• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Middle finger protected by the constitution - US court

Excon said:
More foolish commentary from you. Figures.
It is foolish in you trying to make the court ruling applicable to the discourse I am involved in.

Like I said; You clearly do not understand what is going on here and should gracefully bow out.
I realize you need help in figuring it out, so here. Go to the first page.
Click to expand...

As always the picture of civility I see.

And my opinion still is the same, the middle finger is not obscene.
 
Excon said:
I am not joking around, the image is offensive.
If you are not joking please establish how the photo-shopped image condones animal abuse.
Click to expand...

I think the picture is hilarious, and that you think it is offensive is your problem really.
 
Excon said:
Your reply is stupid. As already revealed, the image is photoshopped.

Your avatar is actually offensive. Please change it to one that is not.
Click to expand...

Report him to the powers that be and if they agree you will have won, if they don't stop complaining as you do not get to decide who posts what avatar (just like I do not have that power).
 
Peter King said:
As always the picture of civility I see.

And my opinion still is the same, the middle finger is not obscene.
Click to expand...
I was very civil, especially considering you butted in when you did nto understand what was being discussed (an uncivil action).
Your personal opinion currently has not a damn thing to do with how the middle finger is, in general, considered. The Court's opinion also is irrelevant to how the middle finger is generally considered, especially as freedom of expression was not intended to just protect non-obscene expression.
 
Excon said:
You are being silly, I am not.
Click to expand...

No, you are trying to order someone, and last time I checked you are not the moderator or boss here. If the powers that be do not find it offensive than you have no leg to stand regarding this subject.
 
Excon said:
I was very civil, especially considering you butted in when you did nto understand what was being discussed (an uncivil action).
Your personal opinion currently has not a damn thing to do with how the middle finger is, in general, considered. The Court's opinion also is irrelevant to how the middle finger is generally considered, especially as freedom of expression was not intended to just protect non-obscene expression.
Click to expand...

And your opinion is just as irrelevant when it comes to the image you keep complaining about. I would assume you have complained about the offensiveness of the image and as it is not gone yet they most likely had the same opinion is I had. This is not a PC zone, this is not a 8 year of under zone, this is debate politics and we are adults here and if someone posts a hilarious avatar (that you seem to take offense at) we should all be mature enough to live and let live. Rather than making demands that are not yours to make.

If the supreme court does not find it obscene, our supreme court (mods) do not find it obscene/offensive, than so be it. Wasting oodles of time about something that was a thread about a legal case is your doing. I was trying to make it like the first post intended it to be.

So I state my case, flipping the bird is freedom of speech, that is why this image is iconic in the Netherlands (and no, there was not a whole kerfuffle about it)

And for those who are too offended by seeing a kid flip the bird I will put it in a spoiler section so to not hurt their feelings or offend them too greatly.

So For those too offended by what the supreme court calls freedom of speech, watch below spoiler/picture at your own risk, if you are too offended by the stinkfinger of a small child, be ware, do not look at the spoiler

5c442f96f86a739433b63385cdc1c7e5.jpg
 
Peter King said:
I think the picture is hilarious, and that you think it is offensive is your problem really.
Click to expand...
You are entitled to your opinion but that does not change the fact that the gesture itself is in-general considered offensive as the information I provided previously establishes.
It is like you do not understand that the word the gesture partially represents is automatically censored on many sites across the web specifically because it is offensive?

But do keep digging your hole.


Peter King said:
Report him to the powers that be and if they agree you will have won, if they don't stop complaining as you do not get to decide who posts what avatar (just like I do not have that power).
Click to expand...
And deeper and deep you go.


Peter King said:
No, you are trying to order someone, and last time I checked you are not the moderator or boss here. If the powers that be do not find it offensive than you have no leg to stand regarding this subject.
Click to expand...
:doh You just keep digging your hole deeper and deeper.
Again. Go to page one and actually read it this time.
"Please change it" is a request, not an order.


Peter King said:
According to you, not to me.
Click to expand...
A lame reply especially given the fact that we are not discussing what you find offensive or not.


Peter King said:
And your opinion is just as irrelevant when it comes to the image you keep complaining about. I would assume you have complained about the offensiveness of the image and as it is not gone yet they most likely had the same opinion is I had. This is not a PC zone, this is not a 8 year of under zone, this is debate politics and we are adults here and if someone posts a hilarious avatar (that you seem to take offense at) we should all be mature enough to live and let live. Rather than making demands that are not yours to make.
Click to expand...
As previously provided.
Excon said:
In Western culture, the finger or the middle finger (as in giving someone the (middle) finger or the bird[1] or flipping someone off),[1] is an obscene hand gesture. The gesture communicates moderate to extreme contempt, and is roughly equivalent in meaning to "**** off", "**** you", "shove it up your ass/arse", "up yours" or "go **** yourself".
The finger | Wiki


An obscene gesture is a movement or position of the body, especially of the hands or arms, that is considered exceedingly offensive or vulgar in some particular cultures. Such gestures are often sexually suggestive.
Obscene gesture | Wiki
Click to expand...

The gesture is considered offensive regardless of what you personally think of it.


It is like you do not understand that the word the gesture partially represents is automatically censored on many sites across the web specifically because it is offensive? Do you really not understand that?


Peter King said:
If the supreme court does not find it obscene,
Click to expand...
That is not what the Court found.


Peter King said:
our supreme court (mods) do not find it obscene/offensive,
Click to expand...
I don't believe any aspect of moderation is open for discussion. So please avoid it.


Peter King said:
Wasting oodles of time about something that was a thread about a legal case is your doing.
Click to expand...
Regardless if you think it is a waste of time, how anyone (besides you) here spends their time, is none of your business.


Peter King said:
I was trying to make it like the first post intended it to be.
Click to expand...
No.
You jumped in with nonsense becasue you did not bother to pay attention to the actual discourse.
 
Excon said:
You are entitled to your opinion but that does not change the fact that the gesture itself is in-general considered offensive as the information I provided previously establishes.
It is like you do not understand that the word the gesture partially represents is automatically censored on many sites across the web specifically because it is offensive?

But do keep digging your hole.



And deeper and deep you go.


:doh You just keep digging your hole deeper and deeper.
Again. Go to page one and actually read it this time.
"Please change it" is a request, not an order.


A lame reply especially given the fact that we are not discussing what you find offensive or not.


As previously provided.
​

The gesture is considered offensive regardless of what you personally think of it.


It is like you do not understand that the word the gesture partially represents is automatically censored on many sites across the web specifically because it is offensive? Do you really not understand that?


That is not what the Court found.


I don't believe any aspect of moderation is open for discussion. So please avoid it.


Regardless if you think it is a waste of time, how anyone (besides you) here spends their time, is none of your business.


No.
You jumped in with nonsense becasue you did not bother to pay attention to the actual discourse.
Click to expand...

So in other words you did not complain to our supreme court or did and were shot down and derailed this thread by your demands and posts that had nothing to do with the OP. Got it.

My post was accurate to the subject of this thread, you are on your own path but I am not going to play along with your games. Long live the supreme court and all other court rulings which state that the middle finger is your freedom of speech.
 
Re: AGENT J's delusional commentary

Excon said:
:laughat:
And again, while still being wrong as usual and lying, you have failed to refute the information I provided. Just another day with the same addled and failed addled bs from you. Figures.
Click to expand...

Since I have already provided evidence (please see Post 120 in this thread) that "flipping the bird" is NOT considered to be either obscene or offensive in ALL parts of "Western Culture", I don't see any reason why I should have to do so again - simply because you don't want to acknowledge that fact.

After all, if I do present that evidence again, you will simply ignore it again and then ask me to present it again, after which you will simply ignore it again and then ask me to present it again, after which you will simply ignore it again and then ask me to present it again, after which you will simply ignore it again and then ask me to present it again, after which you will simply ignore it again and then ask me to present it again, after which you will simply ignore it again and then ask me to present it again, after which you will simply ignore it again and then ask me to present it again, after which you will simply ignore it again and then ask me to present it again, after which you will simply ignore it again and then ask me to present it again, after which you will simply ignore it again and then ask me to present it again, after which you will simply ignore it again and then ask me to present it again, after which you will ...

PS - Did you know that "American culture" and "Western culture" do NOT mean the same thing?

PPS - Do you know where your "I know you are, but what am I?" style of "debate" belongs?
 
Re: AGENT J's delusional commentary

TU Curmudgeon said:
Since I have already provided evidence (please see Post 120 in this thread) that "flipping the bird" is NOT considered to be either obscene or offensive in ALL parts of "Western Culture", I don't see any reason why I should have to do so again - simply because you don't want to acknowledge that fact.

After all, if I do present that evidence again, you will simply ignore it again and then ask me to present it again, after which you will simply ignore it again and then ask me to present it again, after which you will simply ignore it again and then ask me to present it again, after which you will simply ignore it again and then ask me to present it again, after which you will simply ignore it again and then ask me to present it again, after which you will simply ignore it again and then ask me to present it again, after which you will simply ignore it again and then ask me to present it again, after which you will simply ignore it again and then ask me to present it again, after which you will simply ignore it again and then ask me to present it again, after which you will simply ignore it again and then ask me to present it again, after which you will simply ignore it again and then ask me to present it again, after which you will ...

PS - Did you know that "American culture" and "Western culture" do NOT mean the same thing?

PPS - Do you know where your "I know you are, but what am I?" style of "debate" belongs?
Click to expand...

And what is more, this is about freedom of speech and what is offensive and what is not and everybody has their own personal views about that. The thing is, the only one who can make the determination about whether an avatar is offensive are our valiant guardians of Debatepolitics, AKA the moderators.
 
Re: AGENT J's delusional commentary

Peter King said:
And what is more, this is about freedom of speech and what is offensive and what is not and everybody has their own personal views about that. The thing is, the only one who can make the determination about whether an avatar is offensive are our valiant guardians of Debatepolitics, AKA the moderators.
Click to expand...

The exchanges between "excon" and myself are primarily over whether

  1. his position that what he finds offensive is offensive to 100% of the rest of the world;
    *
  2. that what he finds obscene is what 100% of the rest of the world finds to be obscene;
    *
  3. the term "American culture" and "Western culture" are synonymous;
    *
  4. he has the right to dictate to others what they MUST find to be offensive;
    *
    and
    *
  5. he has the right to tell anyone else what they MUST consider to be obscene.

Personally I find "flipping the bird" to be both as silly and an indication of a pronounced lack of oral communication skills as I find the use of such terms as "Niger", "Bitch", "RePUKElican', and "DIMoctat", but I do realize that there are those who consider the use of such terms as exemplifying the absolute pinnacle of intellectual debate (possibly because that is as profound as they are capable of thinking).
 
Re: AGENT J's delusional commentary

Peter King said:
So in other words you did not complain to our supreme court or did and were shot down and derailed this thread by your demands and posts that had nothing to do with the OP. Got it.
Click to expand...
You got nothing.
I openly and politely asked a person to remove their offensive avatar.


Peter King said:
My post was accurate to the subject of this thread, you are on your own path but I am not going to play along with your games.
Click to expand...
Accurate to the thread but not at all accurate to what was being said. Doh! And that was becasue you did not bother to pay attention.

And you were the one playing a stupid game, so stop projecting.



Peter King said:
Long live the supreme court and all other court rulings which state that the middle finger is your freedom of speech.
Click to expand...
iLOL The Court acknowledged her offensively impolite behavior.




:laughat:
TU Curmudgeon said:
[SUP]Since I have already provided evidence (please see Post 120 in this thread) that "flipping the bird" is NOT considered to be either obscene or offensive in ALL parts of "Western Culture", I don't see any reason why I should have to do so again - simply because you don't want to acknowledge that fact.

After all, if I do present that evidence again, you will simply ignore it again and then ask me to present it again, after which you will simply ignore it again and then ask me to present it again, after which you will simply ignore it again and then ask me to present it again, after which you will simply ignore it again and then ask me to present it again, after which you will simply ignore it again and then ask me to present it again, after which you will simply ignore it again and then ask me to present it again, after which you will simply ignore it again and then ask me to present it again, after which you will simply ignore it again and then ask me to present it again, after which you will simply ignore it again and then ask me to present it again, after which you will simply ignore it again and then ask me to present it again, after which you will simply ignore it again and then ask me to present it again, after which you will ...

PS - Did you know that "American culture" and "Western culture" do NOT mean the same thing?

PPS - Do you know where your "I know you are, but what am I?" style of "debate" belongs?[/SUP]
Click to expand...
And again, while still being wrong as usual and lying, you have failed to refute the information I provided. Just another day with the same addled and failed addled bs from you. Figures


TU Curmudgeon said:
The exchanges between "excon" and myself are primarily over whether

  1. his position that what he finds offensive is offensive to 100% of the rest of the world;
    *
  2. that what he finds obscene is what 100% of the rest of the world finds to be obscene;
    *
  3. the term "American culture" and "Western culture" are synonymous;
    *
  4. he has the right to dictate to others what they MUST find to be offensive;
    *
    and
    *
  5. he has the right to tell anyone else what they MUST consider to be obscene.
Click to expand...
You might believe that is the case but you are wrong on all five points.
 
Re: AGENT J's delusional commentary

Excon said:
You might believe that is the case but you are wrong on all five points.
Click to expand...

OK, let's clarify:


  1. Is what you fine offensive also offensive to 100% of the rest of the world?
    • My position is "No.".
      *
    • Your position is;
      *
      • ____ "Yes."
        *
      • ____ "No."

    *
  2. Is what you fine obscene what 100% of the rest of the world finds to be obscene?
    • My position is "No.".
      *
    • Your position is;
      *
      • ____ "Yes."
        *
      • ____ "No."

    *
  3. Are American culture" and "Western culture" synonymous?
    • My position is "No.".
      *
    • Your position is;
      *
      • ____ "Yes."
        *
      • ____ "No."

    *
  4. Do you have the right to dictate to others what they MUST find to be offensive?
    • My position is "No.".
      *
    • Your position is;
      *
      • ____ "Yes."
        *
      • ____ "No."

    *
  5. Do you have the right to tell anyone else what they MUST consider to be obscene?
    • My position is "No.".
      *
    • Your position is;
      *
      • ____ "Yes."
        *
      • ____ "No."
 
My wife once flicked off a driver who had been tailgating us on a highway. The moment that happened, on came the blue lights. That cop can accurately be named "pig." He comes up to the window screaming bloody murder, writes a ticket for supposed left lane violation and impeding an officer (as if he'd had his lights on the whole time). Disgusting lying pig.

But the magistrate recognized his name and dismissed the ticket simply because he is a known asshole.

I'd advised her to focus her argument on the fact that this idiot actually wrote on the ticket "(flicked me off)" after the supposed violations that never happened. But she didn't have to.





Protect and serve my ass. Maybe that's the way it was sixty years ago (I have my doubts), but that's not how they're trained these days. These days, they seem to hit the street with the idea that they can do whatever they please, for any reason, and that shooting people dead is a perfectly good response to feeling like their authority wasn't sufficiently respected.

If someone breaks into my house, I'm handling it myself. Either I'll be in a position to leave the perp trussed up outside my front door for them to pick up, or I'll be dead. I'm not having trigger-happy cops burst into my house guns blazing. I don't trust the police.
 
WillyPete said:
Excellent use of the court's resources, settling the big issues of the day.
Click to expand...

actually it is a huge issue. cops should never be allowed to be vindictive. if they can't handle someone giving them the finger
than they shouldn't be cops.

now this opens up the cop and the city to a civil rights law suit. cops and cities have been losing thousands of dollars over
these types of suits.

why? because cops are not trained to defend and protect the constitution anymore.
 
Mr Person said:
My wife once flicked off a driver who had been tailgating us on a highway. The moment that happened, on came the blue lights. That cop can accurately be named "pig." He comes up to the window screaming bloody murder, writes a ticket for supposed left lane violation and impeding an officer (as if he'd had his lights on the whole time). Disgusting lying pig.

But the magistrate recognized his name and dismissed the ticket simply because he is a known asshole.

I'd advised her to focus her argument on the fact that this idiot actually wrote on the ticket "(flicked me off)" after the supposed violations that never happened. But she didn't have to.





Protect and serve my ass. Maybe that's the way it was sixty years ago (I have my doubts), but that's not how they're trained these days. These days, they seem to hit the street with the idea that they can do whatever they please, for any reason, and that shooting people dead is a perfectly good response to feeling like their authority wasn't sufficiently respected.

If someone breaks into my house, I'm handling it myself. Either I'll be in a position to leave the perp trussed up outside my front door for them to pick up, or I'll be dead. I'm not having trigger-happy cops burst into my house guns blazing. I don't trust the police.
Click to expand...

If I recall it correctly, the shortest training period that is required to become a fully-fledged, gun-totin', siren-blarin', han'cus'-wielding, police officer in the United States of America is 9 weeks. BCT in the US Army is 10 weeks, at the end of which the recruit is considered "trained enough to be trained to do their job". RCMP basic training is 26 weeks (followed by a stretch of OJT [followed by a further stretch of "school training]). To become a member of the Ontaria Provincial Police, the initial training period is 24 weeks.

Of course, if you want to be a fully-fledged, gun-totin', siren-blarin', han'cus'-wielding, SHERIFF, then you don't need any training at all (just a whole lot of family and friends who will vote for you [because they like you better'n "Billy Bob"]).
 
Re: AGENT J's delusional commentary

TU Curmudgeon said:
Excon said:
TU Curmudgeon said:
[SUP]The exchanges between "excon" and myself are primarily over whether

  1. his position that what he finds offensive is offensive to 100% of the rest of the world;
    *
  2. that what he finds obscene is what 100% of the rest of the world finds to be obscene;
    *
  3. the term "American culture" and "Western culture" are synonymous;
    *
  4. he has the right to dictate to others what they MUST find to be offensive;
    *
    and
    *
  5. he has the right to tell anyone else what they MUST consider to be obscene.
[/SUP]
Click to expand...


You might believe that is the case but you are wrong on all five points.
Click to expand...
[SUP]OK, let's clarify:
  1. Is what you fine offensive also offensive to 100% of the rest of the world?
    • My position is "No.".
      *
    • Your position is;
      *
      • ____ "Yes."
        *
      • ____ "No."
    *
  2. Is what you fine obscene what 100% of the rest of the world finds to be obscene?
    • My position is "No.".
      *
    • Your position is;
      *
      • ____ "Yes."
        *
      • ____ "No."
    *
  3. Are American culture" and "Western culture" synonymous?
    • My position is "No.".
      *
    • Your position is;
      *
      • ____ "Yes."
        *
      • ____ "No."
    *
  4. Do you have the right to dictate to others what they MUST find to be offensive?
    • My position is "No.".
      *
    • Your position is;
      *
      • ____ "Yes."
        *
      • ____ "No."
    *
  5. Do you have the right to tell anyone else what they MUST consider to be obscene?
    • My position is "No.".
      *
    • Your position is;
      *
      • ____ "Yes."
        *
      • ____ "No."
[/SUP]
Click to expand...
iLOL
No.
1. That is not how this works.
2. The impetus is on you to support your claims.
3. The body of my posts lays out my position quite clearly and you have failed to refute any of it or demonstrate what you said regarding my position is true.
 
Re: AGENT J's delusional commentary

Excon said:
iLOL
No.
1. That is not how this works.
Click to expand...

Really? You mean that no one is allowed to ask questions of another in order to clarify what the other person's position actually is?

Excon said:
2. The impetus is on you to support your claims.
Click to expand...

Actually whatever "claims" were being made were being made by you and one of those claims was that "flipping the bird" was UNIVERSALLY regarded as obscene. I provided examples of societies where that simply was not the case and then asked you to provide evidence to validate your "assertion of fact" that "flipping the bird was universally regarded as obscene". The onus of proof, when an "assertion of fact" is challenged, is on the person making the "assertion of fact". So far you have been 100% consistent in failing to provide any evidence in support of your "assertion of fact".

Excon said:
3. The body of my posts lays out my position quite clearly and you have failed to refute any of it or demonstrate what you said regarding my position is true.
Click to expand...

The onus of proof, when an "assertion of fact" is challenged, is on the person making the "assertion of fact". So far you have been 100% consistent in failing to provide any evidence in support of your "assertion of fact".

Why don't you actually provide actual answers to the actual questions that you were actually asked?
 
Re: TU Curmudgeon's delusional commentary

TU Curmudgeon said:
Really? You mean that no one is allowed to ask questions of another in order to clarify what the other person's position actually is?
Click to expand...
That isn't what I said. Is it?
Your time to ask questions for clarification about prior arguments came long ago prior to you making these current absurdly false clams about me.
And you failed to refute anything I said when you had that the time.


So not only have you been been 100% consistent in failing to provide any evidence to refute what I provided, you are again misstating reality with your delusional nonsense and are deflecting becasue you can not support the claims you made.
 
Re: TU Curmudgeon's delusional commentary

Excon said:
That isn't what I said. Is it?
Your time to ask questions for clarification about prior arguments came long ago prior to you making these current absurdly false clams about me.
And you failed to refute anything I said when you had that the time.


So not only have you been been 100% consistent in failing to provide any evidence to refute what I provided, you are again misstating reality with your delusional nonsense and are deflecting becasue you can not support the claims you made.
Click to expand...

Coming back 30 days later to whine doesn't really impress anyone.
 
Re: TU Curmudgeon's delusional commentary

TU Curmudgeon said:
Coming back 30 days later to whine doesn't really impress anyone.
Click to expand...
Is that what you think you were doing. Interesting.
 
Re: TU Curmudgeon's delusional commentary

Excon said:
Is that what you think you were doing. Interesting.
Click to expand...

Thank you for a really good example of an "I know you are, but what am I?" post.
 
Re: TU Curmudgeon's delusional commentary

TU Curmudgeon said:
Is that what you think you were doing. Interesting.
Click to expand...
Thank you for a really good example of an "I know you are, but what am I?" post.
Click to expand...

Is that what you think happened. Interesting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom