AMERICA the land of the not so free [Archive]

View Full Version : AMERICA the land of the not so free

puff

22nd July 2006, 02:50 AM

bobcat

22nd July 2006, 08:01 AM

Puff, I think you bring up some very valid points, and I wonder about them myself. I will do my best to explain my take on these symptoms and phenomena, in hopes that others will do so as well.

I have just been reading a website were lots of Americans tell stories of very heavy prohabition laws , roadside searches , sniffer dogs and hell knows what else , ironicaly you can walk into a store in America and buy a gun over the counter .
can anybody give me any idea why America has these crazy standards .

The ease of getting guns has to do with the 2nd Amendment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution ) to the US Constitution, which gives Americans the right to bear arms. This is a topic of enormous controversy between those people that think guns perform an important role in our society, and those that thing they are more dangerous than helpful. The truth lies somewhere in between, I'm sure. In other places (such as big cities), guns probably aren't really useful in day-to-day living. Either way, firearms are a very important part of American History, and as such the topic is really very touchy.

The other laws you describe, search and seizure of property, wire-tapping, domestic spy programs, and things like that, first showed up in America during the Red Scare (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_scare) of the 1940's-1950's. America was afraid of communists, big time. Whether or not these fears were well-founded, the government used its powers to create a number of institutions to "protect" the citizens from the communists. Inevitably, "protection" led to curtailing civil rights, but these were justified in the name of "safety". After the Red Scare was over, the laws relaxed a bit. But they were resurrected after 9/11. America is now scared to death of Terrorists, not communists, so the government is again pushing it's "safety" measures. But just like last time, "safety" has led to the curtailing of rights of individual citizens. The government, and many citizens, feel that these actions are fully justified in the name of protection.

Plus, the majority of the US Congress, plus the President, are of the same political party (Republican). In the way that the US government is set up, if a party controls these two branches, they are free to pass almost any law they want. That is why there have been so damned many laws passed that Bush and his friends support, but many Americans are against.

i also saw on the news that bush veto stem cell research after it was passed by the senate whatever , this seems to me to be a dangerous departure from democratic process

President Bush has decided that his own personal opinions are more valid than the wishes of the American public. I find this tragic, but unfortunately the veto is sometimes used in this fashion.

looking in from the outside , America seems like a top heavy unhappy place to live ,

It's not too bad, really. I like it here. There are things I hate about America, especially in the last few years, but all in all, things aren't too bad. There are benefits and problems to living here, just like anywhere else.

whatever happened to woodstock and the vietnam war protesters .

They are all at home watching TV. It is my opinion that people these days are apathetic and care more about their weekly sitcoms than about the environment, politics, or humanitarian issues.

hopefully this thread will survive the deletion axe mad swingers

I'm sure this thread won't be deleted. It was good to provoke some thinking.

is america like this because of gun toting christian moralists.

Partly, but I don't think it's that significant. I think the major problem (just my opinion here) are the "cowboy nationalists". By that, I mean the folks that think that America and its interests are the center of the universe, and are willing to shoot you if you disagree with them. They go with their guns blazing into international politics, pissing off allies and attacking their enemies. It just so happens that some gun-toting christian moralists belong to that group, but many don't.

is it likely that there will an ever increasing exodus of young people from America seeking a less prohibitive life elsewhere in the western world

Many young people are starting to move to Canada and other places, or at least talk about it. But in all reality, I don't think there ever will be a real exodus, because there are still jobs and prosperity here.

Jeff_Ricks

22nd July 2006, 08:41 AM

I have just been reading a website were lots of Americans tell stories of very heavy prohabition laws , roadside searches , sniffer dogs and hell knows what else , ironicaly you can walk into a store in America and buy a gun over the counter .
can anybody give me any idea why America has these crazy standards .
i also saw on the news that bush veto stem cell research after it was passed by the senate whatever , this seems to me to be a dangerous departure from democratic process ,looking in from the outside , America seems like a top heavy unhappy place to live ,
whatever happened to woodstock and the vietnam war protesters .
hopefully this thread will survive the deletion axe mad swingers ,
is america like this because of gun toting christian moralists.
is it likely that there will an ever increasing exodus of young people from America seeking a less prohibitive life elsewhere in the western worldUp until about a year ago I was dating a local doctor who told me that several years ago she spent a year in New Zealand working at a hospital there and plans to move back there someday. She loved it there. She's becoming disillusioned with the USA for some of the reasons you state. So she got me thinking that in another 15 years, when I retire, maybe New Zealand is the place to be. Puff, don't you live in New Zealand? Do you like it there? If so, why?

Jeff

helemon

22nd July 2006, 10:43 AM

President Bush has decided that his own personal opinions are more valid than the wishes of the American public. I find this tragic, but unfortunately the veto is sometimes used in this fashion.

Did you see Jon Stewart where he had Bush talking about wanting to create a culture of life in defense of his position on stem cells and then he cut to Bush reporting how many Iraqi civilians have been killed.:duh

I think it was Carlin who commented that Christian Conservatives are fanatical about protecting unborn human life but once the child is born their attitude is, 'Your on your own now kid.'

helemon

22nd July 2006, 03:07 PM

http://en.thinkexist.com/quotes/george_carlin/3.html
“When you're born you get a ticket to the freak show. When you're born in America, you get a front row seat.”-George Carlin

puff

22nd July 2006, 09:19 PM

Puff, I think you bring up some very valid points, and I wonder about them myself. I will do my best to explain my take on these symptoms and phenomena, in hopes that others will do so as well.

The ease of getting guns has to do with the 2nd Amendment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution ) to the US Constitution, which gives Americans the right to bear arms. This is a topic of enormous controversy between those people that think guns perform an important role in our society, and those that thing they are more dangerous than helpful. The truth lies somewhere in between, I'm sure. In other places (such as big cities), guns probably aren't really useful in day-to-day living. Either way, firearms are a very important part of American History, and as such the topic is really very touchy.

The other laws you describe, search and seizure of property, wire-tapping, domestic spy programs, and things like that, first showed up in America during the Red Scare (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_scare) of the 1940's-1950's. America was afraid of communists, big time. Whether or not these fears were well-founded, the government used its powers to create a number of institutions to "protect" the citizens from the communists. Inevitably, "protection" led to curtailing civil rights, but these were justified in the name of "safety". After the Red Scare was over, the laws relaxed a bit. But they were resurrected after 9/11. America is now scared to death of Terrorists, not communists, so the government is again pushing it's "safety" measures. But just like last time, "safety" has led to the curtailing of rights of individual citizens. The government, and many citizens, feel that these actions are fully justified in the name of protection.

Plus, the majority of the US Congress, plus the President, are of the same political party (Republican). In the way that the US government is set up, if a party controls these two branches, they are free to pass almost any law they want. That is why there have been so damned many laws passed that Bush and his friends support, but many Americans are against.

President Bush has decided that his own personal opinions are more valid than the wishes of the American public. I find this tragic, but unfortunately the veto is sometimes used in this fashion.

It's not too bad, really. I like it here. There are things I hate about America, especially in the last few years, but all in all, things aren't too bad. There are benefits and problems to living here, just like anywhere else.

They are all at home watching TV. It is my opinion that people these days are apathetic and care more about their weekly sitcoms than about the environment, politics, or humanitarian issues.

I'm sure this thread won't be deleted. It was good to provoke some thinking.

Partly, but I don't think it's that significant. I think the major problem (just my opinion here) are the "cowboy nationalists". By that, I mean the folks that think that America and its interests are the center of the universe, and are willing to shoot you if you disagree with them. They go with their guns blazing into international politics, pissing off allies and attacking their enemies. It just so happens that some gun-toting christian moralists belong to that group, but many don't.

Many young people are starting to move to Canada and other places, or at least talk about it. But in all reality, I don't think there ever will be a real exodus, because there are still jobs and prosperity here.Hey thats a really in depth answer and thanx ,

we do get heaps of american tv shows so i do see quite a lot about what your talking about .

you know the problem with the we must protect are society from terrorists thing is it can be used with great success to gradually turn society into a police state and eradicate personal privacy and freedoms to the point that a culture of fear is born , it could be that the goverment in the end might inflict more misery on the people than the terrorists , thinking about this , america has had two bad terrorist attacks and one of those was an internal problem with the branch davidians , so really it comes down to one bad terrorist attack from an outside entity
to put this on a pa with other countries , the british suffered about 20 years of terrorist attacks from irish nationilists and are now getting problems with muslim terrorists . however as far as i know this still has not put the american mindset into there society . this may also be true of spain and france .
from an outside perspective looking into America , the idea that guns can be bought at will is just the most insane crazy idea that can be imagined , i would hate to think of the level of tension and fear that would be in the air in new zealand if every other person had a gun , the whole idea that people carry guns around is just so foriegn to us , but of course in the old days guns were normal here to , going back a hundred years or so .
as another thought , i would think that the only place on earth that a religion like moism would take hold , would be A merica , thats why i see a link between guns and religion in america , theres a whole way of thinking there that seems different to other western countries , as america has more guns ,bombs , ships and planes than anybody else , i geuss you could say there may some intrepidation at the kind of ruthless christian evangelism that america now seems to be embracing , it might also be said that christian nationalism in america provokes muslim nationilism elsewhere , perhaps arabs have a reason for thinking of America as a great satan and complicit with israel continually .

i was a bit miffed that when israel started killing innocent civilians in lebanon , Bushes only responce was that israel has a right to defend itself , as long as he keeps saying that you can rest assured that the killing in lebanon of innocent people will continue .
i actually think that despite clintons little sex problems with monica , he was a far better world leader

helemon

22nd July 2006, 10:22 PM

i geuss you could say there may some intrepidation at the kind of ruthless christian evangelism that america now seems to be embracing , it might also be said that christian nationalism in america provokes muslim nationilism elsewhere , perhaps arabs have a reason for thinking of America as a great satan and complicit with israel continually .

i was a bit miffed that when israel started killing innocent civilians in lebanon , Bushes only responce was that israel has a right to defend itself , as long as he keeps saying that you can rest assured that the killing in lebanon of innocent people will continue .

I think religious nationalism of any stripe is scary whether Christian, Muslim, or Jewish. I think Dawkins had it right when he said the trouble with religion is that you can't reason with them. No amount of evidence or consequences will change their mind that they are right.

While I recognize that the Allies as the victors of WWII had some rights to divide up the conquered Arab lands that had sided with Hitler, and the fact that prior to WWII there were no regionally understood nation states in the area, but still I wonder about the wisdom of establishing a religious state by countries who value religious freedom. While Jews may have a long history there so do many other religions. If we want to restore it to its original inhabitants we need to go back to the Cannanites who where there when Abraham and Lot first wandered into town.

I also can't help but wonder how fabulously wealthy that whole region would be if the religious factions could bury their differences and live in a secular society where all religions were tolerated. The area is the cradle of so much history that people of all religious backgrounds and even athiests would likely visit to see the sites.

I recall Arafat saying that if Israel was made a part of a Palestinian state that the Jews would be treated like brothers by the Muslims. I some how doubt that it would be that simple, but at the same time I wonder what would happen if this were to happen and laws were put into place in a constitutional document that prevented the creation of laws that favored members of one religion over another and outlawed the creation of a religious state. The Arab world is not going to give up the idea of Muslim religious states for secular democracies while Israel is basically a religious state. It will continue to be a battle over my God is bigger than your God.

I think you are right about growing American Christian Nationalism. I think the events in the Middle East especialy recently are playing in beautifully to the hands of the armegeddon preachers. It is interesting that the majority of the worlds leaders wanted to demand an end to hostilities, except for the US and Britain. Yes Israel should defend itself but did the US react this way when Muslim radicals kidnapped our soldiers or our journalists? Still Israel has been making numerous concessions recently and this is the thanks they get? I am so glad that the US pushed for those elections so that Hamas could legitimately take control of the Palestinian government.:duh

More great Carlin quotes for the topic:
http://en.thinkexist.com/quotes/george_carlin/2.html
“Fighting for peace is like screwing for virginity” - George Carlin quote

“Religion is just mind control”- George Carlin quote

“A man came up to me on the street and said I used to be messed up out of my mind on drugs but now I'm messed up out of my mind on Jeeesus Chriiist” - George Carlin quote

helemon

23rd July 2006, 07:56 PM

While I recognize that the Allies as the victors of WWII had some rights to divide up the conquered Arab lands that had sided with Hitler, and the fact that prior to WWII there were no regionally understood nation states in the area, but still I wonder about the wisdom of establishing a religious state by countries who value religious freedom.

I guess I am wrong. Israel does guarantee religious freedom. I guess I hear so much about laws favoring the Jews and Jewish control over so much of the government I thought that this was not the fact.

http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2002/13997.htm
Israel has no constitution; however, the law provides for freedom of worship, and the Government generally respects this right in practice.

There was no change in the status of respect for religious freedom during the period covered by this report. The Basic Law describes Israel as a "Jewish" and "democratic" state. The overwhelming majority of non-Jewish citizens are Muslims, Druze, and Christians. Of this group, most are Arabs, and are subject to various forms of discrimination, some of which have religious dimensions. Israeli Arabs, temporary residents, and other non-Jewish Israelis, are, in fact, generally free to practice their religions.

Relations among religious groups--between Jews and non-Jews, between Muslims and Christians, and among the different streams of Judaism--often are strained. Societal tensions between Jews and non-Jews exist primarily as a result of the Arab-Israeli conflict; such tensions increased significantly during the period covered by this report, due primarily to terrorist attacks, mostly in the form of suicide bombings by Palestinians, and Israel Defense Force (IDF) actions in the occupied territories. The terrorist attacks against civilian targets in Israel impeded many aspects of daily life, including religious practice.

So I guess it is more that the Muslims feel they have a divine right to control the land that the allies established for a homeland for the Jews and the Jews understandably not wanting to give up what they believe to be their divinely bestowed homeland.

I thought this was interesting:
Missionaries are allowed to proselytize, although the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) voluntarily refrains from proselytizing under an agreement with the Government.
I guess the Mormons figure they will just convert them after their dead? Or was this part of the arrangement for having baptized all those holocaust victims?

I guess I was part right. It would seem that while Israel claims to promote religious freedom, people who believe in religions other than Orthodox Judaism are discriminated against:
The Government states that it is committed to granting equal and fair conditions to Israeli Arabs, particularly in the areas of education, housing, and employment. However, the Government does not provide Israeli Arabs, who constitute approximately 20 percent of the population, with the same quality of education, housing, employment, and social services as Jews. On a per capita basis, the Government spends two-thirds as much for Arabs as for Jews. Although such policies are based on a variety of factors, they reflect de facto discrimination against the country's non-Jewish citizens.

In civic areas in which religion is a determining criterion, such as the religious courts and centers of education, non-Jewish institutions routinely receive less state support than their Orthodox Jewish counterparts. Additionally, National Religious (i.e., modern Orthodox, one of Israel's official Jewish school systems) and Christian parochial schools complain that they receive less funding than secular schools despite the fact that they voluntarily abide by all national curricular standards. During the period covered by this report, the two groups together took their case for equal funding to the High Court.

Government resources available to Arab public schools are less than proportionate to those available to Jewish public schools. Israeli Arab private religious schools are considered among the best in the country; however, parents often must pay tuition for their children to attend such schools due to inadequate government funding. Jewish private religious schools receive significant government funding. Non-Jews are underrepresented in the student bodies and faculties of most universities and in the higher level professional and business ranks.

Government funding to the different religious sectors is disproportionate. Non-Orthodox streams of Judaism and the non-Jewish sector receive proportionally less funding than the Orthodox Jewish sector. Only 2 percent of the Ministry of Religious Affairs budget goes to the non-Jewish sector. The High Court of Justice heard a case in 1997 alleging that the budgetary allocation to the non-Jewish sector constituted discrimination. In 1998 the Court ruled that the budget allocation constituted "prima facie discrimination" but that the plaintiff's petition did not provide adequate information about the religious needs of the various communities. In May 2000, the same plaintiffs presented a case on the specific needs of religious communities regarding burials. The court agreed that non-Jewish cemeteries were receiving inadequate resources and ordered the Government to increase funding to such cemeteries; the Government began to implement this decision in 2001, though some groups complained that implementation was too slow.
And the article lists more discriminatory behaviors. Which is why it is always best to separate church and state!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!