Food for thought, II

[Some Guy]

What I find troubling is when opposition, either left or right, doesn't attack the point of what's said but instead demonizes the speaker.

When a speaker issue constantly lying, deflecting, attacking the rights of others, and destroying the very foundations of truth, fairness and freedoms on which your country was built, maybe it’s time to demonize the speaker.

In case you haven't noticed, Trump's approval numbers and republicans' chances in the 2018 mid-terms have gone up because people are getting worn out by the constant, unending demonizing of the speaker. You're not wrong about the why, just wrong about the how.

 

[bripat9643]

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”
― George Orwell

Yep, this should be posted on every college campus in the country.

And high school, for that matter. Get 'em young.

There's nothing wrong with allowing speech we don't like.
..

I agree. But we are a nation of laws, and the freedom of speech and expression have limits.

Yeah, "consequences". Say the wrong thing and we'll get you.

We'll leverage our Freedom of Speech to stop you from exercising yours.

That's not freedom of expression. That's a cynical perversion of it, a mockery.
.

No, it is freedom of speech. That's other people using their freedom of speech.

Freedom of speech doesn't mean anyone will listen to you, or sit silently while you say something. It doesn't mean they have to broadcast your views on their media network. They can even try to convince other media network owners that your views aren't worth broadcasting. They can organize boycotts against your business, or petition your boss to have you fired.

None of these things violate free speech. They are examples of free speech. Freedom of speech means you are free to express your opinions without interference from government. That's it. That's the case with all our rights. They are promises that government won't interfere with individual freedom - they aren't a requirement that our neighbors accommodate our desires.

Then how about NFL fans boycotting the games because they dislike the players disrespecting the country?

 

[bripat9643]

What I find troubling is when opposition, either left or right, doesn't attack the point of what's said but instead demonizes the speaker.

When a speaker issue constantly lying, deflecting, attacking the rights of others, and destroying the very foundations of truth, fairness and freedoms on which your country was built, maybe it’s time to demonize the speaker.

Hence, the reason you are treated like a pariah in this forum.

 

[bripat9643]

What I find troubling is when opposition, either left or right, doesn't attack the point of what's said but instead demonizes the speaker.

When a speaker issue constantly lying, deflecting, attacking the rights of others, and destroying the very foundations of truth, fairness and freedoms on which your country was built, maybe it’s time to demonize the speaker.

In case you haven't noticed, Trump's approval numbers and republicans' chances in the 2018 mid-terms have gone up because people are getting worn out by the constant, unending demonizing of the speaker. You're not wrong about the why, just wrong about the how.

He's wrong about the "why" also.

 

[bripat9643]

Why do we need to be lectured about the free speech clause in the 1st Amendment by the left when kids in college can be kicked out for uttering a banned word and every conservative speaker has been the victim of assault on a college campus one or numerous times in their careers.? I'd say that an apology rather than quotes from Indian born authors would be a sign that the crazy angry left is ready to enter the 21st century.

First of all the 1st A. restricts the Congress, not private citizens.

Please name the college student (s) who used a "banned word" (and what is was) and was then kicked out of college.

It restricts state governments as well, and that means public universities. Speech codes violate the First Amendment.

Your reference to CAL is foolish, since the University is known for the Free Speech Movement and its faculty includes professors and guest lecturers of all stripes and colors. An agent provocateur, such as Ms. Coulter was not banned, as the Republican Party and the Student Republican Club stated, it was the University and Berkeley Police Agencies who cancelled her appearance for community safety.

She was banned. No one is fooled by the university's lame excuses.

There is no place on our planet with more diversity than at CAL and the area surrounding the Campus. Anarchists and republicans, Vets and war protesters, all colors, creeds and ethnicity study together and debate the issues in class and off; a walk on Telegraph Ave and one will encounter a hodgepodge of people, a minority of them homeless and troublemakers; a minority who disrupt peaceful protests for "kicks".

Wrong. Conservatives and Republicans aren't allowed to say what they think. They are physically assaulted every time they go there, and the university looks the other way. Berkely is a lefting police state.

 

[dblack]

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”
― George Orwell

Yep, this should be posted on every college campus in the country.

And high school, for that matter. Get 'em young.

There's nothing wrong with allowing speech we don't like.
..

I agree. But we are a nation of laws, and the freedom of speech and expression have limits.

Yeah, "consequences". Say the wrong thing and we'll get you.

We'll leverage our Freedom of Speech to stop you from exercising yours.

That's not freedom of expression. That's a cynical perversion of it, a mockery.
.

No, it is freedom of speech. That's other people using their freedom of speech.

Freedom of speech doesn't mean anyone will listen to you, or sit silently while you say something. It doesn't mean they have to broadcast your views on their media network. They can even try to convince other media network owners that your views aren't worth broadcasting. They can organize boycotts against your business, or petition your boss to have you fired.

None of these things violate free speech. They are examples of free speech. Freedom of speech means you are free to express your opinions without interference from government. That's it. That's the case with all our rights. They are promises that government won't interfere with individual freedom - they aren't a requirement that our neighbors accommodate our desires.

Then how about NFL fans boycotting the games because they dislike the players disrespecting the country?

Not a violation of free speech rights.

 

[bripat9643]

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”
― George Orwell

Yep, this should be posted on every college campus in the country.

And high school, for that matter. Get 'em young.

There's nothing wrong with allowing speech we don't like.
..

I agree. But we are a nation of laws, and the freedom of speech and expression have limits.

Yeah, "consequences". Say the wrong thing and we'll get you.

We'll leverage our Freedom of Speech to stop you from exercising yours.

That's not freedom of expression. That's a cynical perversion of it, a mockery.
.

No, it is freedom of speech. That's other people using their freedom of speech.

Freedom of speech doesn't mean anyone will listen to you, or sit silently while you say something. It doesn't mean they have to broadcast your views on their media network. They can even try to convince other media network owners that your views aren't worth broadcasting. They can organize boycotts against your business, or petition your boss to have you fired.

None of these things violate free speech. They are examples of free speech. Freedom of speech means you are free to express your opinions without interference from government. That's it. That's the case with all our rights. They are promises that government won't interfere with individual freedom - they aren't a requirement that our neighbors accommodate our desires.

Then you have no problem with the NFL owners telling the players not to disprespect the national anthem.

 

[easyt65]

'A doughnut without a hole is a pastry'.
- The Seattle Baker on whose case the USSC just ruled...

 

[dblack]

Unless cakes are involved.

Fail.

Nothin'?

Give me something to work with. Maybe you'll get more in return.

That baker can say whatever the **** he wants while he's making that ******* cake. I welcome that.

In fact, he can go to the nearest bakery owned by a gay person and refuse to buy a cake from them they are gay. No problem.

Try harder.

He can even refuse to bake a cake for gay customers. He just can't say why.

Pretty much. You are learning.

As are you - you seem to be finally recognizing that these laws violate free of speech rights.

 

[Darkwind]

What I find troubling is when opposition, either left or right, doesn't attack the point of what's said but instead demonizes the speaker.

That bugs me as well. If you don't agree with what I have to say, then TELL me why you disagree, and what you have as your solution for the proposed problem.

Don't just scream "commie/nazi/socialist/whatever", tell the person you are responding to that they are stupid and whatever other insult they think of at the time.

They never seem to address the points being made, they just want to troll and call names.

Interesting.

You assume that the issue you are discussing requires a solution. Why cannot someone simply disagree with the entire premise and state their beliefs and why they believe what they do? Let's take immigration as an example. The progressive say's it's broken because we don't allow people into the country fast enough. I disagree. I say it is broken because it allows far too many people into the country. There are reasons I believe this, but why should I be required to answer to you or anyone here for those reasons?

As for namecalling, let's add racist to that list. I opposed Obama strictly on his policies, yet every progressive on this forum tried to silence Me and My speech by declaring I was a racist.

With regard to the OP's list of quotes, I want to make sure that both sides are equally guilty of not following these concepts.

 

[Wry Catcher]

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”
― George Orwell

Yep, this should be posted on every college campus in the country.

And high school, for that matter. Get 'em young.

There's nothing wrong with allowing speech we don't like.
..

I agree. But we are a nation of laws, and the freedom of speech and expression have limits.

Yeah, "consequences". Say the wrong thing and we'll get you.

We'll leverage our Freedom of Speech to stop you from exercising yours.

That's not freedom of expression. That's a cynical perversion of it, a mockery.
.

No, it is freedom of speech. That's other people using their freedom of speech.

Freedom of speech doesn't mean anyone will listen to you, or sit silently while you say something. It doesn't mean they have to broadcast your views on their media network. They can even try to convince other media network owners that your views aren't worth broadcasting. They can organize boycotts against your business, or petition your boss to have you fired.

None of these things violate free speech. They are examples of free speech. Freedom of speech means you are free to express your opinions without interference from government. That's it. That's the case with all our rights. They are promises that government won't interfere with individual freedom - they aren't a requirement that our neighbors accommodate our desires.

Then you have no problem with the NFL owners telling the players not to disprespect the national anthem.

The players and their agents might, unless their contract states otherwise they can squat, sit, eat, talk or leave ear buds in their ears during the National Anthem.

What some have done is to protest peacefully, it is people like you who are easily led by Trump to insight conflicts.

 

[dblack]

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”
― George Orwell

Yep, this should be posted on every college campus in the country.

And high school, for that matter. Get 'em young.

There's nothing wrong with allowing speech we don't like.
..

I agree. But we are a nation of laws, and the freedom of speech and expression have limits.

Yeah, "consequences". Say the wrong thing and we'll get you.

We'll leverage our Freedom of Speech to stop you from exercising yours.

That's not freedom of expression. That's a cynical perversion of it, a mockery.
.

No, it is freedom of speech. That's other people using their freedom of speech.

Freedom of speech doesn't mean anyone will listen to you, or sit silently while you say something. It doesn't mean they have to broadcast your views on their media network. They can even try to convince other media network owners that your views aren't worth broadcasting. They can organize boycotts against your business, or petition your boss to have you fired.

None of these things violate free speech. They are examples of free speech. Freedom of speech means you are free to express your opinions without interference from government. That's it. That's the case with all our rights. They are promises that government won't interfere with individual freedom - they aren't a requirement that our neighbors accommodate our desires.

Then you have no problem with the NFL owners telling the players not to disprespect the national anthem.

I don't like it, but it's not a violation of anyone's rights.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Yep, this should be posted on every college campus in the country.

And high school, for that matter. Get 'em young.

There's nothing wrong with allowing speech we don't like.
..

I agree. But we are a nation of laws, and the freedom of speech and expression have limits.

Yeah, "consequences". Say the wrong thing and we'll get you.

We'll leverage our Freedom of Speech to stop you from exercising yours.

That's not freedom of expression. That's a cynical perversion of it, a mockery.
.

No, it is freedom of speech. That's other people using their freedom of speech.

Freedom of speech doesn't mean anyone will listen to you, or sit silently while you say something. It doesn't mean they have to broadcast your views on their media network. They can even try to convince other media network owners that your views aren't worth broadcasting. They can organize boycotts against your business, or petition your boss to have you fired.

None of these things violate free speech. They are examples of free speech. Freedom of speech means you are free to express your opinions without interference from government. That's it. That's the case with all our rights. They are promises that government won't interfere with individual freedom - they aren't a requirement that our neighbors accommodate our desires.

Then you have no problem with the NFL owners telling the players not to disprespect the national anthem.

I don't like it, but it's not a violation of anyone's rights.

It might violate the player's contract.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Fail.

Nothin'?

Give me something to work with. Maybe you'll get more in return.

That baker can say whatever the **** he wants while he's making that ******* cake. I welcome that.

In fact, he can go to the nearest bakery owned by a gay person and refuse to buy a cake from them they are gay. No problem.

Try harder.

He can even refuse to bake a cake for gay customers. He just can't say why.

Pretty much. You are learning.

As are you - you seem to be finally recognizing that these laws violate free of speech rights.

Nope. They do not

 

[dblack]

Nothin'?

Give me something to work with. Maybe you'll get more in return.

That baker can say whatever the **** he wants while he's making that ******* cake. I welcome that.

In fact, he can go to the nearest bakery owned by a gay person and refuse to buy a cake from them they are gay. No problem.

Try harder.

He can even refuse to bake a cake for gay customers. He just can't say why.

Pretty much. You are learning.

As are you - you seem to be finally recognizing that these laws violate free of speech rights.

Nope. They do not

Of course they do. You just acknowledged it. They don't strop discrimination - they just silence it. The point of these laws is to suppress the expression of bigotry, not to eliminate discrimination.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Give me something to work with. Maybe you'll get more in return.

That baker can say whatever the **** he wants while he's making that ******* cake. I welcome that.

In fact, he can go to the nearest bakery owned by a gay person and refuse to buy a cake from them they are gay. No problem.

Try harder.

He can even refuse to bake a cake for gay customers. He just can't say why.

Pretty much. You are learning.

As are you - you seem to be finally recognizing that these laws violate free of speech rights.

Nope. They do not

Of course they do. You just acknowledged it. They don't strop discrimination - they just silence it. The point of these laws is to suppress the expression of bigotry, not to eliminate discrimination.

That is ridiculous. Have you been taking logic lessons from TK?

 

[blackhawk]

Very wise words by many wise people pity so many only pay attention to them when the President is someone they don’t support.

 

[boedicca]

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”
― George Orwell

“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
― Theodore Roosevelt

“Once a government is committed to the principle of silencing the voice of opposition, it has only one way to go, and that is down the path of increasingly repressive measures, until it becomes a source of terror to all its citizens and creates a country where everyone lives in fear."
― Harry Truman

“If freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.”
― George Washington

“Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions. It is the one un-American act that could most easily defeat us."
― William O. Douglas

“The moment you say that any idea system is sacred, whether it’s a religious belief system or a secular ideology, the moment you declare a set of ideas to be immune from criticism, satire, derision, or contempt, freedom of thought becomes impossible."
― Salman Rushdie

"A sacred cow, unexamined, feeds itself and produces a whole lot of bullshit. And nobody wants that, except the people who profit by selling you bullshit. Those are the people who try to tell you that examining or criticizing the sacred cow is taboo.”
― Oliver Markus Malloy

How amusing. You sure didn't promote that viewpoint during Obabble's Reign of Arrogance & Incompetence, but better late than never.

 

[bripat9643]

Yep, this should be posted on every college campus in the country.

And high school, for that matter. Get 'em young.

There's nothing wrong with allowing speech we don't like.
..

I agree. But we are a nation of laws, and the freedom of speech and expression have limits.

Yeah, "consequences". Say the wrong thing and we'll get you.

We'll leverage our Freedom of Speech to stop you from exercising yours.

That's not freedom of expression. That's a cynical perversion of it, a mockery.
.

No, it is freedom of speech. That's other people using their freedom of speech.

Freedom of speech doesn't mean anyone will listen to you, or sit silently while you say something. It doesn't mean they have to broadcast your views on their media network. They can even try to convince other media network owners that your views aren't worth broadcasting. They can organize boycotts against your business, or petition your boss to have you fired.

None of these things violate free speech. They are examples of free speech. Freedom of speech means you are free to express your opinions without interference from government. That's it. That's the case with all our rights. They are promises that government won't interfere with individual freedom - they aren't a requirement that our neighbors accommodate our desires.

Then you have no problem with the NFL owners telling the players not to disprespect the national anthem.

The players and their agents might, unless their contract states otherwise they can squat, sit, eat, talk or leave ear buds in their ears during the National Anthem.

What some have done is to protest peacefully, it is people like you who are easily led by Trump to insight conflicts.

Their contracts says the owners make the rules, dumbass.

 

[bripat9643]

I agree. But we are a nation of laws, and the freedom of speech and expression have limits.

Yeah, "consequences". Say the wrong thing and we'll get you.

We'll leverage our Freedom of Speech to stop you from exercising yours.

That's not freedom of expression. That's a cynical perversion of it, a mockery.
.

No, it is freedom of speech. That's other people using their freedom of speech.

Freedom of speech doesn't mean anyone will listen to you, or sit silently while you say something. It doesn't mean they have to broadcast your views on their media network. They can even try to convince other media network owners that your views aren't worth broadcasting. They can organize boycotts against your business, or petition your boss to have you fired.

None of these things violate free speech. They are examples of free speech. Freedom of speech means you are free to express your opinions without interference from government. That's it. That's the case with all our rights. They are promises that government won't interfere with individual freedom - they aren't a requirement that our neighbors accommodate our desires.

Then you have no problem with the NFL owners telling the players not to disprespect the national anthem.

I don't like it, but it's not a violation of anyone's rights.

It might violate the player's contract.

Wrong.