Freedom in America vs Britain & Europe

[shropshire 0]

Skyrad

Its my impression (and I could be wrong on this) that you can say some things in the USA which would see you potentially arrested in the UK. Certain hate crimes come to mind.
There again you're more likely to see boobies on UK TV!

Personally I'll vote for boobies over the right to talk crap any day of the week.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[DanG 1]

Quote

Personally I'll vote for boobies over the right to talk crap any day of the week.

In America we want both, which is why the Internet is the perfect invention. Non-stop crap talking, and unlimited boobies.

- Dan G

[RonD1120 62]

Skyrad

Its my impression (and I could be wrong on this) that you can say some things in the USA which would see you potentially arrested in the UK. Certain hate crimes come to mind.
There again you're more likely to see boobies on UK TV!

Do not discount Showtime or HBO.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[champu 1]

DanG

Quote

Personally I'll vote for boobies over the right to talk crap any day of the week.

In America we want both, which is why the Internet is the perfect invention. Non-stop crap talking, and unlimited boobies.

The internet has rendered FCC regulations of obscene/indecent/profane broadcast content rather silly, in my opinion. I think sponsorship agreements create enough self-regulation in both venues where the FCC could ditch the policy and you really wouldn't see a sudden or drastic change to programming content.

[quade 4]

champu

The internet has rendered FCC regulations of obscene/indecent/profane broadcast content rather silly, in my opinion.

Except the difference is broadcast TV (free, over-the-air), is using a public resource.

It's like the difference between indecency laws for a public park and a privately owned strip bar.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[jakee 1,596]

quade

*********Reality check, is this true?

Yes and no.
It was what, at the time, separated the creation of the US from the entire rest of the planet. This was part of the basis for the original concept of American "exceptionalism." America is no longer an exception. Some parts of the planet have now caught up.
The English had a Bill of Rights in 1689. I think the catching up was the other way around.

The UK still had a King and subjects.

And the US still had slavery when all those in the Empire were emancipated.

Your move.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[quade 4]

jakee

************Reality check, is this true?

Yes and no.
It was what, at the time, separated the creation of the US from the entire rest of the planet. This was part of the basis for the original concept of American "exceptionalism." America is no longer an exception. Some parts of the planet have now caught up.
The English had a Bill of Rights in 1689. I think the catching up was the other way around.
The UK still had a King and subjects.
And the US still had slavery when all those in the Empire were emancipated.
Your move.

And who, precisely, was responsible for introducing the slave trade in America to begin with?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[kelpdiver 2]

jakee

And the US still had slavery when all those in the Empire were emancipated.

Your move.

Ok - the Empire didn't give up its colonies until after WW2. Ask Gandhi how free the Indian were...

[kelpdiver 2]

kallend

The English had a Bill of Rights in 1689. I think the catching up was the other way around.

If the King has paid the slightest attention to it in the following century, the American Revolution shouldn't have been necessary.

[champu 1]

quade

***The internet has rendered FCC regulations of obscene/indecent/profane broadcast content rather silly, in my opinion.

Except the difference is broadcast TV (free, over-the-air), is using a public resource.

It's like the difference between indecency laws for a public park and a privately owned strip bar.

I understand the chain of authority, that wasn't really my point though.

[jakee 1,596]

quade

***************Reality check, is this true?

Yes and no.
It was what, at the time, separated the creation of the US from the entire rest of the planet. This was part of the basis for the original concept of American "exceptionalism." America is no longer an exception. Some parts of the planet have now caught up.
The English had a Bill of Rights in 1689. I think the catching up was the other way around.
The UK still had a King and subjects.
And the US still had slavery when all those in the Empire were emancipated.
Your move.

And who, precisely, was responsible for introducing the slave trade in America to begin with?

The people who made America.

Anyway, I thought your point was about the USA leading the way, not just doing what everyone else did.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[jakee 1,596]

kelpdiver

***
And the US still had slavery when all those in the Empire were emancipated.

Your move.

Ok - the Empire didn't give up its colonies until after WW2.

And you still have Puerto Rico.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Remster 30]

jakee

******
And the US still had slavery when all those in the Empire were emancipated.

Your move.

Ok - the Empire didn't give up its colonies until after WW2.

And you still have Puerto Rico.

Don't forget the US Virgin Islands. Everyone forgets the US Virgin Islands.

Remster

[jakee 1,596]

Remster

*********
And the US still had slavery when all those in the Empire were emancipated.

Your move.

Ok - the Empire didn't give up its colonies until after WW2.

And you still have Puerto Rico.

Don't forget the US Virgin Islands. Everyone forgets the US Virgin Islands.

I thought they were Richard Branson's

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[kelpdiver 2]

Remster

*********
And the US still had slavery when all those in the Empire were emancipated.

Your move.

Ok - the Empire didn't give up its colonies until after WW2.

And you still have Puerto Rico.

Don't forget the US Virgin Islands. Everyone forgets the US Virgin Islands.

Guam, too, then. Of course, there's really no comparison of these to the treatment in the colonies by the Brits. These people are US Citizens and free to move about the states. There is mixed grumblings about their lack of representation, but no one is dying in the dispute.

Jakee- would have been better rebuttal to cite Vietnam.

[quade 4]

jakee

******************Reality check, is this true?

Yes and no.
It was what, at the time, separated the creation of the US from the entire rest of the planet. This was part of the basis for the original concept of American "exceptionalism." America is no longer an exception. Some parts of the planet have now caught up.
The English had a Bill of Rights in 1689. I think the catching up was the other way around.
The UK still had a King and subjects.
And the US still had slavery when all those in the Empire were emancipated.
Your move.
And who, precisely, was responsible for introducing the slave trade in America to begin with?
The people who made America.

I believe you have "Makers" and "Takers" confused. In large part it was the slaves who built America. England was taking the profits in the form of taxation.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[kallend 2,151]

kelpdiver

***
The English had a Bill of Rights in 1689. I think the catching up was the other way around.

If the King has paid the slightest attention to it in the following century, the American Revolution shouldn't have been necessary.

It doesn't say that you don't have to pay taxes, any more than the US Bill of Rights does.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kelpdiver 2]

kallend

******
The English had a Bill of Rights in 1689. I think the catching up was the other way around.

If the King has paid the slightest attention to it in the following century, the American Revolution shouldn't have been necessary.

It doesn't say that you don't have to pay taxes, any more than the US Bill of Rights does.

Quite a few of these were failures to abide:

no royal interference with the law. Though the sovereign remains the fount of justice, he or she cannot unilaterally establish new courts or act as a judge.
no taxation by Royal Prerogative. The agreement of the parliament became necessary for the implementation of any new taxes
freedom to petition the monarch without fear of retribution
no standing army may be maintained during a time of peace without the consent of parliament.[7]
no royal interference in the freedom of the people to have arms for their own defence as suitable to their class and as allowed by law (simultaneously restoring rights previously taken from Protestants by James II)
no royal interference in the election of members of parliament
the freedom of speech and debates or proceedings in Parliament ought not to be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of Parliament
"grants and promises of fines or forfeitures" before conviction are void.
no excessive bail or "cruel and unusual" punishments may be imposed.

[Southern_Man 0]

kelpdiver

*********
The English had a Bill of Rights in 1689. I think the catching up was the other way around.

If the King has paid the slightest attention to it in the following century, the American Revolution shouldn't have been necessary.

It doesn't say that you don't have to pay taxes, any more than the US Bill of Rights does.

Quite a few of these were failures to abide:

"grants and promises of fines or forfeitures" before conviction are void.


We need to revisit that one re: civil forfeiture

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[shropshire 0]

kelpdiver

Guam, too, then. Of course, there's really no comparison of these to the treatment in the colonies by the Brits. These people are US Citizens and free to move about the states. There is mixed grumblings about their lack of representation, but no one is dying in the dispute.

Jakee- would have been better rebuttal to cite Vietnam.

And a piece of land on Cuba too.. where, I think the Cubans have 'asked' you to fuck off from a few times.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[jakee 1,596]

Quote

I believe you have "Makers" and "Takers" confused.

No, I meant the line of people who ended up forming the USA.

Quote

In large part it was the slaves who built America.

More shame on the founding fathers for writing their subjugation into the constitution then, eh?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[quade 4]

jakee

Quote

I believe you have "Makers" and "Takers" confused.

No, I meant the line of people who ended up forming the USA.

Quote

In large part it was the slaves who built America.

More shame on the founding fathers for writing their subjugation into the constitution then, eh?

Oh, hey, I'm one of the first to say it's not a perfect document. Slavery and 3/5ths is the "original sin" of the country. That said, we said FU to rule by kings. That was something nobody had really ever done before and that was my point in my original response.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Southern_Man 0]

shropshire

And a piece of land on Cuba too.. where, I think the Cubans have 'asked' you to fuck off from a few times.

Gibralter?

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[Andy9o8 2]

Southern_Man

***

And a piece of land on Cuba too.. where, I think the Cubans have 'asked' you to fuck off from a few times.

Gibralter?

Malvinas, anyone?
Northern Ireland?

gee, this is fun. no wait, it's dumb. or is that "daft"? whatever

[jakee 1,596]

Southern_Man

***

And a piece of land on Cuba too.. where, I think the Cubans have 'asked' you to fuck off from a few times.

Gibralter?

The people that live in Gibraltar don't want to be returned to Spain.

Would cut out a huge amount of hassle though.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?