Posted by Racer on July 15, 2005, at 12:48:23
In reply to Lou's response to aspects of this thread-defam?C, posted by Lou Pilder on July 15, 2005, at 10:02:06
> > > Friends,
> > > It is written here,[...do you feel defamed by this?(Dr. Hsiung suggesting not to read in the first place)...]and [...look into legal recourses...]
> > > Defamation to a person can occur when one is stigmatised. The stigmatization in most jurisdictions to be illegal is not the type of defamation that I feel, although it could be in very spacific situations.
> > > If one put a sign up in front of a fish store owned by a ,let's say, a Vietnamese person, and the sign said something like,[...remember,it is your option not to buy fish here in the first place...], could that be defaming to the Vietnamese shop owner?
> > > But let's go further. Suppose tht sign maker was the Mayor of the town.
> > > Lou
> > >
> > Friends,
> > Now let's get a little deeper.
> > Suppose in the example above, the sign maker of [...remember, it is your option not to buy fish here in the first place...] and then has another sign next to that sign that says something to the effect that [...you could get sick from eating the fish in this store so it could be better for you not to buy in the first place...].
> > Lou
> >
> Friend,
> Now let us go further.
> Suppose in the example here that the mayor of the small fishing villiage allows people in the villiage to post their {official doctrins} of their relgious group in the town square that derides, maligns, and defames Vietnamese people, calling them all manner of filth, ect.
> Then the Vietnamese fisherman complains to the mayor about the postings in the town square, and the mayor says that he will allow the postings and change the constitution of the town from that one can not post defaming posters in the town square to you can if they are quoting your church affiliation's doctrins by putting up a copy of a page from their list of doctrins.
> The Vietnamese happens to be the lone dissenter to this and can not stop the postings that defame him and his family and relatives.
> Then many people go to the Mayor and want the Mayor to expell the Vietnamese fisherman from the villiage. Their argument is that it would be better conducive to civic harmony and welfare if the Vietnamese fisherman is expelled from the viliage.
> Lou
> >
>
>Let's say that a dozen people get sick because they ate shellfish from that one fish shop. Let's say that everyone who got sick from eating that shellfish was ALLERGIC to shellfish in the first place, but they go to the mayor and ask that the mayor close down the fish shop. In response to this request, from the people who are allergic to shellfish, the people who got sick after they CHOSE to eat shellfish, the people who then complained to the mayor that the fish shop owner made them get sick -- in response to this situation, the mayor posts a sign reminding people who are allergic to shellfish that they don't have to buy it from this one shop?
Take it a step farther.
Let's say that the fish shop owner then complains to the mayor that the sign might tend to defame him because he is Vietnamese?
How about we desist from analogies all together, and how about we truly move forward, rather than just saying we want to?
poster:Racer
thread:527818
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20050628/msgs/528040.html