wazir Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 The thing is.. its all your fault. You elected the government... if it really bothers you then do something about it - like Thoreau said. Whinging about it forums is fine, but it doesn't improve the situation. And what's worse is drawing a line between them and us (meaning the lawmakers and the citizens). You are law makers, if you don't like it then change it.... "chaque pays a le gouvernement qu' il mérite" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
censorship Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 The thing is.. its all your fault. You elected the government... Bollocks. We elected the 24 members of the House of Keys. We did not elect the members of the Legislative Council. The Chief Minister was selected by the members of Tynwald - one third of which we did not elect - and he selected his government, which includes members of the unelected Legislative Council, without the direct approval of the electorate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piebaps Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 I understand what you mean %age. Just looking at the Facebook bit however, maybe there should be some kind of state interference. The Manx Courts have recently had to deal with 2 cases involving "Facebook Rage" where the aggrieved party has gone and whacked the person who said nasty things. I'm not convinced it would help prevent it but it maybe does give some perspective about how the Govt are thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimcalagon Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 The Manx Courts have recently had to deal with 2 cases involving "Facebook Rage" where the aggrieved party has gone and whacked the person who said nasty things. Damn right -we need to ban facebook because someone might write nasty things on it. Along with mobile phones, paper and toilet walls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wazir Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 The thing is.. its all your fault. You elected the government... Bollocks. We elected the 24 members of the House of Keys. We did not elect the members of the Legislative Council. The Chief Minister was selected by the members of Tynwald - one third of which we did not elect - and he selected his government, which includes members of the unelected Legislative Council, without the direct approval of the electorate. You have failed completely to understand democracy. The system by which the people are represented (currently with the second house being selected by first) is determined by the electorate. If you don't like it you can change this too. Read up on Thoreau http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Disobedience_(Thoreau) If the citizens feel they are not represented they have the power to effect changes more properly to be represented. This is a constitutional right. However, they do not seek to change. instead what they do is elect people on the basis of where to put more bus shelters and pelican crossings and then bitch about things. Or rather don;t vote at all. You have only got yourselves to blame.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 At first glance, some fairly heavy draconian proposals there IMO - wrt: freedom of association and speech (as has been said, seems too 'airy fairy' and open to abuse by litegators); opinion of a constable replacing that of a court; travel restrictions; period held without charge when suspected; police bail; ability to take DNA after a caution and not just at a police station (with no time limit/innocence criteria specificed on DNA record storage that I have seen) etc. - but of course the devil will be in the detail. I think it will be interesting to see the views on MF on this proposed legislation - especially John Wright's views about what is proposed changing/adding here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
censorship Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 The thing is.. its all your fault. You elected the government... Bollocks. We elected the 24 members of the House of Keys. We did not elect the members of the Legislative Council. The Chief Minister was selected by the members of Tynwald - one third of which we did not elect - and he selected his government, which includes members of the unelected Legislative Council, without the direct approval of the electorate. You have failed completely to understand democracy. The system by which the people are represented (currently with the second house being selected by first) is determined by the electorate. If you don't like it you can change this too. Read up on Thoreau http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Disobedience_(Thoreau) If the citizens feel they are not represented they have the power to effect changes more properly to be represented. This is a constitutional right. However, they do not seek to change. instead what they do is elect people on the basis of where to put more bus shelters and pelican crossings and then bitch about things. Or rather don;t vote at all. You have only got yourselves to blame.... You really do talk shite. You'd think after all your international living and mastering of every language you'd be able to do more than quote Wikipedia. Perhaps you could just Fuck Off? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wazir Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 You really do talk shite. You'd think after all your international living and mastering of every language you'd be able to do more than quote Wikipedia. Perhaps you could just Fuck Off? That hardly seem conducive to productive debate. I was seeking to offer you the opportunity to reconsider your opinions based on a source which I provided. I would remind you of Benford's law of controversy : passion is inversely proportional to the amount of real information available. (i.e. the less you know about something the more strongly you feel about it). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
censorship Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 You really do talk shite. You'd think after all your international living and mastering of every language you'd be able to do more than quote Wikipedia. Perhaps you could just Fuck Off? That hardly seem conducive to productive debate. I was seeking to offer you the opportunity to reconsider your opinions based on a source which I provided. I would remind you of Benford's law of controversy : passion is inversely proportional to the amount of real information available. (i.e. the less you know about something the more strongly you feel about it). Do you have any opinions or thoughts which are your own, or do you just think what other people tell you to think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluemonday Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 This idea; makes it an offence to commit acts intended to stir up hatred. This includes hatred on grounds of race, sexual orientation, religious belief or lack of belief or persons with any kind of disablement, should stop a few pulpit pilots in their tracks. That may be the intention but it seems to be so poorly worded that anyone with enough money and the help of a shyster from Athol St. could effectively silence any public discussion of anything controversial. Indeed that would be the most likely outcome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nipper Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 An Athol Street lawyer + the advocates favourite poodle deemster, then anything is possible. Anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wazir Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Do you have any opinions or thoughts which are your own, or do you just think what other people tell you to think? Certainly I have opinions (as anyone on here will agree I'm sure). Often I get overzealous about them. The point though is that by reading widely around a topic and considering what other people (especially great thinkers and philosophers) have concluded in the past is often helpful in marshaling ones thoughts. It's entirely up to you, but I think a wellinformed opinion beats a less informed one or indeed an uniformed one. And since they are opinions there is no way of measuring right or wrong anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimbms Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Remember they can tell you what you can say but no law or man can tell you what to think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macmannin Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Duff Beer man can Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
censorship Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Often I get overzealous about them. That makes you a zealot then or indeed an uniformed one. or, indeed, an uninformed one, unless your opinions like to dress up like soldiers? I am delighted with the irony of you not being sufficiently informed to spell uninformed correctly. As the great 18th century thinker Paul de Rosseur said: 'What a fucking dickhead.' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.