• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Muhammed a Crime? [W:636]

Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Muhammed a Crime?

  • Total voters
    186
Re: Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Mohammed a Crime?

Of course not, our freedom should not be limited by the actions of crazy people.
 
Re: Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Mohammed a Crime?

Dragonfly said:
Isn't it possible in the USofA to be charged with a crime for conspiring to kill the president?
Without ever leaving your bedroom, can't you be charged with a crime for simply blogging about such a thing?

No shots fired, never being closer than 1000 miles away, but just discussing over the phone, or through the internet can't you be charged with a crime?
Click to expand...

No, not always. If the threat is mailed, yes. If it is not mailed, then the threat has to be coupled with at least one step towards carrying it out.

18 USC § 871 - Threats against President and successors to the Presidency | LII / Legal Information Institute

Also, "I wish the president would die", "I hope someday I can kill the president" and the like won't do, even if mailed. You have to actually threaten to kill (or kidnap).

And the president is the only person in the US as to which the standard is this low.
 
Re: Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Mohammed a Crime?

Pinkie said:
No, not always. If the threat is mailed, yes. If it is not mailed, then the threat has to be coupled with at least one step towards carrying it out.

18 USC § 871 - Threats against President and successors to the Presidency | LII / Legal Information Institute

Also, "I wish the president would die", "I hope someday I can kill the president" and the like won't do, even if mailed. You have to actually threaten to kill (or kidnap).

And the president is the only person in the US as to which the standard is this low.
Click to expand...
Yep, it must be a direct threat and must have some indication of immediacy.
 
Re: Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Mohammed a Crime?

DiAnna said:
Absolutely not.

That said, there is no constitutional right to speech which incites violence against others. Several other exclusions to "free speech" protections have already been listed... but to make it illegal to criticize a particular religion? Ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Yes, true, but "fighting words" has been interpreted as real-time, face-to-face speech between Americans or American residents at the time violence might occur. Stretching this to cover every human on Planet Earth would effectively muzzle us all.
 
Re: Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Mohammed a Crime?

ashurbanipal said:
I voted no, but I think a few reasonable caveats should apply. For instance, speech that's clearly intended to stir up violence either by muslims or against muslims, when it's also either misleading or downright false, ought to be illegal. Ditto speech that does so to any other group or entity.

In other words: "Mohammed was a big fat doodiehead," while obviously ignorant and absurd, shouldn't be illegal. But, "Mohammed was a big fat doodiehead, and all you Bible-believing Christians ought to get your guns and kill your Muslim neighbors because they're going to blow the planet up with a huge nuclear bomb vest" should be illegal.
Click to expand...

No, it shouldn't -- unless you're addressing a bunch a nutters ready to bomb a Muslim mosque in the US at that very moment.
 
Re: Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Mohammed a Crime?

My speech and your CHOSEN reaction to that speech are not one and the same. I loathe the rhetoric that blames one person for the chosen course of action on the part of another. Violence can only ensue if the person perpetrating that act chooses to undertake it. They had a choice. They had control over that choice. Be violent/don't be violent. If they choose violence, they are responsible, 100%, for the consequences of that choice.

Free speech should be protected and that is the message that should have been shouted loud and clear this week out of Washington to the rioting, looting whackos in the Middle East.
 
Re: Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Mohammed a Crime?

Thrilla said:
no, i don't believe we should...I happen to enjoy free speech

.. but i don't think it will be too many more years before we start doing such things.... we are already moving away from freedoms and liberties, so it's just a matter of time.
Click to expand...

Has there been some big erosion in Freedom of Speech I'm not aware of? The last major case of this I know of was the Westboro Baptist Church case, which they won.
 
johnny_rebson said:
How about if we change the freedom of religion law and outlaw Islam?
Click to expand...

This is even sillier than suggesting we outlaw anti-Muslim remarks. Why should American Muslims (and no one else) lose the freedom to worship as they choose because of the acts of zealots half-way around the world?
 
Re: Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Mohammed a Crime?

jet57 said:
But, what does this say about the free speech movement of 1963?

And I don't see recruitment as free speech, but rather solicitation.
Click to expand...

The government has no free speech rights, jet. Only an individual can.
 
Re: Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Mohammed a Crime?

Pinkie said:
Has there been some big erosion in Freedom of Speech I'm not aware of? The last major case of this I know of was the Westboro Baptist Church case, which they won.
Click to expand...
I actually could see more reason to limit WBC on fighting words and incitement than what is proposed here. WBC chose the worst Time(funeral), Place(gravesite), and Manner(vitriolic and uncivil) to attack people who did nothing but serve a country and sacrifice for it, really all those funeral protests represent are large scale gay bashings. Frankly, and I speak for myself, I think I would beat a WBC member to death if they did that to a family member of mine, not being bold, that's how much I love my family and friends.
 
Re: Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Mohammed a Crime?

Mad_Hatter said:
My speech and your CHOSEN reaction to that speech are not one and the same.
Click to expand...

Yep.


and, of course, since religion is also a choice, it should stand the same scrutiny as any other ideology also chosen freely. That so many adhere to an ideology that treat it as if it ISN'T a choice should provide any thinking person with ample reason for rejecting it. Unfortunately, there are precious few thinking people out there, it seems.
 
Re: Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Mohammed a Crime?

Pinkie said:
Has there been some big erosion in Freedom of Speech I'm not aware of? The last major case of this I know of was the Westboro Baptist Church case, which they won.
Click to expand...

And actually, as much as I loath what the WBC does and stands for, I agreed with the Supreme Court on that decision. It's easy to believe that speech that is innocuous or inoffensive should be protected, but it's when the speech is objectional (in some cases very objectionable) that we show our real commitment to free speech.
 
Last edited:
Re: Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Mohammed a Crime?

LaMidRighter said:
I actually could see more reason to limit WBC on fighting words and incitement than what is proposed here. WBC chose the worst Time(funeral), Place(gravesite), and Manner(vitriolic and uncivil) to attack people who did nothing but serve a country and sacrifice for it, really all those funeral protests represent are large scale gay bashings. Frankly, and I speak for myself, I think I would beat a WBC member to death if they did that to a family member of mine, not being bold, that's how much I love my family and friends.
Click to expand...

I do, too, for the reason that what they are doing is stalking and harassment rather than indulging in free speech. They are purposely intruding upon the lives of others rather than voicing their opinions in such a way that others are free to take them or leave them. If I were to post some idiotic youtube piece, people are free to take it or leave it. If I followed people around harassing them with the same idiocy to the point they could not avoid me, I would be transgressing.
 
Re: Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Mohammed a Crime?

LaMidRighter said:
I actually could see more reason to limit WBC on fighting words and incitement than what is proposed here. WBC chose the worst Time(funeral), Place(gravesite), and Manner(vitriolic and uncivil) to attack people who did nothing but serve a country and sacrifice for it, really all those funeral protests represent are large scale gay bashings. Frankly, and I speak for myself, I think I would beat a WBC member to death if they did that to a family member of mine, not being bold, that's how much I love my family and friends.
Click to expand...

I agree and I think that decision should have been decided differently (and likely would have been, on better facts). But even if it had, that would in no way lead anyone with any logic to conclude that any US speech which MIGHT offend another person on Planet Earth with any known propensity for violence should also be illegal.

I don't think people are thinking this through. Apart from the strategic error of trying to appease a bully, the speech that'd become illegal wouldn't simply be remarks trashing the Prophet Muhammed. It'd also be speech condemning polygamy, favoring women's rights, supporting gay rights, etc. As so many Ayatollehs have been at pains to remind us, they find almost everything about the USA worthy of condemnation.
 
Re: Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Mohammed a Crime?

Gardener said:
I do, too, for the reason that what they are doing is stalking and harassment rather than indulging in free speech. They are purposely intruding upon the lives of others rather than voicing their opinions in such a way that others are free to take them or leave them. If I were to post some idiotic youtube piece, people are free to take it or leave it. If I followed people around harassing them with the same idiocy to the point they could not avoid me, I would be transgressing.
Click to expand...

The plaintiff in the WBC case was the father of a slain solider, shielded from view of these despicable people during his son's funeral. As are all mourners. I'm sure he was expecting the protest but in fact, he didn't know it had taken place until after they had dispersed. I believe this is the only reason their horrendous conduct isn't legally "fighting words".

If the facts were even slightly different, I think the WBC would have lost.
 
Re: Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Mohammed a Crime?

Pinkie said:
The plaintiff in the WBC case was the father of a slain solider, shielded from view of these despicable people during his son's funeral. As are all mourners. I'm sure he was expecting the protest but in fact, he didn't know it had taken place until after they had dispersed. I believe this is the only reason their horrendous conduct isn't legally "fighting words".

If the facts were even slightly different, I think the WBC would have lost.
Click to expand...

I guess the question I would ask, then, is why it was necessary to shield him from view in the first place? Make no mistake -- I have nothing but complete admiration for those who volunteer their time to act as human shields against these vile things -- but if the very fact that they are doing so is what allows the things to continue their actions, then perhaps it is counter productive in the long run.
 
Re: Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Mohammed a Crime?

No. Then we have no such thing as freedom of speech.
 
Re: Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Mohammed a Crime?

Gardener said:
I guess the question I would ask, then, is why it was necessary to shield him from view in the first place? Make no mistake -- I have nothing but complete admiration for those who volunteer their time to act as human shields against these vile things -- but if the very fact that they are doing so is what allows the things to continue their actions, then perhaps it is counter productive in the long run.
Click to expand...

No one involved at the time anticipated this, Gardener, and I'm not sure the decision makes it clear it turns on that point. (I'd have to go back and read it.)

I believe the father sued the WBC for extreme emotional distress, which (almost always) has a "touching" prerequisite, as in, you can't sue for this if the defendant never touched you. Being as the WBC and the father never had any direct contact, that was missing too.

 
Re: Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Mohammed a Crime?

TheDemSocialist said:
No. Then we have no such thing as freedom of speech.
Click to expand...

Really. If we create a legal ban on all language any violent person on the planet might object to, we'd be left grunting at one another.
 
Re: Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Mohammed a Crime?

Pinkie said:
No one involved at the time anticipated this, Gardener, and I'm not sure the decision makes it clear it turns on that point. (I'd have to go back and read it.)

I believe the father sued the WBC for extreme emotional distress, which (almost always) has a "touching" prerequisite, as in, you can't sue for this if the defendant never touched you. Being as the WBC and the father never had any direct contact, that was missing too.
Click to expand...

I think you are missing my point, there, Pinky. I was simply pointing out the irony that if the case turned on whether or not the father had direct contact with the goons, and the reason for this was all the fine people who show up at these funerals to provide a human shield against this disgusting filth, then the fact that such people did provide a shield prevented the success of the suit.

I am no lawyer, but I would have argued that if the actions of the human filth make it necessary for others to show up en masse in order to prevent such direct contact, then this really provides no excuse for the actions, themselves, since such actions make the response necessary in order to avoid the contact. .
 
Re: Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Mohammed a Crime?

Pinkie said:
we'd be left grunting at one another.[/COLOR]
Click to expand...

and after that, should we smoke a cigarette whilst in the afterglow?
 
Re: Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Mohammed a Crime?

Pinkie said:
The government has no free speech rights, jet. Only an individual can.
Click to expand...

I don't see that.
 
Re: Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Mohammed a Crime?

Gardener said:
I think you are missing my point, there, Pinky. I was simply pointing out the irony that if the case turned on whether or not the father had direct contact with the goons, and the reason for this was all the fine people who show up at these funerals to provide a human shield against this disgusting filth, then the fact that such people did provide a shield prevented the success of the suit.

I am no lawyer, but I would have argued that if the actions of the human filth make it necessary for others to show up en masse in order to prevent such direct contact, then this really provides no excuse for the actions, themselves, since such actions make the response necessary in order to avoid the contact. .
Click to expand...

Well, and by no means apologizing for the WBC, the "direct contact" requirement could have been met by a protester except that since no fights have ever broken out between the good people who shield mourners and the WBC creeps, it'd be very hard to class the WBC's signs and chants as "fighting words".

And we don't actually know what would have happened had a shielder sued the WBC, because that wasn't the posture the case was in when the Supreme Court took it up.
 
Re: Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Mohammed a Crime?

jet57 said:
I don't see that.
Click to expand...

A military recruiter, in the scope of his duties, speaks for the government, which has no guaranteed free speech rights. Therefore, barring recruiters (as recruiters) from a college campus just isn't a freedom of speech issue.
 
Re: Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Mohammed a Crime?

Gardener said:
and after that, should we smoke a cigarette whilst in the afterglow?
Click to expand...

Only if we make no smoke rings someone on the planet might find offensive to the point of growing violent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom