drom_et_reve
drom_et_reve
Having re-read this thread I've come across a sentence that troubles me. There appears to be a pretty serious contradiction in your words.
dròm_et_rêve wrote: In fact, apart from the objectification of women (which I deplore with all my soul), anti-increasing-censorship is one of the causes that I vehemently back. I'm in NO way suggesting that the state should increase censorship.
Does this mean that you do approve of censorship for the purpose of reducing "the objectification of women"? Since I happen to like looking at pretty women I don't share your objection. However; I believe I can draw a parallel. All my life I believed burning of the US Flag to be an act of treason. Then I saw a corny movie called the American President in which the presidents girlfriend had been involved in a flag burning rally years earlier. The fictional president defended her action with something like this: "If you want to believe you are in a free country then the symbol of that freedom can not just be a flag, but also a person enjoying their right to burn that flag in protest. If you truly want freedom of speech than first you'd better prepare your self to acknowledge a man, standing center stage, advocating at the top of his lunges that which you would spend a lifetime opposing at the top of yours. Ackknowledge
that!, celebrate
that in your classrooms and then you can stand up and sing about the land of the
free... and how great it is." After hearing this fictional president's speech: I never again allowed my personal values to trump anyone else's freedom of expression. I don't surf for porn, but support no action to regulate it at the source. I didn't like "Too Live Crew's" music, but would fight any attempt to ban it. I don't believe their is anything more ridiculous than the annual Ku Klux Klan's march on Washington, but now understand why it needs to be protected. The fact that it is; is the very reason I don't have to fear persecution for what I am writing right now. Do you see what I mean?