Secret Santa 2024
Originally Posted by MintCat View Post
Well, one would think so, Zelda.
The quote goes on about how "We reject any attempts to create division and marginalisation", and one could only think that they're referring to the Muslim comment, which got way out of hand and taken out of context.
Nevertheless, despite the hundreds of thousands of people who are so "oh! i disagree with you, so i don't think you should be allowed an opinion! yadda yadda yadda", the government really has no valid reason for banning him.
You'd think our main focus would be to actually control immigration, rather than put all our focus into one guy who's ironically trying to do just that, but that's just my opinion.

I'm pretty sure if you real the full quote it will give a very different impression, I imagine it will real more like "Yeah we know Trump is a knob-head racist, but we can't just ban political candidates because we dislike them".
Good morning sweet princess
Honestly, I dislike Donald Trump. But should he be banned? No, of course not. That's pretty stupid. It isn't like he will be in power over in the United Kingdom. But could he be banned? According to this, and to what their government is saying, he just may be.
Originally Posted by MintCat View Post

This whole thing reminds me of George Orwell's 1984. If Trump is denied access into Britain, then what is free speech? Surely if this decision is made, it will only provide America with the greater desire to actually vote for Trump (which I personally wouldn't mind).

How exactly does this remind you of 1984? Yeah, the country of Oceania was in control of "Big Brother" and all, but there was absolutely no freedom there. You couldn't even have sex. Which is why Winston and Julia were taken into custody and what not. Was literally warBut I don't think it would get like that here.

Are you comparing it to how they hate Goldstein and had the 2 Minutes Hate? If so, I can see how the two can be similar. I was just confused on what was similar between the two.

"Dear reader, I hope this email finds you before I do."
I feel like it is worth making the distinction between freedom of speech, and what Trump is doing. Freedom of speech is saying "In my opinion we should bar Mexicans and Muslims from entering the USA." whereas I'm pretty sure Trump is straight up claiming that he will bar Mexicans and Muslims from entering the USA. You are free to say that you think someone should be shot. If you go around telling people you are going to shoot someone then that is less acceptable and hopefully law enforcement would step in to try to stop that from happening. If Trump just had opinions then that would be fine, but he also has intentions to go through with them to a certain extent, and that is something we can try to stop without taking away free speech.
Good morning sweet princess
Originally Posted by Zelda View Post
I feel like it is worth making the distinction between freedom of speech, and what Trump is doing. Freedom of speech is saying "In my opinion we should bar Mexicans and Muslims from entering the USA." whereas I'm pretty sure Trump is straight up claiming that he will bar Mexicans and Muslims from entering the USA. You are free to say that you think someone should be shot. If you go around telling people you are going to shoot someone then that is less acceptable and hopefully law enforcement would step in to try to stop that from happening. If Trump just had opinions then that would be fine, but he also has intentions to go through with them to a certain extent, and that is something we can try to stop without taking away free speech.

Saying is definitely different than doing, but yes, he acts as if he is actually going to completely kick Muslims out of the United States, which I think is ridiculous.

Freedom of Speech: The right to express any opinions without censorship or restraint.

Muslim people who were born here or are citizens of the US shouldn't have to submit to that kind of fate, but he doesn't care. Any Muslim shouldn't. There just needs to be better background checks for when anyone comes to the US.

I was recently reading about Trump being able to take away citizenship from national born citizens, and that it does say under the 14th amendment that you are granted citizenship if born in the US, but also says "subject to jurisdiction [of the U.S.]". Which is more complicated than it could be. Regardless, Trump has to deal with this, and acts of congress if he even wants to do this.

In conclusion, I don't think he will be elected, and if he is, I don't think he will be allowed to just throw US citizens who are Muslim (don't know if he feels the same about Mexicans when it comes to this) out of the country.

"Dear reader, I hope this email finds you before I do."
Originally Posted by WeooWeoo View Post


Are you comparing it to how they hate Goldstein and had the 2 Minutes Hate? If so, I can see how the two can be similar. I was just confused on what was similar between the two.

Bingo.
Obviously, the likenesses aren't completely identical, but the progression of politics seems to be going in the direction of what Orwell originally predicted, which I find to be worrying.

Originally Posted by Zelda View Post
I'm pretty sure Trump is straight up claiming that he will bar Mexicans and Muslims from entering the USA.

Originally Posted by WeooWeoo View Post
he acts as if he is actually going to completely kick Muslims out of the United States, which I think is ridiculous.

2:24




Also, I'd rather not debate the definition of free speech. Yes, it's important to understand it, but I remember a similar thread to this one literally turned to shit because people couldn't make their minds up about terminology, etc.
Last edited by MintCat; Jan 2, 2016 at 04:57 PM.
Originally Posted by MintCat View Post
Bingo.
Obviously, the likenesses aren't completely identical, but the progression of politics seems to be going in the direction of what Orwell originally predicted, which I find to be worrying.

Yeah, that is pretty worrying. Orwell has already gotten multiple things correct as it is. Telescreens, and what not.

"Dear reader, I hope this email finds you before I do."
Originally Posted by Ele View Post
Yes, just as you are free to say that Hitler was right, other people are free to ridicule you. Freedom of speech means you can say whatever you want and, as an extension of that, you're free to destroy your reputation. I think we all realise that. As the UK enshrines this freedom of speech they're not about to stop Trump from entering their country (even if 500k slacktivists sign a petition).

Fun fact, doing the Nazi Salute in Germany gets you in prison.

Free speech is free when it doesn't piss someone off.

There's this thing called the 'consent of the governed' which basically says that in return for protection of liberties, you lose some freedom. Every single government has some form of this civil contract, America and the UK included. So what happens if a large amount of populace (500k) wants something to happen? Well, the government takes that into account, as it's part of the civil contract that liberties are protected, including the protection against racism and against slander.

In an ideal world, freedom of speech is 100%. In a utopia. Welcome to real life.
goodbye cruel world
regardless of "free speech" what will this ban actually achieve? We already know that a large community of the UK dislike Trump as with every other country, why do they need to ban him?
oxisudofrenohypoglycemolicodin
Originally Posted by Note View Post
Fun fact, doing the Nazi Salute in Germany gets you in prison.

Free speech is free when it doesn't piss someone off.

You can make that argument but it's still not going to change the fact that the UK won't be stopping Trump from entering the country because 'Oh in Germany you can't do this + look, slander laws'. Trump's talking shit, yeah, but there's no justifiable reason to deny him entry into the country (as the UK govt. has already said).
i support donald trump only because i don't live in america
It's stupid to think that there's even the slightest possibility of this happening because if he ever does get elected president (which is more likely than some of you might like to think) it would be too nonsensical to bar the 'leader of the free world' from another one of the leading advanced economies in the world.