Thu, 3 September 2009  Jamye returns as co-host.Of all the Jackass comments we have ever quoted on this show, this week's Jackass Of The Week is has said the worst--hands down. Good news from lawsuits in Kentucky and Colorado. One of the funniest ranting emails we have reported on in quite some time. News from Pakistan, and it isn't good. The Ultra-Orthodox in Jerusalem are at it again. No more blue jeans for school girls in Gaza. Your emails. And much, much more. Comments[11] |
Your take on free speech seems a bit skewed to me. Please understand that I am a very strong supporter of free speech in every way but one -- public hate speech. People should certainly be free to say whatever they like in the privacy of their homes or within *private* assemblies such as church. But when someone is out on a public sidewalk shouting hateful vitriol at people for things they cannot change (ie. race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, disability, or whatever), this is a form of harassment and bullying which is not only offensive, but also damaging to a persons sense of safety and well being, not to mention detrimental to a peaceful society. This kind of speech is never protected in workplace environments -- for good reason -- and is mostly regulated in educational institutions. Goes to show that free speech has limits, even in the United States.
Ohayo Gozaimasu (good morning) from Japan. Just finished listening to this episode and had a few comments. First is on the word Thanksgiving. The jackass (though not the official jackass-of the-week) had a point about Thanksgiving being directly or indirectly connected with Christianity. It is God and the Christian god who is being referenced here. Thanksgiving has an irrefutable historical origin even if the veracity of that origin is in question. I have thought this before and wondered if the holiday could not be renamed Turkey Day or Gobble Gobble day instead. Point #2. The word "redneck" is in fact not a term of denigration--at least not among rednecks. "Hick" and "hillbilly," them's fightin' words but not "redneck." But the guy sounds like a real jerk to me. Another point and this is not specific to Dogma Free America but I am surprised that you have never mentioned the religious connections to the word "holiday." It doesn't take an etymologist to see that this comes the phrase "holy day" and should also be offensive to secularists. But I have never seen or heard this point addressed. Anyway, keep up the good work. Love the show.
We had a elderly street preacher for many years here in Canberra. He would stand in Garema Place (which is a busy pedestrian area in the main shopping district) with a megaphone and dressed in a kilt. Yes he was Scottish with a heavy Scottish brogue. Combined with his cheap megaphone it was impossible to understand a word he said. I haven't seen him for a while so maybe he is dead?
This is a reply to "m" who has left a comment objecting to "hate speech in public." Given the choice I would much rather see "hate speech" in the streets, out in public, exposed for all to hear and see: I want to know what these hate-filled clowns are up to so that they can be monitored and so that they can serve as a bad example to healthy people. The last place "hate speech" should be is in private, where it is hidden and secret. In fact I think the USA government should encourage "hate speech" and set aside public places where hate-filled nutcases can go and spew their insane rage and ire in public--- because I want to see them ridiculed, shamed, mocked, and reviled. Freedom of expression has limits (slander, libel, etc.) but I just cannot see "hate speech" being a threat to anyone when it is open, visible, and exposed; I do see it harmful when it is hidden. And as for "hate speech" itself, anyone who is offended by words is not a grown-up, and should mature the fuck up.
posted by: Desertphile on Fri, 9/4 10:32 PM EDT
In reply to: Point #2. The word "redneck" is in fact not a term of denigration--at least not among rednecks. "Hick" and "hillbilly," them's fightin' words but not "redneck."
--------------------------------------------------
Actually I come from Texas, arguably the home of more rednecks than any other state, so in this case I'm speaking from my experience. Redneck *within this context* would definitely be seen as a pejorative. The word itself doesn't carry the same connotation used in a different context, ie: among friends. But in this man's email it was certainly not meant in a complimentary way.
--------------------------------------------------
Actually I come from Texas, arguably the home of more rednecks than any other state, so in this case I'm speaking from my experience. Redneck *within this context* would definitely be seen as a pejorative. The word itself doesn't carry the same connotation used in a different context, ie: among friends. But in this man's email it was certainly not meant in a complimentary way.
posted by: Jamye on Sat, 9/5 10:23 AM EDT
@ Desertphile:
Where do you think hate speech will go after it and those shouting it are ridiculed, shamed, mocked, and reviled enough times? It/they will go private ... The same place it will go if outlawed and penalized. So why not just cut through the chase and spare people the unnecessary prolonged abuse?
As for "anyone who is offended by words is not a grown-up, and should mature the fuck up" ... I am betting that you have never been on the receiving end of hateful vitriol, bullying, harassment and intimidation or you would think differently. Hate speech is far more than mere words.
Where do you think hate speech will go after it and those shouting it are ridiculed, shamed, mocked, and reviled enough times? It/they will go private ... The same place it will go if outlawed and penalized. So why not just cut through the chase and spare people the unnecessary prolonged abuse?
As for "anyone who is offended by words is not a grown-up, and should mature the fuck up" ... I am betting that you have never been on the receiving end of hateful vitriol, bullying, harassment and intimidation or you would think differently. Hate speech is far more than mere words.
I have to comment/object to Rich's remark regarding EEOC. Rich didn't really say why he distrusted the EEOC and so I can't really comment on that other than to ask "Why?".
Let me first preface the next paragraph by stating that one of my collateral duties (or side job) with the Department of the Interior is EEO counselor. With respect to Rich's remark about the EEOC's overreaction: EEO Counseling is, first and foremost, an informal process with the goal of getting the aggrieved party and the accused party together to hash out their differences. Most of the time this is what happens. Several criteria are required for the aggrieved to even be eligible to lodge a complaint (i.e., they must be one of several "protected classes") All attempts are made to settle differences WITHOUT legal proceedings. Litigation is seen as a last resort and the aggrieved has a very high burden of proof to meet for them to win a case. It is my assumption, and it may be a big one, that the EEOC works in much the same manner when dealing with public cases like the one you related on show #101.
Finally, I enjoyed the 100th episode. These things can turn out to be VERY lame "Seinfeld" and "Skepticality" 100th shows immediately come to mind but yours was good.
Let me first preface the next paragraph by stating that one of my collateral duties (or side job) with the Department of the Interior is EEO counselor. With respect to Rich's remark about the EEOC's overreaction: EEO Counseling is, first and foremost, an informal process with the goal of getting the aggrieved party and the accused party together to hash out their differences. Most of the time this is what happens. Several criteria are required for the aggrieved to even be eligible to lodge a complaint (i.e., they must be one of several "protected classes") All attempts are made to settle differences WITHOUT legal proceedings. Litigation is seen as a last resort and the aggrieved has a very high burden of proof to meet for them to win a case. It is my assumption, and it may be a big one, that the EEOC works in much the same manner when dealing with public cases like the one you related on show #101.
Finally, I enjoyed the 100th episode. These things can turn out to be VERY lame "Seinfeld" and "Skepticality" 100th shows immediately come to mind but yours was good.
I love the show and have been listening since the beginning. I often cringe when you are describing the awful things people do in the name of religion. This episode had me cringing several times however because of your pronounciation of the city, Petosky. I am a former Michigan resident and there is "NO R" in Petosky. Listening the Petrosky was worse than the southern dialects attempted.
posted by: Sparky4Peace on Tue, 9/8 10:10 AM EDT
I noticed the Petosky thing, too. Also, it turns out that the Freedom From Religion Foundation may have gotten the board to reverse their decision with a threatening letter. Check out their latest podcast. Love your show, guys, but they are totally vigilant and love to send threatening letters.
"Hate speech is far more than mere words."
Oh, good bloody gods.
Oh, good bloody gods.
posted by: Desertphile on Wed, 9/23 07:54 PM EDT
Post your comment:
