[SK6]

This was my post for school that became rather prolific and profound, and further discussed. Me personally, I have my convictions, but, do you agree or disagree with the following commentary?

Please know that any negative comment, if done for the sake of debate and done respectfully is welcomed.

I was, and note I said was, a proponent of protecting certain things from freedom of speech. Burning the flag, bad mouthing the president, (not to be confused with disagreeing with the president) and so on. I would have said I was a HUGE proponent.

However, if one logically thinks in the realm of today’s society, if theses rights need to be protected, or the aforementioned things should be excluded from the freedom of speech, then I pose one HUGE question in regard to it.

WHO then is to decide what is, and what is not excluded? If one views it from a stance of impartiality, how can this work? Should the far right wingers (dictatorship) decided or the freaky liberals (anarchists) decide?

It’s a tough call, one that certainly will be debated for the rest of my lifetime for sure. I mean, I am offended by certain shows that are on primetime television advocating homosexuality. Before anyone goes attacking me for that statement, I believe it is the personal convictions and morality that should decide ones orientation. However, we go too far to one side then the other. I heard it recently stated that homosexuals are recruiting for their cause….yet the far right wingers want to bash their heads in with a bible.

So at what point do we defend, or fight freedom of speech? When it suites are political or moral agenda? It’s a hard point to ponder sometimes, as the extreme proponents and opponents have made it so difficult to apply any common sense.

If you attempt to apply common sense to a situation, it will immediately fail. Common sense does not exist in our society.

(OK, folding up the soapbox…walking quietly away….)

 

[Changleen]

I heard it recently stated that homosexuals are recruiting for their cause…

The cause man, They're doin' for the cause...

 

[JRogers]

This was my post for school that became rather prolific and profound, and further discussed. Me personally, I have my convictions, but, do you agree or disagree with the following commentary?

Please know that any negative comment, if done for the sake of debate and done respectfully is welcomed.

I was, and note I said was, a proponent of protecting certain things from freedom of speech. Burning the flag, bad mouthing the president, (not to be confused with disagreeing with the president) and so on. I would have said I was a HUGE proponent.

However, if one logically thinks in the realm of today’s society, if theses rights need to be protected, or the aforementioned things should be excluded from the freedom of speech, then I pose one HUGE question in regard to it.

WHO then is to decide what is, and what is not excluded? If one views it from a stance of impartiality, how can this work? Should the far right wingers (dictatorship) decided or the freaky liberals (anarchists) decide?

It’s a tough call, one that certainly will be debated for the rest of my lifetime for sure. I mean, I am offended by certain shows that are on primetime television advocating homosexuality. Before anyone goes attacking me for that statement, I believe it is the personal convictions and morality that should decide ones orientation. However, we go too far to one side then the other. I heard it recently stated that homosexuals are recruiting for their cause….yet the far right wingers want to bash their heads in with a bible.

So at what point do we defend, or fight freedom of speech? When it suites are political or moral agenda? It’s a hard point to ponder sometimes, as the extreme proponents and opponents have made it so difficult to apply any common sense.

If you attempt to apply common sense to a situation, it will immediately fail. Common sense does not exist in our society.

(OK, folding up the soapbox…walking quietly away….)

The Supreme Court and Congress decide what is protected by free speech, with the former probably being more important. Not everything is protected, nor should it be. I don't think anyone would agree that free speech should follow some kind of agenda. The Supreme Court has lifetime appointments so that they don't have to engage in that kind of political horse-trading and goosestepping. Perhaps this might make more sense if you gave an example of where, in modern America, free speech has been stopped short of where it should. Free speech is all about common sense, for the most part- you can express views and criticize politicians but you cannot endanger other people, cause a riot, threaten to kill the president etc.

 

[Ciaran]

All freedoms should be protected up to the point that said freedoms hurt someone. Such as yelling "fire" in a crowded theatre, or the act of assualt.

You can't go around deciding what freedoms or rights a person should or shouldn't have. What makes you a better judge of me and what I should be able to do than me? You (and everyone else) are just a human, like me. Attempting to decide what freedoms a person should and shouldn't have is oppression. No government entity or person should be able to tell me what I can and can't do. Freedom is never an "issue" untill another human being tries to take it away from you.

Of course along with freedom you must have personal responsibility and mutual respect, which seems to be lacking these days.

Just my opinion of course, your milage may vary.

 

[Changleen]

So, burning the flag is fine as it hurts no one. (provided you don't try to drape them in te burning flag or something).

 

[Cooter Brown]

I would say yes, I personally wouldn't do it as I think it's disrespectful, but who am I to tell someone else they can't?

 

[ioscope]

I hate america. check the date.

 

[BuddhaRoadkill]

May I ask how you were able to come to this conclusion

a proponent of protecting certain things from freedom of speech. Burning the flag, bad mouthing the president, (not to be confused with disagreeing with the president) and so on.

BEFORE coming to this conclusion?

WHO then is to decide what is, and what is not excluded?

The first professes a love of country, while the second shows an understanding of your country. If it wasn't the constitution, bill of rights, checks and balances, etc..., then what was it that lead you to love your country? What did the flag and the president represent to you that was so important?


I found your post quite disturbing. It illuminates perfectly the troubles facing society today and how we've managed to swing so far toward totalitarianism. The citizens are marching lock stock without knowing why. Scary.

But about free speech .... it ends when the foot hits the nuts. :nuts:

 

[Changleen]

They made him stand up every morning and chant. That **** gets to you after a while.

 

[BuddhaRoadkill]

They made him stand up every morning and chant. That **** gets to you after a while.

And Changleen goes in for the kill! ink:

Aye, but thats part of the original design. We pee-on grunts were never meant to actually have a voice. Freedom of Speech was intended as a way for the caucasion, male, rich, landing owning, and educated, to hash out a "truth" via debate. [listed in order of importance] It's why "tenure" exist and it is certainly not a farce. But Freedom of Speech takes on a whole new persona today. While the elite certainly control most everything, it's still comes down to the vote - and ways to control it.



F'it. Being a good labor monkey, I'm to drunk to think. But it's a good and important topic. I'm hoping some frothers pop in and be usefull.

 

[SK6]

May I ask how you were able to come to this conclusion

BEFORE coming to this conclusion?


The first professes a love of country, while the second shows an understanding of your country. If it wasn't the constitution, bill of rights, checks and balances, etc..., then what was it that lead you to love your country? What did the flag and the president represent to you that was so important?


I found your post quite disturbing. It illuminates perfectly the troubles facing society today and how we've managed to swing so far toward totalitarianism. The citizens are marching lock stock without knowing why. Scary.

But about free speech .... it ends when the foot hits the nuts. :nuts:

One is my personal conviction; the other is my attempt at forming a logical opinion, based on our current social trends and the huge partisan rift. For me, the juries still out.

With the current partisan rift that exists, it become evident that political agendas are now taking precedent, and the furthering of the agenda far out weighs the wants of the people.

Thoughts?

If a swift shot to the nutts don't shut someone up, they will, at a minimum, speak with a rather high pitched and annoying voice!

 

[Changleen]

So, SirKnight, what is this agenda that Gays have then?

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

So, SirKnight, what is this agenda that Gays have then?

to take over the world, of course...
and turn us all into gays, so that we dont breed, thus ending mankind within a generation....

the end of the world by the rage of the lord himself!!!!!, every human in 2 homosexual balls of naked bodies humping each other, like the southpark episode..
you dont read the news, dont you????

 

[SK6]

So, SirKnight, what is this agenda that Gays have then?

I would rather not comment. I have my personal convictions, and accept people for who they are.

A generalized comment that I will make though is this, I do not do bullies or cliques. I usually approach these behaviors in an a litigious posture, and I certainly do not tolerate it very well.

Have a nice Day.

 

[Changleen]

I would rather not comment. I have my personal convictions, and accept people for who they are.

Ah, it is a secret agenda! Are you part of the anti-gay illumnati who alone realize the massivly destructive plot being hatched by gays throughout the world could wreak havok with the fabric of modern society?

A generalized comment that I will make though is this, I do not do bullies or cliques. I usually approach these behaviors in an a litigious posture, and I certainly do not tolerate it very well.

Have a nice Day.

You sue bullies and cliques? Or wait, you don't 'do' them? What do you mean?

 

[SK6]

Ah, it is a secret agenda! Are you part of the anti-gay illumnati who alone realize the massivly destructive plot being hatched by gays throughout the world could wreak havok with the fabric of modern society?

My personal convictions are what they are. I however attemp my best to show a tolerance and respect for ideals that are other than mine. illumnati, could you mean the Masons, or the Templars?

:devil:

hhmmmmmm.......on the level and by the square?.......progressive moral science?........so mote it be!

You sue bullies and cliques? Or wait, you don't 'do' them? What do you mean?

Sue them? That is the general idea. As far as "do" them, I shall clarify. I make it a point to stick up for the small guy or the bullied or the rejected because they don't fit the mold or qualifications of the "clique". Bullies, well, lets just say I wish and pray sometimes they attempt to bully me, or do that crap in front of me. :nuts:

Hey, I'm really a mellow kinda guy!

Cheers!

 

[BuddhaRoadkill]

One is my personal conviction; the other is my attempt at forming a logical opinion

You scare me!

Perhaps you might consider that the personal conviction and the logical opinion are inextricably linked, with the logical opinion leading to the personal conviction - not the other way round?

 

[valve bouncer]

You scare me!

Perhaps you might consider that the personal conviction and the logical opinion are inextricably linked, with the logical opinion leading to the personal conviction - not the other way round?

Damn, I think you just got bitch-slapped SirKnight.

 

[SK6]

Damn, I think you just got bitch-slapped SirKnight.

In my attempt at accepting everyone for who they are, I have learned two invaluable truths.

1. Mankind acts far more intelligent then it really is.

2. Never argue with a fool, people may not know the difference.

Have a nice day.