Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The First Amendment does not prohibit reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions.
In the University of Cincinnati case noted above, Plaintiff's brought an action against the University and the Plaintiffs first obtained a preliminary injunction granted apparently by some "LEFTIST judge". ROFL The parties reached an out-of-court settlement and a permanent injunction was entered. That's how our court system works or should work.
I submit for argument, however, if the plaintiff's had been "LIBERALS" protesting the unconstitutional CONDUCT or POLICIES of a "CONSERVATIVE", then the matter might not have been settled out of court ... but the right wing loony birds would have continued to waste attorney fees and judicial resources appealing the matter all the way to the Supreme Court (and then you would have complained when the SC issued a decision against the "conservative").
Funny thing that people like you credit "CONSERVATIVES" for vindicating "free speech" liberties secured by the Constitution, but vilify "LIBERALS" if they exercise "free speech" liberties and use public walkways to picket a business that is engaged in unlawful discrimination.
"Conservative" double standards of "freedom for me, but not for you" are on consistent display.
This:
" ...no law ... prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press;..."
vs.
this:
"The First Amendment does not prohibit reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions."
Some 'moderate.'
Would you kindly stop trying to make your points with fraudulent quotes?
Would you kindly stop lying about the quotes.
Sorry, but you're the person lying about the quotes. Winston Churchill never said that and in an earlier thread that you conveniently ignored I provided proof of that.
You're serious?
Winston Churchill quotes says it was Churchill....
...but, fine....maybe it was someone else.
But to be incensed about who said it....without commenting on the truth of the quote makes you appear.......
...how to say it....
Let's just say Forrest Gump would have speak loud and slow to you…
What a shame for you then that I do, only I live in today's world with its complexities, not 230 years ago when we shit in the woods and got water from a stream. Like the Founders, I deal with the times, and like them as well, I want a government that works for the needs of the governed. Pretty simple actually.Simple enough to prove: today's Liberals do not endorse individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government.
According the creator of this thread, "Only Fascists Assail Free Speech," therefore, Donald Trump must be a Fascist.
After all, "PoliticalChic" a/k/a IgnorantGirl, apparently argues that the "NO LAW" portion of the First Amendment is absolute and means that the government may not even impose reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions on speech. Thus, if BLM protestors want to make a political speech at one of Donald Trump's political rallies, and Donald Trump assails them, then Donald Trump must be a Fascist.
This:
" ...no law ... prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press;..."
vs.
this:
"The First Amendment does not prohibit reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions."
Some 'moderate.'
Would you kindly stop trying to make your points with fraudulent quotes?
Would you kindly stop lying about the quotes.
Sorry, but you're the person lying about the quotes. Winston Churchill never said that and in an earlier thread that you conveniently ignored I provided proof of that.
You're serious?
Winston Churchill quotes says it was Churchill....
...but, fine....maybe it was someone else.
But to be incensed about who said it....without commenting on the truth of the quote makes you appear.......
...how to say it....
Let's just say Forrest Gump would have speak loud and slow to you…
Wrong again. Your source is not "Winston Churchill quotes" it is "Thinkexist" I guess some people will believe anything they read, Here is the Churchill Centre a society dedicated to preserving the historic legacy of Winston Churchill and their comment about your quote. Quotes Falsely Attributed
He did, obviously, and your link was wrong...Would you kindly stop trying to make your points with fraudulent quotes?
Would you kindly stop lying about the quotes.
Sorry, but you're the person lying about the quotes. Winston Churchill never said that and in an earlier thread that you conveniently ignored I provided proof of that.
You're serious?
Winston Churchill quotes says it was Churchill....
...but, fine....maybe it was someone else.
But to be incensed about who said it....without commenting on the truth of the quote makes you appear.......
...how to say it....
Let's just say Forrest Gump would have speak loud and slow to you…
Wrong again. Your source is not "Winston Churchill quotes" it is "Thinkexist" I guess some people will believe anything they read, Here is the Churchill Centre a society dedicated to preserving the historic legacy of Winston Churchill and their comment about your quote. Quotes Falsely Attributed
Click my link, you dope.
What a shame for you then that I do, only I live in today's world with its complexities, not 230 years ago when we shit in the woods and got water from a stream. Like the Founders, I deal with the times, and like them as well, I want a government that works for the needs of the governed. Pretty simple actually.Simple enough to prove: today's Liberals do not endorse individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government.
He did, obviously, and your link was wrong...Would you kindly stop lying about the quotes.
Sorry, but you're the person lying about the quotes. Winston Churchill never said that and in an earlier thread that you conveniently ignored I provided proof of that.
You're serious?
Winston Churchill quotes says it was Churchill....
...but, fine....maybe it was someone else.
But to be incensed about who said it....without commenting on the truth of the quote makes you appear.......
...how to say it....
Let's just say Forrest Gump would have speak loud and slow to you…
Wrong again. Your source is not "Winston Churchill quotes" it is "Thinkexist" I guess some people will believe anything they read, Here is the Churchill Centre a society dedicated to preserving the historic legacy of Winston Churchill and their comment about your quote. Quotes Falsely Attributed
Click my link, you dope.
The Founders and I are so close I tell them when they need a shower...What a shame for you then that I do, only I live in today's world with its complexities, not 230 years ago when we shit in the woods and got water from a stream. Like the Founders, I deal with the times, and like them as well, I want a government that works for the needs of the governed. Pretty simple actually.Simple enough to prove: today's Liberals do not endorse individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government.
Hmmm.....
So you're new position isn't that the Founders were your ilk.
Confederate General Wise, running from Union General Cox, refused to call it 'retreat,' called it, 'a retrograde movement.'
Nice retrograde movement you've made.
That is your opinion, and the opinion of the person who said it however it isn't true.He did, obviously, and your link was wrong...Sorry, but you're the person lying about the quotes. Winston Churchill never said that and in an earlier thread that you conveniently ignored I provided proof of that.
You're serious?
Winston Churchill quotes says it was Churchill....
...but, fine....maybe it was someone else.
But to be incensed about who said it....without commenting on the truth of the quote makes you appear.......
...how to say it....
Let's just say Forrest Gump would have speak loud and slow to you…
Wrong again. Your source is not "Winston Churchill quotes" it is "Thinkexist" I guess some people will believe anything they read, Here is the Churchill Centre a society dedicated to preserving the historic legacy of Winston Churchill and their comment about your quote. Quotes Falsely Attributed
Click my link, you dope.
No, liar....click my link: it says "ThinkExist."
Now...both of you: whoever said this, and whoever repeated it.....
“If you're not a liberal at twenty you have no heart, if you're not a conservative at forty you have no brain"...
...it's the truth.
One can gauge it via the term "free speech zone."
Guess who was a big fan of free speech zones.
Free Speech Under Fire: The ACLU Challenge to "Protest Zones"
He did, obviously, and your link was wrong...Sorry, but you're the person lying about the quotes. Winston Churchill never said that and in an earlier thread that you conveniently ignored I provided proof of that.
You're serious?
Winston Churchill quotes says it was Churchill....
...but, fine....maybe it was someone else.
But to be incensed about who said it....without commenting on the truth of the quote makes you appear.......
...how to say it....
Let's just say Forrest Gump would have speak loud and slow to you…
Wrong again. Your source is not "Winston Churchill quotes" it is "Thinkexist" I guess some people will believe anything they read, Here is the Churchill Centre a society dedicated to preserving the historic legacy of Winston Churchill and their comment about your quote. Quotes Falsely Attributed
Click my link, you dope.
No, liar....click my link: it says "ThinkExist."
Now...both of you: whoever said this, and whoever repeated it.....
“If you're not a liberal at twenty you have no heart, if you're not a conservative at forty you have no brain"...
...it's the truth.
As expected, you randomly quote some random dribble.I'm not opposed to free speech at all, mind asserting how I have expressed my opposition to free speech?Fascists like yourself.
Oooo.....looks who's sensitive about being opposed to free speech!
And he comes up with a clever "so are you" post!
OK....now you can return to the 24-Hour All Cartoon Network.
Well....let's see how you respond to this post:
Here is the sad result of Liberal domination of universities....
6. "Rutgers: There’s No Such Thing As ‘Free Speech’
A guide to preventing “bias incidents” published by Rutgers University warns students that the idea of “free speech” is a lie,Campus Reform reports.
“There is no such thing as ‘free’ speech. All speech has a cost and consequences,” opens the page dedicated to the school’s “Bias Prevention & Education Committee.”The page, maintained by the school’s office of student affairs, encourages students to “think before you speak” and also offers four other core suggestions to avoid the specter of bias incidents.
“Engage,” says one tip. “Join activities, programs, courses, and practices that promote diversity and social justice.”
“Bias Acts Are: Verbal, written, physical, psychological acts that threaten or harm a person or group on the basis of race, religion, color, sex, age, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, disability, marital status, civil union status, domestic partnership status, atypical heredity or cellular blood trait, military service or veteran status,” the description reads."
Rutgers: There’s No Such Thing As ‘Free Speech’
So....better say the 'right things'...and think the 'right' thoughts.....or else!
BTW...21% of Rutgers' budget is via government funding.
Budget Facts and Figures
Well, well, well.....as I predicted: afraid to confront fascism.
Kinda puts you in that camp,huh?
Pick one word to represent America.....you'd probably pick some iteration of "freedom."
The aspect of 'freedom' most often mentioned is freedom of speech.
Sadly, the stronger the Left's influence abounds, the less of that free speech is available.
1. "Americans were asked what they believed was the single most important freedom that citizens enjoy. The majority (47%) of people named freedom of speech as the most important freedom, followed by freedom of religion (10%); freedom of choice (7%); right to vote (5%); right to bear arms (5%); right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness (3%), and freedom of the press (1%). Women were twice as likely as men to name freedom of religion as the most important freedom. Thirteen percent of women named freedom of religion, whereas only 6% of men did.
2. Asked to name the five specific freedoms in the First Amendment, 59% of Americans could name freedom of speech, followed by 24% who could name freedom of religion, 14% freedom of the press, 11% the right to assemble, and 4% the right to petition. Thirty-six percent of Americans cannot name any of the rights guaranteed by the First Amendment.
3. The majority of Americans believes that the First Amendment does not go too far in the rights it guarantees. The gap between those who believe it goes too far and not too far has generally increased over time; however, this year there was a significant increase in those who claimed that the First Amendment goes too far in protecting individual rights.
a. Higher percentages of young Americans tend to agree with the statement that the First Amendment goes too far in the rights that it guarantees. Forty-seven percent of 18-30-year-olds agree, while 44% of 31-45-year-olds, 24% of 46-60-year-olds and 23% of people over 60 agree that the First Amendment goes too far.
b. Additionally, African-Americans and Hispanics are more likely to say that the First Amendment goes too far in the rights it guarantees. Fifty-two percent of African-Americans and 50% of Hispanics agree, while only 29% of whites agree that the First Amendment goes too far.
4. Americans who identify as liberal or moderate are more likely than those who identify as conservative to agree that the news media attempt to report stories without bias. Fifty-one percent of liberals, 50% of moderates and 37% of conservatives support the statement."
http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/madison/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/SOFA-2013-final-report.pdf
Where Liberalism is strongest, one is least likely to find free speech.
Since you are talking about the First Amendment, it might be wise to review the actual language: "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."
The First Amendment applies to Congress (federal government) and is applicable to state governments through the Fourteenth Amendment. See Gitlow v. New York 268 U.S. 652 (1925):
"For present purposes we may and do assume that freedom of speech and of the press -- which are protected by the First Amendment from abridgment by Congress -- are among the fundamental personal rights and "liberties" protected by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment from impairment by the States . . . It is a fundamental principle, long established, that the freedom of speech and of the press which is secured by the Constitution, does not confer an absolute right to speak or publish, without responsibility, whatever one may choose, or an unrestricted and unbridled license that gives immunity for every possible use of language and prevents the punishment of those who abuse this freedom."
The title of your thread is "Only Fascists Assail Free Speech". Your post sets forth 4 premises:
Briefly, your 4 premises are:
1) 47 percent of people [of 1006 people who responded to a telephone survey] identified "freedom of speech" as the most important freedom; 2) 59 percent of people [surveyed] could identify "freedom of speech" as a freedom guaranteed by the First Amendment; 3) The majority of the people [surveyed] believe the First Amendment does not go too far in protecting freedom; and 4) 51 percent of the "liberals" [surveyed, and without knowing how many of the 1006 people surveyed identified themselves as "liberal"], agreed with the statement, "the news media attempt to report stories without bias."
Based on these premises, you concluded: "Where Liberalism is strongest, one is least likely to find free speech."
We can cut to the chase:
Are you a supporter of free speech, or one who would rather leave the determination of what is allowed to be said...or thought...up to those elected officials, bureaucrats, and unelected judges?
I'm a moderate ... very much in the center and very much a supporter of our constitutional republic. You might consider some of my mainstream views as "liberal" if you are a far right-wing loony bird.
I'm not a fascist, so your attempt to bolster your invalid and unsound argument with a one-person survey is absurd.
The First Amendment applies only to government disparagements of "free speech" through our laws. If a particular law violates your "free speech", then the law should be struck down as unconstitutional on its face and/or as applied to your situation. The First Amendment, however, does not mean "freedom from criticism". I am not the government ... I am not a fascist ... and I have criticized your argument as invalid and unsound. That criticism is not against the law.
Pick one word to represent America.....you'd probably pick some iteration of "freedom."
The aspect of 'freedom' most often mentioned is freedom of speech.
Sadly, the stronger the Left's influence abounds, the less of that free speech is available.
1. "Americans were asked what they believed was the single most important freedom that citizens enjoy. The majority (47%) of people named freedom of speech as the most important freedom, followed by freedom of religion (10%); freedom of choice (7%); right to vote (5%); right to bear arms (5%); right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness (3%), and freedom of the press (1%). Women were twice as likely as men to name freedom of religion as the most important freedom. Thirteen percent of women named freedom of religion, whereas only 6% of men did.
2. Asked to name the five specific freedoms in the First Amendment, 59% of Americans could name freedom of speech, followed by 24% who could name freedom of religion, 14% freedom of the press, 11% the right to assemble, and 4% the right to petition. Thirty-six percent of Americans cannot name any of the rights guaranteed by the First Amendment.
3. The majority of Americans believes that the First Amendment does not go too far in the rights it guarantees. The gap between those who believe it goes too far and not too far has generally increased over time; however, this year there was a significant increase in those who claimed that the First Amendment goes too far in protecting individual rights.
a. Higher percentages of young Americans tend to agree with the statement that the First Amendment goes too far in the rights that it guarantees. Forty-seven percent of 18-30-year-olds agree, while 44% of 31-45-year-olds, 24% of 46-60-year-olds and 23% of people over 60 agree that the First Amendment goes too far.
b. Additionally, African-Americans and Hispanics are more likely to say that the First Amendment goes too far in the rights it guarantees. Fifty-two percent of African-Americans and 50% of Hispanics agree, while only 29% of whites agree that the First Amendment goes too far.
4. Americans who identify as liberal or moderate are more likely than those who identify as conservative to agree that the news media attempt to report stories without bias. Fifty-one percent of liberals, 50% of moderates and 37% of conservatives support the statement."
http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/madison/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/SOFA-2013-final-report.pdf
Where Liberalism is strongest, one is least likely to find free speech.
Since you are talking about the First Amendment, it might be wise to review the actual language: "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."
The First Amendment applies to Congress (federal government) and is applicable to state governments through the Fourteenth Amendment. See Gitlow v. New York 268 U.S. 652 (1925):
"For present purposes we may and do assume that freedom of speech and of the press -- which are protected by the First Amendment from abridgment by Congress -- are among the fundamental personal rights and "liberties" protected by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment from impairment by the States . . . It is a fundamental principle, long established, that the freedom of speech and of the press which is secured by the Constitution, does not confer an absolute right to speak or publish, without responsibility, whatever one may choose, or an unrestricted and unbridled license that gives immunity for every possible use of language and prevents the punishment of those who abuse this freedom."
The title of your thread is "Only Fascists Assail Free Speech". Your post sets forth 4 premises:
Briefly, your 4 premises are:
1) 47 percent of people [of 1006 people who responded to a telephone survey] identified "freedom of speech" as the most important freedom; 2) 59 percent of people [surveyed] could identify "freedom of speech" as a freedom guaranteed by the First Amendment; 3) The majority of the people [surveyed] believe the First Amendment does not go too far in protecting freedom; and 4) 51 percent of the "liberals" [surveyed, and without knowing how many of the 1006 people surveyed identified themselves as "liberal"], agreed with the statement, "the news media attempt to report stories without bias."
Based on these premises, you concluded: "Where Liberalism is strongest, one is least likely to find free speech."
We can cut to the chase:
Are you a supporter of free speech, or one who would rather leave the determination of what is allowed to be said...or thought...up to those elected officials, bureaucrats, and unelected judges?
I'm a moderate ... very much in the center and very much a supporter of our constitutional republic. You might consider some of my mainstream views as "liberal" if you are a far right-wing loony bird.
I'm not a fascist, so your attempt to bolster your invalid and unsound argument with a one-person survey is absurd.
The First Amendment applies only to government disparagements of "free speech" through our laws. If a particular law violates your "free speech", then the law should be struck down as unconstitutional on its face and/or as applied to your situation. The First Amendment, however, does not mean "freedom from criticism". I am not the government ... I am not a fascist ... and I have criticized your argument as invalid and unsound. That criticism is not against the law.
Well....let's direct post #21 to you.....
The guy with the 42 IQ failed .....let's see how you do.
As expected, you randomly quote some random dribble.I'm not opposed to free speech at all, mind asserting how I have expressed my opposition to free speech?Oooo.....looks who's sensitive about being opposed to free speech!
And he comes up with a clever "so are you" post!
OK....now you can return to the 24-Hour All Cartoon Network.
Well....let's see how you respond to this post:
Here is the sad result of Liberal domination of universities....
6. "Rutgers: There’s No Such Thing As ‘Free Speech’
A guide to preventing “bias incidents” published by Rutgers University warns students that the idea of “free speech” is a lie,Campus Reform reports.
“There is no such thing as ‘free’ speech. All speech has a cost and consequences,” opens the page dedicated to the school’s “Bias Prevention & Education Committee.”The page, maintained by the school’s office of student affairs, encourages students to “think before you speak” and also offers four other core suggestions to avoid the specter of bias incidents.
“Engage,” says one tip. “Join activities, programs, courses, and practices that promote diversity and social justice.”
“Bias Acts Are: Verbal, written, physical, psychological acts that threaten or harm a person or group on the basis of race, religion, color, sex, age, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, disability, marital status, civil union status, domestic partnership status, atypical heredity or cellular blood trait, military service or veteran status,” the description reads."
Rutgers: There’s No Such Thing As ‘Free Speech’
So....better say the 'right things'...and think the 'right' thoughts.....or else!
BTW...21% of Rutgers' budget is via government funding.
Budget Facts and Figures
Well, well, well.....as I predicted: afraid to confront fascism.
Kinda puts you in that camp,huh?
Hypocrite! You're afraid to confront any information that contradicts your "random dribble". If anyone is predictable, it's you.
[
You, the version known as 'modern Libeals,' are no more than totalitarian/socialists.
You, in particular....a liar.
Pick one word to represent America.....you'd probably pick some iteration of "freedom."
The aspect of 'freedom' most often mentioned is freedom of speech.
Sadly, the stronger the Left's influence abounds, the less of that free speech is available.
1. "Americans were asked what they believed was the single most important freedom that citizens enjoy. The majority (47%) of people named freedom of speech as the most important freedom, followed by freedom of religion (10%); freedom of choice (7%); right to vote (5%); right to bear arms (5%); right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness (3%), and freedom of the press (1%). Women were twice as likely as men to name freedom of religion as the most important freedom. Thirteen percent of women named freedom of religion, whereas only 6% of men did.
2. Asked to name the five specific freedoms in the First Amendment, 59% of Americans could name freedom of speech, followed by 24% who could name freedom of religion, 14% freedom of the press, 11% the right to assemble, and 4% the right to petition. Thirty-six percent of Americans cannot name any of the rights guaranteed by the First Amendment.
3. The majority of Americans believes that the First Amendment does not go too far in the rights it guarantees. The gap between those who believe it goes too far and not too far has generally increased over time; however, this year there was a significant increase in those who claimed that the First Amendment goes too far in protecting individual rights.
a. Higher percentages of young Americans tend to agree with the statement that the First Amendment goes too far in the rights that it guarantees. Forty-seven percent of 18-30-year-olds agree, while 44% of 31-45-year-olds, 24% of 46-60-year-olds and 23% of people over 60 agree that the First Amendment goes too far.
b. Additionally, African-Americans and Hispanics are more likely to say that the First Amendment goes too far in the rights it guarantees. Fifty-two percent of African-Americans and 50% of Hispanics agree, while only 29% of whites agree that the First Amendment goes too far.
4. Americans who identify as liberal or moderate are more likely than those who identify as conservative to agree that the news media attempt to report stories without bias. Fifty-one percent of liberals, 50% of moderates and 37% of conservatives support the statement."
http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/madison/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/SOFA-2013-final-report.pdf
Where Liberalism is strongest, one is least likely to find free speech.
Since you are talking about the First Amendment, it might be wise to review the actual language: "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."
The First Amendment applies to Congress (federal government) and is applicable to state governments through the Fourteenth Amendment. See Gitlow v. New York 268 U.S. 652 (1925):
"For present purposes we may and do assume that freedom of speech and of the press -- which are protected by the First Amendment from abridgment by Congress -- are among the fundamental personal rights and "liberties" protected by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment from impairment by the States . . . It is a fundamental principle, long established, that the freedom of speech and of the press which is secured by the Constitution, does not confer an absolute right to speak or publish, without responsibility, whatever one may choose, or an unrestricted and unbridled license that gives immunity for every possible use of language and prevents the punishment of those who abuse this freedom."
The title of your thread is "Only Fascists Assail Free Speech". Your post sets forth 4 premises:
Briefly, your 4 premises are:
1) 47 percent of people [of 1006 people who responded to a telephone survey] identified "freedom of speech" as the most important freedom; 2) 59 percent of people [surveyed] could identify "freedom of speech" as a freedom guaranteed by the First Amendment; 3) The majority of the people [surveyed] believe the First Amendment does not go too far in protecting freedom; and 4) 51 percent of the "liberals" [surveyed, and without knowing how many of the 1006 people surveyed identified themselves as "liberal"], agreed with the statement, "the news media attempt to report stories without bias."
Based on these premises, you concluded: "Where Liberalism is strongest, one is least likely to find free speech."
We can cut to the chase:
Are you a supporter of free speech, or one who would rather leave the determination of what is allowed to be said...or thought...up to those elected officials, bureaucrats, and unelected judges?
I'm a moderate ... very much in the center and very much a supporter of our constitutional republic. You might consider some of my mainstream views as "liberal" if you are a far right-wing loony bird.
I'm not a fascist, so your attempt to bolster your invalid and unsound argument with a one-person survey is absurd.
The First Amendment applies only to government disparagements of "free speech" through our laws. If a particular law violates your "free speech", then the law should be struck down as unconstitutional on its face and/or as applied to your situation. The First Amendment, however, does not mean "freedom from criticism". I am not the government ... I am not a fascist ... and I have criticized your argument as invalid and unsound. That criticism is not against the law.
Pick one word to represent America.....you'd probably pick some iteration of "freedom."
The aspect of 'freedom' most often mentioned is freedom of speech.
Sadly, the stronger the Left's influence abounds, the less of that free speech is available.
1. "Americans were asked what they believed was the single most important freedom that citizens enjoy. The majority (47%) of people named freedom of speech as the most important freedom, followed by freedom of religion (10%); freedom of choice (7%); right to vote (5%); right to bear arms (5%); right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness (3%), and freedom of the press (1%). Women were twice as likely as men to name freedom of religion as the most important freedom. Thirteen percent of women named freedom of religion, whereas only 6% of men did.
2. Asked to name the five specific freedoms in the First Amendment, 59% of Americans could name freedom of speech, followed by 24% who could name freedom of religion, 14% freedom of the press, 11% the right to assemble, and 4% the right to petition. Thirty-six percent of Americans cannot name any of the rights guaranteed by the First Amendment.
3. The majority of Americans believes that the First Amendment does not go too far in the rights it guarantees. The gap between those who believe it goes too far and not too far has generally increased over time; however, this year there was a significant increase in those who claimed that the First Amendment goes too far in protecting individual rights.
a. Higher percentages of young Americans tend to agree with the statement that the First Amendment goes too far in the rights that it guarantees. Forty-seven percent of 18-30-year-olds agree, while 44% of 31-45-year-olds, 24% of 46-60-year-olds and 23% of people over 60 agree that the First Amendment goes too far.
b. Additionally, African-Americans and Hispanics are more likely to say that the First Amendment goes too far in the rights it guarantees. Fifty-two percent of African-Americans and 50% of Hispanics agree, while only 29% of whites agree that the First Amendment goes too far.
4. Americans who identify as liberal or moderate are more likely than those who identify as conservative to agree that the news media attempt to report stories without bias. Fifty-one percent of liberals, 50% of moderates and 37% of conservatives support the statement."
http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/madison/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/SOFA-2013-final-report.pdf
Where Liberalism is strongest, one is least likely to find free speech.
Since you are talking about the First Amendment, it might be wise to review the actual language: "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."
The First Amendment applies to Congress (federal government) and is applicable to state governments through the Fourteenth Amendment. See Gitlow v. New York 268 U.S. 652 (1925):
"For present purposes we may and do assume that freedom of speech and of the press -- which are protected by the First Amendment from abridgment by Congress -- are among the fundamental personal rights and "liberties" protected by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment from impairment by the States . . . It is a fundamental principle, long established, that the freedom of speech and of the press which is secured by the Constitution, does not confer an absolute right to speak or publish, without responsibility, whatever one may choose, or an unrestricted and unbridled license that gives immunity for every possible use of language and prevents the punishment of those who abuse this freedom."
The title of your thread is "Only Fascists Assail Free Speech". Your post sets forth 4 premises:
Briefly, your 4 premises are:
1) 47 percent of people [of 1006 people who responded to a telephone survey] identified "freedom of speech" as the most important freedom; 2) 59 percent of people [surveyed] could identify "freedom of speech" as a freedom guaranteed by the First Amendment; 3) The majority of the people [surveyed] believe the First Amendment does not go too far in protecting freedom; and 4) 51 percent of the "liberals" [surveyed, and without knowing how many of the 1006 people surveyed identified themselves as "liberal"], agreed with the statement, "the news media attempt to report stories without bias."
Based on these premises, you concluded: "Where Liberalism is strongest, one is least likely to find free speech."
We can cut to the chase:
Are you a supporter of free speech, or one who would rather leave the determination of what is allowed to be said...or thought...up to those elected officials, bureaucrats, and unelected judges?
I'm a moderate ... very much in the center and very much a supporter of our constitutional republic. You might consider some of my mainstream views as "liberal" if you are a far right-wing loony bird.
I'm not a fascist, so your attempt to bolster your invalid and unsound argument with a one-person survey is absurd.
The First Amendment applies only to government disparagements of "free speech" through our laws. If a particular law violates your "free speech", then the law should be struck down as unconstitutional on its face and/or as applied to your situation. The First Amendment, however, does not mean "freedom from criticism". I am not the government ... I am not a fascist ... and I have criticized your argument as invalid and unsound. That criticism is not against the law.
Well....let's direct post #21 to you.....
The guy with the 42 IQ failed .....let's see how you do.
There you go again, ignoring what I actually wrote ...
Again, are you stupid or willfully blind?
Because you have failed to prove that you possess any intelligence, you are in no position to grade someone else's intelligence.
Tell us, in your own words, are there any valid restriction on Free Speech?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. - See more at: First Amendment - U.S. Constitution - FindLaw
Every word I use is 'my own."
That's called free speech.
When I quote, I state the source, and provide quotation marks.
You, as a Liberal, never veer from the orders issued by NYTimes, MSNBC, the DNC, etc.
Nor do you give the credit due.
That's Liberal Plagiarism.
“If you're not a liberal at twenty you have no heart, if you're not a conservative at forty you have no brain.”
Winston Churchill
".... young Americans tend to agree with the statement that the First Amendment goes too far..."
What are the characteristics which identify the nexus of the two quotes above?
Answer: youth and inexperience.
The young, sadly, can be convinced of so very many things that simply are not so. And that is where Liberals excel.
So it is with their captives, in university.
There is stark proof that the Left's control of universities, and the media, the dissemination of information, has destroyed what made America the beacon to the world, freedom.
One can gauge it via the term "free speech zone."
One in six of America's four hundred top colleges has a "free speech zone."
5. "... a legal challenge to an unconstitutional free speech zone policy at the University of Cincinnati (UC) that limited all “demonstrations, pickets, and rallies” to a “Free Speech Area” comprising just 0.1% of the university’s 137-acre West Campus. The policy further required all activity in the free speech zone to be registered ten working days in advance, threatening that “[a]nyone violating this policy may be charged with trespassing.”
University of Cincinnati: Speech Code Litigation - FIRE
Shouldn't all of America be a "free speech zone"????
A note that documents which view....Liberal or conservative....represents the real America:
a. A conservative group sued and won..".. In a major victory for student rights, a federal district court issued a final ruling today prohibiting the University of Cincinnati (UC) from reinstating its tiny “free speech zone.” In today’sorder, United States District Judge Timothy S. Black issued apermanent injunctionagainst UC’s unconstitutional system of speech restriction." Federal Court Delivers Final Blow to U. of Cincinnati 'Free Speech Zone' - FIRE
We would all benefit if there were more brave 'conservative groups' in the universities.
The First Amendment does not prohibit reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions.
In the University of Cincinnati case noted above, Plaintiff's brought an action against the University and the Plaintiffs first obtained a preliminary injunction granted apparently by some "LEFTIST judge". ROFL The parties reached an out-of-court settlement and a permanent injunction was entered. That's how our court system works or should work.
I submit for argument, however, if the plaintiff's had been "LIBERALS" protesting the unconstitutional CONDUCT or POLICIES of a "CONSERVATIVE", then the matter might not have been settled out of court ... but the right wing loony birds would have continued to waste attorney fees and judicial resources appealing the matter all the way to the Supreme Court (and then you would have complained when the SC issued a decision against the "conservative").
Funny thing that people like you credit "CONSERVATIVES" for vindicating "free speech" liberties secured by the Constitution, but vilify "LIBERALS" if they exercise "free speech" liberties and use public walkways to picket a business that is engaged in unlawful discrimination.
"Conservative" double standards of "freedom for me, but not for you" are on consistent display.
