• 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 Orchestrated (fake) Protests Be Allowed To Hinder Free Speech?

Should protesters be allowed to curb free speech in this country?

  • Yes. Protests are protected by the Constitution.

    Votes: 20 55.6%

  • No. If protesters stop free speech, they should be removed by police.

    Votes: 14 38.9%

  • If fake protesters & their masters should be prosecuted.

    Votes: 6 16.7%
  • Total voters
    36
Well we know the insurance companies are spending 1.4 million a day to try and stop a HC bill.

...Is any of that going to fake protestors? I don't know.

But, even if so, I am always for free speech unless laws are being broken.
 
Kernel Sanders said:
If the problem is with enforcement of current laws, what would additional legislation accomplish?
Click to expand...

It would make things that SHOULD BE crimes.......actual crimes.

Quick Examples:

"Anyone who conspires with others for the purpose of depriving someone of their First Amendment rights , is hereby guilty of......."

"Anyone who pays an operative for the purpose of depriving someone of their First Amendment rights , is hereby guilty of......."



I could go on all night!:lol:
 
Devil505 said:
Maybe we need some new laws to protect our First Amendment rights.
Click to expand...

Maybe we need to kill the people in order to save the village.

Devil505 said:
Edit:

How about this proposed law:

If it can be proved that you crossed state lines for the purpose of inhibiting the First Amendment rights of others, & were paid for your efforts, you are guilty of violating 18USC231......(a federal felony) etc..etc...etc

Writing such a law would not be difficult. (Coming up with the political will & guts to do so....would.)
Click to expand...

Well that is one way to get rid of our politicians. But they will exempt themselves. I guess when it comes down to it we will have to import operatives from Canada and maybe hire someone to be our Voice since you cannot limit such laws to target only those who "inhibit" the First Amendment Rights of others it will apply to those who contradict the content of the speech of other. Again the First Amendment right of Free Speech is to protect Unpopular Speech.
 
Shadow Serious said:
it will apply to those who contradict the content of the speech of other. Again the First Amendment right of Free Speech is to protect Unpopular Speech.
Click to expand...

In order to contradict something
...You must be able to actually HEAR what is said. The opponents of health care reform want to prevent you from even hearing the words of the pro-reformers.
If their views are better, what are they so afraid of that they don't even want us to hear the words????
 
Devil505 said:
In order to contradict something
...You must be able to actually HEAR what is said. The opponents of health care reform want to prevent you from even hearing the words of the pro-reformers.
If their views are better, what are they so afraid of that they don't even want us to hear the words????
Click to expand...


From what i understand is that the "paid prepretatiors" were responding to a whopper of a statement by an elected official. So the pro "reform" side politician did get his chance. And the public responded.
 
Devil505 said:
In order to contradict something
...You must be able to actually HEAR what is said. The opponents of health care reform want to prevent you from even hearing the words of the pro-reformers.
If their views are better, what are they so afraid of that they don't even want us to hear the words????
Click to expand...

You should ask yourself that the next time Ward Connerly comes to town.
 
Shadow Serious said:
From what i understand is that the "paid prepretatiors" were responding to a whopper of a statement by an elected official. So the pro "reform" side politician did get his chance. And the public responded.
Click to expand...

This topic is not an attempt to prove anything. It is meant purely see where we stand on attempts to inhibit First Amendment rights of others, if that is taking place.

Is it OK to do that? (interfere with the free speech rights of others)
 
Devil505 said:
By "Better" I assume you mean polls that support your position, right?;)
Click to expand...

No, I mean the honest ones.

The vast majority of Americans have health coverage and don't want the government hosing them, which is the only thing government is capable of doing.

The Left's bogus claim of "xx million" people uninsured or not covered or dying or whatever other scare-phrase they feel is most suitable this hour, can be usually reduced by a factor of whatever it is to make it equal to 10 million or so because that's the proper number.

Again, we're seeing the usual "lets inflate the numbers because we're leftists and leftist starts with an "L" just like lying does". Or don't you remember the mythical six million homeless that infested America until Reagan left office, Bush left office, and a slimy Democrat took the White House? Suddenly, we're exterminated over five and a half-million or so vermin, because the number of "homeless" dropped to less than half-a-million practically over night. Naturally, the Left wants to keep a solid supply of homeless, because they've learned how handy it is for them to have a bunch of living bodies on h and who will sell their vote for a pack of beer and some smokes.

Are you getting the picture of just how utterly despicable the Democrats are and just how aware the general public is of their short-comings, their deceits, and their basic inherent corruption, and how the real people of this country are paying attention and won't let this sleazebag Democrat government continue to steal their freedoms without protest?
 
Last edited:
Devil505 said:
This topic is not an attempt to prove anything. It is meant purely see where we stand on attempts to inhibit First Amendment rights of others, if that is taking place.

Is it OK to do that? (interfere with the free speech rights of others)
Click to expand...

We do not need special laws to prohibit the "inhibition" of Free Speech. We have laws that prohibit Disorderly Conduct. I do not consider an elected official or some other person in a capacity of power, who begins to lie about what you will get with some government program to have their speech infringed when some one loudly disagrees with them.

An infringement of Speech occurs when a person who uses coercion against others either thru the legal actions or thru illegal activity. The former can open to a lawsuit and possible prosecution for malicious use of the courts and other Councils, etc. The second is of coure is illegal.
 
There is a fine line between free speech and acts of intimidation.

From where I sit, I'd say the brownshirts disrupting the town hall meetings are cut from the same cloth as those who stormed the recounts in Florida in 2000. They are not interested in fostering free speech but in preventing it.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
The vast majority of Americans have health coverage and don't want the government hosing them, which is the only thing government is capable of doing.
Click to expand...

Then you keep your present insurance. Simple


Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Are you getting the picture of just how utterly despicable the Democrats are and just how aware the general public is of their short-comings, they're deceits, and their basic inherent corruption, and how the real people of this country are paying attention and won't let this sleazebag Democrat government continue to steal their freedoms without protest?
Click to expand...

Then why did your party get thrown out of: The House...The Senate & the White House?

You guys now have NOT ONE Congressman in the entire northeast. (& no prospect for picking any up in the near future)


:lol::lol:..Don't tell me..............Left wing media bias??:roll:
 
Last edited:
Shadow Serious said:
I do not consider an elected official or some other person in a capacity of power, who begins to lie about what you will get with some government program to have their speech infringed when some one loudly disagrees with them.
Click to expand...

Show me where someone agrees to give up their First Amendment rights when they are elected to public office??
 
Gardener said:
There is a fine line between free speech and acts of intimidation.

From where I sit, I'd say the brownshirts disrupting the town hall meetings are cut from the same cloth as those who stormed the recounts in Florida in 2000. They are not interested in fostering free speech but in preventing it.
Click to expand...

BINGO! You just won the Swastika Award for bring the Nazis to the thread.
 
Devil505 said:
Then you keep your present insurance. Simple.
Click to expand...

You like the taste of red Kool-aid, don't ya?

Nobody who's not a Senator or Congressman will be able to keep their private health coverage. That's the nature of fascism, after all. No denying this.

Devil505 said:
Then why did your party get thrown out of: The House...The Senate & the White House?
Click to expand...

Smokin' too much weed, I s'pose.

I'm a Libertarian, not a Republican.

Devil505 said:
You guys now have NOT ONE Congressman in the entire northeast. (& no prospect for picking any up in the near future)


:lol::lol:..Don't tell me..............Left wing media bias??:roll:
Click to expand...

My party has never had a Congressman, period.

So you can't refute what I say, so you have to play these completely irrelevant strawman games?

BTW, are you trying to claim there's not one Republican Congressthing east of the Mississippi and north of the Macon-Dixon Line? What exactly are you saying here?
 

Attachments

  • man_with_paper_bag.jpg
    man_with_paper_bag.jpg
    34.4 KB · Views: 1,580
Devil505 said:
Show me where someone agrees to give up their First Amendment rights when they are elected to public office??
Click to expand...


Show me where a person who rudely disagrees with an elected representative is suppressing that politico's free speech.
 
Conservatives are men and liberals are little fruity pebbles who put gel in their hair and get beat up by gay bashers.
 
This whole thread is pretty much a partisan joke.

Where is the evidence supporting this silly accusation that this is fake? This is all (including the press secretary) nothing but speculation. :roll:

People protest and it is their right to do so whether you think it is fake or not.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
BINGO! You just won the Swastika Award for bring the Nazis to the thread.
Click to expand...

And congrats to you, sir... For you have just nabbed the coveted hyper-partisan spin of the night award.

And with that you also get a copy of the leaked conservative memo instructing folks on how to crash and ruin a Townhall meeting by being disruptive assholes.

townhallactionmemo.pdf


Way to make a fake spontaneous uprising feel more...real?:2razz:
 
Devil505 said:
Since I & many others feel that the shouting protest at many health care rallies is being orchestrated, & appears designed to prevent the American voter from hearing the other side of the issue, I ask the above poll question.
Whether or not our suspicions (including those of press Sec Gibbs at today's briefing C-SPAN | Capitol Hill, The White House and National Politics) prove to be true, my poll question remains.

The last option should read: If fake, (operatives proven to be merely "Posing" as concerned citizens while actually being paid money for the purpose of inhibiting free speech) protesters & their masters should be prosecuted.
Click to expand...

How are these protesters that you claim to be fake hindering free speech?

Are they blocking doors to prevent the opposition from speaking?
SANTA CRUZ / Military recruiters, confronted by crowd, leave campus job fair / Anti-war protesters at university block doors to building

Are they throwing pies at people speaking?
Videos - Free video downloads and streaming video - CNET TV

Are they hollering off the top of their lungs to prevent others from hearing what someone is saying or trying to intimidate people?
Protesters shout down Tancredo at UNC-Chapel Hill (OneNewsNow.com)

Did they harass their offices to cause them to shut down for a little bit?
Anti-war protesters close down recruiting center - News


Unless they are actually doing the above things then they are not denying anyone their right to speak.



What makes them fake? Do you think those who are protesting somehow do not believe a word of what they are saying? Is there a video of these people being paid to protest?
 
Shadow Serious said:
Show me where a person who rudely disagrees with an elected representative is suppressing that politico's free speech.
Click to expand...


If his/her rude disagreement is done for the purpose of drowning out the speaker, then it is violating the speaker's First Amendment rights & needs to be stopped by the police & possibly prosecuted if that protester is an operative working for others to stop free speech.

Pretty simple concept.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom