Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2101112
Results 111 to 119 of 119

Thread: First Amendment; What's yor take on it?

  1. #111
    Educator Glitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    Alaska (61.5N, -149W)
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,072

    Re: First Amendment; What's yor take on it?

    Quote Originally Posted by uptower View Post
    Incorrect. They have as much free speech as the US but stops short where it can be unnecessarily harmful to others. You can scream the prime minister is an idiot to your heart's content on their street corners, but if you call for rounding up the Jews and gassing them, don't be surprised if the police are watching your Facebook page.

    Incidentally it's no different in the US, despite the illusion of 'free speech': the FBI keeps a tab on hate groups and agitators, no mistake. Hell if they had a file on MLK you can bet they have one on Richard Spencer, the Proud Boys or the Oath Breakers.

    As I mentioned earlier, the far right believes the First Amendment gives them the right to actively discriminate and the Second gives them the means to carry it out. They're living in a dreamworld. Freedom isn't free as the right wing love to preach. Free speech has consequences and hate speech gets you on someone's list.
    No they do not support free speech at all. England, Canada, and all these other nations fine or throw people into prison for things they say or post on-line. Contrary to what you may believe, that is not "free speech." Unless you libel or slander someone in the US, you can say or post anything you like. Offensive hateful speech is protected speech in the US - THAT is the very meaning of free speech. It isn't free speech if you only protect that speech with which you agree. It is free speech when you protect that speech with which you disagree.

  2. #112
    Sage
    Oborosen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Location
    Heflin, Alabama
    Last Seen
    07-15-19 @ 02:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,533

    Re: First Amendment; What's yor take on it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Glitch View Post
    No they do not support free speech at all. England, Canada, and all these other nations fine or throw people into prison for things they say or post on-line. Contrary to what you may believe, that is not "free speech." Unless you libel or slander someone in the US, you can say or post anything you like. Offensive hateful speech is protected speech in the US - THAT is the very meaning of free speech. It isn't free speech if you only protect that speech with which you agree. It is free speech when you protect that speech with which you disagree.
    Yeah, didn't a comedian have to go to a human rights tribunal in Canada, and even ended up being forced to pay a fine for the joke he made?

    I don't think a country that possesses such a policy, or standard. Even understands what free speech is at this point.
    Why do they run?
    Because they have no choice son, such is the way of cowards.
    But even a cornered rat, with no choice, will fight.
    Yes my son and that should tell you more than you need to know about the coward.

  3. #113
    Guru uptower's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:50 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    3,323

    Re: First Amendment; What's yor take on it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Glitch View Post
    No they do not support free speech at all. England, Canada, and all these other nations fine or throw people into prison for things they say or post on-line. Contrary to what you may believe, that is not "free speech." Unless you libel or slander someone in the US, you can say or post anything you like. Offensive hateful speech is protected speech in the US - THAT is the very meaning of free speech. It isn't free speech if you only protect that speech with which you agree. It is free speech when you protect that speech with which you disagree.
    I get the concept, but turn it into a free for all and there are consequences. We're seeing them now with a dangerous pool of ideas fermenting on the internet and in hate groups: not just the words we might not 'like', but calls to action that are dangerous and get people killed. If 'free speech' leads to a mess like Charlottesville, it can;t really be called free.

    But again, principles and reality are a different matter. the first amendment might guarantee free speech, but those who use it too much are probably already being watched by law enforcement. Their free speech is freedom to incriminate themselves and often leads to their plots being uncovered. It has been persecuted before - in the McCarthy era, when MLK marched, and recently where the past few presidents have threatened to lock up journalists, leakers, whistleblowers.

    In that respect it is an illusion: America only has free speech on paper. And right-wing fantasists who think their 1st Amendment rights allow them to hate with impunity, are actually often being watched (by the very 'blue lives' they purport to care for) because those words have consequences.
    "I had nothing to do Russia helping me to get elected."

  4. #114
    Educator Glitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    Alaska (61.5N, -149W)
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,072

    Re: First Amendment; What's yor take on it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Oborosen View Post
    Yeah, didn't a comedian have to go to a human rights tribunal in Canada, and even ended up being forced to pay a fine for the joke he made?

    I don't think a country that possesses such a policy, or standard. Even understands what free speech is at this point.
    Several people have been fined and put in prison in the UK for what they said. The UK has never had free speech, and still doesn't, which is one of the reasons why it is the very first amendment in the US Constitution.

  5. #115
    Educator Glitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    Alaska (61.5N, -149W)
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,072

    Re: First Amendment; What's yor take on it?

    Quote Originally Posted by uptower View Post
    I get the concept, but turn it into a free for all and there are consequences. We're seeing them now with a dangerous pool of ideas fermenting on the internet and in hate groups: not just the words we might not 'like', but calls to action that are dangerous and get people killed. If 'free speech' leads to a mess like Charlottesville, it can;t really be called free.

    But again, principles and reality are a different matter. the first amendment might guarantee free speech, but those who use it too much are probably already being watched by law enforcement. Their free speech is freedom to incriminate themselves and often leads to their plots being uncovered. It has been persecuted before - in the McCarthy era, when MLK marched, and recently where the past few presidents have threatened to lock up journalists, leakers, whistleblowers.

    In that respect it is an illusion: America only has free speech on paper. And right-wing fantasists who think their 1st Amendment rights allow them to hate with impunity, are actually often being watched (by the very 'blue lives' they purport to care for) because those words have consequences.
    The only legal consequences, with regard to speech, in the US is when you libel or slander someone. Using speech to cause someone financial harm is not allowed. Using speech to offend someone is allowed. The only "dangerous pool of ideas" I see are originating from anti-American leftists and foreigners who have no concept what free speech means. Charlottesville was a fine example of leftist hatred and violence. You apparently are not aware that neo-NAZIs are actually the National Socialist Movement. They are all left-wing scum, not a right-winger among them. All fascists, as Mussolini defined the term, are also left-wingers. In fact, ever domestic terrorist organization in the US, from ANTIFA, BLM, ALF, ELF, KKK, and the neo-NAZIs are all leftist scum. Yet they are permitted to exist because unlike the rest of the planet, the US actually values and protects free speech.

    Here is an education in American history that you are clearly lacking: During the 1950s the Democrat-controlled House Un-American Activities Committee violated the constitutional rights of Americans with their investigations. Senator McCarthy had absolutely nothing to do with the crimes committed by the Democrats in the House of Representatives. Senator McCarthy kept his investigations entirely within the federal government, primarily investigating the Department of State and the Department of Defense.

    Propagandists who commit crimes should be arrested. With regard to the criminal leftist media (a.k.a. "the enemy of the people") those crimes include illegally attempting to influence a national election.
    Last edited by Glitch; 07-13-19 at 08:52 PM.

  6. #116
    Guru uptower's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:50 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    3,323

    Re: First Amendment; What's yor take on it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Glitch View Post
    You apparently are not aware that neo-NAZIs are actually the National Socialist Movement. They are all left-wing scum, not a right-winger among them. All fascists, as Mussolini defined the term, are also left-wingers. In fact, ever domestic terrorist organization in the US, from ANTIFA, BLM, ALF, ELF, KKK, and the neo-NAZIs are all leftist scum.
    Incorrect. Neo-Nazism and half of those group are far right. Even the founder of national Socialism - Hitler - railed against the left and Bolsheviks so no, neither he nor his ideological followers can be called leftists in any sense of the word, no matter what moniker they chose for their party.

    Quote Originally Posted by Glitch View Post
    Here is an education in American history that you are clearly lacking:
    No personal comments please. I do not operate at that level.

    Quote Originally Posted by Glitch View Post
    During the 1950s the Democrat-controlled House Un-American Activities Committee violated the constitutional rights of Americans with their investigations. Senator McCarthy had absolutely nothing to do with the crimes committed by the Democrats in the House of Representatives. Senator McCarthy kept his investigations entirely within the federal government, primarily investigating the Department of State and the Department of Defense.
    It takes a very active imagination to defend McCarthyism and free speech in the same breath. MCCarthy stood for exactly the opposite.

    Quote Originally Posted by Glitch View Post
    Propagandists who commit crimes should be arrested. With regard to the criminal leftist media (a.k.a. "the enemy of the people") those crimes include illegally attempting to influence a national election.
    So much for freedom of speech then.
    "I had nothing to do Russia helping me to get elected."

  7. #117
    Educator Glitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    Alaska (61.5N, -149W)
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,072

    Re: First Amendment; What's yor take on it?

    Quote Originally Posted by uptower View Post
    Incorrect. Neo-Nazism and half of those group are far right. Even the founder of national Socialism - Hitler - railed against the left and Bolsheviks so no, neither he nor his ideological followers can be called leftists in any sense of the word, no matter what moniker they chose for their party.
    So now left-wing socialists have somehow become right-wing conservatives in your tiny mind. This is typical public school indoctrination. "Let's pretend that socialists are really right-wing conservatives!" ROFL! You would have to be pretty damn stupid to fall for that one, but that is the irrational left for you.

    Quote Originally Posted by uptower View Post
    It takes a very active imagination to defend McCarthyism and free speech in the same breath. MCCarthy stood for exactly the opposite.
    It takes an uneducated indoctrinated mind to hold a Senator responsible for the illegal actions taken in the House of Representatives.

    Quote Originally Posted by uptower View Post
    So much for freedom of speech then.
    Sorry, but your idea of "free speech" does not give you carte blanche to commit crimes. Or did you miss the whole Mueller investigation about illegally influencing elections? It isn't just a crime for Russians to be illegally influencing our elections, it is also a crime when the media does it. But since you have no clue what "free speech" actually means, I wouldn't expect you to grasp the concept of holding those accountable for illegally influencing elections either.
    Last edited by Glitch; 07-13-19 at 09:27 PM.

  8. #118
    Guru uptower's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:50 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    3,323

    Re: First Amendment; What's yor take on it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Glitch View Post
    So now left-wing socialists have somehow become right-wing conservatives in your tiny mind.
    I wouldn't expect you to grasp the concept of holding those accountable for illegally influencing elections either.
    I'm disappointed. I do not speak to others this way on the forums and had hoped for a more sensible interaction. Sorry it has come to this.

    The saddest part is it has a 'last edited' tag at the bottom and the personal insults are still in there.
    "I had nothing to do Russia helping me to get elected."

  9. #119
    Educator

    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    1,111

    Re: First Amendment; What's yor take on it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Glitch View Post
    Unless you libel or slander someone in the US, you can say or post anything you like. Offensive hateful speech is protected speech in the US - THAT is the very meaning of free speech. It isn't free speech if you only protect that speech with which you agree. It is free speech when you protect that speech with which you disagree.
    It is clear you really don't understand the Founding Fathers' intent when they adopted the 1st amendment. Further, your idea that "offensive hateful speech" is the very speech that must be protected is ridiculous on its face. Add that the USSC has in many cases drawn the boundaries of free speech. You are clueless.

Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2101112

Posting Permissions

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