Killing free speech

[Harpy Eagle]

I don't believe he was trying to make a 1st amendment argument. I believe his point is that much of American society is opposed to the expression of alternative ideas.

That is do agree with, and oddly it seems the more we are exposed to it via the web, the less tolerant as a society we become. Or perhaps it is the over exposure to all sorts of points of views that drives us to want a place where all those ideas are not being crashed upon us.

I will add that, as much as the left preaches about tolerance, inclusion and diversity, they sure don't apply those principles to themselves.

They are not, but I do not find the right to be any better. Wingers are wingers, matters not what side of the bird they sit on

 

[TheGreenHornet]

I don't believe he was trying to make a 1st amendment argument. I believe his point is that much of American society is opposed to the expression of alternative ideas.

That is do agree with, and oddly it seems the more we are exposed to it via the web, the less tolerant as a society we become. Or perhaps it is the over exposure to all sorts of points of views that drives us to want a place where all those ideas are not being crashed upon us.

I will add that, as much as the left preaches about tolerance, inclusion and diversity, they sure don't apply those principles to themselves.

They are not, but I do not find the right to be any better. Wingers are wingers, matters not what side of the bird they sit on

Incoherence verging on stupidity. Need I say more?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I don't believe he was trying to make a 1st amendment argument. I believe his point is that much of American society is opposed to the expression of alternative ideas.

That is do agree with, and oddly it seems the more we are exposed to it via the web, the less tolerant as a society we become. Or perhaps it is the over exposure to all sorts of points of views that drives us to want a place where all those ideas are not being crashed upon us.

I will add that, as much as the left preaches about tolerance, inclusion and diversity, they sure don't apply those principles to themselves.

They are not, but I do not find the right to be any better. Wingers are wingers, matters not what side of the bird they sit on

Incoherence verging on stupidity. Need I say more?

No, you did a very nice job of describing yourself. Nothing else is needed.

 

[K9Buck]

They are not, but I do not find the right to be any better. Wingers are wingers, matters not what side of the bird they sit on

The right isn't censoring and banning people on social media or shadow-banning members of Congress. The right doesn't show up in force to violently intimidate liberal speakers on college campuses. The mindset of leftists has remained the same throughout history and the mindset of the left is to prevent others from expressing thoughts with which they disagree.

 

[night_son]

It is more than discouraging to witness the fact that the younger generation does not value free speech nearly as much as we all should.

What is the problem?

Do they not understand how critical free speech is to a free people?

Or, do they not care whether we remain a free society or not?

Perhaps they are just so wrapped up in their own agenda that their perception of reality is not what it should be?

Many of them have become religious; they have traded free speech for devotion to religion. I am not referring to Christianity, either. Many young people age 15 to 35 have become devout postmodernists. As religious zealots they sacrifice their own and tolerance for free speech in trade for ensuring their speech is not anti-politically correct, "bigoted" or "racist". In many cases, these neo-religious youths will severely self-flagellate themselves for their own "sins" against postmodernism, and will attack others who fail to practice absolute faith to said religion. They're just not worried about losing God or Constitutional given rights so long as they can comply with their ideological masters, the radical left intelligentsia.

 

[TheGreenHornet]

I don't believe he was trying to make a 1st amendment argument. I believe his point is that much of American society is opposed to the expression of alternative ideas.

That is do agree with, and oddly it seems the more we are exposed to it via the web, the less tolerant as a society we become. Or perhaps it is the over exposure to all sorts of points of views that drives us to want a place where all those ideas are not being crashed upon us.

I will add that, as much as the left preaches about tolerance, inclusion and diversity, they sure don't apply those principles to themselves.

They are not, but I do not find the right to be any better. Wingers are wingers, matters not what side of the bird they sit on

Incoherence verging on stupidity. Need I say more?

No, you did a very nice job of describing yourself. Nothing else is needed.

One thing for damn sure I do not straddle the fence like some idiotic moderate nor do I suggest in any manner whatsoever that just because some do so and so and the law supports them...that somehow makes it acceptable.

Revelation 3 KJV

REVELATION CHAPTER 3 KJV

 

[K9Buck]

Many of them have become religious; they have traded free speech for devotion to religion. I am not referring to Christianity, either. Many young people age 15 to 35 have become devout postmodernists. As religious zealots they sacrifice their own and tolerance for free speech in trade for ensuring their speech is not anti-politically correct, "bigoted" or "racist". In many cases, these neo-religious youths will severely self-flagellate themselves for their own "sins" against postmodernism, and will attack others who fail to practice absolute faith to said religion. They're just not worried about losing God or Constitutional given rights so long as they can comply with their ideological masters, the radical left intelligentsia.

Leftists are inherently statists and the state is their religion. It's similar to what Mussolini wrote about fascism and government. The Fascist State, the highest and most powerful form of personality, is a force, but a spiritual force, which takes over all the forms of the moral and intellectual life of man

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I don't believe he was trying to make a 1st amendment argument. I believe his point is that much of American society is opposed to the expression of alternative ideas.

That is do agree with, and oddly it seems the more we are exposed to it via the web, the less tolerant as a society we become. Or perhaps it is the over exposure to all sorts of points of views that drives us to want a place where all those ideas are not being crashed upon us.

I will add that, as much as the left preaches about tolerance, inclusion and diversity, they sure don't apply those principles to themselves.

They are not, but I do not find the right to be any better. Wingers are wingers, matters not what side of the bird they sit on

Incoherence verging on stupidity. Need I say more?

No, you did a very nice job of describing yourself. Nothing else is needed.

One thing for damn sure I do not straddle the fence like some idiotic moderate nor do I suggest in any manner whatsoever that just because some do so and so and the law supports them...that somehow makes it acceptable.

Revelation 3 KJV

REVELATION CHAPTER 3 KJV

 

[TheGreenHornet]

Folly and Wickedness of Men.

Psalms l4

1 The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.

2 The LORD looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek God.

3 They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one.

4 Have all the workers of iniquity no knowledge? who eat up my people as they eat bread, and call not upon the LORD.

5 There were they in great fear: for God is in the generation of the righteous.

6 Ye have shamed the counsel of the poor, because the LORD is his refuge.

7 Oh that the salvation of Israel were come out of Zion! when the LORD bringeth back the captivity of his people, Jacob shall rejoice, and Israel shall be glad.

 

[TheGreenHornet]

That is do agree with, and oddly it seems the more we are exposed to it via the web, the less tolerant as a society we become. Or perhaps it is the over exposure to all sorts of points of views that drives us to want a place where all those ideas are not being crashed upon us.

Based off that line, you would think the president hosted KKK leader David Duke in the Rose Garden for a Sunday interview as if his opinions mattered. No, actually, that was CNN who did that in 2016, but President Trump did something far worse in the eyes of the Left -- he invited citizen journalists, bloggers, and humorous people who make memes to the White House. In doing so, the president sent a loud message to America that internet pioneer Matt Drudge's vision of the world has been all but finalized thanks to social media and the power of the internet. This has legacy media, and their allies like SPLC, terrified that they are losing their power over public discourse'.

Matt Drudge's 'Future' Is Now Realized, And That Has Legacy Media Enraged.

[/QUOTE]

 

[TheGreenHornet]

They are not, but I do not find the right to be any better. Wingers are wingers, matters not what side of the bird they sit on

The right isn't censoring and banning people on social media or shadow-banning members of Congress. The right doesn't show up in force to violently intimidate liberal speakers on college campuses. The mindset of leftists has remained the same throughout history and the mindset of the left is to prevent others from expressing thoughts with which they disagree.

“The left is absolutely terrified of free speech and will do literally anything to shut it down,” Milo Yiannopoulos posted on Facebook after protesters stormed a building at Berkeley where he was scheduled to speak in February.

Such criticism has not come solely from the right. Nor is it new. Over the past few years, a steady stream of commentary has deplored the state of free speech and intellectual inquiry on campus. The Atlantic has published a series of articles with titles such as “The New Intolerance of Student Activism” and “The Glaring Evidence that Free Speech is Threatened on Campus.” The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education has argued that free speech in academia is at greater risk now than at any time in recent history. And the eminent First Amendment lawyer Floyd Abrams went so far as to claim (prior to the election of Donald Trump) that the single greatest threat facing free speech today “comes from a minority of students, who strenuously, and I think it is fair to say, contemptuously, disapprove of the views of speakers whose view of the world is different from theirs and who seek to prevent those
views from being heard.”


Who's Afraid of Free Speech?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Folly and Wickedness of Men.

Psalms l4

1 The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.

2 The LORD looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek God.

3 They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one.

4 Have all the workers of iniquity no knowledge? who eat up my people as they eat bread, and call not upon the LORD.

5 There were they in great fear: for God is in the generation of the righteous.

6 Ye have shamed the counsel of the poor, because the LORD is his refuge.

7 Oh that the salvation of Israel were come out of Zion! when the LORD bringeth back the captivity of his people, Jacob shall rejoice, and Israel shall be glad.

 

[Deplorable Yankee]

It is more than discouraging to witness the fact that the younger generation does not value free speech nearly as much as we all should.

What is the problem?

Do they not understand how critical free speech is to a free people?

Or, do they not care whether we remain a free society or not?

Perhaps they are just so wrapped up in their own agenda that their perception of reality is not what it should be?

Jul172019
Facebook Forbids Words of St Augustine
Under totalitarianism, the rules are vague, so that you must always live in fear of accidently violating them, and so that anything you might say can be suppressed. So comprehensive are the rules that Facebook has threatened to kill the account of Domenico Bettinelli for posting a quote from St Augustine that the social media behemoth’s censors have repeatedly suppressed as “hate speech”:

It’s a quote from a homily by St. Augustine of Hippo, a sermon that is contained in the official liturgical books of the Catholic Church because it is part of the Office of Readings for the 14th Sunday in Ordinary Time in the Liturgy of the Hours (the Divine Office).

The forbidden words of St Augustine are as follows:

“Let us never assume that if we live good lives we will be without sin; our lives should be praised only when we continue to beg for pardon. But men are hopeless creatures, and the less they concentrate on their own sins, the more interested they become in the sins of others. They seek to criticize, not to correct. Unable to excuse themselves, they are ready to accuse others.”

You might think that this call for tolerance is the opposite of hate speech — unless you consider that the working definition of hate speech is “speech liberals want silenced.” That includes speech by Christians.

On a tip from Kate P.
Facebook Forbids Words of St Augustine - Moonbattery

 

[TheGreenHornet]

It is more than discouraging to witness the fact that the younger generation does not value free speech nearly as much as we all should.

What is the problem?

Do they not understand how critical free speech is to a free people?

Or, do they not care whether we remain a free society or not?

Perhaps they are just so wrapped up in their own agenda that their perception of reality is not what it should be?

Jul172019
Facebook Forbids Words of St Augustine
Under totalitarianism, the rules are vague, so that you must always live in fear of accidently violating them, and so that anything you might say can be suppressed. So comprehensive are the rules that Facebook has threatened to kill the account of Domenico Bettinelli for posting a quote from St Augustine that the social media behemoth’s censors have repeatedly suppressed as “hate speech”:

It’s a quote from a homily by St. Augustine of Hippo, a sermon that is contained in the official liturgical books of the Catholic Church because it is part of the Office of Readings for the 14th Sunday in Ordinary Time in the Liturgy of the Hours (the Divine Office).

The forbidden words of St Augustine are as follows:

“Let us never assume that if we live good lives we will be without sin; our lives should be praised only when we continue to beg for pardon. But men are hopeless creatures, and the less they concentrate on their own sins, the more interested they become in the sins of others. They seek to criticize, not to correct. Unable to excuse themselves, they are ready to accuse others.”

You might think that this call for tolerance is the opposite of hate speech — unless you consider that the working definition of hate speech is “speech liberals want silenced.” That includes speech by Christians.

On a tip from Kate P.
Facebook Forbids Words of St Augustine - Moonbattery

Absolutely outrageous.....also I am quite sure you could post the entire Koran and they would not object.