Page 42 of 55 FirstFirst ... 32404142434452 ... LastLast
Results 411 to 420 of 548

Thread: US Police arrest Florida pastor

  1. #411
    Sage
    Peter King's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Netherlands
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    14,029

    Re: US Police arrest Florida pastor

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Chuckles View Post
    Again, I'm not trying to dispute what Dutch law is, I am asking how does it actually amount to discrimination. As in, how would holocaust denial amount to "intentionally making insulting comments about a group of people".
    There are several things that fall under our discrimination/hate speech law, denying the holocaust is one of them, this has been decided by our highest court. Our highest court has decided that denying the holocaust is a crime because it is discrimination under the law.

    This is the opinion of our highest court. It falls under our law of discrimination and hate speech.

    The plight of the Dutch Jews under the holocaust is part of their culture, their political and social identity and their position in the Dutch society is directly connected to the holocaust. To claim that the Jews are liars, profiteers, etc. is compromising the human rights of the Jewish people.

    In the Dutch criminal law discrimination is seen as:

    Under Dutch law, discrimination or discriminatory is seen as all kinds of making difference between, refusal, limitation or preference, that has the intention of or could lead to issues with recognition, the pleasure or practicing on the basis of equality of human rights and the fundamental freedoms regarding the areas of politics, economic, social or culture of other areas of social existence are negated/nullified or compromised.
    Former military man (and now babysitter of Donald Trump) John Kelly, is a big loud lying empty barrel!

  2. #412
    Sage
    clownboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    08-17-16 @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    26,087

    Re: US Police arrest Florida pastor

    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    His past helps to show that his intent isn't just peaceful protest or an exercise in free speech. His intent is to abuse the right to free speech to incite violence.
    Perhaps, but the article you posted does little to show intent to incite violence. It does cast the fellow and his wife as first class assholes, but that's about it. Besides, counting on Der Spiegel for any sort of moral authority or judgement on American matters is a huge mistake to begin with.

  3. #413
    Sage
    Moot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:24 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    27,467

    Re: US Police arrest Florida pastor

    Quote Originally Posted by RabidAlpaca View Post
    I'm confused as to why you think I give a flying rat's ass about what he's done before, we're talking about burning qurans.
    It helps to know the kind of person you're defending.

    He's exercising his freedoms, and you're screaming out of sheer terror for him to be stopped, because we should do whatever the muslims want us to. You refused to answer my pork question, by the way.
    No, he's abusing the right to free speech to incite violence.


    I thought your question about "pork" was a rhetorical slippery slope fallacy....



  4. #414
    Dungeon Master
    Hooter Babe

    DiAnna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Northern California
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,632
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: US Police arrest Florida pastor

    Quote Originally Posted by opendebate View Post
    I don't think you are hearing my point Di. I agree, those idiots who retaliate with violence should exhibit greater control ...but they won't, and that is the first and most important reality here. Because it is a greater certainty that they will retaliate by the taking of innocent lives than that Americans will be asked to surrender more of their rights or freedoms. It seems a bit selfish and stubborn for anyone to suggest we stand with our feet firmly planted refusing to give an inch so that we don't appear weak when lives are at risk. I think we have a greater obligation to address the reality or what we know rather than risk those lives because of what we "fear" will happen if we do. That is a slippery slope fallacy and I never have much respect for those. I think they are rooted in unreasoned fear.
    I don't. It's a founding principle of the rights of all Americans. It is not a fallacy that if we give up rights up to protect ourselves from people who might get mad because we exercise them, that we will continue to be threatened if we exercise other rights that our enemies do not wish us to have. You may not respect it, but it is nonetheless a fact.

    So we disagree.

  5. #415
    King Conspiratard
    Dr. Chuckles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-14 @ 03:04 PM
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    12,895

    Re: US Police arrest Florida pastor

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter King View Post
    There are several things that fall under our discrimination/hate speech law, denying the holocaust is one of them, this has been decided by our highest court. Our highest court has decided that denying the holocaust is a crime because it is discrimination under the law.
    Yes, Peter, I understand that. But pointing to what is established law doesn't answer my question.

    To claim that the Jews are liars, profiteers, etc. is compromising the human rights of the Jewish people.
    1 Jews are liars~!!!

    How did I just compromise the human right's of Mbig? I doubt the fellow even noticed

    2) How does questioning a historical event inherently "claim that the Jews are liars, profiteers, etc"?

    3) While such can be used to attack Jewish people, so what? Are you saying such words can't be challenged, or that outlawing such words prevents people from still thinking or even communicating such things (which actually makes them only harder to address)?

    In the Dutch criminal law discrimination is seen as:

    Under Dutch law, discrimination or discriminatory is seen as all kinds of making difference between, refusal, limitation or preference, that has the intention of or could lead to issues with recognition, the pleasure or practicing on the basis of equality of human rights and the fundamental freedoms regarding the areas of politics, economic, social or culture of other areas of social existence are negated/nullified or compromised.[/QUOTE]

  6. #416
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    01-17-16 @ 05:09 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,122

    Re: US Police arrest Florida pastor

    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    It helps to know the kind of person you're defending.....
    I have defended the free speech rights of many sleezebags (and unsung heroes) over the years. Freedom isn't a popularity contest.

  7. #417
    Angry Former GOP Voter
    Fiddytree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    25,693

    Re: US Police arrest Florida pastor

    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post

    I thought your question about "pork" was a rhetorical slippery slope fallacy....


    Is it really a slippery slope fallacy when they are rioting over a man who wants to burn or flush their holy book, and no one in America has even heard of the guy, let alone joined his congregation? (I'm especially speaking of the first time he became a target of rage)

    Is it really a slippery slope fallacy when the administration blamed a pretty unknown Facebook video from an unknown director for the initial mass wave of violent protests at our embassies?

    Let's face it. This is utterly ridiculous.
    Last edited by Fiddytree; 09-13-13 at 10:02 PM.
    Michael J Petrilli-"Is School Choice Enough?"-A response to the recent timidity of American conservatives toward education reform. https://nationalaffairs.com/publicat...-choice-enough

  8. #418
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    01-17-16 @ 05:09 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,122

    Re: US Police arrest Florida pastor

    Prior Restraint

    The Court uses a stringent standard when it evaluates statutes that impose a Prior Restraint on speech. The test that is most frequently employed asks whether the prohibited activity poses a Clear and Present Danger of resulting in damage to a legitimate government interest. Most often, the clear-and-present-danger doctrine has applied to prior restraints on the publication of materials thought to threaten national security. This test was first expressed by Justice Holmes in the Schenck case. Charles T. Schenck had been charged with violating the Espionage Act (Tit. 1, 3, 4 [Comp. St. 1918, 10212c, 10212d]) by distributing pamphlets that urged insubordination among members of the military. The Court held that his activities created "a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent." The government's interest in maintaining national security and preventing dissension among the troops outweighed Schenck's interest in free speech.

    The clear-and-present-danger test was extended during the 1950s, when widespread fear of Communism led to the passage of the Smith Act, 18 U.S.C.A. 2385, which prohibited advocating the overthrow of the government. The act was challenged as a prior restraint on speech. It was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court, which stated that the clear-and-present-danger test does not require the government to prove that a threat is imminent or that a plot probably would be successful (Dennis v. United States, 341 U.S. 494, 71 S. Ct. 857, 95 L. Ed. 1137[1951]).

    The Dennis decision was criticized as weakening the clear-and-present-danger test and allowing the government too much freedom to restrict speech. These results were remedied somewhat in Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444, 89 S. Ct. 1827, 23 L. Ed. 2d 430 (1969), in which the Court invalidated a statute that punished the advocacy of violence in industrial disputes. The Court held that the government cannot forbid the advocacy of the use of force unless that advocacy is directed to inciting imminent illegal activity and is likely to succeed.

    Expressive Conduct

    In West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624, 63 S. Ct. 1178, 87 L. Ed. 1628 (1943), Justice robert h. jackson wrote that symbols are "a short cut from mind to mind." Expressive conduct or Symbolic Speech involves communicative conduct that is the behavioral equivalent of speech. The conduct itself is the idea or message. Some expressive conduct is the equivalent of speech and is protected by the First Amendment.

    In tinker v. des moines independent community school district, 393 U.S. 503, 89 S. Ct. 733, 21 L. Ed. 2d 731 (1969), the U.S. Supreme Court held that it was unconstitutional to suspend high-school students for wearing black armbands to protest the Vietnam War, because their conduct was "akin to pure speech" and did not interfere with the work of the school or the rights of other students.....

    ....Statutes that prohibit the desecration of the U.S. flag have been found to restrict free expression unconstitutionally. In texas v. johnson, 491 U.S. 397, 109 S. Ct. 2533, 105 L. Ed. 2d 342 (1989), the Court overturned Gregory L. Johnson's conviction for burning a U.S. flag during a demonstration. Johnson's actions were communicative conduct that warranted First Amendment protection, even though they were repugnant to many people. Similarly, in United States v. Eichman, 496 U.S. 310, 110 S. Ct. 2404, 110 L. Ed. 2d 287 (1990), the Court struck down the federal Flag Protection Act of 1989, 103 Stat. 777, 18 U.S.C.A. 700, stating that the government's interest in passing the act had been a desire to suppress free expression and the content of the message that the act of flag burning conveys......

    legal definition of Inciting, Provocative, or Offensive Speech.

  9. #419
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    10-30-14 @ 12:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,908

    Re: US Police arrest Florida pastor

    That was pretty dangerous...

    Dude (Terry Jones?) should have transported the books then set them on fire...

  10. #420
    Sage
    opendebate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 01:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    7,315

    Re: US Police arrest Florida pastor

    Quote Originally Posted by DiAnna View Post
    I don't. It's a founding principle of the rights of all Americans. It is not a fallacy that if we give up rights up to protect ourselves from people who might get mad because we exercise them, that we will continue to be threatened if we exercise other rights that our enemies do not wish us to have. You may not respect it, but it is nonetheless a fact.

    So we disagree.
    I can engage with someone who passionately defends their position in opposition to me and maintain respect for them as a person. Especially when they are civil and fair. I always see you practice both. So yes, we disagree and that's fine.
    "Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers" - Voltaire
    "There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow men. True nobility lies in being superior to your former self" -Hemingway

Page 42 of 55 FirstFirst ... 32404142434452 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •