You know what makes me sick

[boston bean]

the thought that people would be willing to give up even a sliver of free speech because of threats of physical violence from religious fanatics.

[leftstreet]

1. K&R

[Iggo]

2. Every god damned day. (n/t)

[cliffordu]

3. I won't. FUCK THEM AND THE SPRITUAL PEDOPHILE THEY RODE IN ON.

[Initech]

19. +100000000000000000 000000000000

[cali]

22. what?????

[Rex]

4. boston beans?

:hide:

[Tesha]

5. A lot of people around here are willing to give up a lot of (usually others') free speech rights.

It is a shame.

Tesha

[Tippy]

12. It is a shame....It's almost time to sink or swim

and those who are intent on sinking the rest of us should think about what they are doing....their obvious hatred of Obama is not clouding their judgement it is causing them to completely lose their ability to think before rushing ot judgement. They are acting more like republicans every day.....

[11 Bravo]

15. So, answer your own question. Is it OK to provide abortion providers personal info ...

on anti-choice web sites? I know where I stand, but you appear to want to finesse both sides of the issue.

[Tesha]

21. If it's publicly-available information, yes, it is okay to post it.

You may not like that, but that is the law and it's
a law that serves our side as well.

> ...but you appear to want to finesse both sides of the issue.

I'm not finessing free speech at all; I don't
know why you would make that claim.

Tesha

[alphafemale]

27. There's quite a chasm between not being "OK" with something and wanting something to be illegal.

People on DU put up contact information of people with whom they disagree somewhat regularly. People who have by choice or circumstance become public.

This kind of information is easily available on just about anyone.

I'm not necessarily "OK" with it being done to people I disagree with either.

But it is speech I'm not OK with that must be the most protected.

[MNBrewer]

6. Religion poisons everything

[baldguy]

7. Say you know Bob, a guy who's well known by all for his crazy jealousy.

You tell him that Jim's been screwing his wife, so Bob - being Bob - goes ahead & kills Jim.

Do you think you'd be protected from prosecution by the 1st Amendment?

[Tunkamerica]

8. yes. now if you told him with the express intention of inducing him to kill...

different story, but it's still bob killing his wife.

[baldguy]

11. No.

Speech which is likely to incite violence, lawless action, or endanger to the nation's security is specifically NOT protected speech.

"Rev." Jones knew that threatening to burn the Koran was highly likely to do all three. THAT WAS HIS INTENTION. And he succeeded.

[devils chaplain]

13. And so...

If someone were to burn a Koran to make a statement about its truthfulness and benefit to society, you think it should then be protected speech?

[Tunkamerica]

18. which has nothing to do with your previous example.

[11 Bravo]

20. You left out a fairly cogent point there, Sparky. Was Jim actually screwing Bob's wife?

If so, there is no cause of action, because statements of fact (other than matters of national security) are almost always protected speech.

[cali]

25. sorry, you're wrong. it's much more nuanced than you present it.

and burning a book of your own possession is clearly and absolutely protected speech.

[snagglepuss]

10. Bob then should be marginalized and treated for the social pariah he is.

[JVS]

23. So we should blame the media and blogs!

[cali]

24. comparing that situation to burning a book you own won't

win any constitutional arguments- though I'm unconvinced you could bring criminal charges against the person that told Bob that Jim was screwing his wife.

[Tippy]

9. K&R....

[woo me with science]

14. BEST POST OF THE DAY ON DU,

Thank you for saying it!

:patriot: :applause:

[liberaltrucker]

16. Let the assholes threaten all they want

My bumper sticker sums it up nicely:

Armed Liberal
Care for a 'discussion', Fundies?

So far, no takers.

:evilgrin:

[Little Star]

17. I'd give up all organized religion in a heart beat.......

But would fight to the death for free speech.

What the heck kind of christian/muslim/jew would ever threaten physical violence because of free speech? Doesn't say much for them or for their religion in my opinion.

PS: (off topic) I don't need a middle man between me and my god.

[FLPanhandle]

26. I agree

We as a society worry too much about offending peoples fantasy beliefs.