RE: Free speech?

RE: Free speech? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

thompsonx -> RE: Free speech? (12/23/2013 7:41:37 AM)
When we wall off those we disagree with, when we stop being open to different ideas, when we alienate and label and mock, that's where societies stifle and turn inwards. Are you asking us to incorporat intolerane into our constitution? To allow these punkassmotherfuckers to express their swill is not the point...that is guaranteed by the constitution. To endeavor to incorporate bigotry or facism into our constitution is not guarateed by the constitution. America is a nation founded on the idea of a compromise government. It's based on people with opposing ideas sitting down and finding a common meeting ground. It's based on the dialogue between people from all walks of life working together to create a stronger country. What a total crock of shit. Please list the non land holders who where members of the convention? List the women who were part of the convention? List for us those were not white? If we read the federalist papers and the anti federalist papers we find virtually no common ground and no dialog only criticism and acrimony. Moreover, as anyone who has read the Federalist Papers can tell you, one of the things the founders wrestled most with was the fear of the "Tyranny of the majority"-the idea that the majority of a population agreeing on something allowed them to strip the liberties of the minority. That minority would be the landed gentry who were jelous of the power they had acquired under colonialism and sought to preserve it. This is quite clear from a reading of these two sources.

truckinslave -> RE: Free speech? (12/23/2013 7:55:02 AM)
I just found an excellent piece written about what Robertson actually said (as opposed to ranting mischaracterizations of what he said). Said article is in the Atlantic ... calling for a boycott or pressuring for Robertson's suspension tells orthodox Christians that their religion is no longer acceptable, It's not just a war on Christmas; truly it's a war on Christianity.

thompsonx -> RE: Free speech? (12/23/2013 7:56:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SadistDave Sometimes the things people say have consequences. A&E decided they would try to thwack Phil Robertson in the pee pee as a consequence of saying something in a magazine interview. Wrong...a corporation had a contract with another corporation and party a exercised it's option per said contract. That you wish it to be about someone's pee pee speaks volumns as to your agenda. After he was "suspended indefinitely" the consequences of A&E's actions were that more people turned out to support Robertson and boycott A&E within 48 hours than signed up for Obamacare since it began in October. I don't normally like to use personal anecdotes, but to give you an example of how people are boycotting A&E, my boss, who is Hindu, has had access to A&E manually blocked on every television in his 17 hotels. So if his customers were offended by that they could presumabably seek other accomodations. GLAAD, the homosexuality acceptance enforcement group that started all of this, is dealing with the consequences of their intolerance. They have complained about this being the biggest backlash they've had in years as their phones ring off the hook with calls from angry Duck Dynasty fans and religious folk. Your courage in publicizing of the extent of religious bigotry in our country is to be aplauded. So everyone is suffering from the consequences of their actions it seems, but that's not exactly true... A&E has already finished 9 of the 10 episodes for the next season and they have no intention of re-editing them to exclude Phil Robertson. Indeed, at this stage of the game if they DO edit Phil out, they stand to lose a huge market share because loyal viewers won't tune in if they edit him out after all this drama. At the very worst, he will be removed from the final episode of the season. Unfortunately for the network, A&E needs Duck Dynasty more than Duck Dynasty needs A&E. I am pretty sure that a&e could buy he duck boys out of petty cash. That the bigots will find another outlet for their swill is a foregone conclusion...total irony if fox were to pick them up. The irony being that fox will not gain market share and will self lable as bigots who cater to bigots.

mnottertail -> RE: Free speech? (12/23/2013 8:00:32 AM)
Yeah, war on christianity, they have made wars on everyone else, so I guess it is a matter of free speech to say dickheads are dickheads. Interestingly enough, it is also accurate.

EdBowie -> RE: Free speech? (12/23/2013 8:38:43 AM)
If you knew the theater was on fire, why wouldn't you 'be on board with' warning people? quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: MsMJAY I am very much in support of free speech, but There is no "but," MsMJay. You are either on the bus, or you are off the bus. If you do not support freedom of speech when you despise what is being said, then you do not support freedom of speech at all. So you are on board with shouting fire in a crowded theater?[8\|]

thompsonx -> RE: Free speech? (12/23/2013 8:50:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: EdBowie If you knew the theater was on fire, why wouldn't you 'be on board with' warning people? quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: MsMJAY I am very much in support of free speech, but There is no "but," MsMJay. You are either on the bus, or you are off the bus. If you do not support freedom of speech when you despise what is being said, then you do not support freedom of speech at all. So you are on board with shouting fire in a crowded theater?[8\|] I am sorry that you were not aware of the caviat about free speech being limited and the analogy of shouting fire in a crowded theater is pretty well known. That I failed to stipulate what is well known about that doctrin ie: there is no fire, I do apologize to you and any other who is so ignorant as to not understand my meaning.

GotSteel -> RE: Free speech? (12/23/2013 9:08:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave It's not just a war on Christmas; truly it's a war on Christianity. Woah, wait a sec, this is exactly what you were advocating for a bit ago: quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave We should all be free to be offended, and to offend. This is what it looks like when the rest of us get offended by a certain sort of Christianity's war on the rest of us.

EdBowie -> RE: Free speech? (12/23/2013 9:11:40 AM)
There is no such caveat, you were flinging a sound bite, instead of offering up something substantive. The person you were addressing has made it beyond clear where they stand, and your sandbox sophistry is a waste of time. You needed to be called on it. quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: ORIGINAL: EdBowie If you knew the theater was on fire, why wouldn't you 'be on board with' warning people? quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: MsMJAY I am very much in support of free speech, but There is no "but," MsMJay. You are either on the bus, or you are off the bus. If you do not support freedom of speech when you despise what is being said, then you do not support freedom of speech at all. So you are on board with shouting fire in a crowded theater?[8\|] I am sorry that you were not aware of the caviat about free speech being limited and the analogy of shouting fire in a crowded theater is pretty well known. That I failed to stipulate what is well known about that doctrin ie: there is no fire, I do apologize to you and any other who is so ignorant as to not understand my meaning.

Politesub53 -> RE: Free speech? (12/23/2013 10:35:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave I just found an excellent piece written about what Robertson actually said (as opposed to ranting mischaracterizations of what he said). Said article is in the Atlantic ... calling for a boycott or pressuring for Robertson's suspension tells orthodox Christians that their religion is no longer acceptable, It's not just a war on Christmas; truly it's a war on Christianity. The piece you link to is both pathetic and pedantic. It claims Robertson didnt actually equate being gay is linked to bestiality, he sure as hell meant it leads to it though. It seems to me if anyone needs to read what was actually said, then its you. quote: “Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men,” he says. From GQ

popeye1250 -> RE: Free speech? (12/23/2013 12:10:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave We should all be free to be offended, and to offend. That's exactly what happened. My sentiments exactly! Of course the Anal - Retentives think it's a "crime" to,..."offend" someone. But, they have no problem calling someone who disagrees with them a racist or a bigot. So, they believe in "free speech" too, just as long as you agree with them.

mnottertail -> RE: Free speech? (12/23/2013 12:15:16 PM)
The anal retentives are the ones that imagine they say this, and them say that. They are offensive.

thompsonx -> RE: Free speech? (12/23/2013 12:33:10 PM)
There is no such caveat, you were flinging a sound bite, instead of offering up something substantive. Omg are you the only person on the planet who is unaware of that limit on free speech? The person you were addressing has made it beyond clear where they stand, The person I was addressing made some foolish statements and I pointed it out. and your sandbox sophistry is a waste of time. Well I am old and I have nothing to do and lots of time to do it in so I will waste my time as I choose. You needed to be called on it. Coddleme is such a warm fuzy place where people like you feel the need to call on people like me.

thompsonx -> RE: Free speech? (12/23/2013 12:42:49 PM)
My sentiments exactly! Of course the Anal - Retentives think it's a "crime" to,..."offend" someone. No one anal rententive or other wise has said this is a crime...well no one except you. But, they have no problem calling someone who disagrees with them a racist or a bigot. If it is the truth then it is protected free speech. If not then there are lible and slander laws to deal with that. So, they believe in "free speech" too, just as long as you agree with them. You seem to be missing the point here. These punkassmotherfuckers are free to say any fucking stupid ass thing they choose that is not illegal. Those who are offended by it are free to respond in kind or ignore the borish behavior of rich fools. Free speech does not mean you can run your mouth with out people mentioning that only shit is coming out. Free speech does not mean that anyone has to agree with mind numbing stupidity. They are free to say stupid things and others are free to point out how fucking stupid they are to say such stupid things.

popeye1250 -> RE: Free speech? (12/23/2013 1:10:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx My sentiments exactly! Of course the Anal - Retentives think it's a "crime" to,..."offend" someone. No one anal rententive or other wise has said this is a crime...well no one except you. But, they have no problem calling someone who disagrees with them a racist or a bigot. If it is the truth then it is protected free speech. If not then there are lible and slander laws to deal with that. So, they believe in "free speech" too, just as long as you agree with them. You seem to be missing the point here. These punkassmotherfuckers are free to say any fucking stupid ass thing they choose that is not illegal. Those who are offended by it are free to respond in kind or ignore the borish behavior of rich fools. Free speech does not mean you can run your mouth with out people mentioning that only shit is coming out. Free speech does not mean that anyone has to agree with mind numbing stupidity. They are free to say stupid things and others are free to point out how fucking stupid they are to say such stupid things. My sentiments exactly!

Hillwilliam -> RE: Free speech? (12/23/2013 1:17:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx My sentiments exactly! Of course the Anal - Retentives think it's a "crime" to,..."offend" someone. No one anal rententive or other wise has said this is a crime...well no one except you. But, they have no problem calling someone who disagrees with them a racist or a bigot. If it is the truth then it is protected free speech. If not then there are lible and slander laws to deal with that. So, they believe in "free speech" too, just as long as you agree with them. You seem to be missing the point here. These punkassmotherfuckers are free to say any fucking stupid ass thing they choose that is not illegal. Those who are offended by it are free to respond in kind or ignore the borish behavior of rich fools. Free speech does not mean you can run your mouth with out people mentioning that only shit is coming out. Free speech does not mean that anyone has to agree with mind numbing stupidity. They are free to say stupid things and others are free to point out how fucking stupid they are to say such stupid things. My sentiments exactly! Pops and Thompson have agreed. the end of the world is near ETA. I agree as well, start digging a deep hole folks.

EdBowie -> RE: Free speech? (12/23/2013 1:25:38 PM)
It's a target rich environment for shooting down bullshit. Thanks for doing your part. quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx There is no such caveat, you were flinging a sound bite, instead of offering up something substantive. Omg are you the only person on the planet who is unaware of that limit on free speech? The person you were addressing has made it beyond clear where they stand, The person I was addressing made some foolish statements and I pointed it out. and your sandbox sophistry is a waste of time. Well I am old and I have nothing to do and lots of time to do it in so I will waste my time as I choose. You needed to be called on it. Coddleme is such a warm fuzy place where people like you feel the need to call on people like me.

thompsonx -> RE: Free speech? (12/23/2013 2:01:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx My sentiments exactly! Of course the Anal - Retentives think it's a "crime" to,..."offend" someone. No one anal rententive or other wise has said this is a crime...well no one except you. But, they have no problem calling someone who disagrees with them a racist or a bigot. If it is the truth then it is protected free speech. If not then there are lible and slander laws to deal with that. So, they believe in "free speech" too, just as long as you agree with them. You seem to be missing the point here. These punkassmotherfuckers are free to say any fucking stupid ass thing they choose that is not illegal. Those who are offended by it are free to respond in kind or ignore the borish behavior of rich fools. Free speech does not mean you can run your mouth with out people mentioning that only shit is coming out. Free speech does not mean that anyone has to agree with mind numbing stupidity. They are free to say stupid things and others are free to point out how fucking stupid they are to say such stupid things. My sentiments exactly! I am glad you have finally come to the conclusion that I am seldom wrong.

jlf1961 -> RE: Free speech? (12/23/2013 2:56:41 PM)
I have no problem with Phil Roberson stating his religious beliefs, he said nothing that was not in the bible, so how can you complain, unless you want to rewrite both old and new testaments of the bible. I do have a problem with the statement he made about African Americans being better off before the civil rights laws that gave them the same rights as white Americans. Remember this, Jesus was a first century Jew in Galilee, as such he would not have been Caucasian. he would have been dark skinned, and barely indistinguishable from Arabs and Palestinians today. With those facts, he would have not been welcomed in a whites only church, or school, or anywhere else that people of color were denied in the south. As I said, the bible is quite specific about homosexuality, however, remember a mortal sin is denying the Holy Spirit or suicide. Homosexuality is not a choice, and since my daughter is Bi, I accept her lifestyle, but leave the judgement of that lifestyle up to god. I have had baptists, fundamentalist independent baptists and others tell me I am going to hell for being catholic, enjoying dancing, whiskey and being married four times. I even had an ex wife tell me I pray wrong. From 325 AD until 1517 there were basically three churches, the Catholics, the eastern orthodox, and the Agnostics. Yes there various small sects, but nothing very big. I have read both the King James and the Catholic versions of the bible a number of times. The Catholic version of the bible contains the entire original old testament, meaning the Catholic bible has 73 books and the protestant bible has 66. Personally, I feel that the interpretation of the bible is a personal thing. If God didnt want us to think for ourselves, then he messed up giving us free will. Phil Robertson is free to speak his religious beliefs, but do you really think that African Americans were better off before the Civil Rights laws were passed?

truckinslave -> RE: Free speech? (12/23/2013 2:59:10 PM)
quote: It claims Robertson didnt actually equate being gay is linked to bestiality, he sure as hell meant it leads to it though. It seems to me if anyone needs to read what was actually said, then its you. Utter bullshit. Here's what he said. quote: “Everything is blurred on what’s right and what’s wrong,” he says. “Sin becomes fine.” What, in your mind, is sinful? Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men,” he says. Then he paraphrases Corinthians: “Don’t be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers—they won’t inherit the kingdom of God. Don’t deceive yourself. It’s not right.” He is not saying that homosexuality leads to bestiality any more than he is saying it leads to heterosexual promiscuity. He is expressing two pretty standard bits of Protestant theology: sin is sin, and homosexual acts are sins. There is neither causality nor progression in his statements.

truckinslave -> RE: Free speech? (12/23/2013 3:01:38 PM)
quote: Pops and Thompson have agreed. the end of the world is near Phil Robertson is just a uniter.

Page: << < prev 7 8 [9] 10 11 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875