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: 14460
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
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-128) not displayed.
.
.
.
#129. To: christine (#121)
Nothing to concern oneself about on that thread. [Screw Obama and his gun grabbing supporters].
And the men who loan money to governments, so called, for the purpose of enabling the latter to rob, enslave, and murder their people, are among the greatest villains that the world has ever seen. And they as much deserve to be hunted and killed (if they cannot otherwise be got rid of) as any slave traders, robbers, or pirates that ever lived. ... Lysander Spooner
After we get the duel reinstated we can have a party in Austin and really settle accounts !
And the men who loan money to governments, so called, for the purpose of enabling the latter to rob, enslave, and murder their people, are among the greatest villains that the world has ever seen. And they as much deserve to be hunted and killed (if they cannot otherwise be got rid of) as any slave traders, robbers, or pirates that ever lived. ... Lysander Spooner
Yeah, just look at you and the other frauds/cons that have done your best to turn Freedom4um.com into the CFR's Obama4um.com !!
I don't know what I'll do come election day: stay home or vote RP however I can. The other three are totally unacceptable to me.
I have my local GOP critter strongly considering leaving that wing of the CFR Party and, for the time being at least, going Independent. I'll show up to support him and see what's available on the ballot outside of the Establishment. I'm not voting for anyone that isn't actively running for POTUS come election day...including Ron Paul.
There's always tequila shots....last man/woman wobbling on their feet gets bragging rights.
"If the Union was formed by the accession of States, then the Union may be dissolved by the secession of States." ---Daniel Webster, US Senate, Feb. 15, 1833
What's "Free" about Open Borders, One World Monopolist, North American union gun-grabbing World Kyoto Tax and Spend Communism...from a Liberation Theology congregation member that pretends to be a "Christian". I don't know where I saw it first..."Jesus Christ, because He changed my heart"®
"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)‡
Have I mentioned I do not like the way you comb your hair???? Beyond that counselor, one of your better endeavors, so much so that you are to be commended for honesty aforethought. As for Bozo, he is not my best friend. My education in life came from LISTENING to others and reading what they have to say, as everyone adds something, intentional or not. Everyone here, without exception, has a problem with government, whether they recognize it or not. The degree of dissent may vary but no one is totally happy. That is one small tie that binds.
I tend to agree, but there are times when a troll disrupts a thread with so many personal attacks that it is impossible to follow the thread's real discussion w/o a bozo filter.
'Individuals should not take responsibility for their own defense. That’s what the police are for. ... If I oppose individuals defending themselves, I have to support police defending them. I have to support a police state.”' Alan Dershowitz
True... I even read those people until they arrive at the point of being absurd, then I give them short shrift. Usually they do not stay long and move on to more fertile ground.
"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)‡
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.
Roger that. Well said - thanks.
"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)‡
I maintain a one strike and you're outta here policy.
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.
i'm certain i'm already on a list but not because i'm the owner of this website.
"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)‡
can you cite that specific case/name? i'm not familiar with it.
"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)‡
'Burning Bush' comment draws prison term Man plans to appeal CNN 12/06/02 Original Link: http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/12/06/burning.bush.ap (Removed from CNN website) SIOUX FALLS, South Dakota (AP) -- A man who made a remark about a "burning Bush" during the president's March 2001 trip to Sioux Falls was sentenced Friday to 37 months in prison. Richard Humphreys of Portland, Oregon was convicted in September of threatening to kill or harm the president and said he plans to appeal. He has said the comment was a prophecy protected under his right to free speech. Humphreys said he got into a barroom discussion in nearby Watertown with a truck driver. A bartender who overheard the conversation realized the president was to visit Sioux Falls the next day and told police Humphreys talked about a "burning Bush" and the possibility of someone pouring a flammable liquid on Bush and lighting it. "I said God might speak to the world through a burning Bush," Humphreys testified during his trial. "I had said that before and I thought it was funny."
I believe that Neil addressed that problem some while ago - I don't know if there was a fix, or not... www.speedtest.net will let you know just how well you're connecting at any given time.
Hell, it is funny.
Maybe you'll get your bag searched 3 times and get a real personal frisk next time you go through airport security. I'm not saying you can't handle this stuff, certainly you can, but why ask for it? LOLOL She crossed that threshold when she turned the sight on...maybe when she bought the domain name! Come on...I mean, I'd run a site like this...if I lived outside the country. ;)
To Tip, or not to Tip...
well, shut my mouth ;)
What gets me is that there was actually 12 citizens who decided he was guilty of the crime he was charged with. I can't find the original article that gives the whole story, but it was overwhelmingly obvious that the guy was just trying to be funny.
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.
And the men who loan money to governments, so called, for the purpose of enabling the latter to rob, enslave, and murder their people, are among the greatest villains that the world has ever seen. And they as much deserve to be hunted and killed (if they cannot otherwise be got rid of) as any slave traders, robbers, or pirates that ever lived. ... Lysander Spooner
The minute we have to worry about discussing the actual intent of the 2nd amendment, is the minute we need to exercise the right it protects.
Rebates for Ron - Ron Paul For Dummies - New R3volution
See 158. I think we're on the same wavelength.
Rebates for Ron - Ron Paul For Dummies - New R3volution
Interesting. Well you and I are in agreement on that.
I'm in. Only if it's Patron Anejo. I drink tokillya once a year and I'm always amazed at how much of it I can hold...
BTTT
I know why you posted this. Thank you.
I agree.
And the men who loan money to governments, so called, for the purpose of enabling the latter to rob, enslave, and murder their people, are among the greatest villains that the world has ever seen. And they as much deserve to be hunted and killed (if they cannot otherwise be got rid of) as any slave traders, robbers, or pirates that ever lived. ... Lysander Spooner
Try Don Julio - you just touch you lips with this...so very smooth. (Christine claims that I tried to poison her with it, back in the day.)
Well...alright. If you say so. ;)
Comments (169 - 173) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#130. To: christine (#0)
#131. To: robin (#123)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#132. To: FOH (#131)
Yeah, just look at you and the other frauds/cons that have done your best to turn Freedom4um.com into the CFR's Obama4um.com !!
#133. To: lodwick (#132)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#134. To: noone222 (#130)
#135. To: All (#131)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#136. To: christine, Cynicom, lodwick, HOUNDDAWG, Jethro Tull (#121)
#137. To: ghostdogtxn (#136)
. I'm sure other folks have other peeves that I bother them or that bother others.
#138. To: Cynicom (#137)
As for Bozo, he is not my best friend. My education in life came from LISTENING to others and reading what they have to say, as everyone adds something, intentional or not.
#139. To: robin (#138)
, but there are times when a troll disrupts a thread
#140. To: Cynicom (#137)
#141. To: ghostdogtxn, Fred Mertz, Brian S (#136)
(Edited)
#142. To: ghostdogtxn. the thread (#136)
Bottom line is that we are all pretty decent folks, IMO, and so long as we respect this forum (ie- you don't shit where you eat), then it doesn't matter much. And if someone really pisses you off, there's a filter function for a reason. You can bozo that person until the animosity dies down.
#143. To: christine (#141)
#144. To: ghostdogtxn (#140)
I usually don't keep anyone on the filter for more than a day or two, and then typically after they've caught me in a bad mood to begin with. I've cleaned up my list lately.
#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.
#146. To: ghostdogtxn (#143)
#147. To: lodwick (#144)
#148. To: Hayek Fan (#145)
#149. To: christine (#146)
#150. To: christine (#148)
can you cite that specific case/name? i'm not familiar with it.
#151. To: ghostdogtxn (#147)
I don't know if there's a connection, but it seems to me the more people I have on the filter, the slower my connection goes.
#152. To: Hayek Fan (#150)
"I said God might speak to the world through a burning Bush," Humphreys testified during his trial. "I had said that before and I thought it was funny."
#153. To: ghostdogtxn, christine (#143)
Chris, you know better than I do that "prosecution" is the least of your concerns. N SA isn't going to prosecute anyone for a threat. They'll just put your name on a list, maybe hassle your provider, put your personal life under a microscope and "keep an eye on you."
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#154. To: Hayek Fan (#150)
A bartender who overheard the conversation realized the president was to visit Sioux Falls the next day and told police Humphreys talked about a "burning Bush" and the possibility of someone pouring a flammable liquid on Bush and lighting it.
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#155. To: Hayek Fan (#150)
#156. To: christine (#155)
#157. To: christine, thread (#141)
(Edited)
#158. To: christine (#121)
#159. To: noone222 (#157)
(Edited)
#160. To: christine (#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.
Vote Republicrat or Democin, it doesn't matter, you still get McHillobama
#161. To: lodwick (#132)
The other three are totally unacceptable to me.
Vote Republicrat or Democin, it doesn't matter, you still get McHillobama
#162. To: X-15, noone222 (#134)
There's always tequila shots....last man/woman wobbling on their feet gets bragging rights.
Vote Republicrat or Democin, it doesn't matter, you still get McHillobama
#163. To: farmfriend, TwentyTwelve (#162)
(Edited)
This bottle is mine:
I'm in.
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#164. To: farmfriend (#162)
Vote Republicrat or Democin, it doesn't matter, you still get McHillobama
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#165. To: christine (#0)
#166. To: Critter (#159)
See 158. I think we're on the same wavelength.
#167. To: FOH, farmfriend, TwentyTwelve, all (#163)
#168. To: lodwick (#167)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
.
.
.