White House responds to Piers Morgan deportation petition

page: 2
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 09:30 AM
link   
reply to post by NavyDoc
 


So you would like to adopt British law? Make a one time exception to our laws and our Constitution, maybe? Look, no one has to like what the moron is saying... but we do need to accept and protect his right to say anything he wants to, otherwise we all lose.




posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 09:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by NavyDoc
 


So you would like to adopt British law? Make a one time exception to our laws and our Constitution, maybe? Look, no one has to like what the moron is saying... but we do need to accept and protect his right to say anything he wants to, otherwise we all lose.


Not at all. When you are a guest in a foreign nation, you are exactly that--a guest--and that visa can be revoked for any reason, even "we don't like your attitude." That is the law already, so no changes need be made. He's not a citizen, so he really doesn't have the right to do or say anything on our soil, if we don't want him to.

You might say "we don't want to deport him because that would just be a small and petty act" and I would say that is a very reasonable counterpoint and I don't disagree with that entirely, however, the US is perfectly within it's rights to show him the door and send him home. I personally think he is a hypocrite in that he is using our First Amendment freedoms to try to restrict our Second Amendment freedoms and, honestly, as a foreigner, it really is none of his business and if the US is so terrible and US citizens so dangerous, WTF is he doing here, but that is just my humble opinion.
edit on 9-1-2013 by NavyDoc because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 11:11 AM
link   
Excuse me in one breath people are saying "protect Morgans right to speech" same breath they "say ban all the bad guns".

Which way do people want to have it eh?

If I don't have a right to keep an bear arms Morgan has no right no one has any right to free speech as their are "limitations" on speech.

Deport him and deport all those who support restrictions on the second amendment,

So now which way do people want to have it?



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 11:35 AM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


The 1st and 2nd Amendments go hand in hand. If you ban one then the other is sure to go. Citizens have the right to freely express their opinion to ban guns, but they need to understand that the law abiding owners of those guns are ensuring their right to say it.

In my opinion, those are the most important rights we have and all others are dependent upon them.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 11:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kali74
If only people would read...

A petition is a manor of taking an issue to an official, it is a great tool but people need to understand that it is only meant to garner attention by an official... it is basically saying "Hey, this many people feel this way about this issue and you as our representative are required to address it and inform us of your intention to act or not act".

What if I were to petition the government to deport you because I don't like what you say... and what if I got a million signatures, should you be deported for having done nothing but speak? Should a strong dislike of a person nullify the Constitution?


Yes, if only posters would read...

If you were to petition the government to deport me because you don't like what I say, and you got a million signatures, the government would respond that I am within my 1st amendment rights to speak. Then the government would discard the petition and we all move on.

So nothing would happen. Nothing did happen in this case. We know in advance that nothing will happen. So why even have a petition?

The best response I've heard so far is from the poster that pointed out the exposure factor, which to me is the only meaningful purpose of a White House petition. But if we go back to the big picture, exposure means little without legislation to back it up.

Further, a petition will only gain exposure if the media allows it to. This particular petition only gained exposure because it had some shiny Hollywood bling to it. It makes for a good entertainment headline. I have not seen the same degree of media articles about the petition to recognize Westboro Baptist Church as a hate group, and it has over 300,000 signatures which is triple what the Piers Morgan petition had.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 11:58 AM
link   
I really don’t understand why anyone would sign this petition.

My understanding is that people who oppose gun control state that they are defending their second amendment rights and defending the constitution.

Why then do these very seem people disregard the first amendment, freedom of speech, and seek to have a man deported because he exercises his right to free speech.

It is totally hypocritical, rights are universal it does not matter where you are from. To say that you support the constitution of the United States of America and that is why you defend you right to the second amendment then it is totally paradoxical to then ostracize someone for exercising their first amendment rights.

You might not agree with what he has to say but that does not mean that his right to freedom of speech should be challenged.

This petition only displays the hypocrisy of the NRA supporters they are all for defending the constitution but only when it suits them.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 03:39 PM
link   
reply to post by InTheFlesh1980
 


While I agree with you its frustrating the reality is your government like mine (I'm english) is just paying you lip service.
Lets suppose for a minute that your government threw him out for his comments......dont you find that reality ultimately more scary?
Ill say this though, just recently our government extradited abhul hammza the known hook handed terrorist to the US. Well for 8 years this man lived here and for all that time tried to plot terrorist attrofities against your country and mine. He even organised a group of people to hold up banners whilst some british soldiers marched through the streets having completed a tour of duty in afghanistan. What was on the banners?....."death to the british"!

The stinker is, he was getting over £30k in tax payers benefits per year and a huge house all paid for in london. Now, tell me don't you find that offensive? Im personally delighted that they extradited him and althiugh i believe the americans are often over zealous with there actions at times, i know you'll deal with him appropriately instead of our government throwing tax payers money away feulling his extremist beliefs.





new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join