1  2  Next

When are Americans going to realize they are one of the least free first world countries on the planet?

Illegal wire taps, forbidden by their government to visit other countries (Cuba), forbidden to shout at the leader of China (despite a worse record on all fronts compared to Cuba).

This is the kind of BS we will be talking to our grandkids about 50 yrs from now.

m

   

I'm all for free speech but if I was president or prime minister, even I'd be a little angry at that outburst and embarrassed if I'm hosting another country's head of state even though China is a Communist, spying, human rights abusing country. They deserve the same diplomatic protocol the same as anybody else.

   

I'd be surprised if she got any jail time and all her legal costs and any fines will be paid by someone other than herself if it's a finacial burden for her.

   

While I agree that it was totally inappropriate and unnecessary for that woman to be charged for what she did, I tend to disagree with the rest of your post Mukluk.

You can't honestly argue that the US is less free than it's contemporaries. If anything, the States is still the freeest country on earth.

In Canada, we had a Prime Minister in 1997 who actually ordered the RCMP to pepper spray and arrest demonstrators in Vancouver who had the audacity to peacefully line the route taken by Indonesian President Suharto and wave placards protesting his East Timor occupation.

http://archives.cbc.ca/IDC-1-73-1700-11 ... dals/clip8

And in Canada, an Alberta magazine's decision to publish the Danish Mohammed cartoons is now being prosecuted, at public expense, by a Human Rights Tribunal.

Yet in America, free speech is still tolerated. Nazis, Branch Davidians, Communists, Jihads and Fundamental Christians are still permitted to speak their minds publicly without fear of censure. In America, Louis Farrakhan can still publicly proclaim that "Murder and lying comes easily for white people", while Pat Robertson can denounce feminism as an ideology that encourages women to "leave their husbands, kill their babies, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians."

If anyone in Canada said things like that, they'd be hauled before the courts so fast it would make their head spin.

While I think most of those cited above are absolute nutjobs, I believe the mark of a strong confident society is it's willingness to tolerate, discuss and openly refute all points of view without resort to legal sanction.

Canada still has alot of growing up to do on that front.

   

Americans are losing much of their privacy and freedoms, and a few are aware of it.

Catering to the Chinese president is so hypocritical of Bush, I guess that's what sets me off about this one. It is all spin, all politics - things I love to hate.

What ever happened to integrity?

*sigh*

m

   

Well, like in most countries, it's called being a courteous host and attempting to repair relations with that country. That was Bush's main goal until that heckler started spewing Mandarin. Safe to say that Bush's goal probably wasn't accomplished when the announcer stated the wrong country...."The Republic of China" instead of the PEOPLE's Republic of China....

   

Oh yes. Definately.. Where's Sargent Pepper when you need him

It was embarasing but so is turning a blind eye to legions of abuses simply for marketing. We are way to far down a road that we never should have traveled. I can't imagine what the US founding fathers are thinking and I shudder to think of how deep the problem goes.

As for American attacks on free speech; can you sight examples? I'd hazard to say that Canada is much worst, and I'd use the CBC as a prime example.

   

I cited several examples of why I think you're a little off the mark with your argument.

By your failure to address those points, I guess I can assume you have no answer.

Maybe you should go back to protesting outside Starbucks and chanting "Hey Hey, Ho Ho, GW Bush Has Got To Go!"

That seems a little more your intellectual speed.

   

You mean it isn't?

   

You may have a point there. Feminism is a pretty fucked up ideology.

   

Explain. Please do. When you do I suggest you fear the wrath of Erinites and Lily and quite frankly every single CKA member who is devoid of a Y chromosome and quite a few who aren't.

The "barefoot and pregnant" or "subservient to men" reign of ideology is dead. And not short enough it was.

   

Just like any idealology, feminism has some proponents who are 'off the the deep end.' The entire movement can't be judged by the actions of a few. There are also many women who believe in and fight for a woman's equality in society but don't label themselves as 'feminists' per se. Equality is realism.

However, there are some 'feminists' who deride other women for choosing to stay at home and be mothers and homemakers. They claim that these women have somehow betrayed the cause of all women by choosing a family over a career as a doctor or a lawyer or a business executive. Isn't being a mother one of the most important jobs in the world? These women who deride other women for making these choices are no better than the men who say women are incapable of being more than housewives.

   

Chief among them is Germaine Greer. She has been falsely attributed with the infamous "all sex is rape" comment as well as other radical anti-men sentiments that are falsely identified with the mainstream feminism movement.

Feminism has always been about promoting "self-worth" and the desire to stand beside men and not above them or below them. Equality.

Yes some do use it to their advantage or to push an unfair advantage (abject proof of equality with men in my eyes) but the true goal remains altruistic.

That being said a good friend (female) of mine used to say that "women are feminist when it suits them". Perhaps. The core ideals are the ones we should try and emulate.

   

"Feminism" is a ridiculous concept. It is nothing more than an academic attempt to justify tribalism and Chauvinism.

If it is a legitimate concept, then why doesn't it have a counterpart in the form of "Masculinism?"

The very idea is absurd.

If one wants to make the argument that women should have equal access to employment opportunities, then I would support that argument.

But the fact is, they already do. And that's why the Andrea Dworkins of the world have slipped into irrelevance (plus she died-boo hoo!)

Young women today realize that they enjoy the same opportunities as their male counterparts. That's why groups like the "National Action Committee on the Status of Women" are shrivelling up.

Hopefully, we'll soon see universities get rid of crap like "Women's Studies" programs, and kids who can't earn a degree in something legitimate can make themselves useful by going to work at Tim Hortons in Fort MacMurray.

   

Its no wonder you can't get laid unless you pay for it.

   

1  2  Next