A Scary Number Of Americans Don’t Think Muslims Or Atheists Have First Amendment Rights

[Syriusly]

The problem is that progressives don't stop at pointing out stuff, they try to squash it via violence or intimidation.

I can just as easily that that Contards don't stop blah blah blah.

As a liberal- and as a progressive- I have never tried to stop anyone's speech by violence or intimidation.

Nor do most liberals or most progressives.

There are assholes who call themselves 'progressives' who do commit violence. Just as there are assholes who call themselves conservatives who commit violence.

The difference is that right now it is conservative and libertarian speech that is being suppressed via violence. When was the last time a progressive march or talk was prevented by conservative/libertarian protesters?

I don't agree with suppressing free speech especially with violence, such as running people over...or raping them.....because you don't like what their message is.

You can't equate one nutter running people over vs. organized attempts to suppress speech. Plus the lone nutter is getting prosecuted for murder.

And are you saying said rape was part a systematic effort to stop Abortion?

Numerous peaceful left protests have been hijacked by outside agitators, such as ANTIFA thugs and even right wing thugs. You seem to think there is widespread left wing support for the actions of ANTIFA. I doubt there is..

I doubt there is too. As a member of the 'left'- I say arrest anyone who engages in violence in any protest. Those assholes who are beating up supposed Rightwingers are thugs just like Nazi's- and they should have the book thrown at them.

 

[Syriusly]

The only people who are actually supporters of freedom and liberty are those who support other people's right to do and say things they would never do or say themselves.

Everyone else is a bunch of hypocrites, authoritarians, or both.

Freedom of expression does not equate to freedom from criticism.

easyt65 has of course the right to speech free from government interference- and I support his right to say any of the stupid things he regularly says.

As I enjoy my right to point out his idiocy.

The problem is that progressives don't stop at pointing out stuff, they try to squash it via violence or intimidation.

I can just as easily that that Contards don't stop blah blah blah.

As a liberal- and as a progressive- I have never tried to stop anyone's speech by violence or intimidation.

Nor do most liberals or most progressives.

There are assholes who call themselves 'progressives' who do commit violence. Just as there are assholes who call themselves conservatives who commit violence.

The difference is that right now it is conservative and libertarian speech that is being suppressed via violence. When was the last time a progressive march or talk was prevented by conservative/libertarian protesters?

The Regressives will scream about Muslims' freedom of speech rights while enabling the shutting down of speech in campuses across our country.

They're teaching our kids to shut down freedom of expression, to shout it down, or to run to a safe space if neither of those tactics work -- instead of being intellectually curious, engaging in civil conversation with those who disagree with them.

How can such behavior be explained? How blind are these people to their own behaviors?
.

I don't know who the 'Regressives' are.

How about we all 'scream' about the rights of Americans to speak and to peacefully protest.

Regardless of whether they are Muslims or Christians, Right or left.

 

[Syriusly]

Contards of course try to deflect from the discussion of the First Amendment to 'but but...but...but what about the poor Christians!"

The only people who are actually supporters of freedom and liberty are those who support other people's right to do and say things they would never do or say themselves.

Everyone else is a bunch of hypocrites, authoritarians, or both.

Freedom of expression does not equate to freedom from criticism.

easyt65 has of course the right to speech free from government interference- and I support his right to say any of the stupid things he regularly says.

As I enjoy my right to point out his idiocy.

The problem is that progressives don't stop at pointing out stuff, they try to squash it via violence or intimidation.

I can just as easily that that Contards don't stop blah blah blah.

As a liberal- and as a progressive- I have never tried to stop anyone's speech by violence or intimidation.

Nor do most liberals or most progressives.

There are assholes who call themselves 'progressives' who do commit violence. Just as there are assholes who call themselves conservatives who commit violence.

So ANTIFA demonstrators are not Progressives? Does George Soros and other so called Progressives know that? Many praised the violent acts of ANTIFA.

I missed George Soros praising the violence of the ANTIFA- and I mean this seriously. If Soros did praised violence- please provide that quote.

 

[Mac1958]

I don't know who the 'Regressives' are.

Regressives: Illiberal Leftist Authoritarians. A term coined by a liberal Brit named Maajid Nawaz, horrified at the behavior of his end of the political spectrum, and used by many other honest, horrified, real liberals, such as: regressive left - YouTube
.

 

[SeaGal]

The only people who are actually supporters of freedom and liberty are those who support other people's right to do and say things they would never do or say themselves.

Everyone else is a bunch of hypocrites, authoritarians, or both.

I fully agree with this -but would add - it isn't even necessary to support other peoples 1A 'free exercise of'...it is only necessary to not interfere with them by force or law.

 

[martybegan]

The difference is that right now it is conservative and libertarian speech that is being suppressed via violence. When was the last time a progressive march or talk was prevented by conservative/libertarian protesters?

I don't agree with suppressing free speech especially with violence, such as running people over...or raping them.....because you don't like what their message is.

You can't equate one nutter running people over vs. organized attempts to suppress speech. Plus the lone nutter is getting prosecuted for murder.

And are you saying said rape was part a systematic effort to stop Abortion?

Numerous peaceful left protests have been hijacked by outside agitators, such as ANTIFA thugs and even right wing thugs. You seem to think there is widespread left wing support for the actions of ANTIFA. I doubt there is.

It seems that when left extremists go nuts they destroy property. When rightwing extremists go nuts they kill people.

I have no issue with peaceful protests, it's an American right. I absolutely oppose the deliberate acts of violence that ANTIFA engages in.

But by pointing out "ah ah ah!!! look at what this one guy did!!!" when it had nothing to do with any organization at all you are at a minimum trying to explain away some of the violence on the left i,e, "well we only break things and occasionally people, but we DON'T kill them!"

Anti-fa is large groups of people doing violence that they believe is merely part of the political process. They are far more dangerous than lone wolf types.

And you refuse to acknowledge the violence from the right.

ANTIFA is is not just large groups of people. It's a specific group with an anarchistic seeming ideology.

At this point they haven't killed anyone, and thus far that doesn't seem to be in their playbook.

At this point in time the "lone wolves" have accounted for far more loss of life. That's a bit more valuable then property.

I'm more afraid of people who attempt to make their voices heard without though to lives lost.

I'm not defending ANTIFA, but at this point I don't think they are that much to be afraid of. With BLM I saw a concerted effort by the right to portray them as a terrorist group. Demonizing. I think you are making ANTIFA into something bigger then it is.

The violence from the right is handled the proper way, by arresting the assholes, convicting them, and then sending them away for a long time or shoving a needle in their arm

It is an organized group with the express purpose of squashing dissent against their views with violence.

The only reason they haven't killed anyone is more due to luck than anything else.

 

[martybegan]

The only people who are actually supporters of freedom and liberty are those who support other people's right to do and say things they would never do or say themselves.

Everyone else is a bunch of hypocrites, authoritarians, or both.

I fully agree with this -but would add - it isn't even necessary to support other peoples 1A 'free exercise of'...it is only necessary to not interfere with them by force or law.

Before the past few years I would agree with you, however recently the attacks on 1st amendment, 2nd amendment and other rights have become so common that a more active role is needed.

 

[SeaGal]

The only people who are actually supporters of freedom and liberty are those who support other people's right to do and say things they would never do or say themselves.

Everyone else is a bunch of hypocrites, authoritarians, or both.

I fully agree with this -but would add - it isn't even necessary to support other peoples 1A 'free exercise of'...it is only necessary to not interfere with them by force or law.

Before the past few years I would agree with you, however recently the attacks on 1st amendment, 2nd amendment and other rights have become so common that a more active role is needed.

Valid point. Isn't necessary to support what they do, only the right to do it.

 

[Papageorgio]

The only people who are actually supporters of freedom and liberty are those who support other people's right to do and say things they would never do or say themselves.

Everyone else is a bunch of hypocrites, authoritarians, or both.

Freedom of expression does not equate to freedom from criticism.

easyt65 has of course the right to speech free from government interference- and I support his right to say any of the stupid things he regularly says.

As I enjoy my right to point out his idiocy.

The problem is that progressives don't stop at pointing out stuff, they try to squash it via violence or intimidation.

I can just as easily that that Contards don't stop blah blah blah.

As a liberal- and as a progressive- I have never tried to stop anyone's speech by violence or intimidation.

Nor do most liberals or most progressives.

There are assholes who call themselves 'progressives' who do commit violence. Just as there are assholes who call themselves conservatives who commit violence.

So ANTIFA demonstrators are not Progressives? Does George Soros and other so called Progressives know that? Many praised the violent acts of ANTIFA.

I missed George Soros praising the violence of the ANTIFA- and I mean this seriously. If Soros did praised violence- please provide that quote.

That isn't what I said, please quit twisting words to fit your agenda.

 

[Coyote]

I don't agree with suppressing free speech especially with violence, such as running people over...or raping them.....because you don't like what their message is.

You can't equate one nutter running people over vs. organized attempts to suppress speech. Plus the lone nutter is getting prosecuted for murder.

And are you saying said rape was part a systematic effort to stop Abortion?

Numerous peaceful left protests have been hijacked by outside agitators, such as ANTIFA thugs and even right wing thugs. You seem to think there is widespread left wing support for the actions of ANTIFA. I doubt there is.

It seems that when left extremists go nuts they destroy property. When rightwing extremists go nuts they kill people.

I have no issue with peaceful protests, it's an American right. I absolutely oppose the deliberate acts of violence that ANTIFA engages in.

But by pointing out "ah ah ah!!! look at what this one guy did!!!" when it had nothing to do with any organization at all you are at a minimum trying to explain away some of the violence on the left i,e, "well we only break things and occasionally people, but we DON'T kill them!"

Anti-fa is large groups of people doing violence that they believe is merely part of the political process. They are far more dangerous than lone wolf types.

And you refuse to acknowledge the violence from the right.

ANTIFA is is not just large groups of people. It's a specific group with an anarchistic seeming ideology.

At this point they haven't killed anyone, and thus far that doesn't seem to be in their playbook.

At this point in time the "lone wolves" have accounted for far more loss of life. That's a bit more valuable then property.

I'm more afraid of people who attempt to make their voices heard without though to lives lost.

I'm not defending ANTIFA, but at this point I don't think they are that much to be afraid of. With BLM I saw a concerted effort by the right to portray them as a terrorist group. Demonizing. I think you are making ANTIFA into something bigger then it is.

The violence from the right is handled the proper way, by arresting the assholes, convicting them, and then sending them away for a long time or shoving a needle in their arm

It is an organized group with the express purpose of squashing dissent against their views with violence.

The only reason they haven't killed anyone is more due to luck than anything else.

I don't think killing people is their aim - disruption and chaos and violence. When your goal becomes killing people in order to make your point it is a whole different ballpark for law enforcement.

They should be treated like any other group that attempts to instigate violence imo.

 

[Doc1]

Yes, the U.S. Constitution guarantees First Amendment protections for Muslims, atheists and all religious groups.

Let’s get the facts straight.

Nearly a quarter of Americans ― 22 percent ― either don’t know or don’t believe that U.S. Muslims are granted the same constitutional protections as other citizens. Roughly 20 percent don’t know or don’t think that atheists are protected under the First Amendment.

These are among the findings of a new study by the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg Public Policy Center, released ahead of the Sept. 17 Constitution Day, which celebrates the anniversary of the U.S. Constitution’s signing in 1787.

The survey asked respondents whether they thought it was accurate to say that U.S. citizens who are Muslims have the same rights as all other citizens. Seventy-six percent of those surveyed said it was very accurate or somewhat accurate, while 18 percent said it was very or somewhat inaccurate. Four percent said they didn’t know.

On the same question about U.S. atheists, 79 percent said it was very accurate or somewhat accurate, and 15 percent said it was very or somewhat inaccurate. Five percent said they didn’t know.

The annual Annenberg Constitution Day Civics Survey polled 1,013 U.S. adults about the government, the First Amendment and constitutional protections. This year marked the first time the survey included the questions about Muslims and atheists. The survey didn’t ask respondents about their knowledge of protections granted to Christians or other religious groups.

But it isn’t just the constitutional rights of Muslims and atheists that Americans are unclear on. Many Americans are highly misinformed about basic constitutional provisions, including what the First Amendment protects and even how the U.S. government is organized.

Fifty-three percent of Americans incorrectly think that undocumented immigrants aren’t afforded rights under the U.S. Constitution. In fact, the Supreme Court ruled on that issue in the 1886 decision, Yick Wo v. Hopkins, declaring that noncitizens were included in the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause.

Just 26 percent of Americans can name all three branches of government ― down considerably from 38 percent in 2011, when APPC first included this question on the survey.

Thirty-seven percent of respondents were unable to name any of the rights guaranteed under the First Amendment. Just under half of those surveyed named freedom of speech as a right guaranteed by the First Amendment.

But far fewer could name the other First Amendment rights. Fifteen percent of respondents named freedom of religion; 14 percent identified freedom of the press; 10 percent named the right of assembly; and just three percent said the right to petition the government.

The First Amendment states:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.​

More: A Scary Number Of Americans Don't Think Muslims Or Atheists Have First Amendment Rights

I agree! However, even many who may think that Muslims or Atheists actually do have First Amendment rights - they would like to deny them those rights.

The Public Schools stopped teaching the Constitution.

 

[Syriusly]

I don't know who the 'Regressives' are.

Regressives: Illiberal Leftist Authoritarians. A term coined by a liberal Brit named Maajid Nawaz, horrified at the behavior of his end of the political spectrum, and used by many other honest, horrified, real liberals, such as: regressive left - YouTube
.

Thanks- never heard of the term before- glad to know the term doesn't apply to me or most liberals.

 

[Syriusly]

You can't equate one nutter running people over vs. organized attempts to suppress speech. Plus the lone nutter is getting prosecuted for murder.

And are you saying said rape was part a systematic effort to stop Abortion?

Numerous peaceful left protests have been hijacked by outside agitators, such as ANTIFA thugs and even right wing thugs. You seem to think there is widespread left wing support for the actions of ANTIFA. I doubt there is.

It seems that when left extremists go nuts they destroy property. When rightwing extremists go nuts they kill people.

I have no issue with peaceful protests, it's an American right. I absolutely oppose the deliberate acts of violence that ANTIFA engages in.

But by pointing out "ah ah ah!!! look at what this one guy did!!!" when it had nothing to do with any organization at all you are at a minimum trying to explain away some of the violence on the left i,e, "well we only break things and occasionally people, but we DON'T kill them!"

Anti-fa is large groups of people doing violence that they believe is merely part of the political process. They are far more dangerous than lone wolf types.

And you refuse to acknowledge the violence from the right.

ANTIFA is is not just large groups of people. It's a specific group with an anarchistic seeming ideology.

At this point they haven't killed anyone, and thus far that doesn't seem to be in their playbook.

At this point in time the "lone wolves" have accounted for far more loss of life. That's a bit more valuable then property.

I'm more afraid of people who attempt to make their voices heard without though to lives lost.

I'm not defending ANTIFA, but at this point I don't think they are that much to be afraid of. With BLM I saw a concerted effort by the right to portray them as a terrorist group. Demonizing. I think you are making ANTIFA into something bigger then it is.

The violence from the right is handled the proper way, by arresting the assholes, convicting them, and then sending them away for a long time or shoving a needle in their arm

It is an organized group with the express purpose of squashing dissent against their views with violence.

The only reason they haven't killed anyone is more due to luck than anything else.

I don't think killing people is their aim - disruption and chaos and violence. When your goal becomes killing people in order to make your point it is a whole different ballpark for law enforcement.

They should be treated like any other group that attempts to instigate violence imo.

Were white supremacists following Trump's advice about dealing with protesters?
The president, whose initial statement about the rally was criticized for failing to mention racism, now finds comments he made about attacking protesters being revisited. Throughout his election campaign, Trump appeared to encourage violence toward anti-Trump protesters who showed up at his rallies, telling crowds of people that protesters should be escorted out more roughly, and offering to pay the legal fees of any of his fans who attacked them.

"If you see somebody getting ready to throw a tomato, knock the crap out of them, would you? Seriously, OK? Just knock the hell... I promise you I will pay for the legal fees. I promise, I promise," Trump said at an Iowa rally on February 1, 2016.

 

[Syriusly]

Freedom of expression does not equate to freedom from criticism.

easyt65 has of course the right to speech free from government interference- and I support his right to say any of the stupid things he regularly says.

As I enjoy my right to point out his idiocy.

The problem is that progressives don't stop at pointing out stuff, they try to squash it via violence or intimidation.

I can just as easily that that Contards don't stop blah blah blah.

As a liberal- and as a progressive- I have never tried to stop anyone's speech by violence or intimidation.

Nor do most liberals or most progressives.

There are assholes who call themselves 'progressives' who do commit violence. Just as there are assholes who call themselves conservatives who commit violence.

So ANTIFA demonstrators are not Progressives? Does George Soros and other so called Progressives know that? Many praised the violent acts of ANTIFA.

I missed George Soros praising the violence of the ANTIFA- and I mean this seriously. If Soros did praised violence- please provide that quote.

That isn't what I said, please quit twisting words to fit your agenda.

So who did praise the violence of Antifa? You agree that Soros has not praised their violence- why are you so quick to lump the actions of a few with the non-actions of the majority?

 

[HenryBHough]

True that athiests and Mohammedens have free speech rights. It's just that the violent ones ought to be silenced with extreme prejudice.

 

[Papageorgio]

The problem is that progressives don't stop at pointing out stuff, they try to squash it via violence or intimidation.

I can just as easily that that Contards don't stop blah blah blah.

As a liberal- and as a progressive- I have never tried to stop anyone's speech by violence or intimidation.

Nor do most liberals or most progressives.

There are assholes who call themselves 'progressives' who do commit violence. Just as there are assholes who call themselves conservatives who commit violence.

So ANTIFA demonstrators are not Progressives? Does George Soros and other so called Progressives know that? Many praised the violent acts of ANTIFA.

I missed George Soros praising the violence of the ANTIFA- and I mean this seriously. If Soros did praised violence- please provide that quote.

That isn't what I said, please quit twisting words to fit your agenda.

So who did praise the violence of Antifa? You agree that Soros has not praised their violence- why are you so quick to lump the actions of a few with the non-actions of the majority?

When you learn to comprehend what you read, let me know.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Perhaps when Muslim-dominated countries reciprocate by granting non-Muslims the same rights that Muslims have here, somebody here will actually give two $hits.

I keep forgetting we're supposed to act like those other counties.

Fortunately, our constitution applies to all Americans.

Except in Berkeley.....


We all know the OP is a complete fabrication, HuffingGlue outright lying yet again.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Perhaps when Muslim-dominated countries reciprocate by granting non-Muslims the same rights that Muslims have here, somebody here will actually give two $hits.

I keep forgetting we're supposed to act like those other counties.

Fortunately, our constitution applies to all Americans.

Fortunately, our Constitution is a living, breathing document, subject to interpretation and RE-interpretation, when it comes to whom we want to admit, and whom we don't.

Liberals-Progressives are presently out of power... which means that Cultural Suicide is now off the menu...

The OP was talking about Muslim and atheist American CITIZENS not having those rights.

If you think we should be imitating more barbaric countries, well you'd have to shred our founding documents.

If you think Muslim Americans should be denied basic constitutional rights and protections, then your vision of America is a dark one indeed.

No one thinks that.

I categorically state that Huffington is flat out lying, that they fabricated the whole thing.

This is the left now, utter and complete liars who claim all sorts of demagoguery.

Find me 2 actual posters on this board who advocate denying freedom of speech to muslims or atheists.

You know you can't, I know you can't. The fucking Communists have yet again simply made shit up to claim Das Juden make matzo from the blood of gentile children.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

“Nearly a quarter of Americans ― 22 percent ― either don’t know or don’t believe that U.S. Muslims are granted the same constitutional protections as other citizens. Roughly 20 percent don’t know or don’t think that atheists are protected under the First Amendment.”

This is the same ignorance, hate, and stupidity that put the likes of Trump in the WH.

 

[Uncensored2008]

“Nearly a quarter of Americans ― 22 percent ― either don’t know or don’t believe that U.S. Muslims are granted the same constitutional protections as other citizens. Roughly 20 percent don’t know or don’t think that atheists are protected under the First Amendment.”

This is the same ignorance, hate, and stupidity that put the likes of Trump in the WH.

Utter bullshit, the left is fabricating statistics once again.

Only the left denies civil rights to others. This total fucking lie was fabricated in an effort to derail the onslaught against the Bolshevik democrats for their prolonged assault on the 1st amendment. In typical Stalinist fashion, you are attempting to claim your victims are the ones doing what it is you are doing.