Young Writers Society

Home » Forums » Community » Serious Discussion and Debate

Censorship

Post a reply
User avatar
128 Reviews


Gender: Female
Points: 650
Reviews: 128
Sat Jan 08, 2005 8:35 pm
Galatea says...



Anyone who knows me...I swear like a sailor. Not so much out of ignorance as that its just something I do. I can sounds well read and intellegent when I try...but among friends there's not point, really.

However, there is one 'bad word' I will not stand for. It makes me uncomfortable just to read it, let alone type or say or hear it.

c*nt. I feel icky even typing it with the *.
Sing lustily and with a good courage. Beware of singing as if you were half dead, or half asleep; but lift up your voice with strength.




User avatar
48 Reviews


Gender: Female
Points: 650
Reviews: 48
Sat Jan 08, 2005 9:14 pm
Myriadne says...



I think censorship insults the intelligence of the population, especially censorship on moral grounds as it usurps the right of an individual to choose what is "right" for them in relation to their values and beliefs. Perhaps as an alternative for those like crysi who are of the perfectly understandable opinion that sex does not have a place on TV a better program classification system is needed so that people have enough information to make those choices about what they want to watch.




User avatar
5 Reviews


Gender: Female
Points: 650
Reviews: 5
Sat Jan 08, 2005 9:32 pm
View Likes
daria_TV says...



Why censorship you ask? Well because the marjority of this country is religious. This country was formed for religious rights. The truth should not be censored in my opinion. Facts and brutalities about the war should not be kept from the people. But pornography and foul language? Whats the point of throwing it out in the open? It doesn't do us any good. Pornography tears families apart. I've seen it first hand in my own family. Fowl language doesn't add to anybodys mind or their self improvement. Its stupid. Personally I don't want the minority of the country telling us what to do. Telling us where to pray and what to censor and what not to. I don't want my future children to be exposed to pornography. If you wanna swear and look at that crap go ahead. Just don't force it on the rest of us.
~!~!Ich bin ein haufen mist!~!~




User avatar
1226 Reviews


Gender: Male
Points: 15782
Reviews: 1226
Sat Jan 08, 2005 9:55 pm
Firestarter says...



Telling us where to pray and what to censor and what not to. I don't want my future children to be exposed to pornography. If you wanna swear and look at that crap go ahead. Just don't force it on the rest of us.


That's such a silly statement. No-one forces pornography on anyone. It's a choice on looking at it, not not looking at it. Your statement is the exact opposite to the truth. Nothing is forced on anyone.
How young are you?
How old am I?
Let's count the rings
around my eyes.
--The Replacements

idraax: Europe is weird then. Math should be standardized internationally.


Rydia is the coolest.




User avatar
481 Reviews


Gender: Male
Points: 5954
Reviews: 481
Sun Jan 09, 2005 2:45 am
Bobo says...



If we decide to completely get rid of censorship except for national secrets, then pornography would be so readily available that it would be forced on us. That's what daria is trying to say, I believe. And I agree.




User avatar
128 Reviews


Gender: Female
Points: 650
Reviews: 128
Sun Jan 09, 2005 3:04 am
Galatea says...



Age appropriacy and censorship are interlinked, but different issues. But where do we draw the line? When is it regulation, and when is it censorship?
Sing lustily and with a good courage. Beware of singing as if you were half dead, or half asleep; but lift up your voice with strength.




User avatar
1258 Reviews


Gender: Female
Points: 5850
Reviews: 1258
Sun Jan 09, 2005 3:24 am
Sam says...



to start something else, Galatea- book banning. THE COMPLETELY MOST STUPID THING ANYONE EVER CAME UP WITH. Like, for instance, language arts. We were doing projects on the unknown. (UFO's, Roanoke, Spontaneous Human Combustion, etc.) We had this 40-minute talk about how 'don't do a topic that your parents wouldn't approve of the books you will be reading.' that was completely annoying, mostly because my mom doesn't even care about what I read. But that's not as extreme as, persay, banning Harry Potter or something like that from schools. Or My Brother Sam is Dead. That book is the best book that I have ever read set in that time period, and one of my stories spins off of it. Yes, they cuss, and yes, they do kill people, but it's for a reason. Hello, you are in the middle of the Revolutionary war. You CANNOT have a war like that without some kind of bloodshed, even on the sidelines. So it completely makes sense, it's just not senseless violence. Another book- Are You There God, It's Me Margaret. I read it, and I think it's quite good. It sounds real, because a lot of the stuff the friends talk about in that book is really what we talk about. If you are having a sleepover with your friends, you are not going to talk about the weather. You are going to discuss guys. Other stuff. (i don't think I have to say it...*lol*) Unless you're a complete antisocial freak, yeah, this book is pretty true to life.
Graffiti is the most passionate form of literature there is.

- Demetri Martin




User avatar
915 Reviews


Gender: Male
Points: 650
Reviews: 915
Sun Jan 09, 2005 4:16 am
Incandescence says...



Generally I'm an objectivist, specifically a moral objectivist. Censorships on the grounds of morality usurps nothing but a child's prying eyes. A parent cannot and should not be expected to monitor their children 24/7. Censoring sex on television is perfectly acceptable. Cuss words are by far more difficult to do. I don't particularly have a problem with them, because by the time most children are 7, they have at least some grasp of the words, and censoring them out of television will accomplish nothing by further propel kids to search harder. Of course, I'm not saying we should subjugate our kids to filth on tv, either. Trouncing morals and relegating children to an all out moral bacchanal will not improve a country's state, as is exemplified by areas such as the Middle East and parts of Europe, particularly Russia. Also, a country would, in its own best interest, censor certain things for the benefit of the people and more importantly, the country itself. America is the only nation that allows such things, and it certainly doesn't allow all of them, but compared to the rest of the world (and due to left-wing activism), anti-American censorship is slowly coming to a halt. You can argue that the people need that information, such crucial information, but think about what you're saying. Would parents show their children videos of themselves in drunken orgies? No, so why would we expect the same of a government? I totally support questioning the government, but it isn't the government's responsibility to make sure you're informed, it's yours.
"If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing on my shoulders." -Hal Abelson




User avatar
67 Reviews


Gender: Male
Points: 650
Reviews: 67
Sun Jan 09, 2005 5:28 am
QiGuaiGongFu says...



some sense and total knowledge are two different things.
true, i dont believe in the power of profanity, but i still dont want my children saying f*ck this and f*ck that. i remember looking certain words up when i was a younger child, but everyone does that, it is to be expected. its important in the developmental stages of children to have boundries, places and things that are forbidden. not to create a certain mistyque about them, but for them to understand that life is not without its limits.
that, and as we have discovered on this vary bored, there are a great many people who take offense to seeing certain words, if it had never come up, then i wouldn't be using asertisks. there is nothing wrong with bleeping words out, or blanking them out. i find that a lot of times it can be better that way. certain jokes arent as funny if they arent bleeped.
censorship is different from regulation. you can still get programs with profanity, certain channels and any dvd you buy. you can still watch all the porn you want, even get it for free from the internet. and at the same time these things can be heavily regulated. i had to flash an id before they let me buy GTA San Andreas. and within the first ten minutes i knew why. f*ck appeared at least 6 times in the first mission. it wasn't out of place in the slightest, i didn't even notice the first time through, it was what youd expect from the characters on screen, but thats a different debate.




User avatar
5 Reviews


Gender: Female
Points: 650
Reviews: 5
Sun Jan 09, 2005 7:46 pm
daria_TV says...



[quote]If we decide to completely get rid of censorship except for national secrets, then pornography would be so readily available that it would be forced on us. That's what daria is trying to say, I believe. And I agree.[/quote]

thank you! that was exactly what I was trying to say. :D
~!~!Ich bin ein haufen mist!~!~




User avatar
128 Reviews


Gender: Female
Points: 650
Reviews: 128
Sun Jan 09, 2005 11:49 pm
Galatea says...



Okay. First off, Incandescence, your posts are so packed full of stuff that its hard to see what is opinion, what is blanket statement, and what is flourish. You also have a tendency to assume that everyone is thinking exactly the same way you are, and your intentions are not always clear. Not complaining, just observing. It makes it difficult to reply to you.

However, I feel that some important points must be made. You stated that
"A parent cannot and should not be expected to monitor their children 24/7."
I completely agree, however I am unsure as to what this has to do with the censoring of literature. It is not the parent's jobs to watch their children all the time, but it IS the parent's jobs to instill in their children a sense of what is objectionable material. Most children, I have, found, self-censor anyway. If there is porn on TV, they won't watch it. They'd much rather watch cartoons or whatever it is that pre-adolescents watch these days.
"I'm not saying we should subjugate our kids to filth on tv, either."
Most of the programming on American television is filth anyway. Between shows like CSI and all the reality trash on television, children aren't recieving appropriate programming. Of course, this also has to do with the parents. Letting the television raise your children does nothing but create desensitized children who are (generally) unable to distinguish between right and wrong. The problem gets blamed on liberal curriculums and 'bad books', when the issue stems--as do most developmental issues do--from the parents and their lack of involvement in their child's life.
" Would parents show their children videos of themselves in drunken orgies?"
Of course not! But who would? Honestly? I'm not sure what this has to do with censorship either. To elaborate on your last point, it is certainly not the government's job to keep you informed, but it is also not the government's job to keep you unecessarily uninformed either. Nor is it their job to raise your kids in a 'morally sound' environment. The more parents rely on right-wing extremeists and government regulation to ensure their kids are recieving a morally sound education, the less and less parents will be involved. Ultimatly, the responsibility to keep appropriate materials regulated for children relies on their parents, and their parents alone.

"Trouncing morals and relegating children to an all out moral bacchanal will not improve a country's state, as is exemplified by areas such as the Middle East and parts of Europe, particularly Russia."
I ask you put this in real words. Big words make you sound smart, but also make you impossible to understand. I'd like to know the point you're making, but right now all I see is professorial bullshit.
Sing lustily and with a good courage. Beware of singing as if you were half dead, or half asleep; but lift up your voice with strength.




User avatar
481 Reviews


Gender: Male
Points: 5954
Reviews: 481
Mon Jan 10, 2005 1:29 pm
Bobo says...



I don't think Incandescense is trying to say that we should rely on the government to provide all of the moral background for kids or whatever, but that the government, which is supposed to keep its citizens safe, should also regulate television to prevent children from stumbling across something that parents would not want them to see. Of course, with new developments such as satalite and Comcast Digital TV, the parents can now block bad channels, but there always seems to be certain channels that have good shows on at some times and bad ones on at others. This is really dangerous, and no parent wants to have to sit around and watch TV with their kids just to make sure nothing bad comes up.




User avatar
128 Reviews


Gender: Female
Points: 650
Reviews: 128
Mon Jan 10, 2005 2:51 pm
Galatea says...



Then the parents should take their kids to the park, or play games with them, or make them read a book, or find some way better than the idiot-box to occupy their childrens' time.
Sing lustily and with a good courage. Beware of singing as if you were half dead, or half asleep; but lift up your voice with strength.




User avatar
5 Reviews


Gender: Female
Points: 650
Reviews: 5
Mon Jan 10, 2005 6:21 pm
View Likes
daria_TV says...



[quote]the government, which is supposed to keep its citizens safe, should also regulate television to prevent children from stumbling across something that parents would not want them to see.[/quote]

The government is here to keep us safe, true. But when it comes to whats right for parent's children thats up for the parent to decide. Only parents know their kids. The government doesn't know crap about whats good for them. Its up to the parents to decide, and personally I don't think the government has any part in that.

When it comes to if the parents are abusive or mentally unstable then yes the government should take action.
~!~!Ich bin ein haufen mist!~!~




User avatar
915 Reviews


Gender: Male
Points: 650
Reviews: 915
Mon Jan 10, 2005 7:34 pm
View Likes
Incandescence says...



Galatea,

How many people do you know who do not own a television? Not very many. The television is also a look into the world events and politics, something most people like to keep abreast - but not immersed - in. There is not a way to keep kids from watching TV. The government's job is to keep people safe, front and foremost, but this may include, perhaps, the censorship of certain materials. For instance, extreme anti-American documents and movies are censored out of the public eye for the reason that it would cause massive revolution. With the internet, however, government censorship has lost what was a significant stronghold in the realm of politics. You said, "Of course not! But who would?", so I ask that you do not say that the American public desserves this knowledge.
"If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing on my shoulders." -Hal Abelson