Freedom of speech

[truthmatters]

4

[darin]

Freedom and Responsibility of Speech are a Good thing. Every time I see Liberals attempt (sometimes successfully) remove this from our society I think we die a little bit.

Having Free Speech (political speech, especially) protected helps ensure honest questions are asked of our government/leaders without fear of jail or other persecution. Of course, the ironic part is when lawmakers put forth effort or comment to BRING persecution to citizens for what they say.

Take for instance Mayor Nagin, of New Orleans. While he certainly has blasted and attacked George Bush, Our President greeted him graciously.

When Imus said 'Nappy-headed-Hos' POLITICIANS called for him to be fired.

Stupid, eh?

[truthmatters]

4

[darin]

well I kind of thought of that case as everyone using their frredom of speech and accepting the responsibility that came with it.

You see he said what he wanted to say and then the people calling his speech bad said what they wanted to say and then the people paying him to say it fired him because they did not want people to think they paid him to say it.

No one was arrested or harmed(well except the innocent girls who went from one day being private citizens to being famous and ridiculed for doing nothing).

I think it was a grand example of freedom of speech and personal responsibility.

Not exactly how it happened - When politicians and Racist Hacks (see: Al Sharpton) Call for somebody's JOB it's crossed the line. If his EMPLOYER wanted to fire him - fine - but they did so because of pressure from outside forces. The DID in-fact pay him to stir-shit-up. See? See the problem?

[truthmatters]

4

[darin]

When Sharpton speaks his mind its not freedom of speech because YOU dont like him?


What he HELL in what I wrote could cause you to draw such a conclusion??? Holy god help me.



Oh I think Im getting how YOUR mind works now.

I have heard many an R call for someones job for what they say like they did with Dan Rather and Bill Maher.


No you haven't. Name ONE republican who called for Dan Rather's job on a FREEDOM OF SPEECH issue? What's WRONG with you?


See they company is free to fire and hire them if they dont want to lose sponsers that is how it works.

I think they felt it was worth the mioney they had to pay him to get out of the contracts they had with him.

Absolutely! The commentary you're missing is this: It SUCKS that companies would feel pressure and YIELD to pressure from the likes of Al Sharpton, etc. It's said.

[truthmatters]

4

[avatar4321]

freedom of speech is vital for the continuation of this republic. Which is why I am completely disturbed when liberals are always attacking it. especially political speech.

[truthmatters]

4

[avatar4321]

Can you give an example?

political correctness. Campaign Finance Reform. Trying to silence any opposition by labeling people bigots and racists. etc.

[theHawk]

Can you give an example?

Never heard of the Fairness Doctrine?

[truthmatters]

4

[darin]

...Hate-crime/Speech legistlation....

[OCA]

How important is freedom of speach to wether America survives?

What are the Reason freedom of speech is a protective measure for a government or society.

Lets examine history and look into all aspects of this subject.

What are your feelings?

Everybody has freedom of speech according to Truth.................well except for the Klan.

[truthmatters]

4

[OCA]

Please bring up a quote where I sadi the KKK did not have the freedom of speech?

You are applauding a group in another thread that was successfulin curtailing the Klan's first amendment rights to free speech and to peacefully assemble.

[truthmatters]

4

[OCA]

No you just dont really understand freedom of speech.

they both have a right to speak.

Are you sugesting there should be laws that if one group is having a rally that no other gruop can do so too?


No, i'm suggesting that if a group is there solely to provoke then that group should be removed. The clowns should have been removed from the premises before the violence started.

BTW I must've missed in the article where the clowns expressed a viewpoint............well that is unless you think throwing flour in the air is expressing a viewpoint.

[truthmatters]

4

[OCA]

So you do think they dont have the same rights as the KKK?

I think the KKK likes to provoke people by rallying too.

I will defend their right to spaek anyway and also the clowns too.

Do you remember the old bit of your rights stop where your fist ends and my nose begins?

Correct, I don't think they have the right to come there solely to provoke a riot. I do believe that the clowns have a right to express a different viewpoint and if you can find me a transcript that says they laid down their group's foundation and beliefs on that day and didn't just throw flour in the air i'll stand corrected.

Until then the clowns are in the wrong and were there solely to curtail the first amendment rights of the Klan.

[diuretic]

I like to think that the idea of freedom of speech is to allow anyone to express an idea, no matter how vile (and that's a subjective judgement anyway) so that that idea can be discussed.

If you want to read an interesting example of what made your country's Founding Fathers draft the First Amendment then an account of the trial of William Penn is a good starting point. They, the Founding Fathers, were determined not to have the sort of repressive government that ruled Britain at that time.

[truthmatters]

4

[OCA]

The law in this country agrees with my position on this and not yours.

Note who was arrested.

The law did not address your position on freedom of speech you stupid fucking douchebag! The law adressed assault and battery.

Please try and keep the facts straight from now on.

[avatar4321]

So you do think they dont have the same rights as the KKK?

I think the KKK likes to provoke people by rallying too.

I will defend their right to spaek anyway and also the clowns too.

Do you remember the old bit of your rights stop where your fist ends and my nose begins?

no one has the right to incite violence.

[truthmatters]

4

[OCA]

Yes it did by not siting or prosicuting either group for freedom of speech infractions.

You see the law saw NO freedom of speech issue in the incident.

You are being purposely obtuse.

[truthmatters]

4

[OCA]

this is not being obtuse it is stating a fact.

If there were any freedom of speech infraction one side or the other could have claimed them and pressed charges huh?


OH PLEEEEEEEEEEEEASE! What do you think the reaction would be in the liberal media if the Klan filed suit saying their first amendment rights were violated?

You see thats just it, if you are White and espousing pro-White policies such as the Klan does you'll get short thrift from the legal system.........but I guarantee you that if this were the Rainbow Coalition speaking and the Klan wanted to show up the Klan wouldn't have been allowed within two miles of that speech.

For the record you have stated no facts in this thread or any other, would you like to poll the board on whether you've ever stated a fact?

[truthmatters]

4

[OCA]

the truth can not be found in biased polls now can it?

Well if they had truely been infracted against they could always get the ACLU to defend them again.

Why do you assume it would be biased?

[Yurt]

Can you give an example?

Talk show radio

[Pale Rider]

the truth can not be found in biased polls now can it?

The only truth you recognize here is your own twisted lies.

[truthmatters]

4

[Yurt]

maybe you can clairify what you mean by crossing the line?

I thought you meant the freedom of speech line?

Not that I speak for DMP, but what I think he might have been talking about is curtailing speech by calling for someone's job. Al sharkton says BS all day, that is his right. Imus says BS all day, that is his right. However, sharkton called for Imus to lose his livelihood over a silly comment. Sharkton deliberately wanted to "chill" Imus's speech.

Do you see the difference? Sharkton can tell people all day to not listen to Imus, that is his right. But he specifically demanded that he LOSE his ability to speak by losing his job. That, is NOT free speech.

[Yurt]

How is talk radio an example of liberals trying to stop freedom of speech?

They want to ban consertative talk radio. It has been in the news alot lately.

[Pale Rider]

Can you give an example?

A group of protestors dresssed like clowns showing up at a peaceful assembly of Americans with the sole intent to shout down, aggravate, distract, incite, and otherwise impede the ability of the other group to speak.

There's your example. Deny it. Let's see just how foolish you really are.

[truthmatters]

4

[Yurt]

Freedom of speech, while inherently important to a free society, it is not a fundamental right. Nor is the right absolute, there are boundaries. You cannot yell fire in a theatre.

The right is important so that one entity/party/person does not stifle the voices or lives around them. Ideas are an integrel part of any successful government. Without ideas, a government and by extension, it's people, are bound to fail. Even Rome, who once was a true republic, had some speech under the Ceasars. It may have been placating, but the speech was there. If the speech had been more "free," I would argue that Rome may have lasted longer.

IMO.

[truthmatters]

4

[Pale Rider]

Then why didnt the KKK press those charges if they were pressable?

Face the facts that my position lies on the side of the laws of the United States of America.

How do you know they didn't and it just hasn't been reported? They most certainly would have every legal right to.

"Pressable?" That's not even a word. What grade did you say you were in again? Second?

[Yurt]

How do you know they didn't and it just hasn't been reported? They most certainly would have every legal right to.

"Pressable?" That's not even a word. What grade did you say you were in again? Second?

:lmao:

What, you can't bench pressable 175?

[truthmatters]

4

[Yurt]

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/pressable

Wrong, the way you used it is wrong. LOL. Go back and see how you used it, it wrong...

:laugh2:

[Yurt]

Then why didnt the KKK press those charges if they were pressable?

:lmao::lmao::lmao:


Pale meant the WAY you used the word. LOL. DA: these are pressable charges your honor.... not.

[truthmatters]

4

[Pale Rider]

13. to plead with insistence: to press a claim.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/pressable

#13 is a definition for "press." Strike two.

[truthmatters]

4

[Pale Rider]

40. a pressing or pushing forward

works too.

when you press a case it is moving a case forward

That's an adjective. Adjectives describe or identify a noun or pronoun. You were using it as an action. That doesn't work either. Strike three. You're out. Go back to school and learn something this time.

[truthmatters]

4

[Yurt]

For pete sake. You don't pressable charges. Trust me. You never, ever use that word in the sense you did. Stop it. Just trust us.

The button may be pressable, but the "charges" are not pressable.

You just don't use "pressable" when it comes to legal charges. Maybe explosive charges, but not legal.

Let it be. :huddle:

[truthmatters]

4

[Yurt]

You press charges and the charges are either pressable or they are not pressable.

40. a pressing or pushing forward : is a noun

You see if you dont have a case worth pressing it is not a pressable case as in you can not push it forward.

I really dont get the problem here.

Pressing a case

pushing a case forward

Get it.

Nice diversion though.

I am trying to tell you, the word is just not used in the same vernacular you used it. I understand that you thought it did, but it does not. A dictionary is not the "bible" on vernacular.

[JohnDoe]

Never heard of the Fairness Doctrine?yes, it was broadcast tv and radio protocol for over 60 years of our history....I believe?