Germany imposes ban on Tom Cruise

[Iron Greasel]

Originally posted by ladyzekke: Tom Cruise and Scientology both creep me out. Oh, and I heard Germany changed it's mind and will let him in to do his movie.

Good. You can't go around banning opinions just because they're wrong.

[Yorick]

Originally posted by Iron Greasel: quote: Originally posted by ladyzekke: Tom Cruise and Scientology both creep me out. Oh, and I heard Germany changed it's mind and will let him in to do his movie.

Good. You can't go around banning opinions just because they're wrong. [/QUOTE]Oh sure, we can't ban wrong things like murder, fraud, assault, theft, etc. All results of antisocial opinions.

Or can we?

A society is allowed to determine what elements it wants to encourage and what it doesn't. You're doing the exact same thing in your statement. The values shift, the methodology doesn't.

[Iron Greasel]

Yorick, those are acts, not opinions. You can still, in quite a few countries, claim that murder is sometimes acceptable. Or preach against copyright laws in radio.

Oh, and I'm not trying to say that Germany can't ban scientology (or Tom), or that someone should do something hideous to it if it does, only that I don't think it should. Maybe I could have expressed it more clearly.

[Yorick]

Originally posted by Iron Greasel: Yorick, those are acts, not opinions. You can still, in quite a few countries, claim that murder is sometimes acceptable. Or preach against copyright laws in radio. Oh, and I'm not trying to say that Germany can't ban scientology (or Tom), or that someone should do something hideous to it if it does, only that I don't think it should. Maybe I could have expressed it more clearly.

Proselytising is an act too, not an opinion. As is writing a cheque for all your money. What action is divorced from an underlying opinion? Only reactive reflexes. Murder is the result of an opinion that ones actions are somehow in some way justified, and that the victim's life is somehow expendable, and that the act needs to occur. (To satisfy vengance, protection, entertainment, business... whatever)

Point being that opinions and actions are hard to divorce, but that what society should have every right to ban is things which result in the said society destructing or individuals being harmed.

You cannot protect some without infringing on the rights of others. It's a balancing act.

AMERICA traditionally encourages FREEDOM TO DO.
Whereas Europe has traditionally encouraged FREEDOM FROM.

The two emphasis often collide, as to be free from drunk drivers, you lose the freedom to drink and drive.

So people from either culture should take care when criticising the other as being "not into freedom", and ask "which freedom?"

Germans apparently want to be free from oppressive and damaging pseudo-religious bodies harming their society again. Americans apparently want to be able to practice whatever religion they want whenever they want. Both values have historical roots and are understandable given the past experiences of each culture.