Presidential Debate

[Danno 1,228]

I think you have misunderstood what free speech is. When you agree to attend a "collage," you agree to abide by all the rules and regulations of the college. They can put all the restrictions they want in place--you have the choice to go there or not. It's like the TOS on a website. It's irrelevant when it comes to the issue of a government restricting speech.

Freedom of speech is often misunderstood to mean that enyone can say anthing they want, anywhere. This is not the case of course. As pertains to academic institutions, however, they have a long tradition of supporting free speech. That's why people such as the Iranian President (whose name I can't be bothered to spell check at the moment ) are invited to speak at universities, despite the abhorrant views they hold.

People also believe that forums such as VJ are havens of free speech, and that when a post is deleted or edited by a moderator, that this is "censorship." But nobody has the right to free speech on private property, which is what VJ is. You can't go into a Walmart and start picketing them, because it's private property. But you can stand on the public sidewalk out front of their store and picket to your heart's content.

Wal-mart is in the business of exchanging money

A State Collage is in the business of exchanging ideas.

Care to address the Hypocrite angle?

[slim 1,514]

Wal-Mart is private.

State funded schools are public.

Anything funded by the public is subject to equality standards and therefore anything deemed "offensive" isn't protected. Wal-Mart is subject to a certain degree of equality standards too, however they're entitled to form opinions on certain issues and stick with them because they pay for the right to do that. So do you in your own house, business, etc. But, like mox said, once you walk out on the "public" sidewalk in front of your house, anyone can stand there and hold up a sign.

[mox 298]

Care to address the Hypocrite angle?

I'm not quite sure I understand the hypocrite angle. I think with the freedom of speech we have the freedom to be hypocrits. That's why it's not illegal to be a hipocrite, just damned inconvenient. Or am I missing your argument?

[groovlstk 0]

I witnessed someone being beaten on 9/11, an Egyptian guy in Jersey City, in full view of the smoke and debris that was obscuring most of lower Manhattan.

I was in a liquor store waiting to pay for a bottle of much-needed Jameson's on the worst day of my life when a young Arab guy ran up to the open door and yelled "EGYPT OWNS THIS COUNTRY!" People turned to look but most were still in a state of shock over the events earlier that day, no one even commented, but I could hear the guy repeating this line as he went door-to-door along the street. When I exited the shop he was on the sidewalk surrounded by a group of black men who were beating the holy living Jesus out of him.

Did I feel sorry for him? Not a whit.

Did I try to help him? Nope.

Was it wrong? Technically, yes.

Did he get what he deserved? Yes, he got exactly what he was looking for, and then some.

Seven years later and I haven't the faintest degree of empathy or sympathy for him.

[mox 298]

Seven years later and I haven't the faintest degree of empathy or sympathy for him.

If you believe might makes right, then I guess this makes sense.

On the other hand, what if the guy had been mentally handicapped? Over-medicated? Under-medicated? So completely hysterical over recent events that he wasn't in control of his mental faculties? You think you were seeing the whole story, but there's a good chance you weren't.

[slim 1,514]

And why was it that it was a group of black men beating him?

[groovlstk 0]

Seven years later and I haven't the faintest degree of empathy or sympathy for him.

If you believe might makes right, then I guess this makes sense.

If I went into an African American neighborhood and started shouting racial epithets, I'd deserve to get a good popka-whoopin'. The man was no innocent bystander chosen at random. He peed on the wrong group of people at the absolute worst possible time. He knew the possible consequences yet couldn't contain his joy at what he witnessed that day.

On the other hand, what if the guy had been mentally handicapped? Over-medicated? Under-medicated? So completely hysterical over recent events that he wasn't in control of his mental faculties? You think you were seeing the whole story, but there's a good chance you weren't.

Someone who watched the day's events on TV, who wasn't there to witness the exchanges I described, and could never fathom the emotions local people were feeling in the immediate aftermath wants to tell me I really didn't understand what I saw?

Do you realize how sanctimonious that is?

[Danno 1,228]

Ahh the guy got what was coming to him.

We lock up or execute people for giving aid and comfort to an enemy.... In the spirit of this logic, the guy got off easy.

[mox 298]

Someone who watched the day's events on TV, who wasn't there to witness the exchanges I described, and could never fathom the emotions local people were feeling in the immediate aftermath wants to tell me I really didn't understand what I saw?

Do you realize how sanctimonious that is?

Please. The "I was there, it affected me more than it affected you, so you have no right to question my perceptions" is a tired fallacy that's been used for 7 years to shut down any conversation--sorry but I'm not buying it. You should look up the definition of "sanctimounious" before you start applying it so loosely. I respect that you went through a horrible experience, and I would never denegrate you or anyone else who went through such an event. But I'm not going to throw logic out the window because I wasn't there.

And I didn't say that you didn't see what you saw, I said that you only had one tiny sliver of the story, and you're projecting the rest. I gave you some really good examples of what might have been going on, and you ignored them because it conflicts with your own prejudices. You saw what you wanted to see.

Ahh the guy got what was coming to him.

We lock up or execute people for giving aid and comfort to an enemy.... In the spirit of this logic, the guy got off easy.

There's no correlary whatsoever. When we punish people for giving "aid and comfort," there is due process. There is an investigation, there is an incarceration, there is a judge and jury of peers, or at the very least a military tribunal. If groovlstk's story is true, there was none of this. Saying there is justice in mob mentality is like saying there is freedom in anarchy.

[slim 1,514]

I still think we're missing something here.....

Why is it that those who purchase top shelf don't take action? They "feel" but yet don't do anything?

Those who aren't purchasing top shelf actively group together and react.

Care to expand on that?

[groovlstk 0]

Please. The "I was there, it affected me more than it affected you, so you have no right to question my perceptions" is a tired fallacy that's been used for 7 years to shut down any conversation--sorry but I'm not buying it. You should look up the definition of "sanctimounious" before you start applying it so loosely.

I love reading these sanctimonious - yes, I know what the word means, and unlike you I know how to spell it - discussions about due process and justice after the fact. Mox, you're so willing to take into account that the poor guy who was beaten was off his meds that day, are you willing to extend the same possibility to the guys who beat him? Maybe they were "completely hysterical over recent events" and were not in control of their mental faculties, excuses you are quick to extend to the guy who ignited the fracas but not those who were initially minding their own business and wanted nothing more than to get on with their day.

Mox, you and your pals have the luxury of sitting here and preaching about justice and due process with all the earnestness of philosophers chained to a madhouse wall. I'm sorry if it sticks in your craw, but you could never understand the shock and tension in the air that day.

I gave you some really good examples of what might have been going on, and you ignored them because it conflicts with your own prejudices. You saw what you wanted to see.

Really good examples? Such as the guy was off his meds? Please, tell it to Dr. Phil or Oprah.

[mox 298]

yes, I know what the word means, and unlike you I know how to spell it

Damn that spelling mistake rule that automatically loses me the argument. Oh if only I'd been more careful with my spell checking.

[groovlstk 0]

yes, I know what the word means, and unlike you I know how to spell it

Damn that spelling mistake rule that automatically loses me the argument. Oh if only I'd been more careful with my spell checking.

Mox, actually that was a low blow on my part. I know you know how to spell it. So I may have to wrest the mantle of defeat from your grasp.

[mox 298]

Mox, actually that was a low blow on my part. I know you know how to spell it. So I may have to wrest the mantle of defeat from your grasp.

We'll call it a draw.

[slim 1,514]

You guys are still dodging the race card...... well, that'd be the SOP, right?