|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,902 Year: 4,159/9,624 Month: 1,030/974 Week: 357/286 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 866 days) Posts: 2339 From: Socorro, New Mexico USA Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Should the Public Airwaves be More or Less Censored? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 445 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
The First Amendment gives you the right to offend people. Any questions? It’s Against the Law It is a violation of federal law to air obscene programming at any time. It is also a violation of federal law to air indecent programming or profane language during certain hours. Congress has given the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) the responsibility for administratively enforcing these laws. The FCC may revoke a station license, impose a monetary forfeiture, or issue a warning if a station airs obscene, indecent, or profane material. Obscene Broadcasts Are Prohibited at All Times Obscene material is not protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution and cannot be broadcast at any time. The Supreme Court has established that, to be obscene, material must meet a three-pronged test: * An average person, applying contemporary community standards, must find that the material, as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest;* The material must depict or describe, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by applicable law; and* The material, taken as a whole, must lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/obscene.html Any questions?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1284 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: |
One question, been asked repeatedly in one form or another, but I'll give it a go anyway.
Can you not see that there's a difference between obscenity and being offensive? Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dan Carroll Inactive Member |
Well this just about sums up what I am talking about. It is the epitome of poor taste and unnecessary speech. Gosh, if it's so unnecessary, why was it the only thing in my post to which you responded? I'm gonna go ahead and guess the reason is, "I don't have an answer for anything else, but want to keep my moral indignation. It's fun." "I know some of you are going to say 'I did look it up, and that's not true.' That's 'cause you looked it up in a book. Next time, look it up in your gut." -Stephen Colbert
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 441 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
riVeRraT writes: But I stand on my God-given right to be offensive. So go walk up to your local police and curse him out. That happens in almost every traffic stop. Do you seriously believe I don't have the right to call a cop a "pig"? Do you seriously want the police to have the power to arrest people who don't tug their forelock and say "yassa, yassa"? Edited by Ringo, : Spellin'. Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation. Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 423 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
The only speech that NEEDS to be protected is that which offends.
The only speech worth protecting is that which offends. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DrJones* Member Posts: 2290 From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 6.9 |
whoops that was supposed to be to rat and not you. I need to avoid posting when I'm sleepy.
Just a monkey in a long line of kings. If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! *not an actual doctor
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2199 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
If it is illegal to offend people, why isn't Ann Coulter in jail?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 445 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
The only speech that NEEDS to be protected is that which offends. The only speech worth protecting is that which offends. I know everyone else here thinks I don't get that, but I do.Good point jar.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2199 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Maybe you get it now, but you sure didn't before. Otherwise, you wouldn't have thought is was illegal to offend others.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 445 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
Maybe you get it now, but you sure didn't before. Otherwise, you wouldn't have thought is was illegal to offend others. EVC forum, the only place on earth where people will debate with you, even when you agree. Being obscene is offensive.Being offensive, can also turn into harrasment. These are the things I am talking about, but as usual, the point of my discussions always seem to drift away into obilivion. I am even wrong because I mis-spell words, that makes my point wrong. It's like a long running joke.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dan Carroll Inactive Member |
Being obscene is offensive. And the core of your stunning levels of wrongability in this thread is the fact that although obscenity is offensive, offending you does not make something obscene. Throw on the fact that obscenity has a specific legal standing, which you clearly don't get, having cited a fifty-year-dead test as if it was used today, and your justifications for censorship become incredibly, amazingly wrong.
Being offensive, can also turn into harrasment. The TV's harrassing you? Has the toaster been laughing at you?
These are the things I am talking about, but as usual, the point of my discussions always seem to drift away into obilivion. Your original point, if I'm not mistaken, was that the content-censoring authority of the FCC is what should let you keep Desperate Housewives from airing ads during basketball games. I've been asking you why the FCC should be allowed to censor content for... wow, seven pages now. You still haven't answered. So screw it, if you don't want to stick to the point, let's make fun of your spelling. "I know some of you are going to say 'I did look it up, and that's not true.' That's 'cause you looked it up in a book. Next time, look it up in your gut." -Stephen Colbert
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kuresu Member (Idle past 2542 days) Posts: 2544 From: boulder, colorado Joined: |
trouble is, RR, that not everything offensive is obscene.
that test you mentioned is for obscenity. not offensiveness.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2199 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
This is just another instance of the rat's inability to admit that he was mistaken about something.
In this case, he tries to cover it up by implying that he's really understood that offensive speech is protected all along. Of coourse, he's hoping we all forget that he repeatedly claimed that offending people is illegal...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Max Power Member (Idle past 6036 days) Posts: 32 From: Minneapolis, MN, USA Joined: |
riVeRraT writes:
Message 60 Sorry brenna, freedom of speech doen't give you the right to offend people. riVeRraT writes:
Message 75 All I said was that freedom of speech does not give you the right to offend people. riVeRraT writes:
Message 78 Irrelavent reply. It is not legal to offend people, if you can't deal with that, then poo on you. Jar writes:
Message 95 The only speech that NEEDS to be protected is that which offends. The only speech worth protecting is that which offends.
riVeRraT in response to Jar writes:
Message 98
I know everyone else here thinks I don't get that, but I do.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2199 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
Rat, you may think that everyone is piling on here and being unneccessarily harsh with you.
In this thread, you have repeatedly claimed one thing (offending people is illegal), and everybody has told you over and over that you are wrong (offensive speech is exactly what is protected). Now, you imply that what you have been claiming is actually the opposite to what you really know; that offensive speech is protected. You then give some kind of garbled response to my post conflating "obscene" with "offensive", even though you know perfectly well that "obscene" has a specific legal definition that is different from "offensive". The reason we are shoving all of this in your face is because you do this all the time. In fact, just about every discussion with you becomes an exercise in repeating to you what you claimed when you deny you ever said it, and you twisting and contorting in order to not have to admit that you were really wrong about something. THAT is why your threads are not focused. YOU keep going off on tangents to avoid admitting you've made an error. I don't know if you are doing it consciously, but that is what you are doing, nonetheless.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024