Comics, Art, and Fun!
Welcome to WCN Sign in | Join | Help
in
Home Top WebComics Blogs Forums Photos Links Downloads

Freedom?

Last post 08-28-2005, 1:12 PM by Thor. 16 replies.
Page 1 of 2 (17 items)   1 2 Next >
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  •  1/14/2005 6:30:09 PM 499948

    Freedom?

    This is a pretty widespread topic that has been pissing me off and causing me a lot of indecisiveness and uncertainty.

    The first point I want to make involves hypocrisy.

    The Bush administration goes on and on about freedom, they claim they want to liberate Iraq and that America is the 'land of the free'.

    However, Bush is anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage and anti-drug legalisation. How is this free?, surely if America was the 'land of the free', people would be able to do what they like, so long as it doesn't harm others. Bush also supports gun legalisation, whereas abortion and drugs can have negative effects, they are outweighed by the positives. Guns kill and injure... how can anyone support them outside of military or perhaps police use?

    The second point involves restricting liberty to protect the population.

    I've been following the recent efforts of Scotland's devolved parliament to outlaw smoking in public. It is widely believed that it can help health, cut smoking and improve the environment by doing so. It would also cut the profits of the big tobacco companies that are continually poisoning the population and have been doing so using underhand measures for years.

    The issue has left me undecided, whereas it would be an improvement in many areas, is it the right of the government to restrict people's freedom to smoke it public areas?

    According to central government figures, taxes on tobacco cover NHS costs of treating smoking, or so I've heard (I'm really not sure...). Even if this is the case, what is the cash value of a person's life? No taxes can cover the loss of a human (That said, I do have the utmost contempt for our species, I just consider us all equal).

    Anyone else got any thoughts?, or arguments?

  •  1/15/2005 11:05:59 AM 723994 in reply to 499948

    RE: Freedom?

    As far as I know the principles of anarchy is the absence of laws, this however would be counter-balanced by the fact that everybody respected everybody else.

    However, mankind is basically incapable of respecting others to the required level.

    I agree that defending freedom and them setting limits is hypocrit. I will not discuss the bush administration because it would need a topic of its own.

    Regarding the prohibition of smoking in public places. You can smoke basically anywhere, however many people don't like the smoke around them, this would cause them to be disturbed nearby smokers. By forbiding smoking inpublic places you are not preventing people from smoking while at the same time making smokers respect other people right to clean air.

    Health and economy are just excuses to convince the big guys, what matters to the common folk is if by going to a public place there will be smokers or not (by an assortment of reasons). By going back to my initial statement, in a functional anarchy no one would smoke where it could bother others, so I don't see this law as a way of cutting down freedom, just as a reminder on how to respect others.

    The truth is, at least from my point of view, is that you could be caged and feel free, or be absolutely free and feel jailed. It would all depends of what you want and believed.

    The example I'm going to give might be a little ridiculous, but was the best I could remember.

    Imagine "The Matrix" is real, given the choice would you rather live a regular life in a prison world or get free and spent the rest of you life in fear and war?

  •  1/15/2005 2:09:26 PM 725605 in reply to 499948

    RE: Freedom?

    I like the matrix analogy, even if I fail to see it's relevance

    If you ban smoking in public places, it 'improves' the air quality for the people there, right?

    If you do so, you are restricting the liberty of a minority to benefit the majority. Democracy mearly represents the will of the majority, and potentially represses the minority.

    I'm not exactly disagreeing with you, or myself. Just thinking outloud.

  •  1/16/2005 3:04:59 AM 723236 in reply to 499948

    RE: Freedom?

    True, the minority will be repressed, I just think that in that particular case it represses in a way that in a perfect world there would not be the need.

    basically what I'm saying is that no smokers should smoke where it could disturb others, law or no law. If however they're somewhere where nobody would mind, good for them.

    the matrix analogy was just to say that sometimes it may be better a little restrictions on freedom.

  •  1/16/2005 5:15:30 AM 724897 in reply to 499948

    RE: Freedom?

    If you stretch the point a bit further, Ezekiel, how far would you deny the rights of the minority for the benefit of the majority? The classic exam is would you murder a little girl if you could cure cancer... I'm not saying that smoking should be allowed in public places (heck, I'm for a complete ban), the issue has got me confused too. Another example is allowing people like the BNP to continue speading their lies and hatred around in the name of 'free speech.' It's a very tricky area, and one that makes me glad I'm not in politics.
  •  1/16/2005 9:58:30 AM 723987 in reply to 499948

    RE: Freedom?

    Hum... The little girl analogy is tricky, very tricky, but probably not for the reasons you had in mind.

    But I wanted to say something about the freedom of speech.

    Freedom of speech is good, stupidity is not! there is no problem about telling lies and spreading hatred as long as people are well informed and know what is real and what is not. the problem is that there will be people believing those lies. So until there is a way of outlaw stupidity, freedom of speech will have dire consequences that it would not if everybody knew exectly what was going on.  (Sure, just the thought of it ever happen is ridiculous, but I believe that freedom of speech is only a problem because there are people who will believe anything they are told)

  •  1/18/2005 4:05:57 PM 726531 in reply to 499948

    RE: Freedom?

    "Freedom of speech" is a problem because EVERYTHING ON THE INTERNET is pretty much considered "speech" right now. In the real world, we have specific limits to our freedom of expression, such as the "don't yell 'fire' in a crowded building" rule, or rules against threats or conspiracies. On the internet, these kinds of rules are hard to enforce, if they even exist at all.

    And, as more of our daily lives take place online, we will start to see the downsides of "free expression" very soon.

    Cashiavellis

    Edit: You have your free speech in your damn sig.

  •  1/20/2005 2:31:32 PM 724473 in reply to 499948

    RE: Freedom?

    I'll send you back for my previous post.

    There is no problem of yelling "Fire" in a crowded room if everyone knows you're kidding. If they don't then you're a too damn retard if you do so.

    There is nothing wrong with freedom of speech as long as common sense prevails. If you place something in the internet that you know to be inadequate, then you shouldn't in the first place.

    the only reasons why freedom of speech may come to have to be limited is because of the stupidity inherit to the human specie.

    If you have to place something that is of bad taste in the internet make sure everyone knows what is about, that way those who want can avoid it. obviously the human condition will make this logic to fail however. But that is not fault of freedom of speech

  •  1/22/2005 6:23:46 AM 727419 in reply to 499948

    RE: Freedom?

    ...internet?...taken seriously? WHAT STRANGE WORLD HAVE I FALLEN INTO!!?!?
     
    Remember, it's not about "What you say", it's about "How you say". You can slip almost any kind of comment through without being attacked by rabid internet monkies, by making your statements logical and understandable.
     
    Bad: ...damn niggers...****ing up everything...
     
    Good: I don't like the way a lot of the "urban black" community acts. A good deal of their music's lyrics disgust me to no end (the abuse of women, endorsment of drugs, and the excessive obsenities that would kill my grandmother instantly) and there sense of fashion can be quite an eyesore. "PULL UP YOUR PANTS PLEASE!" And the way many white people "wiggers" have chosen to put this fad into their lifestyle is quite...well I say it's just annoying. I would not like my children being exposed to this.
     
    Statement, Reason.
     
    (note: THAT WAS AN EXAMPLE! I do not endorse those beliefs...entirely...)
     
    As for smoking, it is a hazard. It's the less extreme version of carrying a flamethrower over your head and singeing everybody's hair off. Letting people breath that crap into me is not cool. I'm okay with smoking sections, and designated smoking areas. That way, I'll be called a retard if I get lung cancer for staying there and have no one to blame but myself (...much like the McDonald's kids of today!).

    ...wee?
  •  8/14/2005 6:32:49 PM 751314 in reply to 499948

    Re: Freedom?

     Ezekiel wrote:

    This is a pretty widespread topic that has been pissing me off and causing me a lot of indecisiveness and uncertainty.

    The first point I want to make involves hypocrisy.

    The Bush administration goes on and on about freedom, they claim they want to liberate Iraq and that America is the 'land of the free'.

    However, Bush is anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage and anti-drug legalisation. How is this free?, surely if America was the 'land of the free', people would be able to do what they like, so long as it doesn't harm others. Bush also supports gun legalisation, whereas abortion and drugs can have negative effects, they are outweighed by the positives. Guns kill and injure... how can anyone support them outside of military or perhaps police use?

    The second point involves restricting liberty to protect the population.

    I've been following the recent efforts of Scotland's devolved parliament to outlaw smoking in public. It is widely believed that it can help health, cut smoking and improve the environment by doing so. It would also cut the profits of the big tobacco companies that are continually poisoning the population and have been doing so using underhand measures for years.

    The issue has left me undecided, whereas it would be an improvement in many areas, is it the right of the government to restrict people's freedom to smoke it public areas?

    According to central government figures, taxes on tobacco cover NHS costs of treating smoking, or so I've heard (I'm really not sure...). Even if this is the case, what is the cash value of a person's life? No taxes can cover the loss of a human (That said, I do have the utmost contempt for our species, I just consider us all equal).

    Anyone else got any thoughts?, or arguments?

    Hey, mother ***, its liberal anarchists like you  that give this country a bad name. Without democricy, this country would be in chaos. There is a reason Micheal Savage says "Libralism is a mentle disorder", cause you facists think you are the higher. I for one think think that marriage should be held between a women an a man, it was Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve. I even heared on the news last year that in about 140 or 400, something like that, thousand years, the male species will be extinct, and you know what made thm think that? Being a qweer. And as for the abortion issue, are you supporting the fact that its right to take a childs life before the even open there eyes to the new world, or to take there life before they even get to utter their first words, like "mommy" or "daddy". Is that right to you that that child will never expieriance happiness or sadness, tragity or victory. If you think abortin is right, why dont you turn back the hands of time, and convince your mom to have one.Now, do you think that's right. and the gun thing, its not guns that kill, guns are just pieces of metal assembled, its people that kill people. If guns kill people, then blame all your wrong answers on your pencil. But its people like you that are trying to turn this country into a communist country, trying to make this country collaps on its self. Contact me though my e-mail: thor_rocks@hotmail.com. Tell me what you think, I would like to talk to you more on these subjects.

  •  8/14/2005 6:38:50 PM 751315 in reply to 727419

    Re: RE: Freedom?

     Akira wrote:
    ...internet?...taken seriously? WHAT STRANGE WORLD HAVE I FALLEN INTO!!?!?
     
    Remember, it's not about "What you say", it's about "How you say". You can slip almost any kind of comment through without being attacked by rabid internet monkies, by making your statements logical and understandable.
     
    Bad: ...damn niggers...****ing up everything...
     
    Good: I don't like the way a lot of the "urban black" community acts. A good deal of their music's lyrics disgust me to no end (the abuse of women, endorsment of drugs, and the excessive obsenities that would kill my grandmother instantly) and there sense of fashion can be quite an eyesore. "PULL UP YOUR PANTS PLEASE!" And the way many white people "wiggers" have chosen to put this fad into their lifestyle is quite...well I say it's just annoying. I would not like my children being exposed to this.
     
    Statement, Reason.
     
    (note: THAT WAS AN EXAMPLE! I do not endorse those beliefs...entirely...)
     
    As for smoking, it is a hazard. It's the less extreme version of carrying a flamethrower over your head and singeing everybody's hair off. Letting people breath that crap into me is not cool. I'm okay with smoking sections, and designated smoking areas. That way, I'll be called a retard if I get lung cancer for staying there and have no one to blame but myself (...much like the McDonald's kids of today!).

     

    THANK YOU

  •  8/16/2005 4:10:46 AM 751571 in reply to 751314

    Re: Freedom?

    Hey, its ignorant bible bashers like you that give your religion and your country a bad name.

    Firstly, ..... No, I'm not even going to bother arguing with you on the issue of same-sex marraiges because its obvious that you are a total homophobe (and you're probably in denial too).

    Secondly, you haven't considered all the circumstances for abortion. Tell me, if you were a mother, could you even look at your child if you had been raped and the baby had it's fathers eyes?

    Thirdly, you are the fascist here.

    Also, guns do kill people. Lots of people.

    And finally, learn to spell you *** moron.


    "Try and lay an egg."



  •  8/16/2005 1:39:30 PM 751640 in reply to 751571

    Re: Freedom?

    Well said spree.

    Thor, first off, I'm not an anarchist. Plus, just because someone says Liberalism is a mental disorder, doesn't make it true. I don't think myself higher than others, I just believe that my views are the right ones and other people are often ignorant.

    You neglect to mention which country you're from, so I'm going to assume it's the US. Spree is right, amongst most of the western world, and, so far as I know, most of the rest of the world, it is America's religious right and republicans
    which give you a bad name.

    Banning gay marriage isn't going to make homosexuality go away. If you believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman, marry someone of the opposite sex. Nobody is trying to make you be gay or to marry someone of your own sex, so why should you be trying to prevent someone gay from marrying someone of their own sex? It isn't affecting you in anyway whatsoever.

    The same goes for abortions, I personally wouldn't encourage it unless it was absolutely necessary, but I believe people should have the choice about their own body.

    The women will probably be better off when all the men die anyway. Homosexuality has nothing to do with falling sperm counts in men, this is probably more to do to bad health, radiation from TVs etc., pollution and stress. Or maybe God got sick of us wrecking his/her/it's planet and killing each other, so he/she/it chose to kill us off slowly?

    Guns. Guns are great, no? You can shoot people with them from a car, you can rob banks with them, you can even assassinate your own president with them. With no guns, we'd be unable to do these fun activities, I mean, whoever heard of a drive by knifing?. Those poor 'Marilyn Manson fans' wouldn't be able to murder their school friends in a shooting rampage, no matter how much they deserve it.

    Yes, knives and contaminated needles etc. are bad, but no excuse to keep guns.

    And it's people like you that don't even know what communism and anarchy are.

    Seriously man, do some reading and make up your own mind instead of believing only what you're told.
  •  8/16/2005 5:09:58 PM 751669 in reply to 751640

    Re: Freedom?

     Ezekiel wrote:
    Well said spree. Thor, first off, I'm not an anarchist. Plus, just because someone says Liberalism is a mental disorder, doesn't make it true. I don't think myself higher than others, I just believe that my views are the right ones and other people are often ignorant. You neglect to mention which country you're from, so I'm going to assume it's the US. Spree is right, amongst most of the western world, and, so far as I know, most of the rest of the world, it is America's religious right and republicans which give you a bad name. Banning gay marriage isn't going to make homosexuality go away. If you believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman, marry someone of the opposite sex. Nobody is trying to make you be gay or to marry someone of your own sex, so why should you be trying to prevent someone gay from marrying someone of their own sex? It isn't affecting you in anyway whatsoever. The same goes for abortions, I personally wouldn't encourage it unless it was absolutely necessary, but I believe people should have the choice about their own body. The women will probably be better off when all the men die anyway. Homosexuality has nothing to do with falling sperm counts in men, this is probably more to do to bad health, radiation from TVs etc., pollution and stress. Or maybe God got sick of us wrecking his/her/it's planet and killing each other, so he/she/it chose to kill us off slowly? Guns. Guns are great, no? You can shoot people with them from a car, you can rob banks with them, you can even assassinate your own president with them. With no guns, we'd be unable to do these fun activities, I mean, whoever heard of a drive by knifing?. Those poor 'Marilyn Manson fans' wouldn't be able to murder their school friends in a shooting rampage, no matter how much they deserve it. Yes, knives and contaminated needles etc. are bad, but no excuse to keep guns. And it's people like you that don't even know what communism and anarchy are. Seriously man, do some reading and make up your own mind instead of believing only what you're told.

     

    wut du yu meen i cat spel, wut kind uv educaton yu tink i hav, yu maik mei laf, ha. and as for the "drive by stabbings"  thats a new one on me,LOL. But as you said for the abortion thing you said, she can do any thing with her own body, its not her life she is taking away, its up to her to make things better for herself and her baby, and not take the easy way outSleep [|-)] ahhhh, sorry for the yawn(i hope i spelled that right) anyway, you cant just expect for good things to come your way, you need to make them happen. and for the republican thing, i take no sides politicly no religeon (i used to be mormon, and i dont go to church any more either, not for4 years, and that was on 9-11, before that, 3 years) now i have my own religion. you are right about the spurm count not being reduced due to homosexuality, but if it spreads, noone will want to mate anymore, and as for the 'guns killing people' have you ever seen a gun walk into a store and shoot, no its always the person behind the trigger. my bad for calling you an anarchist, and a commie

  •  8/17/2005 3:15:39 PM 751785 in reply to 751669

    Re: Freedom?

    The only problem with religion is the fact that they try to ram the beliefs down everyones throat and believe they are right about everything.
    Free speech can be a good and a bad thing. I agree with the point that those who know how to listen and understand dont consider it as a bad thing but those that don't can really cause some problems. hitlers armies anyone?
    Guns do kill people. A guns whole purpose is for killing things, wot else is it made for? Self defence? please spare me. You're going to defend yourself by shooting and probably killing somebody. (althought i dont have these problems in England i can see the outrage in america and other gun weilding countries)
    Abortion is good and bad. If you are a 17 year old girl whos addicted to smack say then you don;t want to have the child. It wouldn't be fair bringing it into a world where its going to get abused. However if someone decides to have an abortion because it doesn't fit into the schedule for work or somthing then its bad. Or if they've cheated on their husband and want to hide evidence. Thats bad!
    Gay marriage isn't wrong. So what if it was Adam and Eve?? Who says that STORY is true?? If two men or two women love each other whats more right in the world to them than getting married and bonded together? I don;t care if someone thinks its wrong. I have gay friends (tho i am 100% straight) and if they wanted to get married i'd go. There is nothign wrong with it!
    The ability to be free is the ability to be indepedant in your thoughts, actions, beliefs and not having to be spoon fed diplomacy to make you feel like you belong.
    Anyone wants to challenge my views or wants to discuss this further with me add me on msn: Itdoesntexist@hotmail.com
    ....damn my fingers hurt
    Insanity, a sane response to an insane world.
Page 1 of 2 (17 items)   1 2 Next >
View as RSS news feed in XML
Powered by Community Server (Personal Edition), by Telligent Systems