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.

 

If I don't subscribe to your ideology, and can force ATS to ban you, is that right?

page: 4
20
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 04:41 AM
link   

beezzer
Why won't people answer the question?

Either we have a freedom of speech or we don't.

Any restriction impedes that freedom and negates it.

You know you have asked the same question a few times in at least 2 threads.

A restriction that a person willfully agrees to creates the grey area, that you keep trying to say doesn't exist.
edit on 22-12-2013 by daskakik because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 04:42 AM
link   

maus80

beezzer
reply to post by CranialSponge
 


What "gray area" did Phil Robertson breach?

What is your answer, you crazy Canadian?


How about the part in his contract where he won't make his network want to fire him? You can believe with 100% certainty that that is part of the contract.

If I made a contract with you, that if I didn't drop the F-bomb for a week, you'd give me a million bucks, and then I said the F word into a loudspeaker outside of your bedroom...well I should still get my million bucks, because free speech right? I know you'll answer with "I'd never sign that contract" or "I don't have a million" and just let the example go right out the window. Don't bother.


If I had won the lottery last week then this argument would be moot.

If
If
If. . . . . .



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 04:43 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


See you can't address breach of contract being different from breaking a law and being prosecuted, and you can't admit that you are wrong.



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 04:43 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 

You're mistaken because you're not even sure if it is a matter of free speech.



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 04:43 AM
link   

daskakik

beezzer
Why won't people answer the question?

Either we have a freedom of speech or we don't.

Any restriction impedes that freedom and negates it.

You know you have asked the same question a few times in at least 2 threads.

A restriction that a person willfully agrees to creates the grey area, that you keep trying to say doesn't exist.
edit on 22-12-2013 by daskakik because: (no reason given)


2 threads.

Multiple pages.

You continue to post.

And still don't answer a simple yes/no question.

Polly-Sci major?



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 04:45 AM
link   

maus80
reply to post by beezzer
 


See you can't address breach of contract being different from breaking a law and being prosecuted, and you can't admit that you are wrong.


I asked a simple question.

"If I don't subscribe to your ideology, and can force ATS to ban you, is that right? "

Yes/No.

Easy.



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 04:46 AM
link   

beezzer
Why won't people answer the question?

Either we have a freedom of speech or we don't.

Any restriction impedes that freedom and negates it.



Wrong.

The minute that "free speech" impedes on the liberty of other persons, it immediately crosses that fine line over to being "hate speech".

You have your freedoms so long as they don't impede the freedoms (and liberties) of others.

Period.

It doesn't get any simpler than that.



It's how we crazy Canuckians view life.

So on that note (being Canadian and all), I'll say "I'm sorry" for having to be so harsh and straight forward with you... but sometimes tough love is a necessity.



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 04:47 AM
link   

beezzer
Why won't people answer the question?

Either we have a freedom of speech or we don't.

Any restriction impedes that freedom and negates it.


My husband is a teacher and with that job he has to restrict his freedom of speech all the time.

Imagine your child was a student of his and he decided to use the classroom to push his political views. Or to to say things that would be inappropriate for young ears?
Do you feel that he should have freedom of speech then?

I don't and neither does he. He still has his freedom of speech but there is certainly a time and a place for it.



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 04:47 AM
link   

beezzer
Why won't people answer the question?

Either we have a freedom of speech or we don't.

Any restriction impedes that freedom and negates it.


Ok, well people are not free to call in bomb threats. Doing so WILL lead to prosecution. Therefor there is a restriction on free speech, it has been impeded and negated. You no longer have any reason to continue this argument, or care, because you have your answer. Absolute free speech DOES NOT EXIST, PERIOD.



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 04:48 AM
link   
reply to post by CranialSponge
 


I actually have a crush on your avatar *blush*

Simple question though. And I didn't ask about hate speech which is entirely different.

Just free speech.



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 04:49 AM
link   

maus80

beezzer
Why won't people answer the question?

Either we have a freedom of speech or we don't.

Any restriction impedes that freedom and negates it.


Ok, well people are not free to call in bomb threats. Doing so WILL lead to prosecution. Therefor there is a restriction on free speech, it has been impeded and negated. You no longer have any reason to continue this argument, or care, because you have your answer. Absolute free speech DOES NOT EXIST, PERIOD.


So you agree that opinions are worth banning.

Thanks for your input.



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 04:50 AM
link   
reply to post by calstorm
 


Should people be punished for freely expressing themselves?



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 04:50 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 

Actually, I have answered but pointed out that Phil's case can fall under contractual terms so that it may fall in a grey area that falls outside the scope of your question, that you refuse to acknowledge.



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 04:51 AM
link   

beezzer

maus80

beezzer
Why won't people answer the question?

Either we have a freedom of speech or we don't.

Any restriction impedes that freedom and negates it.


Ok, well people are not free to call in bomb threats. Doing so WILL lead to prosecution. Therefor there is a restriction on free speech, it has been impeded and negated. You no longer have any reason to continue this argument, or care, because you have your answer. Absolute free speech DOES NOT EXIST, PERIOD.


So you agree that opinions are worth banning.

If it is harmful to others or impedes on their freedoms then yes.

Thanks for your input.
If it is harmful to others or impedes on their freedoms then yes.
edit on 22-12-2013 by calstorm because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 04:51 AM
link   

beezzer

maus80

beezzer
Why won't people answer the question?

Either we have a freedom of speech or we don't.

Any restriction impedes that freedom and negates it.


Ok, well people are not free to call in bomb threats. Doing so WILL lead to prosecution. Therefor there is a restriction on free speech, it has been impeded and negated. You no longer have any reason to continue this argument, or care, because you have your answer. Absolute free speech DOES NOT EXIST, PERIOD.


So you agree that opinions are worth banning.

Thanks for your input.


Absolutely. I believe if someone called a hospital dozens of times, saying "It is my opinion that there is a bmb in your hospital right now.", they should be prosecuted. You've gotten your answers, they are absolute, and any further participation in your own thread is senseless, in my opinion.



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 04:52 AM
link   

beezzer
reply to post by CranialSponge
 


I actually have a crush on your avatar *blush*

Simple question though. And I didn't ask about hate speech which is entirely different.

Just free speech.



But that's the point.

There's a VERY fine line between free speech and hate speech... and they can end up blending together... and muddying the whole damn thing.

It's a tough balancing act.





... yeah, I have a crush on my avatar too.



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 04:52 AM
link   

beezzer
Should people be punished for freely expressing themselves?

If they signed a contract that said that they would accept the consequences‎ then, yes.



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 04:55 AM
link   
I'm with George "When it comes to rights, I think one of two things is true. Either we have unlimited rights, or we have no rights at all. Personally, I believe we have unlimited rights. For instance, I feel I have the right to do anything I please, BUT, if I do something you don't like, I think you have the right to kill me. So where are you gonna find a fairer deal than that?"




posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 04:55 AM
link   
My question was specific.

If I don't subscribe to your ideology, and can force ATS to ban you, is that right?

I didn't specify hate speech.
I didn't specify hospital bombs.
I didn't specify contracts.
I didn't specify networks.
I didn't specify physical characteristics.



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 04:56 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


and btw beezzer, it's disappointing that you aren't willing to admit to your mistakes or learn from them. If you aren't, then there is no point to discussing things with people, other than to try to convince them that you are right when you aren't. It's a lot more useful to actually learn from those who provide you with truth.



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join