It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Fair-Weather Friends of Free Speech

page: 2
28
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 25 2017 @ 04:28 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Spell out what you want people to do regarding free speech. Not protest speakers at universities? Not tell someone they're being an -ist? What?




posted on Apr, 25 2017 @ 04:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Kali74




Spell out what you want people to do regarding free speech. Not protest speakers at universities? Not tell someone they're being an -ist? What?


No. You should know what free speech is and why it is protected.



posted on Apr, 25 2017 @ 04:30 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Off topic but important, not semantic. The, forces us all to accept a uniform definition of who or what the creator is, their allows for individual interpretation.



posted on Apr, 25 2017 @ 04:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Kali74

So... you're admitting that rights transcend law?

I'm not sure you even know what side you're on, which is appropriate here considering one of the OP's main points was regarding the total confusion many people have on the matter.



posted on Apr, 25 2017 @ 04:33 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

You're the one telling so many people they are wrong so spell it out. Can you? Are you unable to articulate your own thoughts on the subject? Or are you just crying because someone called you an -ist for something you said?



posted on Apr, 25 2017 @ 04:33 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Can you agree with freedom of speech as a fundamental right while simultaneously supporting underhanded censorship tactics?

No. I don't believe so.

But what can you do about it? Other than point it out there's not much.

Anyway, good thread I like your reasoning.



posted on Apr, 25 2017 @ 04:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Kali74

That's not off topic.

The first was written by the same sort that wrote the declaration.

They are synomous with each other.

It's quite clear:



When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth,the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.




We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,


www.ushistory.org...

ALL men are created equal.

ALL men are endowed by the creator by inalienable rights.

The laws of Nature and GOD entitlethem.

Freedom of speech.

Government ONLY has authority so long as it's the consent of the governed.

Infringing A right is verboten.

Under EQUALITY of people.



posted on Apr, 25 2017 @ 04:36 PM
link   
What's the point of spelling it out when the intended are illiterate?



posted on Apr, 25 2017 @ 04:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Kali74


Spell out what you want people to do regarding free speech. Not protest speakers at universities?


Would be a start lol.

I'm supporting free speech by stopping someone from speaking!!

How does that make any sense?



posted on Apr, 25 2017 @ 04:37 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

It's okay Neo, babble is protected speech.



posted on Apr, 25 2017 @ 04:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Kali74




You're the one telling so many people they are wrong so spell it out. Can you? Are you unable to articulate your own thoughts on the subject? Or are you just crying because someone called you an -ist for something you said?


I can articulate my thoughts on the matter.

Crying? No. No one called me anything and I am not discussing my feelings. I am talking about a principle.



posted on Apr, 25 2017 @ 04:40 PM
link   
a reply to: rockintitz



Can you agree with freedom of speech as a fundamental right while simultaneously supporting underhanded censorship tactics?

No. I don't believe so.


No. All one can do is be responsible with his own speech, and advocate for responsibility.



posted on Apr, 25 2017 @ 04:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: neo96

It's okay Neo, babble is protected speech.


That's hate speech.

Think I will protest and go around throwing things, and destorying property to stop it.

Well for no other reason I don't like it.



posted on Apr, 25 2017 @ 04:44 PM
link   
a reply to: rockintitz

I didn't say stop someone from speaking, I said protest... furthermore you can't actually stop someone from speaking unless you lock them away and deprive them of all forms of communication/audience. You don't have a right to a platform.



posted on Apr, 25 2017 @ 04:48 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope


I am talking about a principle.


What does one need to do in order to meet your principle?



posted on Apr, 25 2017 @ 04:49 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

The soft blocks are in the playroom.



posted on Apr, 25 2017 @ 04:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Kali74

But people have been stopped from speaking. Milo, Ben Shapiro, Ann Coulter was just 'rescheduled.'

So you agree this is not the correct way to go about things, right?



posted on Apr, 25 2017 @ 04:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Kali74




What does one need to do in order to meet your principle?


Simply to let them speak.



posted on Apr, 25 2017 @ 04:51 PM
link   
a reply to: rockintitz

No they weren't. They are speaking elsewhere to this very day.



posted on Apr, 25 2017 @ 04:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Kali74

Ear plugs are in the pantry.



new topics

top topics



 
28
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join