View Poll Results: Should you need a license to be a journalist?

Voters
79. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    7 8.86%
  • no

    69 87.34%
  • maybe/other

    3 3.80%
Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ... 910111213 LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 121

Thread: Should you need a license to be a journalist?

  1. #101
    Guru

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:57 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,469

    Re: Should you need a license to be a journalist?

    For right wingers, how would you like the Obama Administration determining if Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity, etc would get or retain their license (right) to broadcast/publish?

    For left wingers, how would you like the Bush Administration determining if Mathews, Olbermann, Gregory, etc would get or retain their license (right) to broadcast/publish?

    Be careful for what you wish.

    .

  2. #102
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,574

    Re: Should you need a license to be a journalist?

    Quote Originally Posted by Your Star View Post
    Owning a gun, and being able to express one's opinions are two completely different things.
    yes just as worshipping at a church and not incriminating yourself are very different rights

    but they both are rights quaranteed by the Bill of rights and neither should be infringed



  3. #103
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Re: Should you need a license to be a journalist?

    Quote Originally Posted by TacticalEvilDan View Post
    I understand you're playing devil's advocate, but even in that light I don't get what your point is.

    I've never made that argument.
    Many people do make that argument when talking about the validity of The Constitution.
    Of course when it comes to rights they favor, their perception totally changes.

    Just throwing that in as food for thought.

    Words are more dangerous than guns, nuclear weapons, just about anything you can think of.
    Yet few want a license to speak freely.
    It's interesting to me.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    óAdam Shepard

  4. #104
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Should you need a license to be a journalist?

    If the government can require a license to exercise one right, then it can require a license to exercise them all.

  5. #105
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Should you need a license to be a journalist?

    Quote Originally Posted by Your Star View Post
    Owning a gun, and being able to express one's opinions are two completely different things.
    Yes... the right to speak freely and the right to a free prerss can cause far more harm than me and my gun.

  6. #106
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Gina's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    31,863

    Re: Should you need a license to be a journalist?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mell View Post
    I am just saying, that if a licencing body, keeps a record of the journalists reputation then this record could be a guide for possible readers of the journalist. One cant stop others reporting what they see(ie travel bloggers etc), even if they are not journalists, but a licence for official journalists would allow us to make a decision on whether to trust what we read or not . It is not a cut and dried thing. We also have to make up our own minds, about whether information from whichever source is reasonable or not. But, journalists working for major news bodies such as FOX, BBC... should have licences which are attached to some kind of record of their trust worthiness or untrustworthiness.
    Why is that necessary? As appealing as it sounds, if Fox gets dinged, will it matter to their viewers? What if any news agency disagrees with the rating their reporter gets on a story? Can they appeal it?

    When I doubt new reportage, and I do often, I get off my hiney and go looking, because it matters to me.
    I don't attack my constituents. Bob is my constituent now.
    This is the important stuff. We canít get lost in discrimination. We canít get lost in B.S. We canít get lost tearing each other down. I want to make a point here that no matter what you look like, where you come from, how you worship, who you love, how you identify, and yeah, how you run, that if you have good public policy ideas, if you are well qualified for office, bring those ideas to the table, because this is your America, too. This is our commonwealth of Virginia, too.
    Danica Roem - The nation's first openly transgender person elected to serve in a U.S. state legislature.

  7. #107
    Shankmasta Killa
    TacticalEvilDan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Western NY and Geneva, CH
    Last Seen
    08-30-15 @ 04:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,444

    Re: Should you need a license to be a journalist?

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    Many people do make that argument when talking about the validity of The Constitution.
    Well, heck, if you go that route, a whole lot of American law becomes completely invalid.

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    Of course when it comes to rights they favor, their perception totally changes.
    Yep, just like the term "judicial activism."

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    Words are more dangerous than guns, nuclear weapons, just about anything you can think of.
    Yet few want a license to speak freely.
    It's interesting to me.
    I think maybe you're exaggerating just a touch. Words, unlike nuclear weapons, can not destroy the Earth's ability to support life as we know it for centuries to come.
    I'm already gearing up for Finger Vote 2014.

    Just for reference, means my post was a giant steaming pile of sarcasm.

  8. #108
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Re: Should you need a license to be a journalist?

    Quote Originally Posted by TacticalEvilDan View Post
    I think maybe you're exaggerating just a touch. Words, unlike nuclear weapons, can not destroy the Earth's ability to support life as we know it for centuries to come.
    They are the leading cause of the use of nuclear weapons, so I think they are certainly something more than what people think they are.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    óAdam Shepard

  9. #109
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ft. Campbell, KY
    Last Seen
    12-31-14 @ 08:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    12,177

    Re: Should you need a license to be a journalist?

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    Owning a gun and being able to express one's own opinion are both US constitutionally protected rights in which the government is not supposed to infringe or prohibit. So if you support the government infringing or prohibiting on one right without a constitutional amendment then you support the government infringing on other rights without a constitutional amendment.
    Constitutional Law, and law in general, has never been that simple. Like I said earlier, advocating the reduction of certain rights in the Constitution while advocating the promotion of others is not hypocrisy. Freedom of speech exists primarily for us to be able to talk and advocate for how we want to change the system, and we may even vote and support politicians which advocate or restrict certain liberties earlier enjoyed.
    The government's job is NOT to adhere to the Constitution its to adhere to the will of the people, if the people want gun owners to have licenses than gun owners will have them. The Constitution needs to be interpreted and perhaps limited through normal law by at least the states if not both the states and federal government and at times counties and cities. Why? Because people across the country want different things, people in one state might want stricter gun laws than others, people might want to live in a dry county which may violate the anti-prohibition amendment, people might want to do all kinds of things. If one group tries to enforce their interpretation of the Constitution on others the nation itself might fall apart as those it is being forced on might not appreciate the removal of their ability to shape their society as they see fit and the new "freedoms" forced on them. At the very least it would cause a lot of unrest, social problems, and resentment.
    Now of course many parts of the Constitution which are currently restricted in some form or another, such as the 2nd amendment, are very clear in their lack of any room for restriction. But whether or not you can make an extremely convincing argument that your interpretation is the correct one, at least as the word of the document goes, it still is your interpretation which you would be forcing upon someone else. You risk turning the Constitution not into a document which enshrines liberties but rather is used to deny people the ability and freedom to construct the laws and regulation of their society, and their society as a whole, the way they wish it to be constructed.

  10. #110
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,067

    Re: Should you need a license to be a journalist?

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    Constitutional Law, and law in general, has never been that simple. Like I said earlier, advocating the reduction of certain rights in the Constitution while advocating the promotion of others is not hypocrisy. Freedom of speech exists primarily for us to be able to talk and advocate for how we want to change the system, and we may even vote and support politicians which advocate or restrict certain liberties earlier enjoyed.
    The government's job is NOT to adhere to the Constitution its to adhere to the will of the people, if the people want gun owners to have licenses than gun owners will have them. The Constitution needs to be interpreted and perhaps limited through normal law by at least the states if not both the states and federal government and at times counties and cities. Why? Because people across the country want different things, people in one state might want stricter gun laws than others, people might want to live in a dry county which may violate the anti-prohibition amendment, people might want to do all kinds of things. If one group tries to enforce their interpretation of the Constitution on others the nation itself might fall apart as those it is being forced on might not appreciate the removal of their ability to shape their society as they see fit and the new "freedoms" forced on them. At the very least it would cause a lot of unrest, social problems, and resentment.
    Now of course many parts of the Constitution which are currently restricted in some form or another, such as the 2nd amendment, are very clear in their lack of any room for restriction. But whether or not you can make an extremely convincing argument that your interpretation is the correct one, at least as the word of the document goes, it still is your interpretation which you would be forcing upon someone else. You risk turning the Constitution not into a document which enshrines liberties but rather is used to deny people the ability and freedom to construct the laws and regulation of their society, and their society as a whole, the way they wish it to be constructed.
    All that is meaningless drivel that you just wrote used to blatantly violate the constitutional rights. The Constitution does not need to be interpreted, this interpretation nonsense is nothing more than a line of BS used to create laws that blatantly violate the constitution. The way to actually understand the constitution is to read it literally. If people wish to restrict certain rights then they must first make a constitutional amendment to do so. If there is no amendment to repeal the 2nd amendment to alter it to make licensing/permits,waiting periods, and other things constitutionally legal, then those things are illegal regardless of what some local city or state wished to do. Therefore no one should be obligated to follow laws that blatantly violate the constitution.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ... 910111213 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •