Overall, What's Your View On Censorship?

by minimus 14 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  minimus

  I am not talking about here!!! I understand that website owners have the right to run their sites as they see fit. Not talking about that.

  I'm talking about government or political censorship. A few decades ago, sexual acts depicted in a movie could get the cinema house closed down. Using foul vulgar language would never be tolerated. Political views could've gotten you labeled as "Communist". Cases have gone to the courts for "civil liberties" to be won or lost. Just today in England, Michael Savage and a number of other folks are not welcomed into the country because of their "extremist" views.

  In this 21st century, do you believe that we are being "censored" unfairly?
• 

  minimus

  I see....this thread's been censored.
• 

  mkr32208

  Noooooot a big fan...
• 

  JeffT

  Absolutely opposed, except in cases of danger to the public (yelling "fire" in a theater); or where those seeing don't have a choice about looking (sex/violence on TV at times when children might be watching). ANY restraint based on political/religious content is wrong.
• 

  jws

  Free speech is better than the alternative, even though it's hard to keep that in mind when somebody's spewing racial hatred or just plain lies

  I don't believe in censorship (maybe in hate speech I do). But I don't believe things should be in people's faces either. I don't want my kids (in their first 2 years at grade school) to see billboards of hardcore action as we drive down the street or bloody, violent movies that I can't block.

  I believe adults should be allowed to choose what they want to see and hear and read. That may mean going out of their way a little, but it should be available and generally is very available if there is a market. On the web you can find practically anything.

  If a movie theater is showing something controversial, that's fine. The people have a choice to buy a ticket or not.

  The movie theater, as a business, also has the right to choose what they show and what they don't. Recently Kevin Smith's film "Zack and Miri Make a Porno" didn't show in some theaters or was renamed to just "Zack and Miri" (which may be worse if you have no idea of the plot and think it's a normal love story).

  The market will decide. Just look at DVD sales for instance. Used to be Walmart wouldn't carry the "unrated" version of something, but now that's all they seem to carry because that's what sells.
• 

  minimus

  I believe you're right, Jeff.

  What about written or verbal bias vs. Jews, gays, blacks, etc. ? Should that be allowed or censored?
• 

  WTWizard

  There is a time and a place for censorship, but not to suppress the truth or normal human experiences. My view is that religion has corrupted sex and certain other functions to make them look dirty, when in fact they are totally natural. In places where religion is not a factor, children are able to watch their parents having sex, and toilets are in the open, and no one seems to be adversely affected. In places where religion is prominent, however, the taboos on these activities placed on them by religion affect the children negatively and they are more likely to be harmed.

  That aside, the government has no business in censoring claims online about cures (unless someone is fraudulently selling a fake cure) for a disease, or other products that could advance civilization. They do it so the Establishment can make money and fleece the whole economy (I bet there is no recession among the big drug companies). If someone has a claim that something might be an improvement, there is no reason to censor it, even if it makes the government look like crap. Nor is there any business in censoring bad comments about the government itself, as long as they are not planning an unwarranted assassination attempt (and it is warranted only if the government actually starts taking the offensive and seizes people's freedoms, for which our forefathers died and killed).
• 

  cameo-d

  WT censors truth and they get away with it.

  The irony here is that those who try to expose the lies will be the ones censored.
• 

  JeffT

  Min: most places have laws against "fighting words" which make it a crime to call somebody names designed to enflame them. These laws run back to the days when they were trying to stop dueling. They had to make it illegal say something like "you bastard" to keep people from meeting at dawn with pistols. There are days when I suspect the fast way to make a polite society would be to legalize dueling again.
• 

  Spook

  I think human nature tends to have a drive toward censoriousness. I recognize it as an unproductive reaction. Though I don't buy into slippery slope arguments.