You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #284: Speaking of catechism, you're right in there with the "free speech needs to have a purpose". Ah, no. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-17-11 12:44 AM
Response to Reply #283
284. Speaking of catechism, you're right in there with the "free speech needs to have a purpose". Ah, no.
It doesn't. Just because speech doesn't contribute to what you consider to be a "robust societal debate about ideas", or organizes "important (according to whom?) cooperative endeavours" or "protects anyone's freedom of conscience" doesn't mean that it's NOT protected, free speech.

You've summed it up pretty nicely- You think free speech is fine, as long as it's what you consider useful, productive, and generally in agreement with what you already think. Which is NOT free speech.

A case can be made that LOTS of things are socially harmful (not to mention 'exploitative', and can we really, please, please, please have that discussion where you twist logic into crazy fucking pretzel shapes to explain how consenting adults in porn are 'exploiting' themselves?) and frankly there are a whole TON of shitty things I would like to get rid of, because, shit, I just don't like them. I can start with a whole TON of music that I just happen to think is shit. It's harming the CRAP out of society, as we speak.

So let's cut to the chase, now: Do you support banning or censoring images of consenting adults nude and/or fucking, or not?

Here are some quotes from our old friend, Andrea Dworkin:

Intercourse is the pure, sterile, formal expression of men's contempt for women.

Men are distinguished from women by their commitment to do violence rather than to be victimized by it.

No woman needs intercourse; few women escape it.

Only when manhood is dead - and it will perish when ravaged femininity no longer sustains it - only then will we know what it is to be free.

Seduction is often difficult to distinguish from rape. In seduction, the rapist often bothers to buy a bottle of wine.

You think intercourse is a private act; it's not, it's a social act.

Childbearing is glorified in part because women die from it.

For men I suspect that this transformation begins in the place they most dread -- that is, in a limp penis. I think that men will have to give up their precious erections and begin to make love as women do together.



...


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC