Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Joey wrote:America was formed by religious fanatics who felt like there were too many religious freedoms in Europe, so they wanted their own stricter state.
The idea that you are "freer" than Europe is laughable. Europe invented democracy, we've been doing it much longer than you, and we're better at it.

The US Constitution is the shortest in the world, so I'm pretty sure you could've taken a couple minutes to read it or at least our Bill of Rights before you decided to make some crazy flamebait comment.

He's not kidding, the US constitution is a really short read.

It's not like, say, the Texas constitution. Ugh that thing is a gorram nightmare.

biccat wrote:
Are you unfamiliar with the concept of state sovereignty?

Quite familiar, but I'm more familiar with the fact that the law as written is very different from the law as enforced.

And that the word "America" does not refer, in common (or, really any) parlance, to the federal government of the United States of America.

biccat wrote:
1776 again.

I mean, slaves did really love their ability to vote.

dogma wrote:I mean, slaves did really love their ability to vote.

Oh, are you talking about slaves? Because I'm pretty sure slaves have never been afforded the right to vote.

Well, legal slaves. People illegally held as slaves would have the right to vote I suppose.

Also could you explain your reference to the 14th amendment in your previous post? Women weren't granted the right to vote in Federal elections until the 19th amendment.

biccat wrote:
Oh, are you talking about slaves? Because I'm pretty sure slaves have never been afforded the right to vote.

No, we're talking about black people being prohibited from voting, and their extensive history as slave labor in the United States.

biccat wrote:
Also could you explain your reference to the 14th amendment in your previous post? Women weren't granted the right to vote in Federal elections until the 19th amendment.

You claimed all women in America were allowed to vote in 1861, the 14th Amendment specifies that male citizens shall not be denied the vote.

Since the 19th Amendment was not ratified until 1920, I assumed you knew something that I did not, and so pointed out an amendment that selectively protected male voting rights.

I suppose you might claim that the letter of the federal law did not prohibit women from voting, but that would ignore all the historical context of the law, and so be rather naive. I'm sure you would never behave in that particular manner.

dogma wrote:

biccat wrote:
Also could you explain your reference to the 14th amendment in your previous post? Women weren't granted the right to vote in Federal elections until the 19th amendment.

You claimed all women in America were allowed to vote in 1861, the 14th Amendment specifies that male citizens shall not be denied the vote.

I never claimed all women in America were allowed to vote in 1861, I claimed women were allowed to vote in 1861.

dogma wrote:I suppose you might claim that the letter of the federal law did not prohibit women from voting, but that would ignore all the historical context of the law, and so be rather naive. I'm sure you would never behave in that particular manner.

I don't get it. First you state "the word "America" does not refer, in common (or, really any) parlance, to the federal government of the United States of America" and now you're referring to federal laws. Are you asking "when were women and blacks allowed to vote"; "when were restrictions on women and blacks voting prohibited"; or "when were women and blacks afforded the right to vote in Federal elections"?

The answer to those questions are different.

biccat wrote:
I never claimed all women in America were allowed to vote in 1861, I claimed women were allowed to vote in 1861.

Ah, yes, I was imprecise. My original intention was to convey the meaning of "When was it that all women (That are citizens and not guilty of a felony.) were allowed to vote in America."

biccat wrote:
I don't get it. First you state "the word "America" does not refer, in common (or, really any) parlance, to the federal government of the United States of America" and now you're referring to federal laws.

Again, I was imprecise, I'm quite hungover you see (This is more often the case than many likely know.), my intention was to convey the meaning "The word 'America' does not generally reference only the federal government of the Untied States."

biccat wrote:
Are you asking "when were women and blacks allowed to vote"; "when were restrictions on women and blacks voting prohibited"; or "when were women and blacks afforded the right to vote in Federal elections"?

The answer to those questions are different.

I'm asking the questions "When were all female citizens of the United States not found guilty of felonies allowed (by the government) to vote." and "When were all black citizens of the United States not found guilty of felonies allowed (by the government) to vote."

The thrust of this argument is that the United State has quite the rocky history with what is commonly considered to be democracy.

dogma wrote:The thrust of this argument is that the United State has quite the rocky history with what is commonly considered to be democracy.

Meh, yeah. But Europhiles tend to assume that the entire country is racist and/or sexist mostly thanks to the actions of the Democrat party.

Women and blacks were allowed to vote in some states well before we amended the Federal constitution. Our lateness in Federal voting rights doesn't mean that the US was late in coming to the Sufferage movement.

biccat wrote:

Joey wrote:America was formed by religious fanatics who felt like there were too many religious freedoms in Europe, so they wanted their own stricter state.
The idea that you are "freer" than Europe is laughable. Europe invented democracy, we've been doing it much longer than you, and we're better at it.

I lolled. Seriously.

You do know that the United States separated from England when it was ruled by a monarch, right?

A constitutional monarch as head of state above a bicameral legislature mostly presided over by elected civil servants adhering to a constitution and common law upon which your nation's is based? Yeah, we know. Why do some Americans persist with peddling the myth that 16th century Britain was an absolute monarchy? It's absolute nonsense. the British were, at the time, the most free people on earth - it is the perception that American colonists weren't receiving these very freedoms that caused the revolt (...a free born Englishman ought not to be ashamed nor afraid to see or speak to any man living...). Well, that and good old-fashioned greed on the part of the American merchant class...

Things that are deliberatly offensive like racism, sexism, sectarianism etc should indeed by regulated, and indeed they are. Being allowed to go about preaching that everyone that doesn't believe in what you do should be punished is right either. Now supporting these things should be a criminal offence, but using them as examples to represent how they are wrong shouldn't be. Things that are difficult to regulate like idiots in the street shouting racist comments (there may not be police available) may not be so effectively controlled, but I don't think that organisations should be able to get away with it-ie churches preaching that those who do not follow them will go to hell or that people shouldn't ahave the same rights as everyone else just because of their sexual orientation (ie the army, and I recall one of the American Republican Party candidates had being against this as one of his key points). In the case of the US I find it ridiculous that people can get away with saying outrightly things like "Muslims shouldn't be trusted/are all terrorists" (not quoting anyone obviously), and this is in the bloody media, all because they have a right to freedom of speech. Not to say that we don't have idiots like that in the UK-the Sun newspaper being an example, though they used to be a lot worse-, but from my owned scewed view I don't percieve it as being as blatant as in other countries. =/

dogma wrote:No, we're talking about black people being prohibited from voting, and their extensive history as slave labor in the United States.

As I understand it the US has never disallowed black citizens (who qualify in all other areas) to vote. Slaves (of any colour) could not vote because they were not citizens and later illiterate blacks could not vote just like illiterate whites. Illiterate whites were demographically more likely to have citizens as grandfathers who were eligible to vote but the law never specified race or colour.

Now I understand the subtext but no US law specifically denied blacks the vote. I'd be interested to see if any voting law (Federal or State) of which I am unaware specifically mentions race or colour.

biccat wrote:
Meh, yeah. But Europhiles tend to assume that the entire country is racist and/or sexist mostly thanks to the actions of the Democrat party.

Yes, stereotyping is fun. As you've clearly noticed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

George Spiggott wrote:
Now I understand the subtext but no US law specifically denied blacks the vote. I'd be interested to see if any voting law (Federal or State) of which I am unaware specifically mentions race or colour.

No voting law that I'm aware of, but the black codes and Jim Crow laws contained many provisions designed specifically to restrict the ability of blacks to vote. This is where the concept of democracy as the holding of regular, free and, fair elections comes in.

Honestly, Americans have been free for ages,im stunned that some of the right wing types still seem obsessed by it. Freedom this and freedom that.. why?!

I feel freer in Europe. In England I can get pissed easier, cross the street where I like, and the cops in England are way more pleasant than the American ones. We got pulled over and I went to get out of the car like I always go and go "alright lads!" and she said "WHAT THE HELL?! ARE YOU TRYING TO GET SHOT?!"

Seriously, America is a great place to live and I would never bash it or say I would be unhappy moving over here again, and sure its pretty free. But If I had to pick one I say England is more free and I feel less likely to be harrassed by the establishment there than I do in the States. Seaward might be able to pluk some nonsensical fact out of the air about state sponsored Religion or whatnot, but the point is I FEEL free and content. I think Americans have more rules and regulations than we do.

I think the reason they crow on about freedom so much is so that people believe it. Some Americans really do seem to think that the USA is the only free place you can follow your own agenda, and in Europe we walk around fearing the establishment like in North Korea.

If you still think that chaps, I suggest you get a passport and go to Europe. In England its easier to cross the street, get a bet on, get a pint, and get a jazz mag. The cops dont act aggressively and nobody has a gun if they do. In real terms, that makes me feel more free than the fact that the Queen is the head of the church. And If you feel free, isnt that enough?

And dont even start me on the other nations.. where 13 year olds can buy beer and you can get a topless hand shandy off a hooker whilst eating space cakes.

Plus, all the cameras make it easier to make amateur porn on the nearest street corner.

dogma wrote:No voting law that I'm aware of, but the black codes and Jim Crow laws contained many provisions designed specifically to restrict the ability of blacks to vote. This is where the concept of democracy as the holding of regular, free and, fair elections comes in.

Yes we both understand that, but there is a difference in terminology from say South African Apartheid legislation that allows one to say that black US citizens have never been explicitly denied the vote and, on paper, for that statement to be factually correct; if somewhat disingenuous.

dogma wrote:Plus, all the cameras make it easier to make amateur porn on the nearest street corner.

That too.

As I said though, I think you guys are obssesed with the whole thing so your media goes on about that stuff. I feel free, the camera thing is something the Americans have an issue with, but you dont notice them, they dont look into your house, and if they are right outside the pub so there is less chance of someone smashing a pint glass in my face im more than happy with it.

I mean, people like glassing you here, we need some kind of deterant!

Yeah, you're definitely right about Americans having an obsession freedom. The camera thing, in particular, has cropped up a few times recently.

This thing where Americans pretend that in their country there is greater freedom to say what you want is nonsense, and worse, it's boring nonsense.

Every democratic, free country values free speach, but every one of them understands that it is not an absolute right, and that in certain situations those rights are limited by other factors. In many places in Europe, for instance, your ability to make racial slurs is heavily restricted, while in the US obscenity laws are much tighter, and even today pornographers can be prosecuted for distributing material showing acts between consenting adults.

None of that makes one country more free than the other. All it does is show how complicated a concept like 'freedom' really is. But no-one seems to want to think about that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Joey wrote:America was formed by religious fanatics who felt like there were too many religious freedoms in Europe, so they wanted their own stricter state.
The idea that you are "freer" than Europe is laughable. Europe invented democracy, we've been doing it much longer than you, and we're better at it.

You're not better at it, you just do it differently. Just like Americans are silly when they think they're country is the most free ever, so are any Europeans that claim the same.

Both the US and Europe place limits on extreme forms of speach, reflective of their cultures.

LoneLictor wrote:

Joey wrote:America was formed by religious fanatics who felt like there were too many religious freedoms in Europe, so they wanted their own stricter state.
The idea that you are "freer" than Europe is laughable. Europe invented democracy, we've been doing it much longer than you, and we're better at it.

The US Constitution is the shortest in the world, so I'm pretty sure you could've taken a couple minutes to read it or at least our Bill of Rights before you decided to make some crazy flamebait comment.

Why the hell are Americans so obsessed with their constitution? It is the laws of the government that are important, not a piece of paper written a few hundred years ago.
Fact is, the colonials were annoyed at the British because the British parliament ensured religious plurality (to an extent) and was overtly anti-slavery.
The American colonists were opposed to tolerance of Catholics, Jews and certain Protestant sects, as well as being fiercely pro-slavery.
Hmm the Bill of Rights...where have I seen that before?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_of_Rights_1689
I'm struggling to think of anything that WAS allowed when the US was independant that was NOT when it was colonial.

sebster wrote:
None of that makes one country more free than the other. All it does is show how complicated a concept like 'freedom' really is. But no-one seems to want to think about that.

sebster wrote:
You're not better at it, you just do it differently. Just like Americans are silly when they think they're country is the most free ever, so are any Europeans that claim the same.

Well said.

sebster wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

Joey wrote:America was formed by religious fanatics who felt like there were too many religious freedoms in Europe, so they wanted their own stricter state.
The idea that you are "freer" than Europe is laughable. Europe invented democracy, we've been doing it much longer than you, and we're better at it.

You're not better at it, you just do it differently. Just like Americans are silly when they think they're country is the most free ever, so are any Europeans that claim the same.

Both the US and Europe place limits on extreme forms of speach, reflective of their cultures.

By almost all measures, Europe is much freer than the United States.
As matty has said, we have no jaywalking laws, which frankly is the stupidest law ever made. There are also more rights for homosexuals, the drinking age is younger, we have a larger political choice, our executives have less power (your president is essentially an elected dictator, our prime minister has no power at all without the legislature).

TheGateway wrote:Yawn,

Please try to troll less obviously

America was formed by people who wanted the ability to practice their own religion without being persecuted for it.

That's a thing people get taught in school but it's basically garbage. The Puritans were a Protestant sect, and the Protestants won in England, they were the dominant religion, and held the crown and had their church tied directly to government. The Protestant majority wasn't hunting down Puritans for being part of their own faction - that doesn't make any sense.

No, the actual issue was that the Puritans were unhappy with where the Reformation had ended, and felt that too much freedom was granted to the Catholics in England. They also had a problem with the monarch being considered the highest power, believing the highest power is God, and these two pressures created considerable instability and unrest. This led to a movement to start a new, purer country in America, as an example to the rest of Europe.

Upon arriving in the US the Puritans were not tolerant of other religions. Look at what they did to the poor Quakers.


There's also the issue that the Puritans are greatly overstated in their relevance to the founding of America. They were neither the first, nor the largest group of immigrants.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

dogma wrote:When was it that America allowed women to vote?

I don't think you want to go down this route, because then New Zealand becomes the first democracy, and I really don't want that to be true.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

mattyrm wrote:That too.

As I said though, I think you guys are obssesed with the whole thing so your media goes on about that stuff. I feel free, the camera thing is something the Americans have an issue with, but you dont notice them, they dont look into your house, and if they are right outside the pub so there is less chance of someone smashing a pint glass in my face im more than happy with it.

I mean, people like glassing you here, we need some kind of deterant!

It's worth noting that lots of British people really hated those cameras and thought they were the worst thing ever and totally part of the rise of an Orwellian police state... until the riots happened and they were really useful in catching people

I'm convinced that Joey goes out of his way to find the most ridiculous stance to take, then rigorously defend it at all costs.

sebster wrote:
I don't think you want to go down this route, because then New Zealand becomes the first democracy, and I really don't want that to be true.

That's what happens when the men spend all their time romancing sheep.

AustonT wrote:I'm convinced that Joey goes out of his way to find the most ridiculous stance to take, then rigorously defend it at all costs.

uhhh?
Literally no idea what that means. What "rediculous" stances do I take?

Joey wrote:By almost all measures, Europe is much freer than the United States.
As matty has said, we have no jaywalking laws, which frankly is the stupidest law ever made. There are also more rights for homosexuals, the drinking age is younger, we have a larger political choice, our executives have less power (your president is essentially an elected dictator, our prime minister has no power at all without the legislature).

That's not all measures. It isn't even close to all measures.

Nor could anyone possibly list all measures, or determine which ones are more important, because that requires a completely subjective judgement. I mean, how would you objectively determine whether the freedom to say whatever hatefilled crap you want is more important than the freedom to live without ever hearing anyone disparage your race or religion, or incite violence against it? How would you objectively determine if the freedom to make and view whatever disgusting, degenerate crap you want is more important than the freedom to move through a society without being exposed to that kind of material?

You can't objectively determine it. Instead you go with the values of your society, which is why most people think their country has got it right, and most other countries have got it wrong and are less free.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

dogma wrote:That's what happens when the men spend all their time romancing sheep.

Joey wrote:

sebster wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

Joey wrote:America was formed by religious fanatics who felt like there were too many religious freedoms in Europe, so they wanted their own stricter state.
The idea that you are "freer" than Europe is laughable. Europe invented democracy, we've been doing it much longer than you, and we're better at it.

You're not better at it, you just do it differently. Just like Americans are silly when they think they're country is the most free ever, so are any Europeans that claim the same.

Both the US and Europe place limits on extreme forms of speach, reflective of their cultures.

By almost all measures, Europe is much freer than the United States.
As matty has said, we have no jaywalking laws, which frankly is the stupidest law ever made. There are also more rights for homosexuals, the drinking age is younger, we have a larger political choice, our executives have less power (your president is essentially an elected dictator, our prime minister has no power at all without the legislature).

Our President is an elected Dictator? You are aware that his main powers are vetoing bills and appointing ambassadors and that Congress CAN ALWAYS OVERRIDE HIM. Congress includes 535 different elected officials by the way, since I bet you think Congress is a Dictator too. Again, read the Constitution, which is our main law thingy and can't be overridden and all US Politicians fap to it, before you bad talk the US. You don't know anything that you're talking about at all.

LoneLictor wrote:Our President is an elected Dictator? You are aware that his main powers are vetoing bills and appointing ambassadors and that Congress CAN ALWAYS OVERRIDE HIM. Congress includes 535 different elected officials by the way, since I bet you think Congress is a Dictator too. Again, read the Constitution, which is our main law thingy and can't be overridden and all US Politicians fap to it, before you bad talk the US. You don't know anything that you're talking about at all.

The point is more in his control of the executive, the President is granted considerable powers that are, in practice, outside the control of congress. Simply by directing the Attorney General to concentrate on one type of crime and not on another he's exercising immense power.

The point, though, is that such power is inherent in just about every elected senior executive position in any form of government, whether you call that position Prime Minister or President, and what keeps it in check more than anything is cultural understanding about what the limits of power ought to be, and the electoral repercussions for overstepping.

Joey wrote:
Why the hell are Americans so obsessed with their constitution? It is the laws of the government that are important, not a piece of paper written a few hundred years ago.
Fact is, the colonials were annoyed at the British because the British parliament ensured religious plurality (to an extent) and was overtly anti-slavery.
The American colonists were opposed to tolerance of Catholics, Jews and certain Protestant sects, as well as being fiercely pro-slavery.
Hmm the Bill of Rights...where have I seen that before?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_of_Rights_1689

You know this is absolute drivel, right? Maryland was formed by Catholics, Pennsylvania by Quakers. The colonies were commercial enterprises. The Puritans get overplayed in history classes, especially, apparently, British history classes. They weren't the first over here - that would be Jamestown, in Virginia - nor were they anywhere near the most influential - that would again be Virginians.

I'm struggling to think of anything that WAS allowed when the US was independant that was NOT when it was colonial.

Well, voting for your representatives, for one.

Seaward wrote:You know this is absolute drivel, right? Maryland was formed by Catholics, Pennsylvania by Quakers.

One of the important parts in understanding the inclusion of seperation of church and state in the Constitution is that it wasn't just driven by a call for tolerance among all men in religion, it was because there were a lot of different religious groups in the US (well, all various stripes of Christianity but they certainly saw each other as very different) and if it came down to battling over which faith was going to win it wasn't at all clear who was going to come out on top. Better to just make sure I get to believe however I want and let the heretics burn.

There was, of course, a wonderful core of people who really did believe in letting people believe whatever they wanted. But they were by no means a majority.