Should heavy metal be banned?

[The South Falls]

Good idea. It will popularize antireligious sentiment and motivate enough people to implement state atheism and leagues of militant godless.

Excuse me. I have a religion. Please don't lump me -- or all other people with a faith -- in with this idea.

I think banning heavy metal is ridiculous, anti-freedom, completely unnecessary and -- as the only studies produced to date (by me) have shown heavy metal potentially beneficial -- possibly harmful to the people who enjoy it.

This is making censorship palatable for the people. It doesn't make sense.

It's not making censorship more palatable to me.

Censorship of art, music, literature or film is bullshit.

Don't like it, don't listen.

Moralists and priests are not placed to judge secular music.

It's supposed to be bullshit. More people should see it that way.

[Monsters and Humans]

First internet licenses? And now this mess?

NS summer never fails to make my brain cells die from all these stupid threads.

[The Parkus Empire]

I think banning films and television that promote shit values would be more effective. We could do without le dog of fence street and men and their fraction

[Nucego]

Good idea. It will popularize antireligious sentiment and motivate enough people to implement state atheism and leagues of militant godless.

Excuse me. I have a religion. Please don't lump me -- or all other people with a faith -- in with this idea.

Not lumping you in, just thinking what the reaction to such a thing would be like. All some people need is a justification and then churches would burn and the religious would suffer, whether they agree or not. It would then inspire reaction on the other side and before you know it, it's a ping pong match with a bomb as the ball.

I think banning films and television that promote shit values would be more effective. We could do without le dog of fence street and men and their fraction

How'd you punish the breachers of said ban?

[The Parkus Empire]

How'd you punish the breachers of said ban?

Fines for the theaters and television channels.

[The Free Joy State]

Excuse me. I have a religion. Please don't lump me -- or all other people with a faith -- in with this idea.

Not lumping you in, just thinking what the reaction to such a thing would be like. All some people need is a justification and then churches would burn and the religious would suffer, whether they agree or not. It would then inspire reaction on the other side and before you know it, it's a ping pong match with a bomb as the ball.

No, that's a fair point. I read the tone differently before.

But, what you say is true. If all the leaders of the western world had a collective brainfart and decided to implement this, having all your music (or anything, really) judged by a panel of ultra-fundie religious-types straight out of Hayes-era Hollywood would be enough to make most tolerant atheists intolerant and most liberal religious people (minimally) agnostic.

People wouldn't take it lying down.

[The Batavia]

I think banning films and television that promote shit values would be more effective. We could do without le dog of fence street and men and their fraction

How about no

[Andsed]

I think banning films and television that promote shit values would be more effective. We could do without le dog of fence street and men and their fraction

And who will decide what are shit values?

[The Parkus Empire]

I think banning films and television that promote shit values would be more effective. We could do without le dog of fence street and men and their fraction

How about no

I think yes, Hollywood and TV exert enormous influence on our culture, nothing wrong with expecting a little responsibility.

[The Parkus Empire]

I think banning films and television that promote shit values would be more effective. We could do without le dog of fence street and men and their fraction

And who will decide what are shit values?

A board of moral experts (I mean religious leaders, that can include atheist religious leaders).

[Andsed]

And who will decide what are shit values?

A board of moral experts (I mean religious leaders, that can include atheist religious leaders).

So what your basically saying is we should censor shows because of what religious and atheist leaders think? What about political beliefs those will surely be censored as well with this idea.

[The Free Joy State]

A board of moral experts (I mean religious leaders, that can include atheist religious leaders).

So what your basically saying is we should censor shows because of what religious and atheist leaders think? What about political beliefs those will surely be censored as well with this idea.

I generally find with people who banner-wave for the censorship of the arts, as long as it's not their ideas or political beliefs, they're generally not concerned.

EDIT: People who cheer for artistic censorship never think their ideas will be caught in the purge.

[Xmara]

And I thought the peak of NS summer was the guy with the internet license idea...

This would just be impractical to implement, not to mention just plain ridiculous.

[Nearly Finland]

Nope. It's a type of music, there's gonna be good stuff and bad stuff. I happen to listen to a lot of super-fun metal, like Alestorm's pirate songs - heck, I've even heard a good polka song once. It's arguable that banning pineapple pizza might be a better idea.

[The Parkus Empire]

A board of moral experts (I mean religious leaders, that can include atheist religious leaders).

So what your basically saying is we should censor shows because of what religious and atheist leaders think? What about political beliefs those will surely be censored as well with this idea.

Because of what religious leaders think. There are no nonreligious moral experts. But some religions, like Buddhism, are atheistic.

Political beliefs being censored in film and TV shows is of no consequence (this is supposing worst case scenario), since they're nothing but privatized propaganda in the hands of a small wealthy elite.

[Side 3]

This is ridiculous. Let's say that hypothetically metal should be banned. If we do that, then genres like rap and standard rock will also have to be banned, as they will be the next most violent music genres. Then we'd have to ban pop, because it encourages partying and drinking. Patriotic music encourages war, and would have to be banned. Blues could lead to depression, and would be banned. Soon, we'd be all out of music to listen to.

[Xmara]

This is ridiculous. Let's say that hypothetically metal should be banned. If we do that, then genres like rap and standard rock will also have to be banned, as they will be the next most violent music genres. Then we'd have to ban pop, because it encourages partying and drinking. Patriotic music encourages war, and would have to be banned. Blues could lead to depression, and would be banned. Soon, we'd be all out of music to listen to.

What about Gregorian chants and Tibetan throat singing?

[Nucego]

How'd you punish the breachers of said ban?

Fines for the theaters and television channels.

Okay, so it's only gonna cost a little more to display popular shows. Big deal. They'd still get their money with ol' Parkus getting a cut. Then what?

Not lumping you in, just thinking what the reaction to such a thing would be like. All some people need is a justification and then churches would burn and the religious would suffer, whether they agree or not. It would then inspire reaction on the other side and before you know it, it's a ping pong match with a bomb as the ball.

No, that's a fair point. I read the tone differently before.

But, what you say is true. If all the leaders of the western world had a collective brainfart and decided to implement this, having all your music (or anything, really) judged by a panel of ultra-fundie religious-types straight out of Hayes-era Hollywood would be enough to make most tolerant atheists intolerant and most liberal religious people (minimally) agnostic.

People wouldn't take it lying down.

As they shouldn't. There will be grave repercussions for anyone in support of such motion. Society will get its retribution from being unnecessarily and unfairly stepped on.

And who will decide what are shit values?

A board of moral experts (I mean religious leaders, that can include atheist religious leaders).

It's a good thing the people can just march in, grab the fuckers by the balls, throw them in the garbage where they belong and threaten against further attempts.

[The Free Joy State]

So what your basically saying is we should censor shows because of what religious and atheist leaders think? What about political beliefs those will surely be censored as well with this idea.

Because of what religious leaders think. There are no nonreligious moral experts. But some religions, like Buddhism, are atheistic.

No. No. No. Just no.

Religious leaders do not have the right to dictate the shape of the entertainment industry to atheists. One religion does not have the right to dictate the shape of the entertainment industry to another. One denomination does not have the right to dictate to another. One person does not have the right to dictate appropriate music, books or films to another.

People can watch, look at, listen to, and read whatever the bloody hell they want.

If you don't like it, walk out of the room!

EDIT: And as for "no nonreligious moral experts"; I've personally met atheists who are more moral than many of the Christians I've known. Atheists may have more taste than to brand themselves a moral expert, but religion =/= morality.

[Otira]

No, music should be open to free expression.

If weed is banned, why shouldn’t heavy metal be banned? It promotes a culture of anger, rage and nihilism that is harmful.

Weed shouldn't be banned.

[His Excellence]

Critics of heavy metal almost entirely rely on knee jerk reactions, acting like songs focused on unsavory subjects are commending what they're actually denouncing, or pretending that bands like Mayhem are the norm instead of an extreme outlier. Too much stock is being taken on how harsh and angry the music sounds, over what's actually making the band angry.

Attempting such a ban just sounds like a really sad attempt at trying to police peoples' emotions and expression of ideals, which if successful (and that's a big IF) would inevitably roll downhill into some We Happy Few territory where nobody's allowed to express any amount of discontent with the immorality of others.

Until the world is a perfect place where nobody hates each other, makes bad decisions, or is alienated for being different, the genre will continue to act as an outlet for musicians and fans alike.

Edit: on further thinking, weed is actually more relevant here than I'd initially considered, given that the Nixon administration (supposedly?) only criminalized it so they could wage war on anti-war hippies. Government does something that people disagree with, then outlaws whatever will give themselves carte blanche on silencing dissent.

[The Parkus Empire]

Fines for the theaters and television channels.

Okay, so it's only gonna cost a little more to display popular shows. Big deal. They'd still get their money with ol' Parkus getting a cut. Then what?

No, that's a fair point. I read the tone differently before.

But, what you say is true. If all the leaders of the western world had a collective brainfart and decided to implement this, having all your music (or anything, really) judged by a panel of ultra-fundie religious-types straight out of Hayes-era Hollywood would be enough to make most tolerant atheists intolerant and most liberal religious people (minimally) agnostic.

People wouldn't take it lying down.

As they shouldn't. There will be grave repercussions for anyone in support of such motion. Society will get its retribution from being unnecessarily and unfairly stepped on.

A board of moral experts (I mean religious leaders, that can include atheist religious leaders).

It's a good thing the people can just march in, grab the fuckers by the balls, throw them in the garbage where they belong and threaten against further attempts.

Increase the fine until they're deterred.

[The New California Republic]

Religious leaders do not have the right to dictate the shape of the entertainment industry to atheists. One religion does not have the right to dictate the shape of the entertainment industry to another.

Yes. All this talk of "moral councils" deciding which music should be banned is absolutely ludicrous. It is similar to something that Saudi Arabia and Iran has.

[The Parkus Empire]

Because of what religious leaders think. There are no nonreligious moral experts. But some religions, like Buddhism, are atheistic.

No. No. No. Just no.

Religious leaders do not have the right to dictate the shape of the entertainment industry to atheists. One religion does not have the right to dictate the shape of the entertainment industry to another. One denomination does not have the right to dictate to another. One person does not have the right to dictate appropriate music, books or films to another.

People can watch, look at, listen to, and read whatever the bloody hell they want.

If you don't like it, walk out of the room!

EDIT: And as for "no nonreligious moral experts"; I've personally met atheists who are more moral than many of the Christians I've known. Atheists may have more taste than to brand themselves a moral expert, but religion =/= morality.

The nonreligious don't have moral experts. That's not my fault.

[Nucego]

Okay, so it's only gonna cost a little more to display popular shows. Big deal. They'd still get their money with ol' Parkus getting a cut. Then what?


As they shouldn't. There will be grave repercussions for anyone in support of such motion. Society will get its retribution from being unnecessarily and unfairly stepped on.


It's a good thing the people can just march in, grab the fuckers by the balls, throw them in the garbage where they belong and threaten against further attempts.

Increase the fine until they're deterred.

And when they stop paying the fine altogether?