Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: OT: on culture war

Expand Messages
  • rainmandu2
    ... speech? ... post, ... of ... who s ... about ... With ... perform ... I agree. But Rick and I were discussing indecency in public (nipplegate) and in the
    Message 1 of 243 , Dec 1, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In cerebus@yahoogroups.com, Donna-Lee Phillips
      <dlp@p...> wrote:
      > Rainmandu--
      >
      > I didn't say anything about sex acts.
      >
      > > If I make a movie that depicts a sex act that you (or others)
      > > consider to be "harmful," why is that an abuse of free
      speech?
      >
      > I certainly didn't say anything about sex acts that I (or others)
      > consider to be "harmful".
      > I didn't say that was an abuse of free speech.
      >
      > >
      > > It's all down to your own perception. Like I said in an earlier
      post,
      > > it's "freedom" when you like it, "license" when you don't. Larry
      > > Flynt is no more "abusing" his freedom of speech, freedom
      of
      > > the press, and freedom of expression than the feminist
      who's
      > > saying she doesn't like "Hustler."
      >
      > I didn't say anything about Larry Flynt, and I didn't say anything
      about
      > "Hustler" (although they gave my book a shitty review).
      >
      > What I say is just this, and no more... absolutely nothing more:
      With
      > freedom comes responsibility.
      >
      > And everyone has the freedom not to watch, read, listen to or
      perform
      > anything they find offensive.
      >
      > DL

      I agree. But Rick and I were discussing "indecency" in public
      (nipplegate) and in the public arena (magazines, etc.). You
      weren't specific when you made your comments, so I figured you
      were on about what we were on about. What WERE you on
      about, then? Verbal harassment?

      Yes, people have the freedom to not watch, etc.

      My point is, quite simply, the government has no role to play in
      matters of speech, "indecent" or otherwise.

      Rainmandu
    • Rick Sharer
      ... Actually, I was speaking of the General You, since I don t really know enough about your situation to make a call one way or another. I apologize if it
      Message 243 of 243 , Dec 28, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        --- Larry <larrytheillini@...> wrote:

        >
        > --- In cerebus@yahoogroups.com, Rick Sharer
        > <rlsharer@y...> wrote:
        > >
        > > > Heh. You're dodging the question. How do I
        > > > properly answer "So,
        > > > Daddy, YOU believe in God, right?"
        > >
        > > Properly? Truthfully.
        > >
        > > Properly in the context of not upsetting your
        > wife?
        > > You lie like a dog.
        > >
        > > It's your choice.
        > >
        > > ...
        > >
        > > Choosing to raise your child in a belief system
        > that
        > > you do not believe is pure hypocrisy, usually
        > caused
        > > by spousal compromise...ergo, there is inherent
        > > controversy.
        >
        > You're misunderstanding the situation and making an
        > awfully big
        > assumption (though probably the inevitable one)
        > about my wife.

        Actually, I was speaking of the General You, since I
        don't really know enough about your situation to make
        a call one way or another. I apologize if it sounded
        like I was calling *you* a hypocrite...I was speaking
        about anybody, including me.

        You mentioned (in a question) that you may do
        something similar, but again, I don't have enough
        info.

        > I'm not trying to pretend to believe in God so that
        > Laurel will. But
        > I'm also not trying to raise her as a freak like
        > Madeline Murray
        > O'Hair's kid who was all messed up because his
        > mother had "kept" him
        > from God. She's going to have to be familiar with
        > the concept.

        That's cool. Again, not going after you. :)

        > What I was asking you personally was whether it was
        > sinful for an
        > atheiest to lie to his kid to encourage the kid to
        > believe in God.
        > Or is it better to tell the truth, which is that
        > Daddy is an atheist,
        > which probably leads to the kid (at least for many
        > years) being one
        > too.

        The answer is the same. It is a sin to lie, it is not
        a sin to raise a child in Truth...there are multiple
        things going on in your hypothetical. :)

        > It was more hypothetical than you took it,
        > because I don't
        > intend to lie to her.

        Again, I didn't intend my explanation to be anything
        but hypothetical.

        > But first we'll work on Santa
        > Claus. Atheism
        > can wait a few years.

        Heh.

        > She's not being raised Catholic, if that's what
        > you're concerned
        > about. ;)

        Whew.

        > Nonetheless, lying is not an elemental prohibition
        > in the ten
        > commandments. It doesn't belong with "killing,
        > cheating, stealing"
        > which are.

        However, "bearing false witness" *is* addressed,
        precisely because the effects of such can lead to
        horrible consequences.

        > > That's never been confirmed,
        >
        > Can four million Evangelicals be wrong? ;)

        Easy.

        > > and if Bush becomes
        > > instrumental in creating a Peace in the middle
        > east,
        > > I'm going to be a lot less confident in that
        > > assertion.
        > >
        >
        > I'll be right there to say "I told you so." Heh.

        Not for long!

        Heh. :)

        TTM




        __________________________________
        Do you Yahoo!?
        Send holiday email and support a worthy cause. Do good.
        http://celebrity.mail.yahoo.com
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.