RE: When PC becomes denial

RE: When PC becomes denial (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Polls and Other Random Stupidity

Message

sensualmagirl -> RE: When PC becomes denial (2/14/2007 9:20:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: domiguy You have lost your mind. Never will I put value on anything you ever post again, and during a debate I will sure to remind others of this post. I assume you are guilty of fast-reply-itis too? I don't typically debate.

WyrdRich -> RE: When PC becomes denial (2/14/2007 9:20:45 PM)
This is what the topic was intended to be, Prior restraint is often considered a particularly oppressive form of censorship in Anglo-American jurisprudence because it prevents the restricted material from being heard or distributed at all. Other forms of restrictions on expression (such as suits for libel, slander, defamation, or actions for criminal libel) generally involve punishment after the offending material has been published. While such punishment might lead to a chilling effect, legal commentators argue that at least such actions do not directly impoverish the marketplace of ideas. Prior restraint, on the other hand, takes the idea or material completely out of the marketplace. Thus it is often considered to be the most extreme form of censorship. This view was expressed by the United States Supreme Court, in Nebraska Press Assn. v. Stuart where it wrote: " The thread running through all these cases is that prior restraints on speech and publication are the most serious and the least tolerable infringement on First Amendment rights. A criminal penalty or a judgment in a defamation case is subject to the whole panoply of protections afforded by deferring the impact of the judgment until all avenues of appellate review have been exhausted. Only after judgment has become final, correct or otherwise, does the law's sanction become fully operative. "A prior restraint, by contrast and by definition, has an immediate and irreversible sanction. If it can be said that a threat of criminal or civil sanctions after publication 'chills' speech, prior restraint 'freezes' it at least for the time." (pulled from the Wiki article I linked to earlier)

domiguy -> RE: When PC becomes denial (2/14/2007 9:21:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cjenny If you feel like you are being misconstrued maybe you could repost it? Phrasing it differently it could make for different responses. No. He should let it stand...We do live in a PC society. Everyone now knows all of the "proper" words to say...but if you listen close "they' will always show themselves for what they are.....Let Wyrd dig himself out....probably end up just going in deeper an deeper....Let it stand for what it is. One of my favorite...stereotyping quotes....."Republicans love America...It's just Americans that they can't stand."

dcnovice -> RE: When PC becomes denial (2/14/2007 9:23:03 PM)
For it to be an instance of prior restraint, wouldn't a court or government official have to be involved? Do you mean self-censorship maybe?

cjenny -> RE: When PC becomes denial (2/14/2007 9:26:32 PM)
Okay I read your new post WR. I'm only guessing here because you didn't ask a question or ask for an opinion but are you saying that by having that information on a second page in an updated story in an infringement upon the First Amendment? That we as Americans have become so hyper PC it allows the media to hold back news? I agree with neither of those personally in conjunction with the shooting.

FukinTroll -> RE: When PC becomes denial (2/14/2007 9:31:27 PM)
Very interesting. Why is it when I get pulled over the police suspect me of being a bad guy? I tell them that if I were a bad guy, I would look like them. If a report were filed for a guy with long hair, an eye patch, and a beard I know the first door they would knock on would be mine. You would think they would pull their heads into this century and look at mug shots and the clean-cut crook trend.

Vendaval -> RE: When PC becomes denial (2/14/2007 9:35:15 PM)
I agree with you Lady Ellen. A link on the page of the first article, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17156121/, discusses how his family fled the massacre. The family members interviewed are in shock and have no idea as to his motives. Unless he left notes, handwritten, or on his computer, a Web-site, or a videotaped confession; his reasons will most likely remain unknown. quote: ORIGINAL: LadyEllen It surely depends on his motive for the shooting doesnt it? If he did it because of some misunderstanding of his religion, then his religion might be relevant. If he did it because he was pissed over something otherwise, then his religion is as irrelevant as his eye colour E

Vendaval -> RE: When PC becomes denial (2/14/2007 9:37:58 PM)
But dontcha know Mr. Troll? The white collar criminals get community service, financial restitution and minimum security at the nicer prisions. The hard core convicts go to maximum security places like say, oh, San Quentin, Rikers, Attica, Pelican Bay, etc.

domiguy -> RE: When PC becomes denial (2/14/2007 9:39:17 PM)
Nice try at recovery. quote: WierdRich It's an act of terrorism. By a Muslim. On American soil. Why is it on page 2? quote: WierdRich Lemme see, guy walks in the door of a mall and starts shooting... I'd say his motivation is a desire to kill. I frankly don't give a rats ass about what led him to it. The facts aren't in yet. That didn't stop the media from putting out all kinds of complete crap about any other subject they call breaking news. Remember the rapes and murders happening right in front of police officers during Katrina? My question isn't about why he did it, but about why the angle doesn't even seem to be getting an exploration. Lets see that facts "aren't in" yet but it is an act of Terrorism.....You don't give a rats as what led him to do it but the most important part of the story is that he is a Muslim. quote: WierdRich This is what the topic was intended to be, Yeah I think everyone can tell what this thread you started is about.

dcnovice -> RE: When PC becomes denial (2/14/2007 9:42:16 PM)
Took another look at the MSNBC piece, and I honestly think AP's writers and editors made the right call. Several reasons: (a) The focus of the story is not the killer, but the survivors' response to the tragedy. The killer's religion, which might be germane to a profile of him, doesn't seem particularly pertinent here. (b) Investigators do not know what role, if any, the killer's religion played in his actions. Making his religion a key identifier, therefore, would be misleading. (c) Making a big deal of the killer's being a Muslim would all too likely result in readers' viewing him as representative of the entire religion in a way that would not happen if he were, say, Lutheran (as one of the Columbine shooters was). That doesn't mean the fact should never be mentioned, imho, but that editors should be particularly sure that it is truly germane to the story.

domiguy -> RE: When PC becomes denial (2/15/2007 7:07:00 AM)
Wyrd is pissed...please don't mesaage me further...Don't want to have to brandish my "dom breakin'" stick...I see you are a switch....will only need to apply half the power to do "the job."

findmedaddy -> RE: When PC becomes denial (2/15/2007 7:14:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: domiguy You have lost your mind. Never will I put value on anything you ever post again, and during a debate I will sure to remind others of this post. domiguy, how is the post from sensualmagirl indicative that she has lost her mind? I can't follow your reasoning at all on that.

domiguy -> RE: When PC becomes denial (2/15/2007 7:20:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: findmedaddy quote: ORIGINAL: domiguy You have lost your mind. Never will I put value on anything you ever post again, and during a debate I will sure to remind others of this post. domiguy, how is the post from sensualmagirl indicative that she has lost her mind? I can't follow your reasoning at all on that. fast reply....unfortunately, she replied faster.....got ahead of me...lol...not intended for her but for Wyrd.

findmedaddy -> RE: When PC becomes denial (2/15/2007 7:22:05 AM)
Ok, phew, thanks. I've enjoyed your posts in the past and was taken up short at the thought that you would take umbrage at such a reasonable post.

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 [4]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125