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.

 

Religious tolerance trumps freedom of speech. The death of the 1st Amendment.

page: 4
16
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 01:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by sheepslayer247
reply to post by ManBehindTheMask
 


I think they are referring to a "you can't yell fire in a crowded theater" type of argument.

Do we have the right to free speech? Yes.

Do we have a responsibility to not yell fire so that people get trampled on their way out the door? Yes.

I think that is what people are missing here. Free speech comes with a responsibility in how you use it. You also have the right to bare arms. Does that mean we can pop-off rounds wherever we want? No...there's a responsibility that goes along with that right.







I undesrtand where they are going with it, and believe me I agree..........

But the point is you cant start mandating things like this, because the slippery slope of where it goes.......

Once again, look we had the patriot act, now look where its landslided too? Indefinite detainment, w out trial of anyone deemed by the gov (which by the way makes the rules on what constitutes a threat) as a threat...

We do not need anymore of this.....this plays right in the hands of the government to tighten the noose, people you have to remain vigilant here......

They want to protect the people, fine, then protect us from the people who react violently over ridiculous films...dont apologize for it, bring them to justice....there should be NO tolerance for that

The crime isnt because someone is stupid and makes a horrible film thats bigotted and nasty, the crime is the mindset of the people who were murdering innocent people and burning down buildings......

If I yell at you and call you every name in the book, and scream racial slurs at you, and you kill me, you get tried for murder.......now, you may hate me because im a complete waste of skin for being a racist moron....but youre still at fault......

How well of a defense is it that "Well, he called him a name and it made him extremely angry, so hes really at fault" ......No, you are responsible for your actions for killing me........

Stop blaming the film makers for this, and dont push any more legislation that will inevitably lead to more rights being taken away from our gov
edit on 21-9-2012 by ManBehindTheMask because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 01:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by icepack
reply to post by ManBehindTheMask
 

the freedom of speech ends, if you insult or discriminate. this freedom of speech is limited like all other freedoms are.

Yet ManBehindTheMask might feel insulted by your reply.

So no. Freedom of speech does not end. Insults, discriminations are interpretive. If we start banning speech based on that, we'll become a silent nation.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
Here it is.
The 1st amendment.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


en.wikipedia.org...

Just 45 words. No caveats. No "special circumstances", no falsly yelling fire in a theatre clause, no religious exemptions. No interpretations. No butthurt clauses.

It must drive some peopl crazy, this little amendment.


That Amendment, along with the Second guarantee all the rest.

I hear more angst about the first four Amendments nowadays than any of the others.

Many people don't seem to get that. They just want their world view and nothing else. And if you disagree with them, you are minimulized or if they had their way...sent elsewhere.

To them, that pesky First Amendment is nothing more than a piece of paper that gets in their way. After all, they know better.

I will always stand against those that think like that.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 02:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by TDawgRex


I will always stand against those that think like that.


Agreed! I may not agree with what some say, but I'll defend their right to say it.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 02:09 PM
link   


Agreed! I may not agree with what some say, but I'll defend their right to say it.


Except for obama because he must say what I want him to say and if he doesn't I'll just make stuff up about him that isn't true and make a big deal about to score points with my conservative brethren.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 02:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by icepack
reply to post by ManBehindTheMask
 

the freedom of speech ends, if you insult or discriminate. this freedom of speech is limited like all other freedoms are.



Actually, America is one of the few countries that protects hate speech as a civil right.

Technically you can say whatever you want regardless of how hateful or stupid it is. Only exceptions is under fighting words, inciting riot/violence and defamation.

It's pretty rare that people get charged with 'fighting words' in most settings at least. Universities etc ... just have to put up with racists etc ... in most instances when they've attempted to ask students to leave/enacted policy 'against' the first ammendment its been over turned when challenged.

The incite to riot part is a lot more wide open that you would think as well.
edit on 21-9-2012 by Pinke because: I forgot to finish my post? *drools*



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


Beez,

This is my take on it...

They (Hillary, Barack, and The State Department) represent the voice's in this movie,
for whatever reason they decided to spend 70k to try and apologize, or
clarify an official position on the You Tube propaganda peice "Innocence of Muslims",
its a complete waste. ( I think they have another purpose, that is to fuel the fire)

I am sure those in Pakistan are not going to give one iota about Hillary and Barack
the next time a Drone strike takes out innocent children.

Then, past that on December 21, 2012 Zero Dark Thirty will open,
with all of the cool information delivered up by The White House and Barack
to Hollywood about how they killed the infamous boogey man bin Laden.

If we make it till then, with Pamella Geller on the loose with her ads set to run
in the New York Subways...

Lots of players, more than a few narratives and perhaps a handful of
ultimate goals. I have a suspicion, well founded that what lies beneath
is indeed a plan that is being implemented. A plan that is carried out
by those who work in secret. We could easliy say that its Radical Muslims,
carrying out the ten year plan to ban all free speech concerning Islam.

Perhaps this is true, I think it is. Yet, something tells me they are getting help
from someone somewhere that has a vested stake in the end of The First Amendment.

To the Radical Muslims, I say this:

“The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously.”
Hubert H. Humphrey


edit on 21-9-2012 by burntheships because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by EvilSadamClone



Agreed! I may not agree with what some say, but I'll defend their right to say it.


Except for obama because he must say what I want him to say and if he doesn't I'll just make stuff up about him that isn't true and make a big deal about to score points with my conservative brethren.



resulting to personal attacks is the first indicator that you are losing the debate.....

That being said, I dont see any post where Beezer or anyone else in this thread has advocated the silencing of Obama.......

Baseless, off topic, and nasty..........are you proud?



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 02:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by EvilSadamClone



Agreed! I may not agree with what some say, but I'll defend their right to say it.


Except for obama because he must say what I want him to say and if he doesn't I'll just make stuff up about him that isn't true and make a big deal about to score points with my conservative brethren.





Almost, but not quite. I enjoy having him speak. The more he does, the more my points are proven.




posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 02:25 PM
link   
reply to post by ManBehindTheMask
 





resulting to personal attacks is the first indicator that you are losing the debate..... That being said, I dont see any post where Beezer or anyone else in this thread has advocated the silencing of Obama....... Baseless, off topic, and nasty..........are you proud?


Gee, uh let's see... this whole thread is precisely a personal attack against Obama because he didn't say what he wanted to say, so that means he loses. The OP already made a big deal about Obama and Hilary making this an apology when they did no such thing. And now he's just changing goal posts and trying to slam Obama yet again. He's just making stuff up to be a partisan hack.

Not to mention that the whole premise of the thread is that Obama should STFU because he isn't saying what the OP thinks Obama should have said while claiming everybody else has the right to free speech.... except Obama because he must say what he wants Obama to say.

So you're the one being baseless and you're also personally attacking me. So that means you lose.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 02:26 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


Actually he doesn't prove any of your points because all you're doing is jsut making stuff up, like when you wrongly claimed and made a big deal about Obama apologized for the video.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 02:30 PM
link   
reply to post by EvilSadamClone
 





So you're the one being baseless and you're also personally attacking me. So that means you lose.


Im being baseless and attacking you? I didnt attack you I made a statement that personal attacks is the first indicator of losing a debate.......and you indeed personally attacked the OP........




Gee, uh let's see... this whole thread is precisely a personal attack against Obama because he didn't say what he wanted to say, so that means he loses. The OP already made a big deal about Obama and Hilary making this an apology when they did no such thing


He might not agree with Obama , but he never once said he wished to silence him.........which was the basis for your claim.......he also never attacked him personally, he attacked his, and his administrations policy on the issue....

Again your vitriol is unfounded......

You may not agree with what the OP has to say, and thats fine too.....but at least be intellectually honest when throwing out accusations.......



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 02:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by EvilSadamClone
reply to post by beezzer
 


Actually he doesn't prove any of your points because all you're doing is jsut making stuff up, like when you wrongly claimed and made a big deal about Obama apologized for the video.

Actually I stated that Hillary did. If you're going to insult me, get your facts right.

As for Obama, let me recap;


Decry the violence. Check!
State that the video sucks. Check!
Defend their (the video maker) rights to be offensive. *crickets*

Obama is being the partisan hack! I'm just nervous when any politician gets too close to the 1st Amendment.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by ManBehindTheMask
 





Im being baseless and attacking you? I didnt attack you I made a statement that personal attacks is the first indicator of losing a debate.......and you indeed personally attacked the OP.


No, I made a statement of truth, It is you who are being intellectually dishonest by attacking me because I just proved your pal beezer wrong and you can't stand it. And all you're doing is just personally attacking me. You be intellectually honest and lead by example.


This is my last post to you.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 02:36 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 





Obama is being the partisan hack! I'm just nervous when any politician gets too close to the 1st Amendment.


All you're doing is making a big deal out of nothing.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 02:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by EvilSadamClone
reply to post by beezzer
 





Obama is being the partisan hack! I'm just nervous when any politician gets too close to the 1st Amendment.


All you're doing is making a big deal out of nothing.



Wrong! (again)

I will stand up for free speech regardless of the content.

Any indication that it might be infringed, I'll get froggy and jump.

You don't have to agree with me (thats obvious) and you're welcome to support any actions to limit free speech.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 02:44 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 





Wrong! (again) I will stand up for free speech regardless of the content.


Nope. You're not standing up for free speech.

And free speech does have its limitations.

Obama and Hellary just condemned the video. Probably without watching it, I might add, like everybody else.

That's not violating anybody's right to free speech.

And there is the possibility that the guys made the video to purposefully incite riots. However, that has yet to be proven in a court of law.

And inciting riots is one of the things you're not allowed to do with free speech.

They don't have to say what you want them to say either.

You're just trying to raise a big stink over nothing.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 02:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by EvilSadamClone


Nope. You're not standing up for free speech.


Really?



And free speech does have its limitations.


Here we go. Can you point that out where it says that in the 1st Amendment?


Obama and Hellary just condemned the video. Probably without watching it, I might add, like everybody else.


Okay. They have a right to do that. But they also have a right to support and defend the 1st Amendment.


That's not violating anybody's right to free speech.


Never said it did.


And there is the possibility that the guys made the video to purposefully incite riots. However, that has yet to be proven in a court of law.


How does a cheesy flm make people kill people? Mind control?


And inciting riots is one of the things you're not allowed to do with free speech.


Can you point that out in the 1st Amendment, I must have missed that.


They don't have to say what you want them to say either.


Never said they have to. I just assumed that when you took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution, that you took it seriously. Maybe Obama and Hillary had their fingers crossed.


You're just trying to raise a big stink over nothing.



Your opinion.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by EvilSadamClone

Except for obama because he must say what I want him to say and if he doesn't I'll just make stuff up about him that isn't true and make a big deal about to score points with my conservative brethren.





Exacrtly, the op's skewed, bigoted, Obama-hating world view is clear for all to see.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 02:54 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 



Freedom of speech does not end. Insults, discriminations are interpretive.

every extreme has its toll. there is a saying: The freedom of the individual ceases to be where the freedom of the other begins. (sorry, google translation)



new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join