Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: The right are all about protecting free speech...


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: The right are all about protecting free speech... Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: The right are all about protecting free speech... - 11/17/2017 1:17:48 AM   
ThatDizzyChick


Posts: 5490
Status: offline
quote:

Bumper stickers such as the one cited shove the owner's vulgarity into the face of every driver following.

Too fucking bad.

_____________________________

Not your average bimbo.

(in reply to MercTech)
Profile   Post #: 21
RE: The right are all about protecting free speech... - 11/17/2017 6:50:45 AM   
Hillwilliam


Posts: 19394
Joined: 8/27/2008
Status: offline
Us Supreme court. Cohen vs California. 1971.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cohen_v._California

This shit was decided almost a half century ago.

_____________________________

Kinkier than a cheap garden hose.

Whoever said "Religion is the opiate of the masses" never heard Right Wing talk radio.

Don't blame me, I voted for Gary Johnson.

(in reply to ThatDizzyChick)
Profile   Post #: 22
RE: The right are all about protecting free speech... - 11/17/2017 7:21:46 AM   
WhoreMods


Posts: 10691
Joined: 5/6/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

Us Supreme court. Cohen vs California. 1971.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cohen_v._California

This shit was decided almost a half century ago.

So this sheriff's excuse for prosecution is nonsense, then?
Who'd'a thunk it?

_____________________________

On the level and looking for a square deal.

(in reply to Hillwilliam)
Profile   Post #: 23
RE: The right are all about protecting free speech... - 11/17/2017 7:33:16 AM   
Hillwilliam


Posts: 19394
Joined: 8/27/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

Us Supreme court. Cohen vs California. 1971.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cohen_v._California

This shit was decided almost a half century ago.

So this sheriff's excuse for prosecution is nonsense, then?
Who'd'a thunk it?

Actually, based on another article. She was actually arrested but it was for an outstanding warrant.

The moral of the story. If you have an outstanding warrant, don't draw attention to yourself.

_____________________________

Kinkier than a cheap garden hose.

Whoever said "Religion is the opiate of the masses" never heard Right Wing talk radio.

Don't blame me, I voted for Gary Johnson.

(in reply to WhoreMods)
Profile   Post #: 24
RE: The right are all about protecting free speech... - 11/17/2017 7:35:33 AM   
WhoreMods


Posts: 10691
Joined: 5/6/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam


quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

Us Supreme court. Cohen vs California. 1971.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cohen_v._California

This shit was decided almost a half century ago.

So this sheriff's excuse for prosecution is nonsense, then?
Who'd'a thunk it?

Actually, based on another article. She was actually arrested but it was for an outstanding warrant.

The moral of the story. If you have an outstanding warrant, don't draw attention to yourself.

Always good advice.

_____________________________

On the level and looking for a square deal.

(in reply to Hillwilliam)
Profile   Post #: 25
[Awaiting Approval]
wickedsdesires


Posts: 364
Joined: 10/25/2008
Status: offline
[Awaiting Approval]
Profile   Post #: 26
RE: The right are all about protecting free speech... - 11/17/2017 9:53:18 AM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

I already made the case about words, especially those with sexual connotations, falling under certain "community standards" decency laws, but put that to the side and my main issue is/was/will always be: It is NOT your "right" to expose my children/grandchildren to words I would rather they weren't exposed to.


The Supreme Court does not limit speech according to "community standards." Nope, speech leading to disorderly conduct charges must be in a class of "fighting words." These are confrontational and may be expected to lead to a physical altercation. And you just can't claim to be frightened. Ohio's disorderly conduct law was struck down in a case where "The court determined that defendant’s words – though rude and offensive – did not amount to “fighting words.” Thus, they were protected free speech under the First Amendment." See: Uhrichsville v. McPeck, 2014-Ohio-3798

So, consistency is not necessarily a good thing. Michael may not like "fuck" but he will have to testify and show by his actions that he was ready to fight.

My right to speak freely is more important than the right of his grandchildren to be protected from hearing or reading the words. Bookburning 101.

_____________________________

vML

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ~ MLK Jr.

(in reply to DaddySatyr)
Profile   Post #: 27
RE: The right are all about protecting free speech... - 11/17/2017 10:29:49 AM   
Hillwilliam


Posts: 19394
Joined: 8/27/2008
Status: offline
Maybe those speshul snowflakes who are offended need a 'safe space'.

_____________________________

Kinkier than a cheap garden hose.

Whoever said "Religion is the opiate of the masses" never heard Right Wing talk radio.

Don't blame me, I voted for Gary Johnson.

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 28
RE: The right are all about protecting free speech... - 11/17/2017 10:52:01 AM   
MasterDrakk


Posts: 321
Status: offline
well, they all are just rabid about insuring political correctness.

(in reply to Hillwilliam)
Profile   Post #: 29
RE: The right are all about protecting free speech... - 11/17/2017 10:52:22 AM   
WhoreMods


Posts: 10691
Joined: 5/6/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

Maybe those speshul snowflakes who are offended need a 'safe space'.

I think the pouting is down to them thinking that Texas already was one.
"We're a red state! How dare these liberals diss the fuhrer here? For shame!"

_____________________________

On the level and looking for a square deal.

(in reply to Hillwilliam)
Profile   Post #: 30
RE: The right are all about protecting free speech... - 11/17/2017 11:06:52 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam
Maybe those speshul snowflakes who are offended need a 'safe space'.


*** Speshul Snowfwake Alert ***

So, this is a few weeks old, but I literally just heard about it this morning.

https://www.goldenstateofmind.com/2017/10/27/16562566/2017-nba-golden-state-warriors-draymond-green-rips-houston-texans-owner-bob-mcnair

Bob McNair is the owner of the Houston Texans NFL franchise.
    quote:

    McNair, advocating for the NFL to instate a rule mandating that players stand for the National Anthem, said, “we can’t have the inmates running the prison.”


The "inmates running the prison" phrase garnered a lot of criticism for McNair. Right, wrong, whatever. This is the only part I'd heard about. I shook my head over the backlash. Obviously, McNair wasn't saying that the NFL is a prison (who wouldn't want to be an inmate in THAT prison, getting paid hundred's of thousands of dollars, at a minimum?!?), so the players aren't inmates.

Now, Golden State Warriors star player Draymond Green jump into the fray (and I hadn't heard this part until this morning). On Twitter:
    quote:



    I don’t think it should be up to him to change his behavior. They got a commissioner just like any other league. First they were sons of bitches and now inmates? I know some inmates. They don’t pay taxes. They’re not community leaders. They’re not (Philadelphia Eagles safety Malcolm) Jenkins, flying to the White House, flying to DC, doing all these things to make a difference. They’re not (former San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin) Kaepernick, donating $1 million. That’ like, come on, man - inmates? That’s unacceptable.

    Will (NFL commissioner Roger Goodell) react to it is the question? I mean, I wouldn’t personally want to play for somebody who view me as an inmate. Because I haven’t done nothing in my life to be an inmate. To be an inmate, you’re either in a hospital or in prison. I’m not in a hopsital and I’m for damn sure not in prion. Then you say, some people commented on my pot that, “Hey, it’s a figure of speech.” Agree or disagree, figure of speeches aren’t okay in 2017. If I come out and give a figure of speech that’s not socially okay, I’m going to get fined. I’m going to get ridiculed. If I come out and give a figure of speech on anything - whether that’s race, whether that’s sexual orientation - whatever that is, if I give a figure of speech in 2017, I’m going to get ridiculed by any group that’s formed to protect one’s group. I’m going to get fined by the NBA. I’m going to be looked at ridiculously by the community. So why is that okay? I disagree with that. If you’re an inmate, you’re not playing. They pay taxes jut like he pay taxes and, if I’ve learned a bit about business, maybe more. So it’s a strong word to use about someone else’s kids again. It’s crazy.


And then on Instagram:
    quote:

    Wow! This sure does sound very Donald Sterling-esque. But I’m sure the fans pay to see him play and he’s putting himself at risk of CTE by going out there every Sunday and giving 110%! Inmates? For starters, let’s stop using the word owner and maybe use the word Chairman. To be owned by someone just sets a bad precedent to start. It sets the wrong tone. It gives one the wrong mindset. Webster states that an inmate is a person confined to an institution such as a prison or hospital. Not sure these tax paying men should be referred to as inmates- but what do I know?


The part that has gotten Green the most criticism is his call to stop using the word, 'owner,' attempting to tie it to slavery.

Mark Cuban, owner of the Dallas Maverick's NBA franchise wasn't real happy about that.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/early-lead/wp/2017/11/04/mark-cuban-slams-draymond-green-over-call-to-stop-using-the-word-owner/?utm_term=.3b60e8c7ecfb
    quote:

    “For him to try to turn it into something it’s not is wrong,” Cuban told ESPN. “He owes the NBA an apology. I think he does, because to try to create some connotation that owning equity in a company that you busted your ass for is the equivalent of ownership in terms of people, that’s just wrong. That’s just wrong in every which way.

    “People who read that message and misinterpret it — make it seem like we don’t do everything possible to help our players succeed and don’t care about their families and don’t care about their lives, like hopefully we do for all of our employees — that’s just wrong.”

    Cuban called McNair’s comments “wrong, ridiculous” but said that doesn’t make it right for Green to equate ownership of a team or company to ownership of people, as in slavery.

    “If you want to talk about slavery and everything that’s important about it and some people who make comments and don’t respect other individuals, great, let’s have that conversation about people who don’t respect others,” Cuban said. “But don’t try to suggest that because we have a team and the nomenclature is ‘owners’ because we own shares of stock, own equity, that it’s analogous to slavery. That’s just as bad [as McNair’s comment]. It’s just as bad.

    “Don’t ask me. Ask anybody who’s ever played for me. Ask anybody who’s ever worked for me. I’m far from perfect, but that’s certainly not a connotation that you’re going to hear from anybody that I’ve ever been associated with. I’ve been brutally honest about racism and how we have to work hard to overcome it, but to suggest that an NBA team is some sort of … I’m not even going to go there.”


Draymond Green didn't back down....

http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/11/16/draymond-green-addresses-mark-cubans-criticism-for-arguing/
    quote:

    “I wasn’t going to get into a back-and-forth with Mark Cuban. That wasn’t my whole point,” Green said. “My point wasn’t to get in a back-and-forth with anyone. My point was to get in a conversation that needed to be had. When you look at Mark Cuban for instance with the whole equity thing and different sorts, we can all own equity and that’s fine. But Mark Cuban would never know or understand how it feels for me, a young black African American to turn on the TV and see what happened in Charlottesville. He’ll never have that feeling. When I say, ‘Hey maybe we shouldn’t use that word,’ to be honest, I don’t expect him to understand where I’m coming from. He’ll never feel what I feel when I turn on the TV and see however many people taken down by the KKK.”

    Green said he has met with business leaders out of respect for their expertise and possible hope to become a businessman after he retires from the NBA. Green said he has a close relationship with Warriors co-owners Joe Lacob and Peter Guber. But Green argued that professional sports owners should be addressed as a “CEO” or a “Chairman” as other business leaders are.

    “Do they really own you, the person? When you think about a basketball team or a football team, when you think of the Golden State warriors, you don’t think of the bridge that is on the front of the jersey,” Green said. “You probably think of Steph Curry.”


Green agrees we can all own 'equity.' But, what he can't get his head around is that when a person, such as Mark Cuban who owns majority equity stake in a franchise actually, for all intents and purposes, owns the franchise. What Green can't get through his head is that a franchise is not the players themselves. A business owner owns the business, but not the people who work for that business. When the current crop of players are no longer with the Warriors, Mavericks, Texans, or whatever sports franchise you want to name, the franchise will still exist, even if only on paper (see what happened to the Cleveland Browns NFL franchise in the late '90's).

Draymond Green, sir, you are a speshul snowfwake.

_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to Hillwilliam)
Profile   Post #: 31
RE: The right are all about protecting free speech... - 11/17/2017 11:08:03 AM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
If it had said fuck hillary, the town would have made him mayor.

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to WhoreMods)
Profile   Post #: 32
RE: The right are all about protecting free speech... - 11/17/2017 11:23:15 AM   
WhoreMods


Posts: 10691
Joined: 5/6/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

If it had said fuck hillary, the town would have made him mayor.

Sort of the initial point that's been obfuscated to death?

_____________________________

On the level and looking for a square deal.

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 33
RE: The right are all about protecting free speech... - 11/17/2017 11:51:06 AM   
DaddySatyr


Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

My right to speak freely is more important than the right of his grandchildren to be protected from hearing or reading the words. Bookburning 101.



There's a time and place for certain words. That you don't recognize that tells me all I need to know about you.





_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 34
RE: The right are all about protecting free speech... - 11/17/2017 12:12:27 PM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
FR.
free speech isnt a big deal except when it is, lol
Maybe we should ban tshirts next


_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to DaddySatyr)
Profile   Post #: 35
RE: The right are all about protecting free speech... - 11/17/2017 12:26:09 PM   
MasterDrakk


Posts: 321
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr


quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

My right to speak freely is more important than the right of his grandchildren to be protected from hearing or reading the words. Bookburning 101.



There's a time and place for certain words. That you don't recognize that tells me all I need to know about you.





Don't see how that is possibly true. Who is in charge of good and bad words? The Holy Roman Church? Perhaps, just the rightwing xtians.

In March 2002, Bush interrupted a meeting Condoleezza Rice was holding and yelled, ""Fuck Saddam. We're taking him out!" And Dick Cheney famously said "Go fuck yourself" to Patrick Leahy on the floor of the Senate.

It tells us all we need to know about those politically correct snowflakes, and all others of even lesser mien.

http://www.newnownext.com/family-values-republican-resigns-after-being-caught-having-sex-with-a-man-in-his-office/11/2017/ perhaps it is these rightist xtian exemplars who make these useless laws.

Lest you fear that these are only one offs, here is rightist morals in the UK: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3242504/Drugs-debauchery-making-extraordinary-Prime-Minister-years-rumours-dogged-truth-shockingly-decadent-Oxford-days-gifted-Bullingdon-boy.html

(in reply to DaddySatyr)
Profile   Post #: 36
RE: The right are all about protecting free speech... - 11/17/2017 12:54:29 PM   
bounty44


Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterDrakk
rightist

theres a good mnottertroll word

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterDrakk
xtian

and there is another.

regardless, whoever you are---its "Christian"

to answer your essentially ridiculous question about who gets to pick the words---painting with a broad brush, every state as well as probably every municipality around the country, so many hundreds of thousands into the millions of places, have public decency/disorderly conduct laws, under which certain speech would fall.

given the nature of the political map, that overwhelmingly points to bi-partisan legislation in creating them, not the "holy roman church" or the "right-wing 'xtians.'"

< Message edited by bounty44 -- 11/17/2017 12:58:50 PM >

(in reply to MasterDrakk)
Profile   Post #: 37
RE: The right are all about protecting free speech... - 11/17/2017 12:56:18 PM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
never fear sherlocks here

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 38
RE: The right are all about protecting free speech... - 11/17/2017 1:27:25 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic
If it had said fuck hillary, the town would have made him mayor.


Any proof? Didn't think so. There were complaints. He looked into it. He was told the person could be prosecuted. He dropped it. She (the truck owner) was pulled over for a separate incident and hasn't been charged under the obscenity laws (which has been posted) for the window sign.

Even if the whole town was pro-Trump, save for the pickup owner, why would the police chief been made mayor? He did nothing partisan. FFS, it's within the realm of possibility that he dropped it because he didn't want any accusations of partisanship made.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 39
RE: The right are all about protecting free speech... - 11/17/2017 1:50:37 PM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
OFFS lighten up .
my eyes rolled back in my head so far I could see my shoulder blades.

I dont use bumper stickers or obnoxious t shirts, while I wear BDSM type tshirts, it comes from not having an outward need to profess my politics, or religion. Ive certainly laughed at a few, ive bought them for other people, but wearing or displaying politics and religion is asking for an argument...from anyone belligerent enough to get offended. I dont need that hassle.
free speech...gets nasty, where is the line? it certainly shouldnt be "dictated" by religion.







_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 40
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: The right are all about protecting free speech... Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





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
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.125