Originally posted by Adam_PoE
To quote attorney Lili S. Lutgens, "We cannot prohibit free expression because we don't like certain activities, nor can we suppress the speech of groups or individuals simply because we find their message distasteful... The First Amendment applies to everyone."
LIKE I ALREADY SAID
this is more than distasteful. It's DANGEROUS.
Would you provoke a woman who has her period ? Would you provoke a man who is bipolar ?
Why provoke a family who are torn up by the death of a loved one with redicious INTRUSIVE and violate protests ?
This will more than likely result in VIOLENT backlash and riot.
FREEDOM OF SPEECH is limitted WHEN a person's or people's lives become endangered...do you understand ?
You do realize that these assine protesters are not threatening anyone? So you're point it... moot.
👇 WRONG
Protestors coming to a Funeral Service to protest are just waiting for a BRAWL to occur.
You want to violate the privacy and disrespect an entire family of people who are devestated over the death of thier loved one.
You don't think there's any physical harm being risked ? You don't think the irrationality of emotion being fueled by BOTH sides, family members and protestors could cause a fight ?
Yes bro...Lives can be endangered in this kind of situation.
Originally posted by Lord Urizen
[B]You do realize that these assine protesters are not threatening anyone? So you're point it... moot.👇 WRONG
Protestors coming to a Funeral Service to protest are just waiting for a BRAWL to occur.
You want to violate the privacy and disrespect an entire family of people who are devestated over the death of thier loved one.
You don't think there's any physical harm being risked ? You don't think the irrationality of emotion being fueled by BOTH sides, family members and protestors could cause a fight ?
Yes bro...Lives can be endangered in this kind of situation. [/B]
You know I hate these sick bastards as much as you do...
But NO you're wrong. Unless someone actually physically attempts to harm one of the mourners... there is nothing no one can do about it.
You can't just say "oh well since violence might occur we had better stop them, even though so far no violence has happened". Right of Free Speech prevents it. Yes I know it's a stupid technicality but guess what, this hell hole of a world is full of bullshit technicalities.
You know I hate these sick bastards as much as you do...
You have no idea how much I dislike them. Hate? No, i don't hate someone i dont know.
But NO you're wrong. Unless someone actually physically attempts to harm one of the mourners... there is nothing no one can do about it.
Freedom of Speech is what we are talking about correct? So i never implied that it was thier intention to physically harm the mourners.
Does that mean violence is not an option ? No....
If there is an Irish Parade taking place in the city, and a group of racists interrupt the parade and say "$#$ the IRISH"!!!!....they are obviously risking a possible riot, and therefore freedom of speech will not protect them in this case.
You can't just say "oh well since violence might occur we had better stop them, even though so far no violence has happened"
If there MAY be sudden violence, then yes you can. You can say whatever you want, but not WHEREVER you want.
They are not only INTRUDERS to the funerals, and they are not only VIOLATING the privacy and respectability of the funeral, they are INSTIGATING with thier protests.
do you understand? Freedom of Speech does NOT protect against INTRUSION, TRESPASSING, VIOLATING PRIVACY, OR INSTIGATION.
. Right of Free Speech prevents it.
Nope ^ it doesnt in that case.
Yes I know it's a stupid technicality
Nope, like I already stated Freedom of Speech has its limits to where, when, and how you can say something.
but guess what, this hell hole of a world is full of bullshit technicalities.
True. But not in this case.
Originally posted by Jonathan Mark
You know I hate these sick bastards as much as you do...But NO you're wrong. Unless someone actually physically attempts to harm one of the mourners... there is nothing no one can do about it.
You can't just say "oh well since violence might occur we had better stop them, even though so far no violence has happened". Right of Free Speech prevents it. Yes I know it's a stupid technicality but guess what, this hell hole of a world is full of bullshit technicalities.
Lili S. Lutgens, "We cannot prohibit free expression because we don't like certain activities, nor can we suppress the speech of groups or individuals simply because we find their message distasteful... The First Amendment applies to everyone."
Are you gonna argue with him? A government official? While I agree with in you the fact that these assholes need to be stopped, its moot since well unless violence does break out, no one is gonna stop them since they are protected by the First Amendment.
It's the same reason we allow white supremacy groups to do their parades. Sad but true.
Originally posted by Bardock42
No, I wonder what exactly you found wrong about german laws regarding that?Because I have no clue what you are talking about that.
i'm saying that censorship past the level of threatening or engangering others (yelling 'fire' in a movie theater, etc) crosses the line imho. once that line is crossed, tell me...where is the next line?
also i disagree with forcing such groups, which very much exist, out of the public's eyes, ears, and minds.
that was my final point, and we could take it no further.... if i remember correctly. basically: i felt it was a slippery slope and you disagreed....for like 6 frikin pages 😛
Originally posted by PVS
i'm saying that censorship past the level of threatening or engangering others (yelling 'fire' in a movie theater, etc) crosses the line imho. once that line is crossed, tell me...where is the next line?also i disagree with forcing such groups, which very much exist, out of the public's eyes, ears, and minds.
that was my final point, and we could take it no further.... if i remember correctly. basically: i felt it was a slippery slope and you disagreed....for like 6 frikin pages 😛
I still do....but I don't want to argue that now.
Maybe I'm a little too patriotic, but I don't understand what is wrong with German Law regarding it...
Although....we could disagree for another 6 pages if you want.
Originally posted by PVS
so then, by this logic how is it justified to ban a nazi salute as harmful and threatening?
By my reasoning? No point in doing that. Find it pretty bad.
But I was mostly replying to that:
Originally posted by Aziz!
Countries like Germany have done just fine.
Originally posted by PVS
no they havent.
How did we not do fine?
Originally posted by PVS
what they did was just was we DID: ban speech which is neither harmful nor threatenting.so if they did do fine by that, then please explain why. why was it a good idea?
I find it wrong to do it. But it didn't do much it is just a small part of censorship....and it didn't really cause a slippery slope...so we are still fairly free just not allowed to scream Heil Hitler and spray Swastikas everywhere.