Originally posted by ADarksideJedi
It is not defending anything,It is the fact that you can be arrested for saying something.Again do we not live in the land of the free?How is this freedom of speech if you can't go around saying anything you want to say?jm 🙂
Okay if you can't read english, its not our fault we have already explained why it's necessary.
Originally posted by ADarksideJedi
It is not defending anything,It is the fact that you can be arrested for saying something.Again do we not live in the land of the free?How is this freedom of speech if you can't go around saying anything you want to say?jm 🙂
Your profound misunderstanding of freedom of speech is almost as blatant as your inability to comprehand the legislation that is the topic of this thread.
Originally posted by ADarksideJedi
I can read.And either of you had said anything about this being the land of the free.This is taking away our freedom of speech.Don't tell me you don't argee with that?jm
Originally posted by Devil King
Your profound misunderstanding of freedom of speech is almost as blatant as your inability to comprehand the legislation that is the topic of this thread.
Re: The Thought Police (new hate crimes law)...
Originally posted by sithsaber408
[b]The Thought Police
By Chuck Colson
5/1/2007What the Hate Crimes Law Would Do
In George Orwell’s classic novel 1984, the government Thought Police constantly spies on citizens to make sure they are not thinking rebellious thoughts. Thought crimes are severely punished by Big Brother.
1984 was intended as a warning against totalitarian governments that enslave and control their citizens. Never have we needed this warning more urgently than now, because America’s Thought Police are knocking on your door.
Last week the House Judiciary Committee, egged on by radical homosexual groups, passed what can only be called a Thought Crimes bill. It’s called the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act. But this bill is not about hate. It’s not even about crime. It’s about outlawing peaceful speech—speech that asserts that homosexual behavior is morally wrong.
Some say we need this law to prevent attacks on homosexuals. But we already have laws against assaults on people and property. Moreover, according to the FBI, crimes against homosexuals in the United States have dropped dramatically in recent years. In 2005, out of 863,000 cases of aggravated assault, just 177 cases were crimes of bias against homosexuals—far less than even 1 percent.
Another problem is that in places where hate crimes laws have been passed, hate crimes have been defined to include verbal attacks—and even peaceful speech. The Thought Police have already prosecuted Christians under hate crimes laws in England, Sweden, Canada, and even in some places in the United States.
If this dangerous law passes, pastors who preach sermons giving the biblical view of homosexuality could be prosecuted. Christian businessmen who refuse to print pro-gay literature could be prosecuted. Groups like Exodus International, which offer therapy to those with unwanted same-sex attraction, could be shut down.
In classic 1984 fashion, peaceful speech will be redefined as a violent attack worthy of punishment.
This is the unspoken goal of activist groups. We know this because during the debate over the bill last week, Congressman Mike Pence (R) of Indiana offered a Freedom of Religion amendment to this hate crimes bill. It asked that nothing in this law limit the "religious freedom" of any person or group under the Constitution. The committee refused to adopt it. It also refused to adopt amendments protecting other groups from hate crimes—like members of the military, who are often targets of verbal attacks and spitting. They also shot down amendments that would protect the homeless and senior citizens, also often targeted by criminals. Nothing doing, the committee said—the only group they wanted to protect: homosexuals.
Clearly, the intent of this law is not to prevent crime, but to shut down freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and freedom of thought. Its passage would strike at the very heart of our democracy.
The full Congress may vote on this bill as early as this week. Unless you want Big Brother telling you what to say, what to think, and what to believe, I urge you to contact your congressman immediately, urging him or her to vote against this bill. If you visit the BreakPoint website, you’ll find more information about this radical law.
If we do nothing, 1984 will no longer be fiction, and Big Brother will be watching you and me—ready to punish the “wrong” thoughts.
^^^Read that editorial today.
Now while I'm not for anybody being hit or hurt, or even demeaned for race, gender, orientation, etc.....
I don't want somebody arresting my pastor because as a minister he gives the Bible's view on homosexuality.
Thoughts? [/B]
I just scanned the actual bill and I didn't see anything that prohibits free speech. Could you please provide a link of where you received your info from...
Re: Re: The Thought Police (new hate crimes law)...
Originally posted by meep-meep
I just scanned the actual bill and I didn't see anything that prohibits free speech. Could you please provide a link of where you received your info from...
Originally posted by Wikipedia
Charles Wendell "Chuck" Colson (born October 16, 1931) was the chief counsel for President Richard Nixon from 1969 to 1973 and was one of the Watergate Seven, jailed for Watergate-related charges.His later life has been spent working with his non-profit organization devoted to prison ministry called Prison Fellowship. Colson is also a public speaker and author. He is founder and chairman of the Wilberforce Forum, which is the "Christian worldview thinking, teaching, and advocacy arm of" Prison Fellowship, and includes Colson's daily radio broadcast, BreakPoint, now heard on a thousand outlets. The ministry conducts justice reform efforts through Justice Fellowship.[1]
Colson has received fifteen honorary doctorates and in 1993 was awarded the Templeton Prize, the world's largest cash gift (over $1 million), which is given each year to the one person in the world who has done the most to advance the cause of religion. He donated this prize, as he does all speaking fees and royalties, to further the work of Prison Fellowship.
Not only is he a corrupt official and lobbyist, he's insane. Typical two-step. Too bad people can't realize where their news streams from.
Originally posted by meep-meep
On the other hand, SithSaber, you wouldn't be posting this because you are really concerned about free speech would you? This wouldn't be because you are a homophobe, would it?
Actually, I'd guess he's concerned about his "right" to be a homophobe and to be vocal about bigotry.
However, the ironic part is, I don't think this law impedes on that right.
"On June 1, 2005 Colson appeared in the national news commenting on the revelation that W. Mark Felt was Deep Throat.[23] Colson expressed disapproval in Felt's role in the Watergate scandal and suggested that if Felt could not remain loyal to President Nixon, then he should have simply resigned."
Thats not exemplary of redeption....
Nor is his signature on the Land letter, which told Bush that there was a THEOLOGICAL basis for the invasion of Iraq.
Nor is his support of the integration of religion into federal programs and the subsequent pseudoscience that "justified" them.
Besides, are you suggesting that Christianity is a free pass to morality?
Originally posted by grey fox
This is honest to god sad, a bunch of pansy assed* gays can't take some insults ? Cry me a river 🙄If I call a gay guy a fakkot** I expect to be called a douche-bag right back , if you can't insult each other without getting lawyers involved then your country has truly hit rock bottom.
*In the fact that they whine and cry over insults, not because their homosexuals.
** Replace the K's with G's , stupid word censor !
Originally posted by ADarksideJedi
I think you are the one misunderstanding the freedom of speech.Some people have other thoughts on it.It seems you are one of those people.Night.jm
You are the one who has no understanding of the freedoms enjoyed. Along with the 99% of people in this thread that want to argue against this legislation, you are getting your information from assumed freedoms and right wing lies that are all centered around denying equality to minorities. You're the type of people who get the word homosexual caught in the back of your throat and maintain this irrational knee-jerk reaction. As I have said before, the propoganda machine of the right wing is mobilized over this issue, not because it hinders freedom of speech, but because it addresses homosexuality. Any step toward normalizing homosexuality or legitimizing it, is another step on the long and insidious road to legalizing homosexuality; be it marriage or just as a matter of existing. You're all fools. And I might add that any cause that counts you among it's followers has already lost.
Originally posted by meep-meep
I just scanned the actual bill and I didn't see anything that prohibits free speech. Could you please provide a link of where you received your info from...
If you're talking to Sithsabre, all you have to do is look up the websites for James Dobson or Jerry Fallwell. Any nutjob, right-wing, neocon, bible-thumping, sex-fearing, hate monger will do. Just drop any name that applies into the search engine and you'll get your source.
Originally posted by long pig
Indeed. If they can take 7 feet of anal beads and a the fake Hulk fist I hide under my bed, they can take a joke.
Yeah. Except it's not a joke. If you want it to be funny, tell a joke that's relevant to the topic. The only joke I see is people actually defending their point of view on an issue that they aren't even informed about. As it is right now, the real joke is about lawyers being chained together at the bottom of the ocean and the neocons are trying to say it's a joke about Bill Clinton, the Pope and Jesse Jackson being on a plane full of snakes.
Originally posted by Fishy
Thanks, so that basically means that this law is good and should be passed and that Starhawk is going to far with his idea's one's again. But that is of course a seperate issue that has nothing to do with this law.
No small minded insults have nothing to do with this law or topic. The point is, people's safety is more important then other people's ability to spout hate speech.