News   Jan 15, 2025
Flemingdon Park Sees 39-Storey Tower-in-the-Park Infill Proposal
 327     0 
News   Jan 15, 2025
News Roundup for January 15, 2025
 414     0 
News   Jan 15, 2025
Winter Delivery
 602     1 

Cannons in Toronto

Observer Walt said:
Not up to your usual standards, Supremo. I don't know anyone who approves of war, and wouldn't really want to know such a person. But I have no problem with displaying artifacts that speak to our history. It's as valid as preserving historic buildings, displaying thousand-year-old artworks in museums, etc. It's part of what has made us what we are. And what penises, homosexuality, etc. have to do with this is well beyond me.
Click to expand...

:) this has nothing to do with my opinions. i like the cannons and i support my tax dollars going to maintain them. i think they are cool.

i'm just pointing out what the PC police, such as beez could start with their agenda. i'm also pointing out his hypocrisy. he complains in one thread that the government shouldn't be funding things that might display situations deemed offensive to some sects of the population.
 
Yeah, this Cannon might be offensive to some sects of the population
lawrencecannon.jpg
 
Prometheus The Supremo said:
not mixed up at all. people can find cannons offensive. why should tax dollars be spent to maintain them and why should they be displayed on public lands? maybe there are some in the public that disagree with the violence that cannons represent. they are after all weapons. is this a message we want to send to our children? that it's okay to fire cannons at an opposing population? why should their tax dollars be spent on displaying or maintaining things they morally disagree with?
Click to expand...
Ah...I got it. Okay, then, you're perfectly free to push and persuade the city to remove the cannons, if you find them offensive or morally disagreeable. If you get sufficient people to support you and your position, by all means, the city will listen and likely remove them.
Prometheus The Supremo said:
i'm just pointing out what the PC police, such as beez could start with their agenda. i'm also pointing out his hypocrisy. he complains in one thread that the government shouldn't be funding things that might display situations deemed offensive to some sects of the population.
Click to expand...
No hypocrisy here, the people should get to decide through their elected representatives what should be funded, and if sufficient numbers of them find movie subjects, historic artifacts, or anything else offensive, well, then, that's got to have some weight on policy making. This is how we obtain hate speech legislation, in that sufficient numbers of people deemed something in the public realm as offensive, and lobbied to have legislation enacted to regulate it. If you want to get rid of cannons, or anything else for that matter that you deem offensive, you simply need to build a consensus and promote the action you want to occur. That's how we got environmental regulations, for example, through public pressure on policy makers. The same will happen with racy movie topics, adult bookstores, uhm....cannons, if you can get enough people to back you.

And I'm certainly not the PC police, just one man with an opinion, nothing more.
 
Prometheus The Supremo said:
beez, have you learned the lesson of the story yet?
Click to expand...
You're looking for a debate, or trying to convey something, AFAIK, on morality, discretionary public finding based upon debatably outdated morality, and cannons.

Instead, I'm telling you that the public can decide what morals it wants, and if the majority deems that cannons or racy films are offensive, it can have the public funding removed, and have the cannons scrapped, and the films forced on the open market.
 
and if the majority deem that giving women the ability to vote is immoral or wrong, we should ban them from voting? what if the majority of people wanted women to wear burkas?

governing a nation in the right direction takes alot more than just mob rule.
 
Prometheus The Supremo said:
i'm just pointing out what the PC police, such as beez could start with their agenda. i'm also pointing out his hypocrisy. he complains in one thread that the government shouldn't be funding things that might display situations deemed offensive to some sects of the population.
Click to expand...

Regardless of whether or not people find it offensive our history is our history. To erase our bad moments in history is to polish over our wrongdoings. To erase our good moments is to forget those who we should be proud of. Was Beez talking about erasing history in another thread or something?
 
Prometheus The Supremo said:
and if the majority deem that giving women the ability to vote is immoral or wrong, we should ban them from voting? what if the majority of people wanted women to wear burkas?

governing a nation in the right direction takes alot more than just mob rule.
Click to expand...

To be a good dictator or person it might take more but mob rule is exactly what runs a democracy. A good leader might be able to steer public opinion but if he is unable to steer their opinion then he doesn't get elected and his view of right and wrong no longer matters regardless of whether his point of view is more morally correct. What is actually right and wrong take back seats to what is publicly decided to be right and wrong in a democracy. It is up to people to provide convincing arguments on their point of view and to try and sway opinions.

As an example look at the abortion issue. I think you would find close to 99% of people believe a one month old human baby should be considered a human life under the law and a human sperm which hasn't fertilized an egg yet should not be considered a human life under the law. So almost everybody agrees that somewhere between those two points a full human life under the law has been created but there is wide disagreement at which point that occurs. Some will believe it is instantaneous at conception, some believe it is instantaneous at birth, some believe it is somewhere in the middle, and some will believe that responsibilities for that human life will exist outside that period. Morality is a point of view.

I am guessing that you have a disagreement with Beez about criteria used for federal funding for art or movie development. Personally I am against censorship of media which is not illegal. Showing crime in a movie is fine by me if crime isn't obviously being promoted or committed in the making of the movie. Now federal funding is an entirely different thing since federal funding isn't censorship, it is prioritization of where tax dollars are spent. Some people will take offence to tax being spent on any non-necessity, some will find certain forms of art to be a worthwhile expense, and some will find any form of art a worthwhile expense but even then the amount of the total budget would be in debate. Personally I would hope that there are some criteria for which art gets funded. I would seriously hope that "Debbie Does Toronto Backdoor Style 5" isn't going to get federal funding. I am fine with such a movie existing, but please do not spend our tax dollars on it.
 
EnviroTO said:
Regardless of whether or not people find it offensive our history is our history. To erase our bad moments in history is to polish over our wrongdoings. To erase our good moments is to forget those who we should be proud of. Was Beez talking about erasing history in another thread or something?
Click to expand...

no, it has nothing to do with history. it has to do with public funds paying for things that portray violence and public funds being spent on things that people object against and how beez is against that.
 
EnviroTO said:
To be a good dictator or person it might take more but mob rule is exactly what runs a democracy. A good leader might be able to steer public opinion but if he is unable to steer their opinion then he doesn't get elected and his view of right and wrong no longer matters regardless of whether his point of view is more morally correct. What is actually right and wrong take back seats to what is publicly decided to be right and wrong in a democracy. It is up to people to provide convincing arguments on their point of view and to try and sway opinions.


I am guessing that you have a disagreement with Beez about criteria used for federal funding for art or movie development. Personally I am against censorship of media which is not illegal. Showing crime in a movie is fine by me if crime isn't obviously being promoted or committed in the making of the movie. Now federal funding is an entirely different thing since federal funding isn't censorship, it is prioritization of where tax dollars are spent. Some people will take offence to tax being spent on any non-necessity, some will find certain forms of art to be a worthwhile expense, and some will find any form of art a worthwhile expense but even then the amount of the total budget would be in debate. Personally I would hope that there are some criteria for which art gets funded. I would seriously hope that "Debbie Does Toronto Backdoor Style 5" isn't going to get federal funding. I am fine with such a movie existing, but please do not spend our tax dollars on it.
Click to expand...


Re: mob rule -this is why we need an educated society. a democracy is only as good as its people or else it's garbage in and garbage out as carlin would say.

Re: exactly. these films are not promoting anything.

Re: porn doesn't need federal funding. it makes enough money on it's own.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top