First Amendment

Discussion in 'Law and Justice System' started by Gunny, Apr 28, 2007.

  1. Gunny
    Offline

    Gunny Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Messages:
    44,689
    Thanks Received:
    6,753
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Location:
    The Republic of Texas
    Ratings:
    +6,770
    I disagree. One of the first things I disagree with is using "the Founding Fathers intent" as justification. The founding fathers' opinions were like everyone else's.

    Based on your interpretation, anything I deem hurtful is "hate speech" and should not be tolerated. "Hate speech" is defined by current societal popularity, not equality under the First Amendment.

    The responsibility to "not hurt or damage others" is your personal ethic, and a commendable one. However, your standard of ethical conduct is not contained within the law.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  2. onedomino
    Offline

    onedomino SCE to AUX

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,677
    Thanks Received:
    474
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Ratings:
    +476
    Many people agree that there is a definition of hate speech. Many countries have built laws to outlaw it. Such a definition includes the idea that hate speech seeks to denigrate and engender prejudice against particular groups based on race, sex, age, etc. The definition of hate speech is not burdened by some moving moral definition of its content. Rather, it is defined by the effect it produces. Clearly, Joyce’s continuous references and denigrating remarks based on race seek to engender prejudice. For example, immediately after the VT shooting Joyce posted this: http://usmessageboard.com/showthread.php?t=48215 designed to engender prejudice against a particular group; namely, Koreans. He has posted hundreds of anti-Semitic diatribes. In many countries, including the UK, Canada, and Australia, he could be imprisoned for seeking to incite racial prejudice. Someone in another thread said that Joyce was just expressing his views. Over and over again hundreds of times? That is not expressing his view. Rather it is attempting to incite prejudice against other groups. Why is Joyce’s obvious racism tolerated on this board? I assume that you are aware of the fact that his nic refers to an individual executed by the British at the end of WW2 for being an anti-Semitic Nazi sympathizer and traitor.

    I will skip discussing the disgusting remarks of OCA, they are too easy a target.
     
  3. actsnoblemartin
    Offline

    actsnoblemartin I love Andrea & April

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,039
    Thanks Received:
    407
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    La Mesa, CA
    Ratings:
    +407
    Please read what i wrote very carefully. I wrote some very offensive words to make a point only, I do not hate anyone.

    Thank You

    It is a very fine line. I read through everything he said. He is right when he said, we should not just let anyone in the country, we need to screen everyone who comes into the country to make sure they are not rapists, murderers, or worse. but their are racist overtones, and I dont think we should tolerate it anymore. It doesnt make this board any better. On the other hand, in america, we tolerate racism from minorities against white people, we tolerate double standards all the time, and that should stop. For example, it should not be ok for a black man to say ******, and not for a white man to say ******. It we be just as deplorable for me as a jew to say ****, and not allow you to say it. We live in a very politically correct world, and it has to stop. We have the race police in jesse jackson and al sharpton and its a joke, racism exists, but its not only white people against minorites, its everyone against everyone. The person who says, i have never uttered a racist word, or had a racist thought is the most racist. I believe everyone is atleast 1% racist and 1% prejudice, its what you do with the thoughts and feelings.
     
  4. actsnoblemartin
    Offline

    actsnoblemartin I love Andrea & April

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,039
    Thanks Received:
    407
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    La Mesa, CA
    Ratings:
    +407
    do we prosecute people for feelings or actions?.

    Now we have people, who have prejudice thoughts and feelings. Do we prosecute them?. Or do we wait till they say them?. and what exactly do they need to say?.

    Now, in america. As my point illustrates, or try to. certain genders and races, can talk trash, and get away with it, while others cant. If your white, and you say, im white, and simply im proud to white. Everyone will accuse you or being racist. EVEN, if your note. But youre hispanic, you can say la raza, which is clearly racist, cause they claim to be "the race". Or you can say black pride, which seems racist too me. Why the hell does everyone seems so insecure they have to be proud of their race, big deal, you were born a color (white black asian etc), what do you have to be so proud of, what did you do?

    women can call men pigs, and dogs, and its accepted, but if men call women bitches, they are women haters.

    we have a lot of double standards, i could name more. but you get my point

    If its not politically correct to say, you will be attacked for saying it
     
  5. Gunny
    Offline

    Gunny Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Messages:
    44,689
    Thanks Received:
    6,753
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Location:
    The Republic of Texas
    Ratings:
    +6,770
    If I censor WJ's remarks, do I then censor YOURS for your hate speech against his expressing his beliefs? Then I can censor anything Al Sharpton, Jess Jackson and/or Louis farrakham have to say. How about the hate speech between left and right?

    I do not share WJ's views. However, I see NO difference between any speech denigrating others because of their race than I do speech denigrating others because of their ideals, religion, etc. Intolerance is intolerance.

    The definition of "hate speech" you refer to is arbitrary and selective based on perception and opinion, and yes, it has changed greatly just since I was a child. The politically correct definition of "hate speech" is every bit as intolerant as any white/black/other supremist speech.

    The laws that you state exist in these other nations restrict freedom of speech, and would be unconstitutional in this country. You can't legislate away ideals. It's failed in almost every case.
     
  6. actsnoblemartin
    Offline

    actsnoblemartin I love Andrea & April

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,039
    Thanks Received:
    407
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    La Mesa, CA
    Ratings:
    +407
    For the record, I do not share wj's views and I do not think what i said was hate speech, because I used it in the context of making a point, however you would be within your right, to censor it, because it is provocative. I was simply asking a question, where do we draw the line. I did not mean to offend, but i thought using the n word and the k word were neccesary to make a point. Im sorry if i was out of line to do so. As far as censoring hate speech, I think we should do it because if we allow it to fester it will become cancerous, and we must call people on it.

    In other words, i agree with everything you said.
     
  7. Gunny
    Offline

    Gunny Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Messages:
    44,689
    Thanks Received:
    6,753
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Location:
    The Republic of Texas
    Ratings:
    +6,770
    I would not be within my right to censor anything. I do not dictate board policy. I enforce it.

    If the "line" is crossed, the offender will receive a PM requesting they desist. If they do not, further action will be taken, if necessary.

    Censoring "hate speech," or any ideals for the matter, is what causes festering.
     
  8. William Joyce
    Offline

    William Joyce Chemotherapy for PC

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2004
    Messages:
    9,693
    Thanks Received:
    1,135
    Trophy Points:
    190
    Location:
    Caucasiastan
    Ratings:
    +1,349
    First, I would hope that the fact that "racist" remarks are punishable by law in Europe would cause you to question those laws, their supporters, and their motivations, instead of jumping in to say what a great idea it is. It's always been something of a relief to me that in America, both liberals and conservatives have a pretty strong commitment to free speech, and your failure to support that is bewildering. If you don't like what someone has to say, fire back. If I'm wrong about what I say, point out why. If my conclusions are invalid, say how. Don't be a child who demands to be protected from words you disagree with.

    Second, I take exception to the assertion that I'm "inciting prejudice" against other groups. The better word is post-judice! The fact is, for instance, that Jews do have a disproportionate amount of control over the media, and blacks commit a disproportionate amount of crime. These are facts. If people conclude that this is a bad thing, are they so wrong? I think what this comes down to is the modern belief that "Ye Cannot Make Negative Group Generalizations." But you can, you can, you can! To say otherwise is to confound basic logic. If your concern is that "innocent" individuals would be adversely affected, I don't think that's illegitimate. But that's a cost of the position I concede. The untold harm accruing because of the absolute ban on generalizations goes unconceded.

    Third, my main goal in posting on the Internet is to demonstrate that whites in America are becoming a hunted minority. Our numbers are dropping. We are losing political, cultural and economic power. Other racial and ethnic groups are standing in solidarity against us and making increasingly shrill demands. Meanwhile, we are too afraid to even think about fighting back. I think that's wrong. So, if sometimes carrying that message involves a little uncomfortable pointing to the facts about other groups, so be it. If whites were free to conduct their own affairs, I agree: it would be unseemly to point out that blacks have lower IQ's, etc. But we're not. And the constant insistence is that we're all equal, as races, and the only reason blacks don't do as well is because of white "racism." I believe this is dead wrong. Yet I and other whites suffer for it, through affirmative action, open borders, high taxes, general mayhem, etc.

    This crap is rough and can be depressing, I know. And I am absolutely aware that simply talking about what's happening to whites is taboo. It's not like I can walk into my office and say, "Hey, Joe, we whites sure are getting screwed, huh?" I'd be reported to bosses and fired.

    But they're important issues. I care very much whether whites have a good future or a bad. Right now I see us heading toward a bad one, so I speak.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  9. actsnoblemartin
    Offline

    actsnoblemartin I love Andrea & April

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,039
    Thanks Received:
    407
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    La Mesa, CA
    Ratings:
    +407
    I agree with everything william joyce just said. And as a matter of fact, in canada if your a christan preacher and you say youre against homosexuality and gays are going to hell you can be jailed, its not so black and white, and that was my point, where do you draw the line.

    I dont want to simply pick and choose who to shut up, based on who i dont like. If were going to shut up william joyce, we must shut up the al sharptons of the world, and those who discriminate against whites and men.
     
  10. jillian
    Offline

    jillian Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    69,550
    Thanks Received:
    13,012
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    The Other Side of Paradise
    Ratings:
    +22,426
    From a personal perspective, I have no problem with either a WJ or Al Sharpton shutting up. From a First Amendment perspective, there wouldn't be any need to protect pleasant speech. It's the vile stuff that people would try to shut down and which needs protection.
     

Share This Page