| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Censorship in Democracy; Philosophy and Debate | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Nov 24 2005, 01:03 AM (134 Views) | |
| richndanapoint | Nov 24 2005, 01:03 AM Post #1 |
|
Unregistered
|
Democracy is supposed to be a system where views can be heard from all parts of society. So, in such society, should people or organizations be censored to prevent their views from reaching the public? First of all let me differentiated the different types of censorship, which can be applied. Of course this type of censorship should apply. Child pornography, snuff movies, racial vilification, slander, and anything showing bestiality are already censored. Also books, magazines or any other material giving instruction on how to commit criminal activity. Also what other type of censorship should apply? Since the principle that censorship is vital, and is already a fact, and since this fact is already widely accepted, the question is not should a democracy have censorship but where do we draw the line. :angel: |
|
|
| Deleted User | Nov 24 2005, 04:23 AM Post #2 |
|
Deleted User
|
I could argue against censorship of all of those, if you'd like, and if I'm bored enough. ![]() Well, I'm not sure I could manage a case for slander unless it involved parody, but then, by definition, it wouldn't be slander, would it? :unsure: |
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Community Chat · Next Topic » |
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
10:13 AM Jul 11
|





10:13 AM Jul 11