• 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!

Why Do We Tolerate Voliations of the BOR such as the 1st Amendment

Why Do We Tolerate Voliations of the BOR such as the 1st Amendment
Click to expand...

Please explain how the 1st Amendment is a violation of the Bill of Rights.
 
Deuce said:
Yes, using your rather expansive definition of government...but once again I have to explain to you that ‘no government’ is not among your options unless you invent a magic wand that ends all crime.
Click to expand...

I think that's a fair point. I don't get to control another person deciding to do bad. And I've said as much before. However, without your government, I am free to control how I defend myself from them. It also becomes easier to do without you creating more crime, and by larger organizations, institutionally.
 
DebateChallenge said:
Alright I see what you're saying but you shouldn't get in trouble for verbally threatening somebody, that would be a violation of the 1st amendment.
Click to expand...

Do you believe the 1st Amendment protects an individual if they yell "Fire" in a movie theater? (Hint: the SC says no).

The problem is in today's world we have situation where a child has killed another child for whatever reason. Back when I was growing up saying "I will kill you" was not taken literally. It is today.

Bottom line, the 1st does not give you the right to say whatever you want wherever you want.
 
mike2810 said:
Do you believe the 1st Amendment protects an individual if they yell "Fire" in a movie theater? (Hint: the SC says no).

The problem is in today's world we have situation where a child has killed another child for whatever reason. Back when I was growing up saying "I will kill you" was not taken literally. It is today.

Bottom line, the 1st does not give you the right to say whatever you want wherever you want.
Click to expand...

I don't know about you, but I'm capable of determining if a theater is on fire myself, whether it has an idiot yelling "fire" in it or not. I don't need a nanny state helping me out in the matter.
 
DebateChallenge said:
Why do We the People of the United States put up with the government violating our constitution and violating our rights? For instance, the First Amendment gives us freedom of speech and yet the government will punish people for saying stuff. Why do we put up with that? We are allowed to say whatever we want without repercussions.
Click to expand...
LOL i dont know what country you are from but all your posts seem to be severely uneducated about my country

the bolded above has NEVER been the case in the history of the united states :shrug:
 
Anarchon said:
I think that's a fair point. I don't get to control another person deciding to do bad. And I've said as much before. However, without your government, I am free to control how I defend myself from them. It also becomes easier to do without you creating more crime, and by larger organizations, institutionally.
Click to expand...

Red:
Government or no government, one is free to so control one's comportment.
 
Xelor said:
Red:
Government or no government, one is free to so control one's comportment.
Click to expand...

You're wrong again. Your government completely negates my ability to defend myself from them, and limits my ability to defend myself from others.
 
Anarchon said:
I think that's a fair point. I don't get to control another person deciding to do bad. And I've said as much before. However, without your government, I am free to control how I defend myself from them. It also becomes easier to do without you creating more crime, and by larger organizations, institutionally.
Xelor said:
Red:
Government or no government, one is free to so control one's comportment.

Anarchon said:
You're wrong again. Your government completely negates my ability to defend myself from them, and limits my ability to defend myself from others.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Blue:
You just keep thinking that....


​
'Tis in ourselves that we are thus or thus. Our bodies are our gardens to the which our wills are gardeners.
-- William Shakespeare, Othello​, Act I, Scene III​
 
Anarchon said:
I don't know about you, but I'm capable of determining if a theater is on fire myself, whether it has an idiot yelling "fire" in it or not. I don't need a nanny state helping me out in the matter.
Click to expand...

I agree.
 
DebateChallenge said:
Why do We the People of the United States put up with the government violating our constitution and violating our rights? For instance, the First Amendment gives us freedom of speech and yet the government will punish people for saying stuff. Why do we put up with that? We are allowed to say whatever we want without repercussions.
Click to expand...

You're mostly right, but partly wrong.

The only wrong part is "without repercussions". There are almost always repercussions, and the law deals with such things by way of libel laws.

As to the rest, the government violates any part of the Constitution it wishes, anytime it pleases. It was the government that passed the Patriot Act in the dark of night and under duress, and that Act renders the Fourth Amendment null and void. But few people said anything about that, mostly just radicals like ACLU. ;)

The people don't control the government, rather the government controls the people.

Law-breaking in Washington DC is standard fare. Neither military aggression nor perjury is punished there. More often perjurers receive medals. George Bush just received the Liberty Award a few days ago.

Up is down, green is blue in DC.
 
Xelor said:
Blue:
You just keep thinking that....


​
'Tis in ourselves that we are thus or thus. Our bodies are our gardens to the which our wills are gardeners.
-- William Shakespeare, Othello​, Act I, Scene III​
Click to expand...

Bill didn't have a gun to his head.
 
Anarchon said:
I don't know about you, but I'm capable of determining if a theater is on fire myself, whether it has an idiot yelling "fire" in it or not. I don't need a nanny state helping me out in the matter.
Click to expand...

Red:

rotflmao.gif
 
Anarchon said:
I don't know about you, but I'm capable of determining if a theater is on fire myself, whether it has an idiot yelling "fire" in it or not. I don't need a nanny state helping me out in the matter.
Click to expand...

If a semi was bearing down on you and your back was turned and someone tried to warn you, he's a nanny state idiot? Man you're tough to please...

Xelor said:
Red:

rotflmao.gif
Click to expand...

Well said...
 
Anarchon said:
I think that's a fair point. I don't get to control another person deciding to do bad. And I've said as much before. However, without your government, I am free to control how I defend myself from them. It also becomes easier to do without you creating more crime, and by larger organizations, institutionally.
Click to expand...

And when you find your defense was not able to stop a crime committed upon your person, what then?
 
DebateChallenge said:
Why do We the People of the United States put up with the government violating our constitution and violating our rights? For instance, the First Amendment gives us freedom of speech and yet the government will punish people for saying stuff. Why do we put up with that? We are allowed to say whatever we want without repercussions.
Click to expand...

Actually, we aren't free from our words having repercussions. That has never been true. The greatest abuse of the first amendment is predicated on the sentiment you articulate here.

There are people who think they should be able to say whatever they like without any consequences. They don't understand the responsibility that comes with rights. They are often the same people who fail to grasp the responsibility that comes with religious freedom. Just because you're free to believe any whackadoodle thing doesn't mean your words and actions, that are based upon that whackadoodle thinking, are protected. Believe, if you like, that God protects you. Put your hands on my wife in that God's name, however, and I'll prove he's not as on the job as you think.

You see. Words and thoughts/beliefs aren't reality. It's vital that we, as adults, internalize that lesson and get over ourselves, as being rights-endowed never kept anyone from getting an ass whuppin'.
 
D_NATURED said:
Put your hands on my wife in that God's name, however, and I'll prove he's not as on the job as you think.
Click to expand...

Why would I want to do that? Im talking about saying what I want not putting my hands on anybody.
 
DebateChallenge said:
Well I do know of a case of a boy getting in trouble with the law for telling a bully he was going to kill him. This bully in school was constantly harassing the boy until finally the boy said, "Knock it off, Im gonna kill you!" The boy got in trouble not only at school but also with the law for saying he was going to kill the bully. For saying words such as "Im gonna kill you," it might not be a good idea to say such words but the law has no business punishing somebody for saying such words as that would be a violation of the First Amendment which is supposed to guarantee free speech.
Click to expand...
The 1st Amendment is not, and never has been, absolute. There are lots of exceptions already recognized by the law and the courts. You can't defame, you can't slander, you can't threaten, you can't deliberately cause a panic, you can't publicly display obscenities, government employees cannot release classified information (though once it's out, journalists can publish it), the list goes on.

Immediate, specific and credible threats are not protected by the 1st Amendment. E.g. if you pin a note that reads "I'm gonna kill you, signed DebateChallenge" to your ex-wife's door with a huge bloody knife? Yeah, that's a criminal threat, and is not protected.

I also have to say that there are lots of issues with your example. It's vague, you omit details until you need them, there's no public record of it, and of course one instance doesn't really prove much.
 
SoCal said:
If a semi was bearing down on you and your back was turned and someone tried to warn you, he's a nanny state idiot? Man you're tough to please...
Click to expand...

No. If I were driving with my back turned, I'd be the idiot. Again, responsibility for one's own actions is paramount, not giving that responsibility to the nanny state.
 
DebateChallenge said:
Why would I want to do that? Im talking about saying what I want not putting my hands on anybody.
Click to expand...

It wasn't directed at you specifically. I was merely making the point that beliefs are a big bag of nothing but when beliefs become actions the repercussions are unavoidable, as with ALL actions, and shouldn't surprise anyone. Furthermore, nobody should feel entitled to needlessly insult others or lie about them because they have the first amendment. We should still have a sense of responsibility NOT to be dicks, even if we have the right.

Do you agree?
 
Anarchon said:
No. If I were driving with my back turned, I'd be the idiot. Again, responsibility for one's own actions is paramount, not giving that responsibility to the nanny state.
Click to expand...

Who said you were driving and how likely is it you would hear/notice someone outside your car? :doh

Nothing like going to ridiculous...or obtuse...lengths to avoid answering the question asked.

OTOH...just how well do you observe all the traffic BEHIND you when you do drive? 100%? :roll:
 
Lursa said:
Who said you were driving and how likely is it you would hear/notice someone outside your car? :doh

Nothing like going to ridiculous...or obtuse...lengths to avoid answering the question asked.

OTOH...just how well do you observe all the traffic BEHIND you when you do drive? 100%? :roll:
Click to expand...

I keep track of all of it that can affect me.
 
Anarchon said:
I keep track of all of it that can affect me.
Click to expand...

As do we all, for the most part.

So then what's your answer to his question?
 
Threats of violence are free speech. However, they are not free from repercussions.
 
D_NATURED said:
It wasn't directed at you specifically. I was merely making the point that beliefs are a big bag of nothing but when beliefs become actions the repercussions are unavoidable, as with ALL actions, and shouldn't surprise anyone. Furthermore, nobody should feel entitled to needlessly insult others or lie about them because they have the first amendment. We should still have a sense of responsibility NOT to be dicks, even if we have the right.

Do you agree?
Click to expand...

I don't think its a good idea to insult others or tell lies about people but there is no law that prohibits it. Whether or not we have the moral responsibility NOT to be dicks, as you put it, is a different matter. What Im talking about is legal responsibility.

With the 1st Amendment comes freedom of expression. That being said, if I decide to express myself by saying I would like to smash so and so's head like a watermelon I shouldn't get in trouble for saying that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom