fucktoyprincess
Posts: 2337
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Kana
Errrr, AFAIK, and I'm not claiming to be an expert on French constitutional law or anything, but in France, free speech isn't seen as one of the foundation stones of their govt. In fact, many euro countries (Who have dealt with terrorism and Muslim extremists far longer than we have) have passed some seriously stringent anti-terrorism laws that allow for the suspension of specified liberties under certain circumstances.
So no-I couldn't give a fuck if the French suspend the protests (But I am shocked they showed some spine-who knew they had a backbone?). I care about, and posted on, an American point of law as interpreted by an American judge re the single most basic right Americans possess.
That said, I'm all for allowing the protests...if the riot police can open fire the second they turn violent. :-)
Let the Jihadists decide their own fate. If they can behave like adults let em gather. And if not, oh well...that's their choice and their doom.
No loss to the rest of the world.
And finally, WTF? These folk want it both ways. They think they should be free to criticize others but Allah forbid someone criticize them. Because if you do, they'll kill you. That's all sorts of fucked up. They want rights given to them that they would never extend to another. They choose to be who and what they are and protect and support the extremist within their mix.
So hey, fair is fair and turnabouts fair play.
(Think how they would react if everytime we saw a America is the Great Satan sign, we kidnapped an Imam and, with quasi govt funding, approval and protection, decapitated him on national TV to the cheers of the nation(Kinda like the super bowl of beheadings). Yeah, I bet they would have flipping babies on the spot.)
Look, this is simple stuff, almost Hobbesian in nature.
Civilization exists because people, clans, tribes and nations enter into a social contract in which each surrenders some of their rights (Specifically the right to kill you and take your shit at any moment for any reason) in return for peace.
These folk want all the advantages of the social contract yet don't want any of the rules to apply to them.
So fine. Give em want they want. Tear up the contract so it doesn't apply...but then remember, we don't have to play by the rules then either, because there are none.
This is the true danger of the terrorist. They erode the social contract, which leads to anarchy and vigilantism. And they need to be treated accordingly, as folk who have willingly and voluntarily chosen to exist outside of the rules and regulations that govern free modern nations.
Marlo Stanfield. " “You want it one way, but it's the other way"
You wanna sit at the grown up table, you gotta act like a grown up. Otherwise you get lectured, spanked and sent back to the kids table and you get to look like an ass in front of your peers
France has a long history of allowing public protest. They do it all the time - usually around economic issues. Again, you claim you are pro First Amendment, but you really only seem to want to protect free speech if it fits your idea of what is right. That's not really how free speech works in the U.S. And that is what we are discussing. The ads in the subway. I think they are in poor taste. I think they could cause violence. But I still think it is protected speech. That's all I'm saying. No need for lectures and the nasty language. And for the record I am NOT the one who wants it one way but it's the other way. YOU are. Read all of my posts on this thread. I've said the speech is protected. We are just having a discussion on what free speech means to each of us, and you are entitled to your own reasoning. You are fixated on the violence - which ALL of us on this thread object to. No one is supporting the VIOLENCE. A protest is not the same as violence. Can a protest become violent? Sometimes, yes.
The Wall Street Occupy movement protests vandalized property, and had arrests over violence and at least one rape. But they were allowed to continue protesting until it simply became too much to handle. Again, a protest is not automatically violent. You don't shut down all forms of protest and then claim this furthers free speech. When groups of people group together anywhere, a kind of mob mentality can sometimes take over. I'm not sure that means we ban all protests. This is my opinion, as someone who is a staunch supporter of the First Amendment. You are entitled to whatever viewpoint suits you in your own life. Be well.
(Is this confusion occurring because you think "protest" means violence? A strike is a protest - it doesn't have to be violent. Standing with signs and chanting on the street - there was a protest by the Chinese against Japan last week in midtown Manhattan - is a protest. And I support such protests. This has nothing to do with violence. Again, I'm not sure what you are reading into my statements. You seem to think I am saying things that I'm not saying at all. Chill out man, and be well.)
_____________________________
~ ftp
|
RE: Anti-Jihad adverts to run in New York subway - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread