1,516
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 9:
Line 9: + +
Debate: To what extent should we have obscenity laws (view source)
Revision as of 20:42, July 24, 2008
, 20:42, July 24, 2008no edit summary
The Bible predicts numerous events about the troubles of the "End Times", but I believe it does not teach Christians to stick their heads in the sand. We are here to save a lost and depraved world.
The Bible predicts numerous events about the troubles of the "End Times", but I believe it does not teach Christians to stick their heads in the sand. We are here to save a lost and depraved world.
Back to the topic at hand, what makes any law a "good" law. For example, ''All'' speech is protected by the First Amendment. Does this include slander? Does anyone have the "right" to say whatever they want about anyone else? [[User:Bdonelson|Bdonelson]] 16:32, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
Back to the topic at hand, what makes any law a "good" law. For example, ''All'' speech is protected by the First Amendment. Does this include slander? Does anyone have the "right" to say whatever they want about anyone else? [[User:Bdonelson|Bdonelson]] 16:32, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
:"Free speech" has always been subject to reasonable interpretation versus being an absolute right - you can't slander, you can't falsely yell "fire" in a crowded theater, etc. Defining "obscene" speech has always been a contentious area - the "obscenities" shouted in the opening of ''Saving Private Ryan'' are part of a historical recreation, and full frontal nudity can be represented in works of great art without being considered obscene. In my view, it's best to place the least amount of reasonable restrictions on defining obscenity, and let individuals decide for themselves with their own wallets, radio tuners, remote controls, and web filters. --[[User:DinsdaleP|DinsdaleP]] 16:42, 24 July 2008 (EDT)