Censorship

[Evan Burton]

I'm going to start this thread here then move into its more appropriate place, in the PC sub-forum. That way a link will be left here on the JFK forum and people can follow it back if they are interested.

Censorship is an issue close to my heart. In Australia, our esteemed leaders wish to place a mandatory filter on our internet (see another thread about this in this sub-forum), in order to protect young children from inappropriate images, etc. I object to this, believing it is a parental responsibility and, as an adult, if I wish to view adult images I should be allowed to do so.

Anyway - censorship. A number of members expressed opinions about images being displayed. This made me think about my visits to the US and my surprise about the censorship that occurs there. I'd like to describe my experience and ask others to post their own experiences and opinions.

I found it amazing that US television censored things that I would consider innocuous. When watching the movie 'Kill Bill', I was confused that violence could be shown but they changed the name of a car from "Pussy Wagon" to "Party Wagon". I was also surprised by the censoring of "god damn", and not showing two raised fingers (the reverse of Churchill's V For Victory)... or even sometimes blocking out the single finger "bird"!

So - can there be an agreed definition of what is obscene or inappropriate? Is the best censorship..NO censorship?

[Mike Williams]

I'm going to start this thread here then move into its more appropriate place, in the PC sub-forum. That way a link will be left here on the JFK forum and people can follow it back if they are interested.

Censorship is an issue close to my heart. In Australia, our esteemed leaders wish to place a mandatory filter on our internet (see another thread about this in this sub-forum), in order to protect young children from inappropriate images, etc. I object to this, believing it is a parental responsibility and, as an adult, if I wish to view adult images I should be allowed to do so.

Anyway - censorship. A number of members expressed opinions about images being displayed. This made me think about my visits to the US and my surprise about the censorship that occurs there. I'd like to describe my experience and ask others to post their own experiences and opinions.

I found it amazing that US television censored things that I would consider innocuous. When watching the movie 'Kill Bill', I was confused that violence could be shown but they changed the name of a car from "Pussy Wagon" to "Party Wagon". I was also surprised by the censoring of "god damn", and not showing two raised fingers (the reverse of Churchill's V For Victory)... or even sometimes blocking out the single finger "bird"!

So - can there be an agreed definition of what is obscene or inappropriate? Is the best censorship..NO censorship?

Evan,

I believe everything has its place. But will say that by and large I am against censorship.

I agree with you 100% in that it is the parents responsibility to monitor the child's exposure.

In my opinion, and for what its worth, all things have to be put into perspective. In the recent photos posted here at the Ed Forum for example, one must weigh the evidential value against the offensiveness of the image. It would seem those pictures were posted in order to prove or disprove two points. One whether or not Oswald was circumcised, and the other being the "adequate" status of his equipment.

Neither of these is ground breaking to the case, and the latter is certainly so subjective as to offer little proof to anything, "adequate" being a subjective and relative term. They certainly will not prove nor disprove the Judyth issue, as her fable has many more mountains to climb.

So all in all it was a worthless posting, which by the way, could have been researched among those that cared to, via email. We all know how to use email...don't we?

Up until the ridiculous posting, I allowed my son to read the Ed forum, as in recent time he has shown a great interest in history, and JFK in particular. I do not think I will allow that any longer, as the posters of such images show poor discretion and I no longer have any comfort in knowing that those among us would not post such things in a forum where students of all ages might be reading.

Mike

[Todd W. Vaughan]

I'm going to start this thread here then move into its more appropriate place, in the PC sub-forum. That way a link will be left here on the JFK forum and people can follow it back if they are interested.

Censorship is an issue close to my heart. In Australia, our esteemed leaders wish to place a mandatory filter on our internet (see another thread about this in this sub-forum), in order to protect young children from inappropriate images, etc. I object to this, believing it is a parental responsibility and, as an adult, if I wish to view adult images I should be allowed to do so.

Anyway - censorship. A number of members expressed opinions about images being displayed. This made me think about my visits to the US and my surprise about the censorship that occurs there. I'd like to describe my experience and ask others to post their own experiences and opinions.

I found it amazing that US television censored things that I would consider innocuous. When watching the movie 'Kill Bill', I was confused that violence could be shown but they changed the name of a car from "Pussy Wagon" to "Party Wagon". I was also surprised by the censoring of "god damn", and not showing two raised fingers (the reverse of Churchill's V For Victory)... or even sometimes blocking out the single finger "bird"!

So - can there be an agreed definition of what is obscene or inappropriate? Is the best censorship..NO censorship?

Evan,

I believe everything has its place. But will say that by and large I am against censorship.

I agree with you 100% in that it is the parents responsibility to monitor the child's exposure.

In my opinion, and for what its worth, all things have to be put into perspective. In the recent photos posted here at the Ed Forum for example, one must weigh the evidential value against the offensiveness of the image. It would seem those pictures were posted in order to prove or disprove two points. One whether or not Oswald was circumcised, and the other being the "adequate" status of his equipment.

Neither of these is ground breaking to the case, and the latter is certainly so subjective as to offer little proof to anything, "adequate" being a subjective and relative term. They certainly will not prove nor disprove the Judyth issue, as her fable has many more mountains to climb.

So all in all it was a worthless posting, which by the way, could have been researched among those that cared to, via email. We all know how to use email...don't we?

Up until the ridiculous posting, I allowed my son to read the Ed forum, as in recent time he has shown a great interest in history, and JFK in particular. I do not think I will allow that any longer, as the posters of such images show poor discretion and I no longer have any comfort in knowing that those among us would not post such things in a forum where students of all ages might be reading.

Mike

“Up until the ridiculous posting, I allowed my son to read the Ed forum, as in recent time he has shown a great interest in history, and JFK in particular. I do not think I will allow that any longer, as the posters of such images show poor discretion and I no longer have any comfort in knowing that those among us would not post such things in a forum where students of all ages might be reading.”

OH PLEASE!

You made or referred to no less than 5 adolescent jokes about LHO’s penis in less than 3 hours!

And you also referred to a penis using slang terms no less than 4 times!

And after doing that you have the audacity to write “as the posters of such images show poor discretion and I no longer have any comfort in knowing that those among us would not post such things in a forum where students of all ages might be reading.”????

What a hypocrite.

Tell us, did you allow your son to read your jokes and your slang?

[Mike Williams]

I'm going to start this thread here then move into its more appropriate place, in the PC sub-forum. That way a link will be left here on the JFK forum and people can follow it back if they are interested.

Censorship is an issue close to my heart. In Australia, our esteemed leaders wish to place a mandatory filter on our internet (see another thread about this in this sub-forum), in order to protect young children from inappropriate images, etc. I object to this, believing it is a parental responsibility and, as an adult, if I wish to view adult images I should be allowed to do so.

Anyway - censorship. A number of members expressed opinions about images being displayed. This made me think about my visits to the US and my surprise about the censorship that occurs there. I'd like to describe my experience and ask others to post their own experiences and opinions.

I found it amazing that US television censored things that I would consider innocuous. When watching the movie 'Kill Bill', I was confused that violence could be shown but they changed the name of a car from "Pussy Wagon" to "Party Wagon". I was also surprised by the censoring of "god damn", and not showing two raised fingers (the reverse of Churchill's V For Victory)... or even sometimes blocking out the single finger "bird"!

So - can there be an agreed definition of what is obscene or inappropriate? Is the best censorship..NO censorship?

Evan,

I believe everything has its place. But will say that by and large I am against censorship.

I agree with you 100% in that it is the parents responsibility to monitor the child's exposure.

In my opinion, and for what its worth, all things have to be put into perspective. In the recent photos posted here at the Ed Forum for example, one must weigh the evidential value against the offensiveness of the image. It would seem those pictures were posted in order to prove or disprove two points. One whether or not Oswald was circumcised, and the other being the "adequate" status of his equipment.

Neither of these is ground breaking to the case, and the latter is certainly so subjective as to offer little proof to anything, "adequate" being a subjective and relative term. They certainly will not prove nor disprove the Judyth issue, as her fable has many more mountains to climb.

So all in all it was a worthless posting, which by the way, could have been researched among those that cared to, via email. We all know how to use email...don't we?

Up until the ridiculous posting, I allowed my son to read the Ed forum, as in recent time he has shown a great interest in history, and JFK in particular. I do not think I will allow that any longer, as the posters of such images show poor discretion and I no longer have any comfort in knowing that those among us would not post such things in a forum where students of all ages might be reading.

Mike

“Up until the ridiculous posting, I allowed my son to read the Ed forum, as in recent time he has shown a great interest in history, and JFK in particular. I do not think I will allow that any longer, as the posters of such images show poor discretion and I no longer have any comfort in knowing that those among us would not post such things in a forum where students of all ages might be reading.”

OH PLEASE!

You made or referred to no less than 5 adolescent jokes about LHO’s penis in less than 3 hours!

And you also referred to a penis using slang terms no less than 4 times!

And after doing that you have the audacity to write “as the posters of such images show poor discretion and I no longer have any comfort in knowing that those among us would not post such things in a forum where students of all ages might be reading.”????

What a hypocrite.

Tell us, did you allow your son to read your jokes and your slang?

Care to show me where I posted one obscene word?

Even the slang I used was not anything obscene. So what are you whining about?

I gave the thread the obvious contempt it deserved, it was and is moronic to post pictures like that where children may be reading.

[Dean Hagerman]

Censorship is BAD

I control what my children watch on TV and view on the internet

Its my job to censor what my children view

Its not the USAs job to censor what I as an adult watch or view

[Mike Williams]

Censorship is BAD

I control what my children watch on TV and view on the internet

Its my job to censor what my children view

Its not the USAs job to censor what I as an adult watch or view

Dean,

You are wise beyond your beers!

Best to you my friend!

Mike