View Poll Results: Are there any examples of free speech that you believe fall under restrictions?

Voters
26. You may not vote on this poll
  • Screaming fire and guns in a crowded auditorium/theater/church etc

    25 96.15%
  • Not acting on it yet making a film about the joys of children sexuality

    9 34.62%
  • Writing or speaking reasons why one might want to shoot or kill a candidate running for POTUS

    9 34.62%
  • Speaking inflammatory words to a culture where our troops and tax revenues are invested

    3 11.54%
  • Media produced inciting hatred while troops/citizens in that culturein order to incite violence

    5 19.23%
  • Protesting military funerals by taunting the fallen as our pay back for not being perfect

    5 19.23%
  • Making a film or writing a book about that denigrates women as not worthy except for sex services

    1 3.85%
  • Distributing a film in a country where our troops are stationed saying they represent Satan

    2 7.69%
  • Loudly bellowing sexual, political, and religious insults

    4 15.38%
  • Intentionally speaking of unproven deviant sexual inuendo of another to their community

    8 30.77%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 2 of 13 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 130

Thread: The First Amendment

  1. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Last Seen
    01-05-17 @ 02:11 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,479

    Re: The First Amendment

    Quote Originally Posted by Aunt Spiker View Post
    This here - why did you group sex, politics and religion together?
    Good question Aunt Spiker ... I was actually being intentionally vague and referencing cases that were impacted by SCOTUS rulings on limitations to the First Amendment.

    I was hoping to open an interesting discussion on the first Amendment and now I have invitation to kayak ... so off I go! I might come back to this thread later or let it die. We have a good discussion on another thread and I was going to bring in SCOTUS rulings on the First Amendment into the discussion. Maybe later tonight ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    Yes, even shouting fire in a theater is protected under the first amendment. Can you not read what it says?

    Anyway, speech in your example is not the act that is responsible for deaths. That would be the idiots that can't handle being orderly. Speech can not kill, sorry.

    Well not exactly. Although ... I agree with you regarding on orderly protests ... if they wanted to peacefully protest against crazy ass hater Jones ... it might gain some respect and yet now they have committed far more despicable actions.

    For the record ... here is my post quoted below from another thread regarding Crazy Ass Jones v. Crazy Ass Fundamnetalists.


    Originally posted by Dion:


    This is how I really feel on this case.

    Jones is despicable and should be mocked endlessly.

    There are consequences to free speech .... however, excepting certain limited circumstances that are defined as "not protected speech", there is nothing the government can or should do in this case.

    Additionally, this situation is not even remotely analogous to "shouting fire". ( I had started another thread with some wild examples on that SCOTUS ruling) . If you applied that standard (SCOTUS) to this situation, every little thing that we believe, or write, or speak that goes against someone's religion could be considered an incitement to violence.

    People are responsible for the actions that they take. If the actions involve killing people because they were offended well then they can go **** themselves.
    Last edited by Turin; 09-16-12 at 03:51 PM.

  2. #12
    Cheese
    Aunt Spiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Sasnakra
    Last Seen
    09-10-16 @ 06:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,433

    Re: The First Amendment

    Quote Originally Posted by Dion View Post
    Good question Aunt Spiker ... I was actually being intentionally vague and referencing cases that were impacted by SCOTUS rulings on limitations to the First Amendment.

    I was hoping to open an interesting discussion on the first Amendment and now I have invitation to kayak ... so off I go! I might come back to this thread later or let it die. We have a good discussion on another thread and I was going to bring in SCOTUS rulings on the First Amendment into the discussion. Maybe later tonight ...
    Well - sexual insults: like calling someone a **** . . . or a dick. Yes - that's protected. Unless you're thinking of something else.

    Politics - protected.

    Religion - protected.

    But I don't think taht - to others - all should be considered the 'same thing' - one might be ok but the other not. Like religion VS sexual . . . or political vs religion.
    A screaming comes across the sky.
    It has happened before, but there is nothing to compare it to now.
    Pynchon - Gravity's Rainbow

  3. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Theoretical Physics Lab
    Last Seen
    01-06-15 @ 11:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    25,120

    Re: The First Amendment

    I'd protect all but the first, which is definitely NOT protected (looks like a few on the first page were arguing if it was or not...it's not).

    The third one is protected too, until they win. It is a federal crime (known as sedition) to directly threaten the POTUS, even if done in jest.

    So you don't mind if I tell DP about our night in my back seat in an Arby's parking lot, right Dion?

  4. #14
    Whoa, daddy!
    MadLib's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,225

    Re: The First Amendment

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    Yes, even shouting fire in a theater is protected under the first amendment. Can you not read what it says?

    Anyway, speech in your example is not the act that is responsible for deaths. That would be the idiots that can't handle being orderly. Speech can not kill, sorry.
    Not according to SCOTUS, so no. That is actually the exact example they use when restricting other forms of free speech.

    The speech is responsible for deaths, since any reasonable person would panic if they thought there was a fire in the theater.
    Quote Originally Posted by ecofarm View Post
    Hah. If someone put me in their sig, I'd never know. I have sigs off.

  5. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: The First Amendment

    Quote Originally Posted by MadLib View Post
    Not according to SCOTUS, so no. That is actually the exact example they use when restricting other forms of free speech.

    The speech is responsible for deaths, since any reasonable person would panic if they thought there was a fire in the theater.
    The act of running people over is responsible for the deaths. The speech itself is incapable of being responsible for deaths of people. Its also NOT reasonable to panic in such a situation and everyone knows you are supposed to stay orderly in that situation. People that fail to do so and kill people are responsible for the deaths, no one else.

    In short, their premise is faulty and they are blatantly violating what is actually written even by pondering it.

  6. #16
    Whoa, daddy!
    MadLib's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,225

    Re: The First Amendment

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    The act of running people over is responsible for the deaths. The speech itself is incapable of being responsible for deaths of people. Its also NOT reasonable to panic in such a situation and everyone knows you are supposed to stay orderly in that situation. People that fail to do so and kill people are responsible for the deaths, no one else.
    I guess generations of SCOTUS decisions are invalid, then
    Quote Originally Posted by ecofarm View Post
    Hah. If someone put me in their sig, I'd never know. I have sigs off.

  7. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: The First Amendment

    Quote Originally Posted by MadLib View Post
    I guess generations of SCOTUS decisions are invalid, then
    That is what I'm getting at.

  8. #18
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: The First Amendment

    Quote Originally Posted by Dion View Post
    I am going to throw out examples of what some people might view as free speech and ask you if you think they fall under the protection of our first Amendment.

    Here is one reference for the First Amendment ... please add others to the thread if you think they might be helpful.

    First Amendment | LII / Legal Information Institute
    The first one is the only clear cut case where we can infringe upon freedom of speech. All the others under certain circumstances are OK, and thus it is not innate to that exercise specifically. Though under each, it could be taken to extremes where perhaps infringement is warranted.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  9. #19
    Whoa, daddy!
    MadLib's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,225

    Re: The First Amendment

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    The first one is the only clear cut case where we can infringe upon freedom of speech. All the others under certain circumstances are OK, and thus it is not innate to that exercise specifically. Though under each, it could be taken to extremes where perhaps infringement is warranted.
    The second one, if it actually had pornographic images of children, could be restricted.

    The third one could be construed as a threat.

    The last one could constitute slander.
    Quote Originally Posted by ecofarm View Post
    Hah. If someone put me in their sig, I'd never know. I have sigs off.

  10. #20
    Whoa, daddy!
    MadLib's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,225

    Re: The First Amendment

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    That is what I'm getting at.
    I don't think so. Rights are nut ultimate. You can possess a gun and bring it with you, but you cannot put it at someone's head. The right to bear arms doesn't mean you could do such a thing.
    Quote Originally Posted by ecofarm View Post
    Hah. If someone put me in their sig, I'd never know. I have sigs off.

Page 2 of 13 FirstFirst 123412 ... 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
  •