SPEW!! DEBATE!!

[ohthatisbadnews.livejournal.com]

Click on the picture to join!

The monthly SPEW debate is here! Wanna know whats going on? Look under the cut!!


Imagne going to the record store, and blaring from the loud speakers is an artist like Eminem. You have your two young children with you. Should they have to listen to that kind of music, even if you think that it is immoral?
The Topic of the debate is a popular one. Should Music/Movies/Magazine/Video Games/Etc. be censored? Should the government be able to say, "No You cannot put that on your album" or "That is too vulgur for our youth to see on the big screen!"
What I Want I want you to debate over this issue. Gryffindor//Slytherin will be arguing that the government SHOULD NOT be able to censor the media. Ravenclaw//Hufflepuff will be arguing that the government SHOULD be able to censor the media.
Rules
-Only qualifing comments count! They must be signed, be at least 3 sentences, stay on topic, and stay on your assigned side.
-Keep it civil. If you don't agree with what someone says, let it slide off your back, and don't start an argument. You will not be allowed to participate in the contest for SPEW.
-Have fun! Thats what I want most of all

The Break Down
-10 points for first comment.
-5 points for each additional comment.
Deadline
-The debate will end THURSDAY, Mar. 2nd, at 8 P.M. EST!

Thank you!



DEBATE OVER! Sorry, I had to end it a little early, but I have a paper due tomorrow, and it will take me the rest of the night to finish it.

Comments

Re: Stop the Wiggas!

[sleep-x-dream.livejournal.com]

We cannot make the assumption that people are responsible and have good judgement.

Thus how can a government composed of the people be entrusted with the responsible to make good judgment. This one contradiction upsets the entire foundation of your argument.

A woman fairly recently put her RV in cruise control then left the wheel to make herself a sandwich then successfully sued the RV manufacturer! Holy Crap!

This is one isolated incident. Post statistics and then you will have a case. There will always be "exceptions" to every rule.

We are asking our GOVERNment time and time again to save us from ourselves by instituting rules and laws that are for our own good.

Who is? We ask our government to protect us from one another, allowing us to live harmoniously, but I do not see/understand the point you are trying to make with this statement. Not to mention there are various special interest groups pushing for less governmental influence/control over today's culture/society.

We need laws in place to stop Nebraskan middle-class tweenagers from dressing up and walking around like they're from the 'hood. It's for their own good and it's for the good of everyone around them. They are cheapening REAL ghetto culture and being pretentious

I believe you are starting to diverge from the issue at hand, but I will entertain your statement. And argue that by censoring ones dress you are in effect putting a hold on individuality which is part of what makes are world so great, the various differences which spring up and propel us to great new heights.

and honestly just looking like asses.

Personal opinion = null and void to factual argument.

Also by stating that individuals who dress in this manner or listen to certain types of music you are degrading their culture, indirectly exclaiming yours to be superior.

If they weren't exposed to such explicit lyrics, they wouldn't try to engage in drive-by cow-tippings potato-gun shootings.

This is not a proven theory. As I stated earlier the type of music listened to or the type of video games played has not been proven to have a causal relationship with the type of behavior exhibited by individuals.


trent | slytherin

Re: Stop the Wiggas!

[karinablack.livejournal.com]

Thus how can a government composed of the people be entrusted with the responsible to make good judgment.

Personal opinion, this negates your argument. The government is composed of our elected leaders and intellectual betters. Because this is a democracy (imsofullofit) the majority has a say in what is "right" and "wrong." Right and wrong are simply semantics and diversionary tactics for opinion.

This is one isolated incident.
Unfortunately not. There has been more than one documented case of a person behaving so stupidly, it dropped the collective IQ of the general populace. We do NOT, in fact, ask the government to save us from each other- time and time again we have shown that laws have been instated to save us from ourselves. Examples: the seat belt & helmet laws.

Also by stating that individuals who dress in this manner or listen to certain types of music you are degrading their culture, indirectly exclaiming yours to be superior.

You're lacking an adjective, thus your argument is null and void.
"music you are"
it should read "music are ____, you are..."

My culture may or may not be superior, you cannot base an argument on that which I have not said. ;)

Interpretive implications notwithstanding, the argument is whether or not government should impose restrictions on media. Some call this censorship, but one could also argue that by posting speed guidelines, they are also censoring your right to personal expression by driving in a manner which some consider "too fast."

You have to wonder, when does raising the speed limit stop? When there's no speed limit at all? And no punishment for driving recklessly? Explicit language and violence in mass media is completely unregulated aside from ooh little stickers warning people what they're about to buy MAY be offensive.

You can't scream "FIRE" in a crowded movie theatre- is that censorship or just good judgement?
Why, then, should "let's go kill cops" be censorship instead of good judgement?

It's all semantics.

Karina Black, Ravenclaw