With all of the laws effecting our ability of free speech now adays, do you think that the United States is really staying free? what are your thoughts armor games?
sorry about that, i meant to type you are looking at this skin deep.
I felt it was in depth. Anyways, we're only three pages in and nichodemus is the only forum giant in here currently. Just wait for the unintelligence to die down. It gets deeper than this.
they have tried passing bill that would limit our freedom of speech,
When? I never heard of this.
most places in Europe be cause they are more open-minded and aren't as controlling as America is becoming. Also you can get into another country very fast for vacation.
You never hear anything but debt crisises coming from europe. Very open though.
Why are you arguing about why i think some other place might be better? Your getting off topic with going into a separate argument about my opinion, go make a different topic if you want to argue about that related to it.
Then why are you bringing up an argument saying how good other countries are if you don't even want such an argument developing potentially? If you don't like comparing, which is after all, a valid and basic argument technique, stop avoiding and evading the main question I keep throwing at you; Which in a nutshell is, show credibly how you think the government is power hungry.
An atheist was in a halloween parade dressed in a costume, like all the other marchers. His costume was a zombified Muhammad (he was beside a zombified pope). A Muslim in the crowd took offense at this and physically assaulted the parader. The judge overseeing the case dismissed the charges and actually rebuked the atheist on the grounds that he was effectively asking for it. So much for freedom of expression.
last time i checked. there is no official pics of muhammed. so this muslim has no ground that he was dressed like muhammed because he isn't able to know how muhammed looks like. it could just be any arabic zombie, there are 100.000's of muhammed's in the arabic world.
how could this muslim recognise muhammed, when there is no image of muhammed. no1 knows how he looks like. but still they take offence when we draw a arabic guy by the name muhammed.
(hypocrits)
as for what the topic is realy about: people in usa shouldn't cry. most of the world has less freedom. and there is no sign that usa will become a dictatorship somehow. so i feel it's useless to furtur post in this topic.
not everyone, thats just the make believe of the americans.
All an issue of relativity. Course it isn't as free as some parts of Europe, but if you compare it to the likes of Asia, LA, Africa, and suddenly the USA vaults in front.
America is still a free country but there putting a butt load of restrictions on a bunch of stuff
EX. The bible, oil, and industry in general
America puts no restrains on the Bible; if any, the proliferation of a vast diversity of Christian groups shows the opposite. I would also like to see your ''examples'' on how they restrain the industry and oil markets. Don't just spout.
The Energy Information Administration at the U.S. Dep. of Energy has analyzed the effect of lifting the moratorium on offshore drilling. With leasing beginning in 2012, production of oil would not be expected to start before 2017. The EIA estimated how much of the oil could be extracted both technically and in an economically viable fashion. The EIA found that access to the Pacific, Atlantic, and eastern Gulf of Mexico regions would increase domestic oil production by 1.6 percent between 2012 and 2030. Oil prices are today governed by demand and supply in the global market, and a 1.6 percent increase in the U.S. production would have little or no impact on price. The Natural Resources Defense Council estimated that the price of oil would only drop about 3â"4 cents in 15 to 20 years.
I would've guessed the price would spike insanely due to OPEC limiting production for feeling oppressed by the competition.
If Americans released their oil into the market, it wouldn't lead to a price spike. If OPEC reduces it's production in response, it would merely be shooting themselves in the foot.
I believe they are. According to Machiavelli's The Prince, the best way to rule (between ruling by fear or love) is by fear. If people love their government in good times, okay. However, in bad times, they will dissent and often attempt to overthrow their government (through protests, riots, and even civil war). If the population fears their government, however, the government stays in power regardless. Machiavelli says that the best ruler is not the most qualified, but the one who can maintain control. Many will debate this view, though, as this would imply that rulers such as Kim Jong-Il and Fidel Castro are astounding leaders.
Personally, I worry over personal privacy. The government has machines that can open and re-seal letters, cameras that can identify hundreds of protesters in a single snapshot, records of your social security number, what you buy, how much you earn in a year, all of your physical records, where you went to school, where you go on the internet (unless you have encryption which may still be able to be bypassed by powerful and expensive government technology), legal permission to listen in on phone calls, read e-mails, and intercept transcontinental communications all at their own discretion. Also, the government is requiring the FAA to give clearance to unmanned surveillance drones in civilian airspace by as soon as 2013. Supposedly they will be used for assisting in security (as well as being sold to independent companies and enterprises), yet I have an uneasy feeling as to the true motives of these drones. While they may not be carrying missiles in domestic airspace, they are small, quiet, and have the potential to fly right by your window and record you when you're not looking (When American special forces were prepping to infiltrate Osama's secret compound, they landed a helicopter within a few hundred feet of his area and he never even knew).
