[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Cash Jordan: ICE Raids Home Depot... as California Collapses

Silver Is Finally Soaring: Here's Why

New 4um Interface Coming Soon

Attack of the Dead-2025.

Canada strips Jewish National Fund of charitable status

Minnesota State Rep. Vang just admitted that she is an ILLEGAL ALIEN.

1100% increase in neurological events since the roll-out of Covid mRNA

16 Things That Everyone Needs To Know About Violent Far-Left Revolution In Los Angeles

Undercover video in Arizona alleges ongoing consumer fraud by Fairlife

Dozens arrested after San Francisco protest turns violent Sunday

Looking for the toughest badasses in the city (Los Angeles)

Democrat Civil War Explodes: DNC Chair Threatens to Quit Over David Hogg

Invaders waving Mexican flags, pour onto the 101 Freeway in Los Angeles

Australian Fake News Journo Hit By Rubber Bullet In L.A. Riot

22-year-old dies after being unable to afford asthma inhaler

North Korean Bulsae-4 Long-Range ATGM Spotted Again In Russian Operation Zone

Alexander Dugin: A real Maidan has begun in Los Angeles

State Department Weighing $500 Million Grant to Controversial Gaza Aid Group: Report

LA Mayor Karen Bass ordered LAPD to stand down, blocked aid to federal officers during riots.

Russia Has a Titanium Submarine That Can ‘Deep Dive’ 19,700 Feet

Shocking scene as DC preps for Tr*mp's military birthday parade.

Earth is being Pulled Apart by Crazy Space Weather! Volcanoes go NUTS as Plasma RUNS OUT

Gavin, feel free to use this as a campaign ad in 2028.

US To Formalize Military Presence in Syria in Deal With al-Qaeda-Linked Govt

GOP Rep Introduces Resolution Labeling Free Palestine Slogan as Anti-Semitism

Two-thirds of troops who left the military in 2023 were at risk for mental health conditions

UK and France abandon plans to recognise Palestinian state at conference

Kamala Backs LA Protests After Rioters Attack Federal Officers

Netanyahu's ultra-Orthodox partners move ahead with Knesset dissolution plan

Former Prime Minister of Ukraine: Zelensky will leave the country


Miscellaneous
See other Miscellaneous Articles

Title: Free Speech on Freedom4um
Source: [None]
URL Source: http://none
Published: Aug 18, 2006
Author: Christine
Post Date: 2006-08-18 12:01:37 by christine
Keywords: None
Views: 17373
Comments: 173

It is time for me to address the issue of "free speech" on Freedom4um. My free speech means that I have 100% control over what I say and everyone else has 0% control over what I say. Now, I understand that there are consequences to exercising my right to free speech, but I still retain 100% control.

Free speech means that I have a right to express or spew thoughts and words of preference, love, hate, or anything with which another may disagree. That said, the rules or policies of this forum, which is my private property (see this forum's Mission Statement), are that members can exercise free speech as long as they (1) do not make a specific threat against an identifiable person or target, (2) earnestly debate or discuss the relevant issues that are part and parcel of this forum's reason-to-be. Let me remind you that these are rules for this forum and, as such, do not necessarily apply off of this forum, as public laws should, in most cases, be even less restrictive than private property rules and regulations.

Again, free speech on this forum means that people can express their love or hatred for anyone, any group, any race, any culture, or any thing, as long as they adhere to the two contingencies listed above. Everyone else on this forum is similarly at liberty to exercise their free speech right to challenge, debate, argue, or agree with the ideas and speech of another.

We will not censor speech as we abhor political correctness and authoritarianism as well as those thought-control and speech-control tyrants who would restrict another's speech. Any limitation on thought and speech constitutes the first level of the destruction of all remaining rights. Afterall, the framers of the Constitution believed that free speech was the most fundamental right to be protected which was the reason that they placed it FIRST in the Bill of Rights.

I do not say this lightly, but anyone who cannot handle the content of another's speech may not be suitable for this forum. Such a person may be better suited for a forum whose moderators control and steer the forum's ideas and speech in a given direction.

Many people have no concept of what Free Speech and Freedom really mean. Do you?

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 141.

#114. To: All (#0)

I'm bumping this to the top because of some dissention taking place among some members regarding some posts by others which are being perceived as threatening. I haven't seen a post that I believe violates my contingency #1 in the particular thread (No specific threat against an identifiable person or target). This was first written in 2006. I would like to invite discussion about Free Speech on Freedom4um again.

christine  posted on  2008-03-27   2:14:22 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#121. To: ghostdogtxn, Jethro Tull, Critter, HOUNDDAWG, Brian S, Dakmar, Fred Mertz, noone222, wudidiz, Pissed Off Janitor, robin, Hayek Fan, Original_Intent, (#114)

I'm bumping this to the top because of some dissention taking place among some members regarding some posts by others which are being perceived as threatening. I haven't seen a post that I believe violates my contingency #1 in the particular thread (No specific threat against an identifiable person or target). This was first written in 2006. I would like to invite discussion about Free Speech on Freedom4um again.

the thread i am referring to is this one:

http://freedom4um.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi? ArtNum=76666&Disp=0

christine  posted on  2008-03-27   11:20:37 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#136. To: christine, Cynicom, lodwick, HOUNDDAWG, Jethro Tull (#121)

ghostdogtxn  posted on  2008-03-27   16:28:37 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#141. To: ghostdogtxn, Fred Mertz, Brian S (#136) (Edited)

thank you for your thoughtful response. i believe in order for a comment to qualify as a threat to government officials, it must be stated as an intent to perform a specific act against a named person or target. if you or anyone knows of a case that was prosecuted where this was not true, i would like to know about it.

JT cited the Watts vs the United States case here where the SC ruled that such speech is given the widest possible protection even if it implies physical threat.

christine  posted on  2008-03-27   17:37:02 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 141.

#143. To: christine (#141)

ghostdogtxn  posted on  2008-03-27 17:42:34 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#145. To: christine (#141)

JT cited the Watts vs the United States case here where the SC ruled that such speech is given the widest possible protection even if it implies physical threat.

Unless you're drinking in a bar and telling a joke to a friend which concerns a burning bush. Then they send you to prison for 37 months.

F.A. Hayek Fan  posted on  2008-03-27 17:45:39 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#157. To: christine, thread (#141) (Edited)

The first substantive threat to government was the institution of the 2nd Amendment ... a direct threat intended to be understood by all of those in government.

noone222  posted on  2008-03-27 18:57:52 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 141.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]