Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBig3KilledMyRainDog
Yikes. The democrats are conservative? You must be so far left that no country seems liberal. Exactly what aren't they Liberal on, going on the assumption that there are ideas that are in fact liberal. (which there aren't)
|
Political correctness and forced diversity. Neither of which can be considered liberal by non-mainstream standards. Faux-liberal and pseudo-liberal would be good descriptions, maybe even quasi-liberal.
Yes, I am that far to the political left.
Quote:
|
If the FCC limits freedom, then don't listen to traditional radio. But what can't you do because of the FCC?
|
It isn't what I can't do personally, it is that my tax payer dollars are being used to hush people who did nothing criminal. It shouldn't ever be the government's role to prevent free expression. If a radio station doesn't want "foul content" than the station won't have it. If you're offended than turn the channel to something you want to hear. No government interaction is necesary, and our tax money being used to support the FCC is both economically poor and restrictive of "traditional radio" liberties. It wrongs the people in two ways. Not to mention the FCC were put in place, we didn't even vote them in. It should be up to us what we hear, not the government. Let the people have their say and quit wasting our money.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by oojay
This sounds like something Joseph Stalin might say..
|
I'd be inclined to agree with Stalin if he ever did say that. Protesting is a form of conflict yet it doesn't actually harm anyone, debate/argument is a form of conflict (depending on context) but it doesn't harm anyone. If you can make a convincing enough point someone might change their stance, maybe not.
I get offended whenever someone mentions abortion and stem cell research being bad things. Do I believe those people should be harmed or killed? Not at all. Do I believe confronting them with the positive points of both might be a good thing? Most certainly, and I'll address it. I'll engage in a discussion, which might evolve into debate where in which arguments are made, but it is all in non-violent protest against their stance. See? Non-violent conflict that may sway someone's stance with no government interaction what so ever. If we are to live in a free country it is requisite that we can freely express our opinions without the government shooting us down on it.