Justice Stephen Breyer: Is Burning Koran 'Shouting Fire In A Crowded Theater?'

[chanel]

Here we go. We should have seen this coming.

Last week President Obama told me that Pastor Jones could be cited for public burning – but that was “the extent of the laws that we have available to us.” Rep. John Boehner said on "GMA" that “just because you have a right to do something in America does not mean it is the right thing to do.”

For Breyer, that right is not a foregone conclusion.

... he's not prepared to conclude that -- in the internet age -- the First Amendment condones Koran burning.

“Holmes said it doesn’t mean you can shout 'fire' in a crowded theater,” Breyer told me. “Well, what is it? Why? Because people will be trampled to death. And what is the crowded theater today? What is the being trampled to death?”

Justice Stephen Breyer: Is Burning Koran 'Shouting Fire In A Crowded Theater?' - George Stephanopoulos' Bottom Line

Burning the flag? Free speech.
Burning the Koran? National security concern.

 

[Annie]

I'll kill you for saying that. You no longer have free speech. What nonsense Breyer displayed.

 

[007]

I don't think this pathetic display of cow toeing and appeasement to muslims can get any more ridiculous. What's next? Thanking them from now on for sawing someone's head off? This has reached the point of absurdity.

 

[chanel]

Islamophobe!

 

[007]

The "islamophobe card" is the new "race card." Once the islamophobe card is played, you have to sit down, shut up, and let a muslim cut your head off.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I'll kill you for saying that. You no longer have free speech. What nonsense Breyer displayed.

Rarely are ad hominem attacks reasonable or appropriate. In this case Annie, you deserve to be branded stupid. Not because you have the audacity to characterize a Supreme Court Justice, but because all of your posts are of the same genre - thoughtless partisan bullshit.

 

[Wicked Jester]

Is burning the koran "shouting fire in a crowded theatre"

No!......It's just plain stupid. It will accomplish absolutely nothing. The extremist muslims aren't going to change their twisted views. It's not going to change a damn thing. Why waste the matches?...It's stupid!

I mean seriously, do muslims burning american flags make americans say, "oh look, they burnt the flag, I must be wrong for being an american so, I now hate america"?

I fully support the pastors right to burn them, but it's stupid!

 

[Wry Catcher]

Is burning the koran "shouting fire in a crowded theatre"

No!......It's just plain stupid. It will accomplish absolutely nothing. The extremist muslims aren't going to change their twisted views. It's not going to change a damn thing. Why waste the matches?...It's stupid!

I mean seriously, do muslims burning american flags make americans say, "oh look, they burnt the flag, I must be wrong for being an american so, I now hate america"?

I fully support the pastors right to burn them, but it's stupid!

I'll probably regret saying this Chef, but you're not wearing the shoes of a religious zealot (I know, suggesting you might be sane is out of character, hence my likely regret).
Burning the America flag with immunity is what our flag stands for. The freedom to express oneself no matter how obscene the expression maybe to others.
Burning the Koran - a symbol like our flag - will inflame the zealots of Islam, not all of them, but enough a reasonable person would believe, to cause a violent reaction resulting in the death of inncents.
Americans are better than that. At least most of us, there are American zealots as evidenced by McVeigh, Rudolf or Roeder.

So Chef, now dem bums have a chance to hurt my Giants. If I apologize for Joe Morgan's HR will that get us through this series?

 

[chanel]

Of course it is. But think about how some kook in FL became the most feared and "dangerous" person in the world. And he hadn't even done anything yet. Its beyond absurdity.

People around the world go fucking bonkers burning flags and threatening our troops yet Rev Cuckoo is the "real" criminal. We are living in bizarro world folks. Its like giving in to 2 year olds having a temper tantrum.It just makes it worse.
(Not to mention these two year olds like to blow shit up.)

 

[Wry Catcher]

Of course it is. But think about how some kook in FL became the most feared and "dangerous" person in the world. And he hadn't even done anything yet. Its beyond absurdity.

People around the world go fucking bonkers burning flags and threatening our troops yet Rev Cuckoo is the "real" criminal. We are living in bizarro world folks. Its like giving in to 2 year olds having a temper tantrum.It just makes it worse.
(Not to mention these two year olds like to blow shit up.)

I guess the question which occurs is why are our troops all over the world? And why, if we are a nation of peace and freedom, do people "go fucking bonkers burning (our) flags".

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I'll probably regret saying this Chef, but you're not wearing the shoes of a religious zealot (I know, suggesting you might be sane is out of character, hence my likely regret).
Burning the America flag with immunity is what our flag stands for. The freedom to express oneself no matter how obscene the expression maybe to others.
Burning the Koran - a symbol like our flag - will inflame the zealots of Islam, not all of them, but enough a reasonable person would believe, to cause a violent reaction resulting in the death of inncents.
Americans are better than that. At least most of us, there are American zealots as evidenced by McVeigh, Rudolf or Roeder.

So Chef, now dem bums have a chance to hurt my Giants. If I apologize for Joe Morgan's HR will that get us through this series?

I actually see no reason for a reasonable person to carve a free speech exemption for Koran burning out of the Constitution. An attempt to extend the fighting words doctrine to this situation would be even more ludicrous than the original decision that created that exemption. It is usually used to justify shutiing down a speaker whose words “by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace,”Unless the Muslims woh are upset about this are actually among the group of people who are witnessing the burning of the Koran I see no way to make that one work. Unless you support Breyers theory that the internet makes all speech immediately offensive to anyone in the world, and thus unconstitutional. That slope would be so slippery that it would effectively eliminate any contoroversial and offensive speech, and I wouldn't have to listen to idiots like rdean, or Breyer, anymore.

The other approach would be to expand Brandenburg to include stuff like this, but I am pretty sure that Jones burning the Koran is not “directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action.” He was calling on Muslims to raise up and riot against anyone, he was calling on people to stop letting Islam walk over them. Unless they have some sort of political power everyone claims they do not have I do not see that inciting a riot.

 

[jillian]

Burning the flag? Free speech.
Burning the Koran? National security concern.

aside from your wacko knee-jerk reaction to the title, did you even read the article?

Oh no!!! Justice Breyer asked a question!!!! The horror!!! I realize that rightwingnuts hate when people ask questions. But really... what he ssaid was that his question:

will be answered over time in a series of cases which force people to think carefully. That’s the virtue of cases,” Breyer told me. “And not just cases. Cases produce briefs, briefs produce thought. Arguments are made. The judges sit back and think. And most importantly, when they decide, they have to write an opinion, and that opinion has to be based on reason. It isn’t a fake.”

Breyer, the author of “Making Our Democracy Work,” told me it’s a “rickety system” -- but it’s worked “fairly well” for a long time.

really... *shakes head*

 

[Liability]

If burning a Qur'an is akin to "yelling 'fire' in a crowded theater," then burning an American flag near a whole bunch of people I know would constitute the very same threat to the public order.

But libs (like that idiot liberal fraud wearing the black robes, "Justice" Breyer) have long insisted that burning an object is "clearly" nothing but speech, and thus protected by the First Amendment.

So why would burning THIS particular object be considered "behavior" rather than pure speech?

Hypocritical gasbag uber libs are even more dangerous in the Despotic Branch.

 

[Liability]

Burning the flag? Free speech.
Burning the Koran? National security concern.

aside from your wacko knee-jerk reaction to the title, did you even read the article?

Oh no!!! Justice Breyer asked a question!!!! The horror!!! I realize that rightwingnuts hate when people ask questions. But really... what he ssaid was that his question:

will be answered over time in a series of cases which force people to think carefully. That’s the virtue of cases,” Breyer told me. “And not just cases. Cases produce briefs, briefs produce thought. Arguments are made. The judges sit back and think. And most importantly, when they decide, they have to write an opinion, and that opinion has to be based on reason. It isn’t a fake.”

Breyer, the author of “Making Our Democracy Work,” told me it’s a “rickety system” -- but it’s worked “fairly well” for a long time.

really... *shakes head*

When lib zealots "ask" such "questions," they are actually making proposals for future action.

 

[asterism]

Burning the flag? Free speech.
Burning the Koran? National security concern.

aside from your wacko knee-jerk reaction to the title, did you even read the article?

Oh no!!! Justice Breyer asked a question!!!! The horror!!! I realize that rightwingnuts hate when people ask questions. But really... what he ssaid was that his question:

will be answered over time in a series of cases which force people to think carefully. That’s the virtue of cases,” Breyer told me. “And not just cases. Cases produce briefs, briefs produce thought. Arguments are made. The judges sit back and think. And most importantly, when they decide, they have to write an opinion, and that opinion has to be based on reason. It isn’t a fake.”

Breyer, the author of “Making Our Democracy Work,” told me it’s a “rickety system” -- but it’s worked “fairly well” for a long time.

really... *shakes head*

Think this through though, if burning a Koran is equal to shouting fire in a crowded theater then what is actually being alive as a Jew? What do you think inflames these terrorists more, burning a book or just having Jews in existence?

 

[jillian]

When lib zealots "ask" such "questions," they are actually making proposals for future action.

in other words, no one is supposed to question rightwingnuts because you have no answers.

only slogans.... and kneejerk reactions... and fauxrage.

thanks for your answer.

 

[Trajan]

Here we go. We should have seen this coming.

Last week President Obama told me that Pastor Jones could be cited for public burning – but that was “the extent of the laws that we have available to us.” Rep. John Boehner said on "GMA" that “just because you have a right to do something in America does not mean it is the right thing to do.”

For Breyer, that right is not a foregone conclusion.

... he's not prepared to conclude that -- in the internet age -- the First Amendment condones Koran burning.

“Holmes said it doesn’t mean you can shout 'fire' in a crowded theater,” Breyer told me. “Well, what is it? Why? Because people will be trampled to death. And what is the crowded theater today? What is the being trampled to death?”

Justice Stephen Breyer: Is Burning Koran 'Shouting Fire In A Crowded Theater?' - George Stephanopoulos' Bottom Line

Burning the flag? Free speech.
Burning the Koran? National security concern.

but we cannot stop Nambla from putting out instructive pamphlets on molestation...got it. Unreal.....simply unreal.

 

[jillian]

but we cannot stop Nambla from putting out instructive pamphlets on molestation...got it. Unreal.....simply unreal.

what are you talking about?

 

[RadiomanATL]

Burning the flag? Free speech.
Burning the Koran? National security concern.

aside from your wacko knee-jerk reaction to the title, did you even read the article?

Oh no!!! Justice Breyer asked a question!!!! The horror!!! I realize that rightwingnuts hate when people ask questions. But really... what he ssaid was that his question:

will be answered over time in a series of cases which force people to think carefully. That’s the virtue of cases,” Breyer told me. “And not just cases. Cases produce briefs, briefs produce thought. Arguments are made. The judges sit back and think. And most importantly, when they decide, they have to write an opinion, and that opinion has to be based on reason. It isn’t a fake.”

Breyer, the author of “Making Our Democracy Work,” told me it’s a “rickety system” -- but it’s worked “fairly well” for a long time.

really... *shakes head*

It's the part that he thinks that there is a question that I'm having a problem with.

As has been said before, I will defend an American's right to open their mouths and act completely stupid. This extends to burning Korans, Flags, Bibles, Torah's, etc.

 

[Liability]

When lib zealots "ask" such "questions," they are actually making proposals for future action.

in other words, no one is supposed to question rightwingnuts because you have no answers.

only slogans.... and kneejerk reactions... and fauxrage.

thanks for your answer.

Since you appear not to be up to being at all honest tonight, let me publicly correct you.

Normally, when one says "in other words," one is under an obligation to restate what the other party actually said

You, of course, didn't even make an effort to do so.

So, no points for you, jilly.

Don't thank people for their answer when you can't even be bothered to be honest.

Now, go take a nappy.