someone plesae help me with this?
There has long been debate over the people’s right to freedom of expression, and the word censorship is often at the center of this debate. The First Amendment to the Constitution declares that “Congress shall make no law. . . abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press,” therein guaranteeing citizens of the United States the right to freely express themselves. Although not explicitly stated, this freedom of expression includes not only freedom of speech, but also freedom of artistic expression, whether spoken, sung, painted, or photographed. If the Constitution already guarantees these freedoms, then why all the fuss over censorship?
The argument over censorship is two-fold: One, who is allowed to censor, and two, what material should or should not be censored. According to the First Amendment, the government cannot pass laws barring the freedom of expression. While the government isn’t allowed to censor, it has passed laws that exclude some forms of expression. For example, libelous material is illegal, which means you cannot knowingly lie and purport your information to be true. Further, the government disallows any information that causes others to disrupt the peace. In either of the aforementioned cases, we do not apply the term censorship, as the information or material has been found to infringe on the rights of others. If the government passes legislation preventing the printing of information about foreign policy, though, it has denied people their right to choose which information they read. Further, it has prevented the people from making informed decisions about their government, who they elect based on this type of information.
While the government cannot censor, the First Amendment does not apply to institutions, businesses, or people not funded by the government. Therefore, a radio station can choose not to play a song, just as a newspaper can choose not to print particular articles. While these businesses are within their legal rights, those decisions still deny the public access to that song or article. Like a blindfold over our eyes, censorship has occurred. The question one should ask now is “What characterizes information that a business or group would censor?” In most cases, censorship occurs when a group, business, or library thinks that an item contains objectionable material. On the surface, this seems not only acceptable, but also necessary. After all, young children might see violent images or hear graphic lyrics. The debate over censorship flares up because people cannot clearly define what constitutes violent or graphic material.
If violent images cannot be clearly defined, then clear laws cannot be made to protect those who might be affected by them. Lawmakers and our government often agree that they have a responsibility to prohibit truly obscene materials. Even if a seventy-five percent majority feels that a particular CD contains obscene lyrics, can the government stop the other twenty-five percent of people from listening to it? If that happens, artists lose their First Amendment rights to free expression because they cannot produce the songs they want to sing. Suppose a majority feels the Venus de Milo is obscene? Students in our country would then be denied exposure to a work that the rest of the world studies. Do we label rock and roll or rap music with a “Parental Advisory” sticker? If so, operas like Madame Butterfly, which deal with sexual content, should receive the same treatment. As lawmakers ponder these same situations, we as citizens must ask ourselves what we give up if laws are passed regarding censoring certain materials.
The Constitution and the Bill of Rights protect American citizens from the government abusing its power—they provide the structure for many of our freedoms. The First Amendment in particular protects our freedom to express ourselves, standing as a guide to lawmakers, politicians, and individuals. The founders of our country set up the government to ensure certain freedoms, and we must recognize that we give up these freedoms when we allow censorship to occur. Some might say that you cannot compare the lyrics of certain music to a great work of art, and they might be right. The First Amendment was created to stop censorship, however, not to stop ridiculous forms of expression. The fear in limiting any form of expression comes when we don’t know where to draw the line: today graphic lyrics, tomorrow any artwork containing nudity. A variety of people find objectionable content in television, movies, artwork, books, and music. As citizens of this country, however, we have the freedom not only to express ourselves using these mediums, but also to choose which of the forms we want to read, hear, or observe. No one can force us to watch a television program or read a book. Instead, we must force ourselves to stay educated about issues that concern us and continue exercising our own freedoms of expression and choice.
One could point to such instances as an episode of “Postcards from Buster” in which a homosexual couple that had adopted kids was taped but they were not allow to air the show because those opposed to showing such a family in a good light forced the government and the government agencies that control PBS and its government funding forced PBS not to show it. This could not be considered anything but censorship but because their was no group or money to take it to court it was never acted upon. This is freedom of speech in America where the dollar and who controls it controls the freedom of speech. You could also point to the political contribution of corporations where because of their ability to fund politics and politician give them a much greater voice in elections than any individual therefor these corporations in effect control the government rather than the people who cannot possibly match their money.
So not only have the climate change lies been exposed, but the leader has a degree in economics?
Oh, and he was a railroad engineer, and those are the qualifications the PRO-global warming people were bragging about? They kept saying that the “scientists” were right and all the skeptics were wrong, but the MAIN piece used for their 2007 report was based upon 1 report from a guy no one knew much about? Sounds like good scientific process to me, how about you?
Oh, and let’s not forget the “peer-reviewed” science, isn’t that funny?
A high-level inquiry into the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change found there was “little evidence” for its claims about global warming.
It also said the panel had emphasised the negative impacts of climate change and made “substantive findings” based on little proof.
ALSO, VERY IMPORTANT is this:
The review also cast doubt on the future of IPCC chairman Dr Rajendra Pachauri.
Earlier this year, the Daily Express reported how he had no climate science qualifications but held a PhD in economics and was a former railway engineer.
Dr Pachauri has been accused of a conflict of interest, which he denies, after it emerged that he has business interests attracting millions of pounds in funding. One, the Energy Research Institute, is set to receive up to £10million in grants from taxpayers over the next five years.
Greg: You want me to listen to an economist who has a VESTED interest in getting global warming legislation passed? You MUST vote democratic, huh?
Im all for protecting the environment. But when the global warming spokesman — a fat sexual predator named al gore — uses scare tactics to prove a point, before having most of his data proven to be incorrect, and eventually making billions of dollars off his bs… Well that’s when i stop giving a damn
I’m confused. Who’s the best choice?
There are 3 females in my life who I have connections with for different reasons.
The 1st is Khloe. We were together for 7 years and were each others first relationships. The reason we broke up is because of money. I’d always supported her when she needed it financially, without her even having to ask most of the time, not expecting anything in return. She also did for me when she could. However, things went sour during our 4th year together when I fell on hard times. I lost two jobs in two months, couldn’t afford my place anymore so I moved in with my cousin and found out that I wasn’t getting approved for funding for a business I was trying to start. Anyway, because she was doing great financially at the time, I asked her to borrow $1200 and I’d pay her back in exactly two months. Luckily, I found another job and would have the $1200 for her by then. Also, she could afford it because she had several thousand dollars saved and was bringing in close to $4000 a month. After she finished shopping and paying bills, she would always have at least $1000 left over each month. So she gave me the money. Then we ended up getting into an argument about 2 weeks later over what time I was supposed to pick her up for an out of town function. The argument escalated and all of a sudden, she screamed “Well, if that’s how you feel and you always think you’re right, give me back my $1200 that I gave you.” So because we disagreed about what we were arguing about, I guess she felt that gave her the right to bring up that I owed her money, as a means of “shutting me up and putting me in my place”. So soon after that we broke up, then got back together. Then we broke up again but during that break up, I got a girl pregnant. So because me and Khloe were still in contact, I broke the news to her that I had a baby on the way. She didn’t take it well at all. However, eventually she took me back but it was a strain on the relationship from then on. Also, she’d been pressuring me to marry her for some years. I thought about it but didn’t like feeling threatened to do something like that. Plus I know it was an embarrassment for her to her family after she told them about my baby. So we’re not together now but we still talk and hang out every once in a while. Also, she still wants a relationship and a ring. I love her but don’t think I’m in love with her.
The 2nd is Dionne. She’s the baby mama. We were never in a relationship. She’s a cool girl but we differ in a lot of areas and she has a bad temper. Plus I think she secretly has a grudge against me because I told her that I was getting back with Khloe when she was a couple of months pregnant. To this day, she still wants to try to be in a relationship, but I honestly think if I did get in one with her, it would be for my child. I have love for her but I’m not in love with her.
Finally, there’s Michelle. Michelle and I have been knowing each other for about 7 years (I was still w/my ex while we were friends). We’ve always been just friends. She’s the girl who knows everything about me, including all the drama I mentioned above. I’ve told her some things that I can’t believe I actually told her. She was the person I talked to when I was having problems with my ex, anything with my job, etc. She makes me laugh, is very intelligent, cool, fun to hang out with, pretty and educated. After knowing each other for about 4 years, she moved out of state and we lost contact for 2 years. Then by chance, we bumped into each other at a festival, exchanged numbers and started communicating again like 2 years hadn’t even passed. So it’s been about a year and a half since we’ve been back in communication. So several months ago I expressed how I’d been feeling about her and she felt the same and we kissed for the first time. Then I found myself falling fast and hard for her (like I’ve never fell for anybody in my life). Next thing, we’re saying I love you and revealing how we’d been liking each other for years. Then I kinda messed things up by pulling back. I told her I wanted a relationship with her, then told her I wasn’t ready for that because I’d just broken up with my ex (breakup was shortly before me and Michelle kissed). Then she started pulling away because she said it seemed like I didn’t really know and was all over the place with what I wanted. So she started dating soon after that, which I didn’t like but couldn’t blame her. She would sometimes go without talking to me, which drove me crazy. Everything reminded me of her and I’d be thinking she was hugged up somewhere with a guy. Then she’d eventually call and it’d be like a relief. Thinking about her was like being on drugs. She was and still is on my mind a lot. It’s like I have to talk to her everyday or my day isn’t right. We’ve never had sex, but still talk
Ok….the last 2 sentences got deleted. It was supposed to be: We’ve never had sex, but still talk and go out sometimes. I can honestly say I love her.
All of them are good girls, but who seems like the best choice to pursue a relationship with?
Dionne, the mother of your baby, will always be somewhere in your life. Good or bad. There is a sore spot between you & Khloe that will always be there regardless how well you’re getting along. Money is one of the top reasons why couples split. As for Michelle, you need to piss or get off the pot (no pun intended). She has been around for awhile but she won’t wait forever. Follow your heart as well as your gut feelings. This is supposed to be forever. Good luck!
Powered by Yahoo! Answers