CDZ America Held Hostage by Radical Left?

[Asclepias]

Who is denying anyone rights? For that matter what rights are you talking about?

Freedom of speech and assembly.

Who is denying anyone freedom of speech and assembly?

 

[forkup]

Who is denying anyone rights? For that matter what rights are you talking about?

Freedom of speech and assembly.

woodie we had this discussion before, Both those rights belong to the protesters just as much.I have to point out that Trump decided to cancel, while the police said they had the situation under control. I can even make a case that the cancelation of the event caused the problems. After all if you cancel an event at the last moment ppl will always get pissed, creating an enviremont where violence gets that more likely. My point is that Trump is like I stated, being sanctimonius. He knew that his style would always create problems like would have happened in Chicago.

 

[Asclepias]

Who is denying anyone rights? For that matter what rights are you talking about?

Freedom of speech and assembly.

woodie we had this discussion before, Both those rights belong to the protesters just as much.I have to point out that Trump decided to cancel, while the police said they had the situation under control. I can even make a case that the cancelation of the event caused the problems. After all if you cancel an event at the last moment ppl will always get pissed, creating an enviremont where violence gets that more likely. My point is that Trump is like I stated, being sanctimonius. He knew that his style would always create problems like would have happened in Chicago.

Not only that. Its really not a right at all that has to deal with the situation. There is nothing in constitution that guarantees a person the right to speak undisturbed by another citizen. At best it protects you from the government punishing you for you speaking.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Who is denying anyone rights? For that matter what rights are you talking about?

Freedom of speech and assembly.

woodie we had this discussion before, Both those rights belong to the protesters just as much.I have to point out that Trump decided to cancel, while the police said they had the situation under control. I can even make a case that the cancelation of the event caused the problems. After all if you cancel an event at the last moment ppl will always get pissed, creating an enviremont where violence gets that more likely. My point is that Trump is like I stated, being sanctimonius. He knew that his style would always create problems like would have happened in Chicago.

Not only that. Its really not a right at all that has to deal with the situation. There is nothing in constitution that guarantees a person the right to speak undisturbed by another citizen. At best it protects you from the government punishing you for you speaking.

Exactly. But the trouble is, some people think that if you don't agree with them, or if you respond in a negative way towards their comments by saying something negative, or worse yet, disproving an erroneous point, you are trying to limit their free speech.

No. Free speech means you can say anything you want to, but free speech also allows me to comment on what you said, with you responding, and me replying until we quit talking.

And no, boycotting someone for saying something stupid isn't a limit on the person who said the stupid thing, it's another form of free speech to respond to the comment with.

 

[daws101]

imo the trumpster has either wittingly or un wittingly given the asshats permission to do what until now, most of them would not do ..

So who decides whether the asshats have "permission" to deny the rights of others? You?

No one is being denied their rights
Besides you have your asshats reversed.

 

[daws101]

Never had a woodie is either ignorant or pretending to be.

 

[Agit8r]

This may sound like a partisan title, but there is no other way to describe the assault on our First Amendment rights. As demonstrated almost daily, there is a sizable and growing segment of our population who seek to silence, by disruption and intimidation, those with whom they disagree. This is happening, more and more often, at educational and political events throughout the country.

The common denominator for these "protests" is the predominance of left-wing activists at these events. Since when does the First Amendment confer the right of one group to deny the same right to another group? Ironically, this group of activists is the first to accuse the other groups they are trying to silence as "brown shirts" when in fact they are the ones employing the same tactics as the Nazis in the 1930s.

Equally repugnant to our Constitutional rights are those on the sidelines who makes excuses for this wretched behavior, usually in concert with pushing their own political agendas. Can they not see that we are moving towards a South American-style political system where the ignorant masses are beguiled into thinking that they can vote themselves into prosperity, while the elite live behind high walls with armed guards?

Does anyone here not believe that silencing others will lead to silencing everyone?

Who is proposing that the government should censor anyone?

 

[Asclepias]

Crickets

 

[daws101]

 

[jwoodie]

Dear "Winners:"

You have demonstrated that you are willing to abandon principle when it conflicts with your personal desires. You are the first to proclaim self-righteous indignation at the actions of your opponents, but the last to condemn the same actions by those whom you support. Well done.

 

[daws101]

Dear "Winners:"

You have demonstrated that you are willing to abandon principle when it conflicts with your personal desires. You are the first to proclaim self-righteous indignation at the actions of your opponents, but the last to condemn the same actions by those whom you support. Well done.

Your pants should spontaneously combust any second now.

 

[tinynascarfan]

Like it or not, Donald Trump has the right to say whatever he wants to say, but no one forces you or anyone else to listen to the man.

I can still use any words I want to use. Words that inflame others, and words that encourage others.

And I have never protested anything in my life, at an actual protest. The closest I came was getting ready to stop the Westboro Baptist Church, from protesting at a military funeral in my area, they never showed up. I had every intention of peacefully stopping them from interfering with a military funeral, and violence did cross my mind. Not me starting anything, but knowing that violence may occur.

I am a Protestant Christian, and support our military at the same time.

The question is, is the freedom of speech worth fighting for, and possibly dying for, in your own opinion. I would fight for it, and I would die for it, and if people want to shut down freedom of speech, then they better be prepared to be killed, because some people will see that as an act of war.

For the record: I would fight for my freedom of speech, freedom of religion(all religions, including Muslims), and my freedom to own a gun, I would also fight for my family. I would, in some cases, be willing to lay down my life to protect any of these listed above.

We fight for what is important to us.

 

[Asclepias]

Dear "Winners:"

You have demonstrated that you are willing to abandon principle when it conflicts with your personal desires. You are the first to proclaim self-righteous indignation at the actions of your opponents, but the last to condemn the same actions by those whom you support. Well done.

Using a lie as a deflection is not going to help hide the gaffe you made by claiming someones rights were being taken. Instead of taking it like a man you have hidden behind baseless accusations. You should be embarrassed.

 

[jwoodie]

Dear "Winners:"

You have demonstrated that you are willing to abandon principle when it conflicts with your personal desires. You are the first to proclaim self-righteous indignation at the actions of your opponents, but the last to condemn the same actions by those whom you support. Well done.

Using a lie as a deflection is not going to help hide the gaffe you made by claiming someones rights were being taken. Instead of taking it like a man you have hidden behind baseless accusations. You should be embarrassed.

=Protesters have a right to infringe the rights of others, but not vice versa.

Keep it up: Trump loves you.

 

[Asclepias]

Dear "Winners:"

You have demonstrated that you are willing to abandon principle when it conflicts with your personal desires. You are the first to proclaim self-righteous indignation at the actions of your opponents, but the last to condemn the same actions by those whom you support. Well done.

Using a lie as a deflection is not going to help hide the gaffe you made by claiming someones rights were being taken. Instead of taking it like a man you have hidden behind baseless accusations. You should be embarrassed.

=Protesters have a right to infringe the rights of others, but not vice versa.

Keep it up: Trump loves you.

What rights do they have right to infringe upon? I keep asking what right was taken away but you cant seem to tell me. Whats up?

 

[jwoodie]

What rights do they have right to infringe upon? I keep asking what right was taken away but you cant seem to tell me.

Post #80:

Freedom of speech and assembly.

The protesters are infringing those rights of the Trump supporters.

 

[Asclepias]

What rights do they have right to infringe upon? I keep asking what right was taken away but you cant seem to tell me.

Post #80:

Freedom of speech and assembly.

The protesters are infringing those rights of the Trump supporters.

You still havent pointed out how the protestors were infringing on their rights of freedom of speech and assembly. I dont think you understand what freedom of speech entails. If you did understand you would be able to show me in the constitution where those rights were infringed upon. Stop stalling and show us.

 

[Syriusly]

This may sound like a partisan title, but there is no other way to describe the assault on our First Amendment rights. As demonstrated almost daily, there is a sizable and growing segment of our population who seek to silence, by disruption and intimidation, those with whom they disagree. This is happening, more and more often, at educational and political events throughout the country.

The common denominator for these "protests" is the predominance of left-wing activists at these events. Since when does the First Amendment confer the right of one group to deny the same right to another group? Ironically, this group of activists is the first to accuse the other groups they are trying to silence as "brown shirts" when in fact they are the ones employing the same tactics as the Nazis in the 1930s.

Equally repugnant to our Constitutional rights are those on the sidelines who makes excuses for this wretched behavior, usually in concert with pushing their own political agendas. Can they not see that we are moving towards a South American-style political system where the ignorant masses are beguiled into thinking that they can vote themselves into prosperity, while the elite live behind high walls with armed guards?

Does anyone here not believe that silencing others will lead to silencing everyone?

How is one person exercising their right to free speech more important than another American's right to free speech?

Clearly all violence should be dealt with- and the ones committing violence- whether a 79 year old white dude or a 30 year old black dude- should be arrested and prosecuted- but just as much as candidates have the right to free speech- so do people who disagree with the candidates.

 

[jwoodie]

If Hillary's or Bernie's rallies were disrupted in the same manner (BLM excepted, of course), you would blame the protesters for their unconstitutional behavior. I can hardly wait to hear your complaints if this happens.

 

[Asclepias]

If Hillary's or Bernie's rallies were disrupted in the same manner (BLM excepted, of course), you would blame the protesters for their unconstitutional behavior. I can hardly wait to hear your complaints if this happens.

You still havent pointed out how they exhibited unconstitutional behavior. There is nothing in the constitution that says you cant disrupt anyone while they are speaking. If there is please point it out with a link included to the pertinent entry.