OMG! Freedom of Speach Cuts BOTH Ways?!

[Jimbo]

Janeane Garofalo show "under fire"
ABC said targeted for boycott if it airs series with anti-war activist
Janeane Garofalo show

She has the right to say silly things and all the people that she pissed off have the right to write letters.
I'm curious to see where this leads.

Also:
Susan Sarandon and Tim Robbins also feel the love!

OMG! This must be the doing of John Ashcroft!

 

[conjur]

Robbins, who starred as rookie 'Nuke' LaLoosh, was reportedly "dismayed" by the decision to nix the celluloid celebration and drafted his own poison pen letter to Petroskey, saying: "You belong with the cowards and ideologues in a hall of infamy and shame."

Waaaah! I make millions of dollars and I deserve more publicity! Waaaaah!!

 

[RyanM]

I believe in Freedom of speech. But people have a right to call the person an idiot when they are spouting factless bullshite.

 

[Alistar7]

Let her protest after the war is already over, woo woo.

 

[swifty3]

Originally posted by: Alistar7
Let her protest after the war is already over, woo woo.

If the war is "over" why did 2 marines die and 20 injured yesterday, and why did 4 die today in a suicide bombing.

Don't count your chickens b 4 they hatch. Their is still intense fighting near Saddam town of birth.

 

[Marshallj]

I think both sides need to understand that although they have freedom of speech, the people who they are speaking against ALSO have freedom of speech. And when you're a minority group (such as these anti-war protesters) speaking out against the majority, the majority is going to align itself against you. And when the majority aligns itself against you, you're not in a very good position... In this case, the majority voiced their concerns to a TV network, who makes money by showing programs to the widest audience possible. When almost 3/4 of the viewing audience is against what you're doing you're going to lose money. So the network has to make a business decision here.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Marshallj
And when the majority aligns itself against you, you're not in a very good position...

Esp. when they have no vaseline at hand. :Q

 

[BDawg]

I support their freedom of speech, but I think it's ignorant to boycott someone or some country just because they have a different opinion on something like this.

 

[Marshallj]

lol

 

[Marshallj]

 

[Marshallj]

Originally posted by: BDawg
I support their freedom of speech, but I think it's ignorant to boycott someone or some country just because they have a different opinion on something like this.

Both sides do it. Hell, everyone does it... everyone wants to be heard. And when you tally up all the voices, the majority's going to win

 

[BDawg]

Originally posted by: Marshallj

Originally posted by: BDawg
I support their freedom of speech, but I think it's ignorant to boycott someone or some country just because they have a different opinion on something like this.

Both sides do it. Hell, everyone does it... everyone wants to be heard. And when you tally up all the voices, the majority's going to win

Sometimes the majority doesn't win. Sometimes the loudest wins, or those with the most money, or best connections.

 

[xirtam]

But the real question is... do we have freedom of spelling?

 

[Marshallj]

Originally posted by: BDawg

Originally posted by: Marshallj

Originally posted by: BDawg
I support their freedom of speech, but I think it's ignorant to boycott someone or some country just because they have a different opinion on something like this.

Both sides do it. Hell, everyone does it... everyone wants to be heard. And when you tally up all the voices, the majority's going to win

Sometimes the majority doesn't win. Sometimes the loudest wins, or those with the most money, or best connections.

Ok, with that said, 70% of the population will surely be louder, have more money, and have more connections that a group less than half its size.

I think many of these activists are so vocal because they want a disproportionately large voice in the matter. But they preach democracy, and according to their own values the majority should still win.

 

[Red Dawn]

I haven't a problem with their (Robbins and Sarandon) views. I don't agree with them but they are entitled to them. The Moron who canceled the event obviously doesn't like the fact that others think differently than he does. Of course being a member of the Reagan Administration it's to be expected of him

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Originally posted by: Marshallj

Originally posted by: BDawg

Originally posted by: Marshallj

Originally posted by: BDawg
I support their freedom of speech, but I think it's ignorant to boycott someone or some country just because they have a different opinion on something like this.

Both sides do it. Hell, everyone does it... everyone wants to be heard. And when you tally up all the voices, the majority's going to win

Sometimes the majority doesn't win. Sometimes the loudest wins, or those with the most money, or best connections.

Ok, with that said, 70% of the population will surely be louder, have more money, and have more connections that a group less than half its size.

I think many of these activists are so vocal because they want a disproportionately large voice in the matter. But they preach democracy, and according to their own values the majority should still win.

What planet do you love on? That's far from a given.

 

[Marshallj]

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian

What planet do you love on? That's far from a given.

What planet do I LOVE on? Any planet with hot women. If you're going to make an insult, at least spell it right.



But seriously, this is common sense, if you just pick a group that is twice as large as another group, you'll get more of everything.

Unless you intentionally skew the results by seeding the 70% group with poor people and hand picking wealthy, well connected people and placing in the 30% group, you are on average going to be in a better position with 70% on your side. Yes, you can produce false results if you desire to, but that would not be an accurate statistic by any means whatsoever.

It seems that you are not of this planet, where you're from you fabricate and hand-pick the results and use that as your evidence.

We are in a democracy. You are in the minority. You lose.

 

[Red Dawn]

It really p[isses me off that sokme fscktard would politisize a Baseball event. It's like the dipsh!t thinks baseball is the Domain of Neo Neanderthals..err Conservatives?

 

[Marshallj]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
It really p[isses me off that sokme fscktard would politisize a Baseball event. It's like the dipsh!t thinks baseball is the Domain of Neo Neanderthals..err Conservatives?

Considering that it's baseball tradition for the President to throw out the first pitch during special occasions, I'd think they'd want to stay on his good side.

 

[Jmman]

Well, they certainly have a right to voice their antiwar sentiments, and this organization has a right to cancel their invitations because of their beliefs. No big deal. As a celebrity you are nothing without your fans though, and by going against the majority of the fan base who clearly support this conflict, you don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure out that you may be shooting yourself in the foot.....

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Jmman
Well, they certainly have a right to voice their antiwar sentiments, and this organization has a right to cancel their invitations because of their beliefs. No big deal. As a celebrity you are nothing without your fans though, and by going against the majority of the fan base who clearly support this conflict, you don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure out that you very well may be shooting yourself in the foot.....

Obviously the Organization has a right just like people have a right to be complete buffoons which I think is a fair accessment of the guy who canceled the event. What's next, not electing someone into the Hall of Fame because they supported Gore instead of Dubya?

 

[SuperTool]

If people start boycotting channels because they don't agree with someone's view on that channel, than all they will get is boring TV that doesn't offend anyone, doesn't express any new views on which there isn't already consensus, and isn't interesting to watch. It will have a chilling effect on the freedom of speech in this country. "You are free to say what you want, but be prepared to be blacklisted and have your career ruined", is not freedom of speech. If that's freedom of speech, then so is "You are free to say what you want, but be prepared to get a bullet in your head."
People should be mature enough to be able to listen to views they don't agree without getting a fit. I don't agree with anything on the right wing newsradio station over here, but I still listen to it.

 

[Jmman]

Originally posted by: SuperTool
If people start boycotting channels because they don't agree with someone's view on that channel, than all they will get is boring TV that doesn't offend anyone, doesn't express any new views on which there isn't already consensus, and isn't interesting to watch. It will have a chilling effect on the freedom of speech in this country. "You are free to say what you want, but be prepared to be blacklisted and have your career ruined", is not freedom of speech. If that's freedom of speech, then so is "You are free to say what you want, but be prepared to get a bullet in your head."
People should be mature enough to be able to listen to views they don't agree without getting a fit. I don't agree with anything on the right wing newsradio station over here, but I still listen to it.

This isn't a free speech issue at all. This organization simply doesn't agree with their viewpoint and doesn't want to give them a platform to spread their agenda. Would you be saying the same thing if they were from the KKK or NAMBLA? Doubt it. And I don't think this guy has the power to ruin anybody's career, but when you are dependant on your popularity with the masses, you certainly have the ability to ruin your own career by opening your mouth.......

 

[kylebisme]

exactly, it is freedom of speech that is important; exercising the freedom to oppress speech only gets in the way.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Originally posted by: Marshallj

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian

What planet do you love on? That's far from a given.

What planet do I LOVE on? Any planet with hot women. If you're going to make an insult, at least spell it right.



But seriously, this is common sense, if you just pick a group that is twice as large as another group, you'll get more of everything.

Unless you intentionally skew the results by seeding the 70% group with poor people and hand picking wealthy, well connected people and placing in the 30% group, you are on average going to be in a better position with 70% on your side. Yes, you can produce false results if you desire to, but that would not be an accurate statistic by any means whatsoever.

It seems that you are not of this planet, where you're from you fabricate and hand-pick the results and use that as your evidence.

We are in a democracy. You are in the minority. You lose.

WTF are you talking about? I haven't said anything in this thread, other than your assumption is WRONG, and you've said why yourself:
by seeding the 70% group with poor people and hand picking wealthy, well connected people and placing in the 30% group
Just because you have a majority of people doesn't mean you have a majority of power or influence. And it was a TYPO, look at your keyboard nimrod.