,
It's the Liberal left that shuts down free speech. Look at our colleges and universities with their so called 'safe spaces' and demanding that those they disagree with not be allowed to speak there. And I notice that it's the left trying to shut down Trump's free speech at his events. The right doesn't shut down free speech, it's the LEFT that tries to do it.
I think it's extremely important to continue to pi$$ people off now and again. It's been reported to have many health benefits one of which is eliminating unnecessary fluid retention.
Hello S:
Yeah. It amazes me that the birthplace of the free speech movement has evolved to what it has today.
In any case, I said NOTHING about shutting anybody down.. I LOVE free speech, and I'm a LEFTIST. If the right wing was shut down, I'd have nobody to argue with except Rosie. How much fun would that be?
But, the NUTS of my post is that protest IS Constitutional.. And, if the right wing LOVES the Constitution SOOOO much, WHY does LIVING it, PISSS them off so badly?? Can you address THAT?
excon
Can you give examples of how it is pissing them off? Or are they just disagreeing with what the left said or did?
Hello again, S:
Sure.. This is from our very own website.
excon
PS> (edited) I thought you said WHO.. Here's HOW it's pissing them off.. They LIKE the status quo.. They DON'T like anybody who DOESN'T like the status quo, and DEMONSTRATES their dissatisfaction.
Expression always has consequences, not being locked in a cage for it doesn't mean it's free of conquence. Association too, is a right.
I am owed back-pay for fluid I removed at no cost ;)
Personally, I agree with DeliveringtheTruth. When the 5 Rams players used the 'hands up narrative' they were continuing a FALSE narrative. Even the DOJ couldn't find evidence against Officer Wilson. What the press ignored was the black witnesses that exposed Brown's accomplice's initial lie, were threatened if they spoke out. Brown was never on his knees with his hands up. Oh, the 5 players have the right to 'express themselves.' And we have the right to expose their false narrative and burn their jerseys in our protest.
The same goes with Kaepernick. He has the right to do as he wants, but his assertions are flawed. People have the right to object to Kaepernick's behavior. Rather than sitting on his butt, can Kaepernick tell us what he's done to help the 'oppressed' blacks? In fact, what has Black Lives Matter done? Have they gone into the inner cities to protest the gang violence and the shooting of their fellow black or brown citizens? Are they protesting the shooting of Dwayne Wade's cousin's murder by fellow blacks?
Just as these people have the right to express themselves, those who disagree have the right to do the same. If, in the case of your example, means they won't watch NFL games, so be it. Their choice. If it means burning jersey's, so be it. It's their 'free expression' of their beliefs.
Hello again, S:
You already made the key distinction. Is it pissing them off, or do they just disagree?? You sound pretty pissed off too, but I notice you refrained from calling them vile names.. Marginally, that puts you in the latter category.. The poster in my link is in the former - hence, my question..
excon
It is not the "free speech" that is aggravating....it is the continuation of the lies making bad situtations even worse. I from MO and I was glad to see them go to LA.
Free speech does not make me mad. Lies make me mad, but you still have right to speech them as long as no one gets hurt.
I enjoy a good debate with facts.
Disagree and show it. And I'm far from 'pissed off,' just annoyed at the ignorance of those who continue to promote a lie. Yes, there are still problems in this country, but sadly, our President and both this AG and the former AG have made matters worse. Why does the President only speak out when a police officer shoots a black man (often without knowing the whole circumstances), but ignores a black mother being shot by a couple of gang-bangers?
I refrain from name calling when possible. You have the right to your opinions and I to mine. We both have the right to express them without name calling.
Hello my:
I'm from Seattle, and I HATE that Kaepernick fellow too..
But, I don't think people who take advantage of their Constitutional rights, make ANYTHING worse.. You know, of course, that our country was FOUNDED in dissent.. Civil disobedience is one of the most PATRIOTIC activities one can participate in.
excon
If you are using your free speech to say that the police shot an innocent man when we know that was not the case, and the people who believe this lie are burning the town down....that is making it worse.
Just like the sister of the man in MI who CNN edited the tape to claim she was calling for peace. But was calling for the criminals to stop burning their "s###" down they need their "s###" go to the suburbs and burn their "s###" down.
That is free speech but it is harming others. When the Rams came out with their hands up....they were encouraging those criminals in Ferguson to burn and steal there. And that is making it worse.
THe Constitution doesn't say that anywhere.
Heck, no!!
The left confuse the individual, society and the state. They're completely separate things. The constitution is a document that regulates the state, not you.
To the right, freedom of expression just means that the state won't persecute it (i.e. it's not illegal). We view the state as a referee. Though we view ourselves as players in the great game of life, not the referee.
I want left wing ideas to be so completely marginalized that people are afraid to express them for fear of being ostracised. That doesn't make me against free speech. I just want to win the game.
The left does EXACTLY the same thing ALL the time. Though you're ideologically unable to admit to yourself that you wish to suppress others. You have to kid yourself that you're enlightening and educating people. Peace and love, blah blah blah.
The right believes that enlightened ideas ultimately win out in the free competition of ideas. The left wish to suppress free competition between ideas because it knows it would lose.
People are free to express themselves as they wish so long as they harm no one. People are also free to choose what they will or will not give audience to. I already explained that to you before. Colin Kaepernick was free to refuse to stand for the National Anthem, and good for him. Legally, he committed no offense. His employers, the NFL and the SF 49ers, took it a step further and agreed there would be no ramifications on his livelihood. Good for them. However, as I already told you, I as one individual am just as free to disagree with his views, and just as free to refuse to watch the SF 49ers or their advertisers. You cannot force a gun to my head and force me to watch an event in which he has chosen to impose his views.
What, exactly, is your problem with my exercising that choice?
I also will not be watching any 49er games.
Hello t:
Of course it does.. You should know better than argue the Constitution with me.. It's right there in the 1st Amendment where it says, "Congress shall make no law respecting..... the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
You're welcome..
excon
