mdchachi said:
> All the "restrictions of freedom" I cited do not exist in Europe at least.
Listing a few missing freedoms doesn't prove your thesis.
It is not a thesis, just a few things in my mind at the moment. I started this thread to gather as many ideas about things that make the US different from other developed countries. Some of them include some criticism, but I am certainly not trying to prove anything. Sorry if you couldn't se that (although I had mentioned it before).
> But I would be extremely interested if you could list of enviable freedoms
I'm not the one trying to prove a point, you are. And you've done a poor job of proving that Americans are especially less free than others.
As I said, I am not trying to prove anything. Just noticing a few differences. If
you disagree, then you should provide some data supporting your claims. It's so easy to say that someone is wrong, but not giving counter-examples.
Did you look at the link I gave you? France doesn't guarantee the freedom of religion. Many countries don't give people the right to vote. Many countries don't give you the right not to incriminate yourself. Take a look.
I looked, and that site doesn't seem very clear or reliable. Of course that France guarantees freedom of religion (since the declaration of Human Rights of 1789). That is why their is a clear separation of state and religion, which is not the case in the the US, where people must still swear on the bible in court (even if they are not Christian), and must accept the USA'S motto "God bless America", even if they do not believe in god. Thanks for poiting it, as it is one of the most basic freedom which Americans are not granted.
> Since Bush passed the "Patriotic Act", the US Police has gained very undemocratic rights to go into anybody's house, look for anything (even private documents) and stay as long as they want.
This is an ill informed opinion. Either you've been brainwashed or you're not very well read.
For some reason, I had a hard time finding the article I read about this (on an American site) when I searched for "Patriotic Act" on Google. I might have been misinformed about going into people's houses, but what seems true is that the FBI has the right to check people's
private property (I guess in their house) and anybody's library record without them knowing it.
Check this
from the BBC :
BBC World News said:
But since then dozens of cities and counties across the country have approved resolutions criticising the Patriot Act and various lawsuits have been brought to declare it unconstitutional.
Even the Republican-led House of Representatives has become involved in recent weeks, striking down "sneak-and-peek" rules which allowed government agents to search private property without telling the owner.
Other controversial areas - such as agents being allowed to scrutinise people's library records without showing what crime they believe could be being committed - still stand despite challenges.
> The blood alcohol limit should be lowered. Or maybe, there shouldn't be 14 year-old kids driving.
I used to have more respect for your opinions and analysis but you've totally abandoned reason and logic. There's never been a significant relationship between alcoholic and 14-year-old drivers as far as I know. Anyway, states that let people drive so young do so because there is a need (or at least there used to be when we were more of an agricultural nation).
So you are basically saying that there is no connection between traffic accidents and the consumption of alcohol, or that 14 year-old children are less mature and responsible than adults in general ? Then what is "alcoholic" ? Did you mean "alcohol" or "alcoholism" ?
> What is more, setting the legal drinking age to 21 doesn't change much, as most of the people on the road are above 21 anyway.
The statistics of drunk driving fatalities and how they went down after raising the drinking limit directly refute your statement.
So you see that 14 year-old kids are not that responsible, as they were forcedly drinking and driving. Don't you also think that speeding or "driving uncautiously" is more likely for teenagers than more mature adults ?
> In the US, some people attach more importance to possess a gun than to be able to drink a beer on a hot summer day or a glass of wine at a French restaurant.
Have you met any of these people or are you just making stuff up again?
This is just the logical conclusion that transcend from the law. Why can any American possess a gun from age 18, but can't drink until 21. Is there more need for people to possess a gun earlier than being able to drink a beer ?If not, why is the law like that in the US ?
> Are people prohibited to drink alcohol till 21 even at home ? Do parents who allow their children to drink risk reprimands or fines ?
Of course not. Kids drink all the time. Parents who allow their kids to drink
moderately don't risk anything. But parents who allow their kids and their
friends to drink, say, at a home party and the kids later kill somebody driving
home or do something else stupid causes the blame to land on the person
who furnished the alcohol. So it's a very bad idea to do that but stupid parents do it all the time.
In short: moderate drinking (say, wine with dinner) with the family is not a problem and is low risk.
Good to know. It's the same in Europe. However, in Japan parents who let their children drink risk a fine for "complicity against the law". That is the kind of info I want to be shared in this thread.
------------------------------------------------------------
Another difference I found between the US and other countries :
6) a)Americans have a middle name (only one, right ?) and usually mention it or the initial. There are differences regarding this between European countries (please let me know how it is in your country or family) and sometimes from one generation to another.
In my case, I have 2 middle names, which are my godfather and godmother's first names. My parents have 3 or 4 middle names, sometime including a grandparent or a name used by lots of people of the same generation. There are people with more than 10 middle names, especially among the nobility. However, we (and I think this is true of all Europeans) never use our middle names or initial(s) for it. They only appear on some official documents like the birth certificate or passport, and usually not even in contracts, credit cards, etc.
Japanese don't have middle names, as it is prohibited by law - something I find really strange, especially in a such a populous country where family names are so little varied. That means that there are loads of people with exactly the same name.
6) b) Americans have a tendency to name the first son the same as his father, then name him Junior (Jr). This is virtually unheard of in Europe, at least this century (my genealogy revealed a few sons and fathers with identical first names, though). Japanese never use Junior and Senior either.
My question for Canadians is : do you also use middle names and Jr. in the same way as Americans ?
