Posted on 04/30/2012 1:11:36 PM PDT by JSDude1
Christian groups in South Korea called on Friday for pop icon Lady Gaga to cancel her concert here saying it was “pornographic” and promoted homosexuality. South Korea’s government has already bowed to public pressure and banned under-18s from attending the 26-year old’s concert, but protesters gathered outside the venue said that was not enough. “Some people can accept this as another culture but its impact is huge beyond art and debases religions. Even adults can’t see her performance which is too homosexual and pornographic,” said Yoon Jung-hoon, a reverend who organized the “Civilians Network against the Lady Gaga Concert”.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
Who said Christians can’t protest? Did you read my thread, or did you listen to those words in your head again? Protest the concert all you want. Jump up and down, wear little ribbons, cheer, chant, bang drums ... knock yourself out.
However, when the Gov’t steps in and enforcs Censorship, Conservatives are usually concerned. You see, the difference is pretty basic. You can protest, and I can opt to either listen, or not listen. I have a choice.
But, when the Gov’t imposes a decision- you have crossed into the stuff that makes Dictatorships. Perhaps you are unaware of how this works? Dictatorships dictate what you can watch, what you cannot watch, and what you must watch. You don’t get a choice.
We have sense enough to know (at least sometimes) the cure to bad speech is good speech not less speech. Yeah Lady Gaga is nasty and annoying, but if we start banning stuff because somebody finds it nasty and annoying we all wind up having to shut up.
A tasteless, no talent hack does not “porn” make.
Let the weirdos have their show. Least you’ll know where they are for a few hours.
SnakeDoc
Ditto. There are innumerable awful acts out there. But I have no business telling other adults they can't watch them.
When the concert occurred last Friday, it was restricted to adults.
The Korean Media Rating Board, a government agency, deemed the concert’s content provocative, pornographic and supporting of homosexuality.
Although people see it as absolutely stupid, I love comedians who mess with peoples heads. Andy Kaufman was the all time best. I got almost every video that guy ever made. "I am the intergender wrestling Champion of the woorld!"
One of my favorites was when he interviewed his ex-girlfriend from atop a 10 foot high desk so he could feel superior to her. .
Freedom means you have the right to do what you want, even if it is short-sighted and stupid.
***
Decades of “short sighted and stupid” have given us the “government” we have.
Just as my neighbor should not be doing drugs, they shouldn’t be pumping their mind full of filth, and then voting for filth.
Fine, call it smut. And by all means, as a parent YOU have a duty to censor what YOUR children see. But YOUR rights end where mine begin. Just because you don't approve, doesnt' mean that everyone else must agree with you.
Or, are you so blind that you cannot see that this mindset can be perverted with the same threat of force as you feel justified using today. If you can Censor Lady Gaga - then someone else can Censor you tomorrow; under the same threat of force. Today, it's Lady Gaga, what will it be tomorrow? Will it be your church? Will it be your political party? Will it be your viewpoints?
Well said, sir!
Still wish our culture has as much sense as the Koreas as still being for purity and against pornography and homosexuality.
Can’t argue with that can you..?
I am a conservative, not a libertarian maybe that’s the difference between you and I.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You nailed it. Hodar is the typical FR liberal screaming and ranting about censorship and dictatorships simply because we conservatives would dare express a desire our country - our society - AND EVEN OUR GOVERNMENT return to basic fundamental conservatives rules and laws that 1)our country was founded on and 2) rules and laws that made America great.
But hey. If Ho wants to go gaga over Gaga, then that’s his right. Just as my right is voting for candidates who oppose his ideals and supporting laws that promote sane fiscal and social policies.
I think her music’s a lot more interesting than most of the stuff that’s out there. She’s paying real homage to the passion of the ‘70s and the spunk of the ‘80s. Her best songs are miles above most of the boring junk out there...the whiny male singers, the emptyheaded bubble gum pop stars and the cliched romantic ballads. When you throw in her visual presentation, you can see she’s operating at a notch above her competition on a creative and artistic level. And you can see those extra layers of work in her music as well. She’s doing for pop music something like what Quentin Tarantino did for films.
I’ll skip it because it’s a bad ripoff of Madonna.
In other words, she's completely ripping them off....a fake copy of Madonna.
Culture-wise, I agree 100%. If the American culture were similar to Korea's, Lady Gaga would be bankrupt. But the difference is, because no one would bother to buy her act or her records, not because her 'act' was destroyed by some Goverment bureacracy that will eventually be used to oppress all of us. Again, this is about 'Control', not about defending the young - that's merely the excuse.
I find her to be only mediocure in talent.
But, when you have Gov't injecting itself and imposing Censurship - I disagree. Freedom means the ability to make a choice - even if it's a stupid choice.
It does not mean "you can make a choice as long as I approve of your choice".
You certainly have the right to decide what your children see. But what gives you the right to decide what other partents can let their kids see? I've never been to an LG show, buy I have seen some of her productions on tv. They are suggestive, but hardly "porn". LG is not my cup of tea, but she is clearly a very talented singer/songwriter/artist. If a parent wants to let their teenager see her show that's their business.
All that's missing is the fake British accent.
You have no concept on what our Gov’t was founded on. The Bill of Rights says what the Gov’t CANNOT do. You are constantly inventing rationale for the Federal Gov’t to take away the very freedoms you think you hold dear. You are the person who insists that what people do in their bedroom, is indeed, somehow YOUR business.
You are a power-hungry tryant, who luckily for mankind, has been denied the power to control others. I suspect you have a rough enough time managing your own affairs. Trying to dictate what eveyrone else does, is not, never was, and will never be your job.
Get over yourself.
You are the person who insists that what people do in their bedroom, is indeed, somehow YOUR business.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ahhh. I see you remember my old tagline. (Yes, as a matter of fact, what you do in the privacy of your bedroom IS my business.)
Anyway, I’m glad you are happy at the sorry state our country is in now. High taxes, high unemployment, higg welfare levels, high levels of porn, abortion and promiscuity... on and on we go with the failures of social liberalsim. I’m glad you’re happy - because YOU are at fault.
And me and conservatives like me? We just want our country back.
Libertarianism is generally considered to be the group of political philosophies which emphasize freedom, individual liberty, and voluntary association. Libertarianism is variously defined by sources. There is no general consensus among scholars on the precise definition nor on how one should use the term as a historical category. Libertarians generally advocate a society with little or no government power.
New Liberalism is a book by Matthew Kalkman[1][2][3][4] that examines the evolution of Liberalism from its early beginnings to its potential future incarnations. The author argues that New Liberalism is the next step in this evolution: the notion that, in order for a society to be maintained and to evolve, it is necessary to take into account our responsibility to future generations. The key challenges of our time, from climate change to the growing debt and deficits, and the growing inequalities all threaten not only our freedom, but the freedom of future generations. Where classical liberalism was centered on negative freedom (freedom from harm), and social liberalism was centered on the broader concept of positive freedom (freedom to develop), new liberalism adds a further dimension with the concept of timeless freedom (ensuring the freedom of future generations through proactive action taken today).
In conclusion - there is very little in common with a modern-day "Liberal" and a "Libertarian". Here's a hint: Democrats are typically "Liberals".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.