses during Waterloo.

08-02-2012, 08:36 AM	#77
thierabess Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 387 Senior Member	However, you cannot hide behind 'free speech' as a means of causing undue suffering, or for the purpose of causing commercial or reputational damage to an individual. Whose fault is it if some people have thin skins? For instance, if merely pointing out that a certain individual is a pathetic loser for vacationing alone in Vegas, if that causes some pussy "undue suffering" then that's the least of his problems. Finally, artistic expression in the UK, at least on television and radio, is a lot more lenient than in the US. Oddly, this doesn't apply to video games where it's the other way around (UK games have age restrictions), and quite frankly I think censorship is a bigger problem in both countries than the principle of allowing harmful speech or not. Good point. But I think we can identify religion as the single underlying cause behind America's censorial attitude towards television and Art. Christianity continues to warp America's attitude towards sexuality. Nudity is discouraged in public. Art that criticizes religion is deprived of funds or exhibition. Just last year, Christian conservatives managed to get the National Gallery to pull David Wojnarowicz's (fairly tame) film because it contained religious iconography. And they don't stop there. Not merely content with censoring art that might be construed as blasphemous, religious conservatives have successfully deprived any form of the Arts of public funding, so what you get in America is art that is largely commercial pop-culture for the masses, neutered corporate-sponsored installations, or more post-modernist crap auctioned off to rich private collectors. Here we have a perfect example of how granting too much of one freedom can diminish others. The first amendment was never intended to provide religion with the sort of special status and power it enjoys today. America's greatest president (and incidentally, my namesake) Thomas Jefferson made it clear, along with Madison, that freedom from religion is the only way to ensure freedom and social harmony for every citizen. We have an obligation to reduce religious influence in public affairs. Britons are also protected by various Human Rights treaties, which Americans are not, as well as the European Convention, True enough, though I doubt most brits and people like DM want to hear most of their rights are protected by a European Convention. for the purpose of having a dig at Britain. It seems you're still upset about Trafalgar. Fixed. The Prussians saved Britain's collective asses during Waterloo.
	Quote