1. Are we moving toward a nation without the unalienable rights memorialized in the Constitution? Can you imagine a United States President nominating a candidate for the Supreme Court, who opposed the first amendment to the Constitution? Well, one did:
"I take it as a given that we live in a society marred by racial and gender inequality, that certain forms of speech perpetuate and promote this inequality, and that the uncoerced disappearance of such speech would be cause for great elation."
In a 1996 paper, "Private Speech, Public Purpose: The Role of Governmental Motive in First Amendment Doctrine," Kagan argued it may be proper to suppress speech because it is offensive to society or to the government.
That paper asserted First Amendment doctrine is comprised of "motives and ... actions infested with them" and she goes so far as to claim that "First Amendment law is best understood and most readily explained as a kind of motive-hunting."
Kagan's name was also on a brief, United States V. Stevens, dug up by the Washington Examiner, stating: "Whether a given category of speech enjoys First Amendment protection depends upon a categorical balancing of the value of the speech against its societal costs."
If the government doesn't like what you say, Elena Kagan believes it is the duty of courts to tell you to shut up. If some pantywaist is offended by what you say, Elena Kagan believes your words can be "disappeared".
WyBlog -- Elena Kagan's America: some speech can be "disappeared"
Elena Kagan Radical anti-gun nut? « The Daley Gator
2. Progressives don't believe that there are any rights that the government cannot cancel, and we have a President and a Supreme Court Justice who believe in censorship. In fact, this administration seems to have an inordinate 'sensitivity' toward a certain major religion....What happens when we put those two views together?
Oriana Fallaci, was one of the best known of European journalists. In 2006, the New Yorker wrote that after 9/11, Fallaci wrote three short angry books that the Western world is in danger of being engulfed by radical Islam. Life and Letters: The Agitator : The New Yorker
a. In 2002, a French NGO, The Movement Against Racism and Friendship Between Peoples, tried to get her book The Rage and the Pride, banned.
b. In 2003, Fallaci was sued in Switzerland by the Islamic Center of Geneva, charging racism. The Swiss judiciary issued an arrest warrant for a criminal trial.
c. In 2005, Fallaci was ordered to stand trial in Italy for vilification of Islam. The trial became moot, as she died in 2006 of cancer.
3. In 2008, Brigitte Bardot, actress, was convicted and heavily fined for an open letter to Nicolas Sarkozy, in which she objected to the ritual slaughter of sheep during the Islamic feast of Eid. Is Brigitte Bardot Bashing Islam? - TIME
4. We all recall the reaction of the Muslim world to the publication, in Denmark, of the Mohammed cartoons. At the United Nations . The U.N. high commissioner for human rights, former Supreme Court of Canada justice Louise Arbour, replied to the OIC, [Organisation of Islamic Cooperation] "I find alarming any behaviors that disregard the beliefs of others." She launched investigations into "racism" and "disrespect for belief," and asked for "an official explanation" from the Danish government. However, despite being a professed defender of human rights, she showed no alarm at the OIC's disregard for the Danes' belief in and commitment to a free press. The Mohammed Cartoons | The Weekly Standard
5. What is the argument that the United States will never lose its vaunted love of freedom? Who can look at the above, and not see into what we are descending?
What do we stand for ..and when?
Do we stand for anything?
a. How horrible, fantastic, incredible it is that we should be digging trenches and trying on gas-masks here because of a quarrel in a far away country between people of whom we know nothing. It seems still more impossible that a quarrel which has already been settled in principle should be the subject of war.
Neville Chamberlain
How long before the Left begins some campaign based on a "Better Red Than Dead" theme?
"I take it as a given that we live in a society marred by racial and gender inequality, that certain forms of speech perpetuate and promote this inequality, and that the uncoerced disappearance of such speech would be cause for great elation."
In a 1996 paper, "Private Speech, Public Purpose: The Role of Governmental Motive in First Amendment Doctrine," Kagan argued it may be proper to suppress speech because it is offensive to society or to the government.
That paper asserted First Amendment doctrine is comprised of "motives and ... actions infested with them" and she goes so far as to claim that "First Amendment law is best understood and most readily explained as a kind of motive-hunting."
Kagan's name was also on a brief, United States V. Stevens, dug up by the Washington Examiner, stating: "Whether a given category of speech enjoys First Amendment protection depends upon a categorical balancing of the value of the speech against its societal costs."
If the government doesn't like what you say, Elena Kagan believes it is the duty of courts to tell you to shut up. If some pantywaist is offended by what you say, Elena Kagan believes your words can be "disappeared".
WyBlog -- Elena Kagan's America: some speech can be "disappeared"
Elena Kagan Radical anti-gun nut? « The Daley Gator
2. Progressives don't believe that there are any rights that the government cannot cancel, and we have a President and a Supreme Court Justice who believe in censorship. In fact, this administration seems to have an inordinate 'sensitivity' toward a certain major religion....What happens when we put those two views together?
Oriana Fallaci, was one of the best known of European journalists. In 2006, the New Yorker wrote that after 9/11, Fallaci wrote three short angry books that the Western world is in danger of being engulfed by radical Islam. Life and Letters: The Agitator : The New Yorker
a. In 2002, a French NGO, The Movement Against Racism and Friendship Between Peoples, tried to get her book The Rage and the Pride, banned.
b. In 2003, Fallaci was sued in Switzerland by the Islamic Center of Geneva, charging racism. The Swiss judiciary issued an arrest warrant for a criminal trial.
c. In 2005, Fallaci was ordered to stand trial in Italy for vilification of Islam. The trial became moot, as she died in 2006 of cancer.
3. In 2008, Brigitte Bardot, actress, was convicted and heavily fined for an open letter to Nicolas Sarkozy, in which she objected to the ritual slaughter of sheep during the Islamic feast of Eid. Is Brigitte Bardot Bashing Islam? - TIME
4. We all recall the reaction of the Muslim world to the publication, in Denmark, of the Mohammed cartoons. At the United Nations . The U.N. high commissioner for human rights, former Supreme Court of Canada justice Louise Arbour, replied to the OIC, [Organisation of Islamic Cooperation] "I find alarming any behaviors that disregard the beliefs of others." She launched investigations into "racism" and "disrespect for belief," and asked for "an official explanation" from the Danish government. However, despite being a professed defender of human rights, she showed no alarm at the OIC's disregard for the Danes' belief in and commitment to a free press. The Mohammed Cartoons | The Weekly Standard
5. What is the argument that the United States will never lose its vaunted love of freedom? Who can look at the above, and not see into what we are descending?
What do we stand for ..and when?
Do we stand for anything?
a. How horrible, fantastic, incredible it is that we should be digging trenches and trying on gas-masks here because of a quarrel in a far away country between people of whom we know nothing. It seems still more impossible that a quarrel which has already been settled in principle should be the subject of war.
Neville Chamberlain
How long before the Left begins some campaign based on a "Better Red Than Dead" theme?
