Boxes of Lady Gaga's new album were intercepted at the airport by Lebanese authorities. They are currently deciding whether to censor the albums for "offensive" content to Christians, or ban it altogether.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/babylon … non-l.html
Shaky Lebanon's 17 offically recognized religious groups include Muslims, Druze and various Christian denominations. They're all pretty thin-skinned when it comes to religious references -- and the law errs on the side of banning anything potentially inflammatory. Music that refers to religious figures or Israel is directly censored by the Lebanese General Security in a joint effort with the Ministry of Information.
Any decision to ban the album would be in accordance with Article 75 of the 1962 Lebanese Law for distribution of print media, which states that, “Distributors are prohibited from circulating media that diverges from public decency and morality, or is at odds with nationalistic or religious beliefs."
A Christian leader is telling it like it is.
“If they are going to offend us we are going to cancel the album," said Father Abdo Abu Kassm, director of the Catholic Information Center. "We will not accept that anyone insult the Virgin Mary or Jesus or Christianity. We have dignity. Call us traditional, call us backward, call us whatever you want. We will not accept it."
The case has already stirred outrage among Lebanese who think the country would be better served if officials spent their time forming a government or fixing the country's dilapidated electricity network than poring over Lady Gaga's lyrics in search of racy innuendos.
You just can't make this stuff up.
Good for Lebanon if they want to ban Lady Gaga. We bend over backwards trying to get on the right side of celebrities, like they're special because they're famous. It's sick making. Would you put up with someone coming into your town square and selling dirty pictures to your children? It's the same thing.
Putting celebrities in their place is correct--I agree with that. But not for the wrong reasons. There are legitimate limits to speech, but this isn't one of them, just because some nut will take "offense." If every time somebody "took offense" to something somebody said or sang we banned it, we wouldn't have very much speech!
I think its legitimate in this case. She's selling a brand not presenting a respectful argument. If some fellow gets out his wang in a public place, (which pretty much sums up her shows) he can't use the excuse, 'hey, it's a free country'. It's bad manners if nothing else.
So what if she's selling a brand? If your problem is with her performances, that is of course a different issue altogether. I'm sure there is an age limit to get into most of her live performances, like with many artists.
The issue at hand here is censoring the music. There's nothing visual. And moreover, you seem to be forgetting just why they are considering censoring it--it's not because it's in bad taste or lewd; it's to protect various religious symbols from "offense." That is not responsible limitation of free speech; it is cowardice in the face of people (Christians in this case) who take themselves and their religion far too seriously.
When it comes lewdness, there are a number of measures that can be done to limit children's access to it, such as parental notifications on the CD.
You are mistaken. There wouldn't by any free speech; there is always someone, somewhere, that will take offense. It's why the country has so embraced the whole silly PC concept - someone somewhere might take offense.
Some things are offensive, no matter the pc spin YOU put on them.
You know---like how your crowd hates the burning of the flag.
Do you stand up for that free speech?
Yes, of course. "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
Flag burning is detestable, but that is never a reason to limit free speech.
How about that preacher who burned the Quran?
Lots of Americans were happy with him!
No Islam Center near Ground Zero...where's their freedom?
The preachers action was stupid in the extreme, designed to gain notoriety for his edifice to God (and, undoubtedly more income to it) but he had a right to do it.
Muslims certainly have a right to build on ground they own, limited only by local building codes.
How many instances of censorship will you choose before you realize that you are not allowed to be the God of censorship? That you cannot determine what others say or hear? Before you understand that if you are allowed to perform such censorship that others have exactly the same right to determine what you can see or hear whether you like it or not?
They do it all the time.
Pledge of allegiance, in kindygarden--I was forced to say the Lord's Prayer.
In God we Trust, So Help me God...it's everywhere!!
That country has the right to not invite Gag-me in.
As she has insulted their people.
She insulted me, and I'm not even religious.
I just find her offensive to the max, and if we don't allow a mosque to be built because it's "too sensitive" a subject....then who are we to point the finger at another country?
What was done to you in kindergarten was reprehensible and disgusting. It is also extremely common and practiced by the same type of people that would censor; ie those that know what is best for others. In no way is it free speech, rather it is the opposite of it.
Yes, the country had a legal right to bar Gaga. They did not, however, have the ethical right if there was even one person that wanted a record.
I did not know that laws had been passed to prevent the construction of that "mosque". If it was simply public pressure from people saying they didn't want it, well, that is an excellent example of free speech. They spoke, even though the words were obnoxious (at least to me) and their words were effective. That they thus denied the rights of the islamic center people is immaterial as far as free speech goes - the center still had the right to build there and chose not to.
We can't force our idea of free speech on another country. Besides, how much more free speech do you want? I've seen the size of the Hustler empire. The desire to free everything regardless has the effect of enslaving people too. Pornography has always been around, but when you make it available everywhere people's appetite for it grows and grows like a tapeworm. Censorship to certain degrees is also about freedom.
You can't force it on another country, but there is no reason to defend it, either. I want as much free speech as we can get. Because it is disgusting or perverted in your opinion is never a reason to limit it.
LMC, just above, would limit it to no flag burning. You would limit it to no pornography. Someone else would limit it to no speech against religion. Once started there is no end to the limits as someone somewhere can always be found to believe that any speech is offensive and should be censored.
I didn't say no flag burning!! Republicans always do! IE: your side of the aisle.
There is plenty that you don't give free expression to.
AND--you do it in the name of Patriotism.
Not so, LMC - I make a poor republican, believing that govt. needs to stay as far away from peoples lives as possible. I also make a poor democrat, believing that govt needs to stay as far away from peoples wallets as possible. I suppose that makes me your enemy in these forums.
If I mistook your statement on flag burning, I apologize.
Is that all this is - an attack on someone you perceive to be in the opposite political party without any actual consideration as to the ethics behind your statements? Or do you truly believe that "Some things are offensive, no matter the pc spin YOU put on them" and that those things just happen to be the very things you consider offensive and therefore are worthy of censorship?
Yes I do!
If Obama says he is a Christian, I think those who keep saying he's Muslim should be fined!
If Gag-a-thon offends people, let them keep her out!
And if I don't want to stand and say the Pledge...leave me alone!
All my life I am forced to do what others say...is that censorship?
FINE! Then I will not raise my right hand, so help me god.
I will not stand and say the pledge, and I will say what I want in public.
oooops--Stern tried that.....FINED. Out you go.
Great! We are in agreement, then. You should not have to do what others say you should. You should be able to say what you want in public. You should not have to "so help you god". I am in wholehearted agreement. If someone slanders Obama then yes, they should be fined - that one is a clear violation of free speech rights.
Now can you explain why anyone else should do what you want them to do? Why people should not be able to buy a Gaga record (outside, of course, the fact that it is legal for the govt. there to impose their will as they see fit - we are speaking of ethical, not legal rights)?
That some of the people there find Gaga offensive is not a reason that she can't sell records to those there that don't find her offensive. That type of action is exactly what you are complaining about happened to you - why would you deny the rights you are so vehement about to anyone else?
We have not had much free speech for a long time!
Let her try to do a show in Iran or Saudia Arabia, if they allow it, then I will believe in free speech being allowed.
i totally agree with you, the young minds grasp things faster so they shouldn't be exposed to such corruption. they are the leaders of tomorow and we look up to them to make it better
They only thing they did by banning her is give her more publicity. Financially it won't affect her at all, and her fans are still going to love her regardless.
I am not a fan, and could care less about how much she sells and what she does and does not... but I'm just saying...
In response to the Lady GAGA subject- does people really know what is in and behind her music?
Here's some videos showing the true agenda and message of her music- even if she's not aware of it personally it is still in her music.
Lady Gaga - Judas Video - Occult Symbolism - Hidden Messages
Lady Gaga and the Occult Indoctrination of Children
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4X1axt5V … 8E5D41D63F
Lady Gaga & Beyonce Using 666 Symbolism
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9qwazeJ … re=related
LADY GAGA TAROT CARD READING with EYES WIDE OPEN
These are some of the videos explaining and showing how the occult/satanism and such are in her music. She's not the only one- there are many many artists bowing down to this and most don't even know what there doing.
God's people perish for the lack of knowledge....
God bless you!
You got it!
A lot of MK Ultra Monarch programming....
Riahnna(sp), Madonna--the Queen, Britney--she tried to break the programming, Aguilera.....the list goes on.
Anytime a female is first and foremost a sex-kitten: watch out!
Consider: Beyonce has an altar-ego stage presence_Sasha Fierce. Nicki Minaj has many. MK Ultra programming.
And Gag-me just takes it to a whole ugly level.
Depravity, upside-down values, down-is-up, bad is good!
Transhumanism. what's the word for male/female together? No difference...Androgeny!
They know a new world is coming...their job is to usurp it and make it their own.
heavenbound, It's a good thing you shared those links of what Lady Gaga represents. Satan is very decieving, and some don't even know what they are getting themselves into. How sad.
I happen to agree with him. She is extremely offensive. Have you seen her vidoe Alejandro?
That is Blasphemy...Satanism, IMO.
And she has a very derogatory attitude towards Jesus...mocking and ridiculing.
She is a Satanist, if you aks me. (s/o to Russsshhhhhh)
"Boohoohoo--they want to kill me."
Who, exactly? You have 10 million fans.
get over yourself.
Absolutely. Censorship is such a wonderful tool for both governments and majorities. Governments can keep their unwashed masses in a state of ignorance of any truth or facts, while majorities can use such terms as "disgusting" or "offensive" to protect any minorities around from harming themselves by seeing or hearing offensive material.
I strongly suggest that we ban the bible from America at the same time. In the spirit of government I tell you that it is full of falsehoods and lies and should be banned so that you never believe in such lies. In the spirit of the majority I also tell you that it is offensive pornographic trash and that you need protection from such disgusting filth as I know far better than you what disgusting filth actually is.
errrr--Gaga is in the majority here.
Did I mention the 10 million fans?
Well said, took the words right out of my mouth.
I thought you were against people pushing their views on other people.
It was intended as sarcasm - an indication of what happens when we support limiting speech to only what we like to hear.
I have no idea what you're talking about. lovemychris wishes to push censorship onto others because they feel religious beliefs are being "blasphemed", did you not get that?
Ga Ga has a view. She wants to impress it on the Lebanese and get paid for it. Why are we on her side? She's no Gandhi.
You have a view, too. Should we lobby to censor you? Why would we be on your side? You're no Gandhi.
Notice how your argument isn't valid?
So I'm selling sex to teenagers am I? Well perhaps I should be censored.
I have no idea about that, but you certainly are trying to sell your religious beliefs, which many would consider far more dangerous than selling sex.
No but you are saying things that offend me in the way that sexy singers offend you.
Why should only things you are offended by be censored?
Even if you banned the bible, believers will still know it.
Of course, you would stop new believers reading it, and believers would need to speak it to people, until someone smuggled a copy into the fascist state that would have banned it, then it would go into print again, just secretly.
A little persecution is good for the faith.
The bible is banned in most Muslim countries, but we still manage to get it into them, and they still see new believers every year.
Sorry, your dream will remain a dream.
I do not, of course, promote the banning of the bible. That would be censorship just as banning Gagas works is.
As you point out it is futile anyway - those people that want it will get it even as they make themselves liable to punishments proscribed by the govt. Can't say that I agree that persecuting anyone is good for them, though - better that they have what they want without anyone else butting their nose into the matter.
Innit though. I'd like to see her banned for being rubbish.
Take that Beiber kid back and we will do the same for Gaga.......
I watch GaGa 'cause she's an "original" talent!
She's an American success story!
I watched one of her shows on TV and changed my mind about her.
I thought she was just another "Madona" type weirdo...kind've a cultist, but after watching her perfom, the "Lady" is a truly talented, entertaining woman!
She's a concert pianist, she CAN sing and she writes her own music!
Her backup dancers are great and the backdrops and special effects are eyepoppers.
Screw the primitives and backward whose minds have been so corrupted by religious fiction that they cannot accept and appreciate true human talent when it appears.
My only wish would be that "they" could realize, after death, what fools they had been while living, by not taking advantage of all that we who have no religious belief...enjoyed!
Up with joyful hedonism!
I'm not corrupted by religious fiction, and she offends me.
On a visceral level.
Like there should be a tongue snaking out of her mouth and hissing going on.
She was swallowing black rosary beads, and had an upside-down crucifix on her crotch.
Which "fiction" is that?
If you knew Satanism, you wouldn't have to ask.
What the heck is that?
Can ya explain using a well thought out response that isn't just opinion with no foundation in fact?
No you can't.
"upside down crucifix?" Is that supposed to be meaningful to a pragmatic realist such as me, who just can't seem to relate "fiction" to fact? I think not. In fact the thought is ludicrous to me. :
"Rosary beads?" Oh you mean those little stones on a string that
religious sheep herders, way back in the 11th and 12th centuries, who were as easy to fool and lead as their sheep, used to to keep track of how many time they prayed to there "superman in the sky?" Naw! I never found a reason to wear beads. I did wear a hooka necklace when I was a young surfer. Does that count?
Jeez! This is the 21st century and folks are still foolish enuf to do that! Evolution is truly a slow process.
Personally? I don't believe in "trolls" under bridges and winged things called "angels" sitting on clouds.
This is all "corrupted"
(To destroy or subvert the honesty or integrity of.").. thinking.
It's the opposite of truth. Do you know the definition of that word? I know your answser: NO! :
Gag-a is not speaking to "pragmatic realists" like you..she's speaking to Luciferians like herself.
I assume the tv show you watched was the HBO one?
That is where she made fun of Jesus, as if he was some clown.
Hmmm, funny that--she demands respect for herself, but cannot give it.
Here is for your perusal...which I'm sure you will dismiss, as you've got such an "open mind":
http://vigilantcitizen.com/musicbusines … alejandro/
There ya go again!
Yer trying to corrupt my thoughts with fairytale stuff!
What the heck is a luciferian? It has no meaning for me.
You speak as if you "KNOW" this jesus. I've read about him, but you "KNOW" no more about him than I...which is nothing.
I'll "PROVE" my open mind to ya when ya provide me with sumthin' other than your opinions which have absolutely no basis in fact. Can ya do that?
I know the answer to that to: NOPE.
http://vigilantcitizen.com/musicbusines … alejandro/
How about The History Channel??
http://altnewsreport.wordpress.com/2010 … erianshow/
Oh yes! The "illuminati" is alive and well!
A 1 world gov't would be wonderful...but...there's no possibility of it happening in this century.
Now lets get to this Luciferian concept.
What the hell is it?
Pls test my "open mind" and offer a good solid opinion based on sound reasoning, logic and facts. by golly if ya do that, ya just may have a convert...:
WHY? Can't I answer my own way?
You say Gaga is talented...is this a fact? No, it's your opinion.
I have opinions too--just as valid as yours.
Why don't you tell me....you really think she is the most talented musician out there?
She is paid and promoted as such.
I say no--she is big because she is willing to promote Luciferianism.
That is my opinion.
I have seen enough of it to know.
And read enough of the ways of the underbelly too.
The opposite of Christ is what they're after.
Do what thou wilt.
Satisfy your lusts and ego.
Who pays for her ultra expsensive videos? They must cost millions to make....each.
They are selling a product they want you to buy.
Lupe Fiasco had to make his own videos....he's just as good a musician.....
But he is not selling the same thing.
For, if she was so great--she wouldn't need all that glitz and glamour and stupid-a$$ claw-foot shoes!
you don't even "tapdance" around the barn well!
No talent in those feet! :
Pls make this your last response to me. You'd be mightily appreciated...whewwww! :
Egad! Chris, ya remind me of some of the strange, untalented people who audition on "American Idol" who get 3 No votes to go to Hollywood.
You just made "my list."
Enuf is enuf!
Honestly, you Americans forcing your food and bad-taste music on other nations and calling it freedom. tut tut
Ya gotta "clicker" (my grandaughter calls it that)that will change TV stations or turn it off. Use it. :
I can't stomach "rap!" It's not music to my ears and I am not embarrassed to say that to the kids at the gym. They laugh at me and call me "the old guy who doesn't like our fav rap music!"
To each his own Lizzie.
We're not trying to force ya to listen to or recognize talent.
Hell no! In fact, as an American, I'll protect your right to freedom of speech to announce your preferences to the world with impunity! :
Forcing the food and music on other nations??!!! The only thing you must do to end that tremendous force is refuse to pay for it. I assure it will stop very quickly as there is no force, only the generous offer to share that wonderful Big Mac with anyone that will pad our pockets.
Of course, you will have to convince the other nation, as a whole, to stop paying. As many do not agree with you I don't expect that it will happen but then that is what freedom is all about.
It would be more free to do it the other way around: people are free to seek out this stuff for themselves but not pour it on to the masses as a matter of course. If we reckon this country needs enlightening, wouldn't it be better to start with something of a little higher caliber art and intellect wise? Shes going into a country in order to make money, and shes going to be singing 'I'm in love with Judas' and wearing sliced pork as an outfit, in a Christo-Muslim country. It's insulting them on so many levels.
No, it is not better to simply produce a product and wait for people to beat a path to your door; without a sales effort very few new products will sell at all. Neither is a sales effort "pouring it on the masses"; it is simply letting the masses know it is there for the purchasing.
No need for a "higher" caliber of art; the masses that supposedly want it will make that decision with their picketbooks.
Personally, I agree that it is insulting, but again let the masses decide that. If they are insulted they won't buy; if not they will spend freely and Gaga will once more be proven correct in what people want. After all, it is not enlightening being sold, nor is it the American people selling it. It is Gaga selling entertainment, nothing more. If people find value in her trash who are you or I or anyone else to declare otherwise?
"In an exclusive interview with the Guardian, the singer, whose current single is called Judas, refers to her recent Monster Ball tour as "a religious experience", becoming for many, an alternative to organised faith. But she goes on to clarify, "it´s more like a pop cultural church".
The pop star has developed a devoted fanbase over the last two years, and her single Born This Way is being championed as an anthem for the disenfranchised, particularly in America.
Yet she insists: "It´s more self-worship, I think, not of me. I´m teaching people to worship themselves."
Satanism: God is ME.
Just my opinion, no doubt.
Now---how can you prove that she's talented?
Enemy is your word, not mine. And no, I do not hate you.--before someone Accuses me of it.
I certainly hope that this person will fade away . What a pathetic person to admire.Those that admire ,need help...Pure and simple garbage.
Lady Gaga music is Satanic and she is promoting evil.
Funny, because all I hear is music, which I happen to like and have purchased to listen to in the privacy of my own home.
I find plenty of music out there offensive, my response is not to listen to it.
"Gaga was raised a Roman Catholic. At the age of 11, Gaga attended Convent of the Sacred Heart, a private all-girls Roman Catholic school on Manhattan's Upper East Side." ~~ wiki
...didn't know that Beelz! You are certainly, a "font" of knowledge.
Much appreciated! :
Cathy O'Brien was raised a Catholic too.
Much of her Monarch programming was done in a Catholic church.
In fact, the ones who were programming her called her Cathy-Lick. And you know what this means.
It is the opposite of Jesus they are after. They use Jesus and twist him inside out, pervert his meaning. Blaspheme him.
And Gag-me does just that. Then tries top claim some artsy-fartsy reason for it. Uh uh--she's defaming Christ.
She bothers me on a visceral level....I have known her kind before.
See for yourself what you don't want to acknowledge...and there were hearings on MK Ultra in the 1970's in our Congress.
Why are you presenting this strawman argument by introducing a wacko conspiracy theorist?
Oh yes, you have made it quite clear your religious beliefs are being offended and you wish to act upon them in much the same way a Muslim is offended with pictures of Muhammad; with censorship.
Do you attempt to censor everything and everyone that bothers you in some way? Should we lobby to censor you if we deem that you bother us?
Again, your argument is from an emotionally charged position and is simply not valid.
Are you suggesting that the US and the UK don't censor stuff ?
Of course not. Most likely, censorship is alive and kicking all over the place, but it's role is such that one individual or group makes decisions as to what others are allowed to see or hear. It is their authority in the matter that is in question.
In the case of Gaga, wherever she is going to accidentally on purpose flash her tits, it is government officials charged with the work who are banning it. Just as the Yahoo news feed published four of my comments on various issues but my criticism of the actions of the American controlled UN in Libya somehow would not appear.
HELP!HELP!...I'm drowning in "Lady GaGa's" satanic. suliminal machinations!
WOW!!...I'm drowing and, being the filthy hedonist, infidel I am, I"M ENJOYING IT!
IS THERE NO HOPE FOR US WICKED?
Save me a place under the surface of the river of sh!t in the 4th level of Dantes Inferno!
Oh, let me exchange places with
Quasimoto as he stared into the face of the decortive, stone gargoyle and asked, pleadingly: "Why was I not made of stone such as thee?"
I and "lady GaGa," are truly lost souls! :
Qwark, the forsaken, hath spoken......
I am relieved to know that Lady GAGA has the usual following of the religiously impaired finding and disseminating all the hidden and overt evil in her music.
It reminds me of the Beatles!
All their songs, and the rolling stones music was evil.
Look what it has done to the world?
Sir Mick would love this.
Another sign that Lady Gaga is corrupting the spirituality of today's innocent youth:
The search volume for "Lady Gaga" meets or exceeds the search volume for "God"!
http://www.google.com/trends?q=lady+gag … amp;sort=0
Perhaps we really are in the end times... but at least we have some catchy music to enjoy!
"the center still had the right to build there and chose not to."
Yes, I know. Out of respect for the people. The same people I had to cite the prayer for. The same people who demand we are a Christian nation.
And Ironically, the same people who make Gaga a star.
I remember the Beatles were treated in much the same way by the religiously challenged 40 years ago.
Some things never change. especially religion.
Children seek. The seeking they do in music has resulted in changes that keep up with knowledge of the world around us, a terrible plight for an old fashioned fundy!
So basically what I'm discovering here is there is a cadre of people out there who think Lady Gaga is the spawn of Satan.
Basically she is Harry Potter set to music... with stilettos. Therefore if I listen to Lady Gaga I will grow a pointy black beard and start smearing chicken blood on my neighbor's door.
Get a grip, people. She's a friggin' entertainer, lol.
I completely disagree with what she is saying, but I will defend to the death her right to say it.
But you won't let a muslim center near ground zero.
The basic issue here is cross cultural values. Different cultures see things differently, for instance, here in China, a modest girl will comfortably wear shorts that are tiny even in terms of hot-pants, yet will not show a hint of cleavage, shile modest western girls will wear longer shorts and happily show vast cleavages.
Ideas of personal freedoms, the type of limitations imposed on freedom of speech, the degree of unnacceptable 'pornography'etc.
If Lady Gaga is considered 'art' then she can express her art as she chooses as it is the public who accept or deny what she displays - but to take that art to another culture may not be acceptable to them. As 'art' Lady Gaga represents the breakdown of morality, social behaviours, breakdown of religion, sex as commodity, all in a kind of extension of punk rock combined with other music forms.
If another culture does not share the values contained in the art then imposing it on them is no different to imposing trade agreements by armed force.
Hypocritical criticisms of 'other' cultures are media promoted rubbish and intelligent people can see them for what they are, (and Gaga is of the media) worse, they obscure the real criticisms that can be made that might lead to real improvements in those cultures and societies. A culture that promotes women as sexual commodities is hardly in a position to criticise other cultures for their treatment of women, cultures that promote aggressive conflict are in no position to criticise others that respond with violence. And pornographic elements of western culture have no right to impose their debased ethics and morals on cultures that do not share such debasement of human sexual activities.
by EncephaloiDead 4 years ago
We know that freedom of speech often allows hate speech and we know that more reasonable and rational speech combats hate speech. Should freedom of religion provide protection for religious hate speech in the same way?
by Elyse Maupin-Thomas 10 months ago
What are your thoughts on challenging and banning books?To clarify: challenging a book is to attempt to restrict a material based on the disapproval of a group. Banning is removing the materials entirely. Top reasons for challenging books include offensive language and sexually explicit...
by crankalicious 4 years ago
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/18/nyreg … login&This is an old article, but worthy of discussion. If you're a teacher in public school and you assert that Noah's ark carried dinosaurs, should you be fired or defended for being able to express your right to free speech?Is this an issue...
by censoredchristian 8 years ago
Classic - I may have to copy this one down and keep it for posterity."Three times he was banned for spreading the love." There is something awfully biblical about being banned three times. Give me a minute and I will think of it.......
by Tessa Schlesinger 2 years ago
Why are Christians permitted by law to prosyletize on the streets? Shouldn't it be made illegal?Religious organizations do not pay taxes so they should not be permitted the use of the streets for their 'work.' In addition, as much as there is freedom of speech, there is also the freedom to not hear...
by Sophia Angelique 5 years ago
if someone talks to someone about sex, and it's unwanted, it's considered harassment. The other day, i was sitting in Starbucks and this man (for the second or third time) demanded to converse on the basis that I was in a public place and if I was in a public place then I was obliged to speak to...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|