Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Westboro Baptist Church Hate Group Petition Reaches 85,983 Signatures

page: 7
21
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 12:23 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 



It is not my nor anyone else's (especially the government) responsibility to set limits or definitions on what constitutes free speech.


Reread my post, if you must. I didn't say anything about defining free speech, I addressed the necessity of drawing a line between productivity and abuse. There's a certain point at which freedom becomes counter-productive, and clearly some are too blind or stupid to see it. That's when someone has to step in and say, "Hey, you can't do that. It's completely unnecessary, and it does more harm than good."

When freedom becomes a weapon rather than a shield, that's when the line must be drawn. And if not the government, then who? Who is supposed to take a stand and defend us? By your logic, no one will ever take a stand because it's someone's right to offend and harass and abuse us as long as they don't touch us. It's called freedom.

I don't know what to say anymore. This kind of logic has me speechless with disgust.
edit on 18-12-2012 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 12:24 PM
link   
Be careful here...

Even though WBC says loathsome things that other people don't even think, how long will it be before "Main street USA Baptist Church" gets a list of subjects they can't preach about? Hate speech, you know.

Don't get me wrong. I think WBC is a tool of satan. But what's to keep other churches safe once the one bad apple is silenced?

It's the perfect "in" to start persecuting Churches. One group acts unspeakably bad. EVERYONE want's them shut up. A law is passed, saying they are a "hate speech" group. What will be the definition of "hate speech" and how many other Churches (or other organizations for that matter) will that law affect?

I remember going to Haiti back in 1985. Baby Doc was still in power. There were "shoeshine boys" on the corners outside of the home we stayed in. We were warned that they were actually Tonton Macoute (Baby Docs secret police). Say the wong thing and you become part of the bonepile outside Port au Prince. We also went to a pastors home to talk. Many homes there (most really) had no windows, just square holes with a screen. We literally had to talk the perimeter of his house before we started talking Christianity to make sure nobody was hiding in the bushes listening.

Lets hope we never have to look both ways before we talk about our beliefs here. It was scary as hell.



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 12:49 PM
link   
I don't find this issue to have anything to do with religious beliefs. The only thing religion has to do with it is that its inclusion evidently makes the harassment immune to intervention.
Not that I know how verbal abuse would be handled if its content were entirely secular.
edit on 18-12-2012 by EllaMarina because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 01:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
There's a certain point at which freedom becomes counter-productive, and clearly some are too blind or stupid to see it.


I guess I'm just blind or stupid. (or all 3
)

I don't see how freedom can be counter-productive.



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 01:41 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


You are correct Beezzer freedom is NEVER counter-productive


Those who wish limits to said freedoms should be the first to have to deal with them... however it is not the answer either...


I myself disagree with their biased interpretation of the rules and how an almighty views said behavior... it is there right...

With this in mind however the answer is obvious...

Counter protest... and if it comes down to it...

Kick their arses and make them feel the pain... it is the american way... they have the to free speech and Americans have the right to free speech in response..

If your the lawyer of the person who does kick their arse... I would say jury trial...



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 01:43 PM
link   

190,350

This petition now has the highest number of signatures in the history of the whitehouse.gov petition site. Gun control has 181,976 and the petition for Texas to secede is 120,659.



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 01:48 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 



I guess I'm just blind or stupid. (or all 3 )

I don't see how freedom can be counter-productive.


Freedom becomes counter-productive when one person's freedom overrides another person's freedom, with absolutely no justification. When one person decides their desires are more important than anothers, and lives are scarred as a result.

That is when freedom is counter-productive. We are free so we can be happy. When another person's freedom violates our right to be happy, that's counter-productive. When someone uses their freedom to go out of their way to make some else's life a living hell, that's when freedom is counter-productive.

I want to know who told you that freedom means having the right to violate someone else's freedom without cause.



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 02:02 PM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


Never.

Of course, when ones freedom is imposed upon, then it no longer becomes a freedom.

But freedom of expression should be cherished. You have the freedom to not listen and participate.

The fact that you are disagreeing with me (by your definition) is an imposition on my freedom. So you should stop.
*By your example*



You must not disagree with me, because that would be an imposition on my expression of me being right!

(Confusing)



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 02:09 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 



But freedom of expression should be cherished. You have the freedom to not listen and participate.

The fact that you are disagreeing with me (by your definition) is an imposition on my freedom. So you should stop.
*By your example*


I probably should have seen that coming.


Am I using one of your most recent personal tragedies as a rock to throw in your face? Am I disgracing your family by smearing them with a abhorrent political campaign? Am I kicking you while you're down, rubbing a fistful of salt in an already gaping wound?

No.


You must not disagree with me, because that would be an imposition on my expression of me being right!


I thought I was being clear. Apparently I wasn't. Freedom of speech concerns solely what's being said, not how it's being said. And apparently, it's perfectly okay to allow a group of verbal terrorists to harass the funerals of dead children. According to you, that's the definition of freedom of speech.

Good to know that the very values upon which this country as founded have become as corrupt as the people now leading it. If this is what freedom is, then freedom can go straight to hell along with the Westboro Baptist Church.

Screw America.
edit on 18-12-2012 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 02:12 PM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


counter productive ... an interesting choice of words....

I measure the fact your rights end somewhere between a foot from my nose to the full reach of my arms...

It is a no longer your rights zone...


Freedom is never counter productive and their are other methods for dealing with those who persue those means...


From what I have seen and read I think you and Beezer are trying to say some of the same thing just from different backgrounds...

Could I get you both to state you view with no high emotion value words?

It appears you both enjoy freedom quite well, just disagree on wither it is your nose where it ends or your arm...

What got from your post is that freedom should be limited... it why asked for the definition statement

I want to make sure I clearly see the dividing line between your thoughts and Beezers... otherwise I am lean towards Beezer...

You can never legislate speech nor should you... because those with power will get to set those definitions... such what is hate speech... which they can interpret to be opposing views



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 02:20 PM
link   
reply to post by ripcontrol
 


Pursuit of Happiness and Common Good. Core democratic values. Are they dead, or just asleep? As far as I can tell, they're no longer in effect, by reading this discussion.

Maybe people just don't care anymore. Should I remind you what these values are?

Pursuit of Happiness:


"...one of the "unalienable rights" of people enumerated in the Declaration of Independence, along with "life" and "liberty." "The right to pursue any lawful business or vocation, in any manner not inconsistent with the equal rights of others, which may increase their prosperity or develop their faculties, so as to give them their highest enjoyment."


Common Good is generally held to be the good of the community.

So how does WBC fall in line with this?



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

Originally posted by AfterInfinity


I thought I was being clear. Apparently I wasn't. Freedom of speech concerns solely what's being said, not how it's being said. And apparently, it's perfectly okay to allow a group of verbal terrorists to harass the funerals of dead children. According to you, that's the definition of freedom of speech.

Good to know that the very values upon which this country as founded have become as corrupt as the people now leading it. If this is what freedom is, then freedom can go straight to hell along with the Westboro Baptist Church.

Screw America.
edit on 18-12-2012 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)


Okay. You are entitled to your opinion.

What I'm afraid of, is if the censure of Westboro succeeds, then who will be next?



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 02:31 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 



What I'm afraid of, is if the censure of Westboro succeeds, then who will be next?


Whoever decides to spend their freedom reducing that of another's. What did those people at the funeral ever do to WBC? Nothing. So if another event is verbally assaulted for no good reason, then they'll have to be separated like two kids fighting over a candy bar.



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by beezzer
 



What I'm afraid of, is if the censure of Westboro succeeds, then who will be next?


Whoever decides to spend their freedom reducing that of another's. What did those people at the funeral ever do to WBC? Nothing. So if another event is verbally assaulted for no good reason, then they'll have to be separated like two kids fighting over a candy bar.


So anyone is fair game if they express themselves in the same controversial manner as Westboro?



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 02:47 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 



So anyone is fair game if they express themselves in the same controversial manner as Westboro?


Occupy wasn't even half as controversial as WBC and they still got disbanded. So why is WBC allowed to do this?



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by beezzer
 



So anyone is fair game if they express themselves in the same controversial manner as Westboro?


Occupy wasn't even half as controversial as WBC and they still got disbanded. So why is WBC allowed to do this?


I didn't agree with much of what Occupy did, yet I even started a thread and spoke up for them as well. We have to stand up for freedoms or else we can just sit and watch as they are given away.



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 04:16 PM
link   
Just throwing my 2 cents in.

If you put limitations on WBC's free speech and right to protest you put the same limitations on us all.

So they cherry pick scripture, what denomination doesn't?

On a personal level I think those people objectify wtf is wrong with people. On the other hand I LOVE what they represent, being Baptists and Christians in general. That is organized religion folks, and WBC doesn't even kill people, they just talk #. Believers don't even read the bible anymore, or when they do like on Sunday morning they water it down to suit they're liking. "Jesus" said follow the law of Moses, plain and simple. Thats Leviticus!

The nature of the WBC has nothing on the laws of Leviticus..



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 04:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Agarta
 


Excellent! Perhaps something will finally be done about that horrible group!

S&F



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 04:36 PM
link   
Keep in mind that freedom of speech means that Congress shall not make any laws abridging free speech, not that it can be done anywhere at any time for any reason. There are still limitations on what you can say, where you can say it, why you can say it and so forth.

The Freedom of Speech stipulation has to do with political discourse, not just running around shouting things because you feel like it.



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 04:41 PM
link   
I went into more detail on another thread and don't want to post verbatem in multiple posts. Here is the link to the thread where I posted reference material concerning it.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

basically, there are limits on speech, you can't just say whatever you want, whenever you want, wherever you want.

From the US Courts: www.uscourts.gov...

Freedom of speech includes the right:
Not to speak (specifically, the right not to salute the flag).
Of students to wear black armbands to school to protest a war (“Students do not shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gate.”).
To use certain offensive words and phrases to convey political messages.
To contribute money (under certain circumstances) to political campaigns.
To advertise commercial products and professional services (with some restrictions).
To engage in symbolic speech, e.g., burning the flag in protest.


However, there are things that freedom of speech does NOT include:

To incite actions that would harm others (e.g. “[S]hout[ing] ‘fire’ in a crowded theater.”).
To make or distribute obscene materials.
To burn draft cards as an anti-war protest.
To permit students to print articles in a school newspaper over the objections of the school administration.
Of students to make an obscene speech at a school-sponsored event.
Of students to advocate illegal drug use at a school-sponsored event.


There are limitations and those limitations must be met or it doesn't meet the criteria of "free speech".


edit on 18-12-2012 by L8RT8RZ because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join