Previous  1 ... 23  24  25  26  27  28  29 ... 31  Next

Sometimes.

As Derby so astutely points out, there are civil penalties for libel and slander, but still, there are no criminal penalties for lying about people and there is no prior restraint that bars you from uttering false or derogatory comments about anyone as there is in Canada. For instance, maligning minority groups is prohibited even if the allegation is true. It is not the truth or substance of the comment that is prohibited but the "offensive" nature of the comment.

   

Having criminal laws for slander and/or libel is not something I'd consider a lack of freedom. Similarily, I have heard freedom advocates say Canada is a freeer (sp?) nation because we have no death penalty. The laws you are rferring to are hate speech laws designed to criminalize people who incite hate & violence. A fine line to be sure. If (in the US) I make a statement (radio/TV whatever) alongs the lines of "I think that illegal immigrant mexicans are ruining this country and I think that private citizens should protect this country by killing them as they come over the border." I could be charged as an accomplice to murder can I not?

   

Don't suppose you checked out the link, eh?

It's a global study on freedom of the press. I think they took 50 factors into consideration vs. you taking one.

Canada is number five, the United States can be found at numero 17.

Reporters without borders did a similar study with similar results... I just can't find it quick enough to post on my lunchbreak.

   

That is a matter of philosophy. The death penalty in the USA is seen as a twofold statement of the highest penalty for violating someone else's right to life and it is seen as preventing the repeat offender from ever killing again. Canada is freer for murderers as they are free to live and walk free (Karla Homolka ring any bells) while in the USA the innocent are freer with people like Karla incarcerated or executed (which is what she would've been in Texas).




Nope. No more than Pat Roberston can be charged with a crime for recommending the assassination of Hugo Chavez. We draw a line between saying you should do something and then taking steps to actually do it.

You're free to say people should shoot Mexicans as they illegally cross the border but if you get caught handing out guns and ammunition to your followers after saying such a thing then you can be prosecuted for criminal conspiracy and your words can be held against you as indicating the motivation for arming your followers. But the speech itself is not illegal.

Acting on it can be even if that action does not result in any other crime.

If I say I want to beat you up with a baseball bat and then I go buy one at the store in the USA this is all that is needed to lock me up on conspiracy charges.

My words alone are enough for you to get a restraining order against me.

But still, I am free to say what I will.

   

My comment was to show that criminal penalties that differ from country to country are not a good measure of personal freedoms. I myself am a dealth penalty proponent. You could also say that Canada is freeer because of our lax laws on pot. It would easily become a tit-for-tat process which is why I don't believe that either country is freeer then the other.

BTW, the US has loads of rapist/murders who are now walking free but you already knew that.



Not to be argumentative but I seem to recall a law and order episode where the person was convicted in just such a case. Very slim evidence I know. I don't think you would be successfully prosecuted in Canada for that type of thing either. Still, I know this tangent started from your response to "Canada has a greater freedom of the press" but do you agree with me that neither country has any real edge in freedoms?

   

Oh, I did. It is a left-leaning site that is critical of the USA. And they're critical of the USA. Big surprise.

The poor ranking of the United States (17th) is mainly because of the number of journalists arrested or imprisoned there. Arrests are often because [B]they refuse to reveal their sources in court. Also, since the 11 September attacks, several journalists have been arrested for crossing security lines at some official buildings.[/B]

Reporters who are jailed for contempt of court take their chances. YOu know how all you Canadians are foaming at the mouth to get Bush's aide Karl Rove jailed for allegedly revealing a name? The reporter who has the name of the real leak refuses to tell even though this is a National Security issue.

And why should reporters be allowed to cross into secured areas without permission? If they were allowed to do so then why would not a terrorist get a job as a reporter to accomplish a mission against a secured facility? If a reporter tried to get to my office without permission and a security clearance he would not be jailed, he would be killed.

Sorry, this is just typical leftism.

   

Honestly, prior to the Patriot Act I'd have stuck to my guns and said the USA was significantly ahead of Canada. I can say we still have an edge on freedom of speech (a small one granted) but overall? I'm not so sure.

But with Canada seeking to monitor all cell and Internet activity and the US seeking to expand the Patriot Act it seems both are in a race to become more authoritarian.

For all of our criticisms of Communist China it seems that we are both working to emulate China.

   

Neither country has much to complain about so trying to come up with a definitive winner is pointless. Our countries enjoy similar freedoms although they are slightly different, which some will find great and others will find infuriating.

   

It's called the Worldwide Press Freedom Index and that site was merely reporting what it is.

The above link is the 2004 numbers, Canada doesn't look as good in that one at #18 (US at #23)

The government is not the only body that puts restrictions on the press (such as banning the image of soldiers coffins).

If the media is privatly owned, it will represent the intrests of its owner, eh. In Canada we have both public and private news sources. Love it or hate it, the CBC balances things out with the private media.

   

I'm Roman Catholic.

   

Zeus, Apollo, and Poseidon are roman gods. Catholics pray to the god they say is the father of jesus christ. I've heard he is also called jehova. He probably has many other names as well. Next time you wish to call upon a blessing from a deity it is not unreasonable for someone to ask which deity you are requesting it from.

   

Well actualy it's Juptier, Neptune and I don't know Apollo... but they're basically the same tihng. Least they had original names. Christianities god is just 'God.' Realllllllllly original.

   

Zeus, Apollo, and Poseidon were originaly Greek gods, not Roman. Not to be nitpicky but just the same.

   

Hmmm, some mistakes in the names- as others have pointed out.

God Bless Western Civilization.

   

IMO any civilization that lets Brit Spears and Rap top the charts deserves to be destroyed. Such a pitiful thing we are.

   

Previous  1 ... 23  24  25  26  27  28  29 ... 31  Next