Joey Vento Is Right, This Is America, Speak English

*sigh*

It's "Swahili" thank you very much. Sango nini?

I've been to a NY Deli, I've actually been to that little soup Nazi place based on the Seinfeld character across from the Public Library with the lions.

 

thank you.

 

Oh for Pete's sake. This isn't about "either-or" fallacies we are talking about when it comes to offensive literature or hate speech or what have you in the face of Freedoms of Expression and the rights thereof. It's dramatic to think that because something like "taking down a sign because it was deemed offensive by the courts" = the impossibility of free thought and expression of independent political opinions.

There are rarely only two options. It's not realistic to suggest that "either we pass the new school bond issue or we condemn our children to a life of illiteracy." A company demand that employees accept a wage reduction or face losing their jobs ignores other solutions to the firm's financial problem.

I have fundamental problems with the American Constitution and what it means to have "Free Speech" in the country.

And it's not the cornerstone of democracy to codify the right to Free expression 100% into a staple of regulating human behaviour and into an indoctrinated list of allowances hundreds of years before racism was no longer common place. That is essentially one of my main points.

You say it's democratic to target groups of people, I say it's injustice.

 

I'm not trying to attack you in any way. I'm just trying to show you the flaws in your argument.

 

how is speak english if you want to be served properly ? i cant understand you and your costing me money so step aside while i make a dollar and serve this man while your trying to figure out what or how to order!!
being racist or hateful?

 

The sign said "This is America, When ordering, Please speak English." If the workers in the restaurant speak English, and the customer doesnt, how would he be able to order anyway? If they couldnt speak english, they wouldnt even be able to read the menu. Maybe all restaurants should be required to have menus for every language in the world and keep a translator who speaks every language. Come on, its rediculous.

 

there's just one problem. english is NOT an "american" lanugage!

if someone wants to have a problem with none indiginous lanuguages then let them speak a REAL one, whatever it might happen to be, indiginous to where they are standing. in new york i don't know but i'm guessing, that would be one of the languages of the indiginous six nations the land there was swindled and robbed from.

hardly anyone knows how to speak them? fine. its about time everyone started learning to.

=^^=
.../\...

 

So you believe that any language that is spoken first in a given region should be the official language? By your logic, English is not even an English language, because the Celts were there before the Normans. Maybe they should all speak Gaelic. Maybe all Italians should speak Latin. Maybe people in the middle east should speak Aramaic. There are very few places in the world where the language spoken is the original language of the region.

The fact is, whether or not the law states it specifically or not, that English is the American language. Our declaration of independence, our constitution, and our laws are written in English. Why should we change from what seems to have been sufficient for hundreds of years?

 

*bangs head on desk*

That's exactly what I am talking about. I believe in the courts, the judicial system to set a precedent. I understand how the law works, thanks. Maybe you will want to read my previous posts to see that is what I've been talking about for the past couple weeks in this particular thread.

What I was saying, was that it is possible for the courts to deem this man's sign as offensive, ask him to remove it, and no other cases would essentially be affected by this decision, because other rights to expression are still upheld in the Constitution.

Okay, let me explain. Let's hypothetically assume that the case went the other way and the courts did find it that Mr. Vento had to take down his sign. That wouln't necessarily mean that ALL people would have to take down their politically charged signs across the country, no.

If you believe that everything is a direct and rigid precedent in case law and has no authority from the constitution, you are widely mistaken.

(That's my point from yesterday)

It's not as if I'm harping by Mr. Vento winning his case it's going to mean that everyone is going to be putting up politically charged signs like "Blacks in the Back" or "No Jews Welcome" and "Mexicans are Stupid" because this case has set a precedence to all other similar cases - and asserts a person's right to say whatever they want to people in any circumstance.

It's the contents and subject of the message that is either deemed to be unconstitutional or constitutional. In my opinion, the courts should have ruled that it was unconstitutional that a person can put up such an offensive sign, but as you can see, the American Constitution is designed to uphold certain values and characteristics of social behaviour in your country. Mainly Liberalistic values.

 

still explain to me how a sighn that says ( this is amarica speak english is offencive???
what particular group is that sign refering too? i dont thik that why he put up the sihgn has any thing to do with his right to put it up as mutch as i donnt think that you saying i cant or shouldent put up one similar ! this is amarica the languag that we speak is english if you REFUSE to learn it then have a nice day! im in a lunch rush and dont have time to learn your language! get it??

 

and yes i have been to philly and newyork andqubec and a whol lot of outher places to ive worked with latinos that pretend to not understand what is being said and worked with outhers that are the hardest workers ive ever met if you want to live here and get the sandwich you want learn or at least make an attempt at learning ENGLISH !

 

How can you tell when someone is or isn't making an attempt to speak English when they can't speak it?

EDIT: spelling

 

This argument is beginning to remind me of trench warfare. We have been arguing for quite some time, but neither side is going anywhere fast. I have attempted to answer all of your arguments with my own but you have ignored several of the main questions i have raised. It is difficult to argue logically with someone when the premise of their argument is largely based on emotions instead of facts. I think we can both see that neither of us is going to change our opinion anytime soon. So, i will end with some relevant quotes from great minds.

If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all. ~Noam Chomsky

I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. ~Voltaire

The populist authoritarianism that is the downside of political correctness means that anyone, sometimes it seems like everyone, can proclaim their grief and have it acknowledged. The victim culture, every sufferer grasping for their own Holocaust, ensures that anyone who feels offended can call for moderation, for dilution, and in the end, as is all too often the case, for censorship. And censorship, that by-product of fear - stemming as it does not from some positive agenda, but from the desire to escape our own terrors and superstitions by imposing them on others - must surely be resisted. ~Jonathon Green,

If all mankind minus one were of one opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind. ~John Stuart Mill, On Liberty, 1859

 

Good god man! You even misspelled "America"...TWICE! In all your fighting to be able to speak English you've managed to consistently butcher its written form. I'm having trouble even reading this it's so grammatically flawed. I understand that nobody's perfect, but in the context of your position in the thread it's just sort of ironic.

Sorry, please continue with your debate for which I'm purely a fence-sitter (though it seems to have fizzled out for the most part).

 

This argument is beginning to remind me of trench warfare. We have been arguing for quite some time, but neither side is going anywhere fast. I have attempted to answer all of your arguments with my own but you have ignored several of the main questions i have raised. It is difficult to argue logically with someone when the premise of their argument is largely based on emotions instead of facts. I think we can both see that neither of us is going to change our opinion anytime soon. So, i will end with some relevant quotes from great minds.

If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all. ~Noam Chomsky

I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. ~Voltaire

The populist authoritarianism that is the downside of political correctness means that anyone, sometimes it seems like everyone, can proclaim their grief and have it acknowledged. The victim culture, every sufferer grasping for their own Holocaust, ensures that anyone who feels offended can call for moderation, for dilution, and in the end, as is all too often the case, for censorship. And censorship, that by-product of fear - stemming as it does not from some positive agenda, but from the desire to escape our own terrors and superstitions by imposing them on others - must surely be resisted. ~Jonathon Green,

If all mankind minus one were of one opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind. ~John Stuart Mill, On Liberty, 1859[/QUOTE]Dear Jesus, I'm going to bed.

I'll leave you with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms under the Canadian Constitution for shits and giggles:

http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/

 

Thank you for censoring my post. Again you ignored the majority of what i wrote and cut out part pf it, and then made a claim that:

quote"Yeah, sure. So by that logic, what you are saying is that people are going to be putting up signs that say "NO BLACKS" or "This is America, please don't practice Islam" ad nauseum everywhere across the country since a case can open the floodgates for thousands of cases." endquote

Well, in the part of my post that you so conveniently left out of your quote, I already stated the clear distinction between discrimination based on race or religion, which is illegal under the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and asking someone to "please" order food in English in your restaurant, which is not illegal, and in my opinion, not very offensive. If you were in France and saw a sign in a small French restaurant that said "please speak French when ordering," would you be so offended? Besides, if the person ordering didnt speak English then he wouldnt be able to communicate with the restaurant staff anyway or even read the menu for that matter. Not to mention the very people that you say the sign is offensive to wouldnt even be able to read the sign, as its written in English.

 

in what way is that not the same logic that is pretended to being supported?

facts are a mythical beast. this one tantamount to an urban legend.

hundreds of years of denying thousands! (possibly tens of thousands, nine to eleven thousand for sure in most places)

=^^=
.../\...

 

^ This is America, When replying to my posts, please speak English.

 

Mhm. Now you are making more things up.

This is what the sign says, not what you are saying it says in your posts:

 

You ever see 56 Pages of the Indian Act underneath the strings of Ojibwa-Anishinabeg beads?



English continues to be the language of the Oppressor.