View Poll Results: 1st Amendment Needs Change?

Voters
20. You may not vote on this poll
  • WBC protesters should be in a re-education gulag as we spoeck, learning some fucking manners.

    1 5.00%
  • It was a funeral! That's so outrageous, it should not have been protected.

    0 0%
  • WBC should have been forced by the cops to move 1 mile away. Easy. now everyone's happy.

    1 5.00%
  • WBC is so horrible, who gives a fuck what their rights are?

    0 0%
  • WBC porotesters are Americans, and they had the right to do exactly what they did.

    17 85.00%
  • I hate rude people.

    1 5.00%
Page 1 of 12 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 118
Thanks Tree100Thanks

Thread: Do You Think The First Amendment Goes Too Far?

  1. #1
    Veteran Member Madeline's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    51,342
    Thanks
    29705

    From
    Cleveland, Ohio

    Do You Think The First Amendment Goes Too Far?



    There's a movement afoot to convince Americans that the First Amendment "goes too far". (Apparently, except when it protects the free expression of bigotry against GLBT people by self-professed "religious" people.

    But I digress......}

    And many highly-respected people NOT on PH, liberals and conservatives, seem to agree.

    *Snip*

    The bill, however, was modeled after model legislation written, and vetted, by scholars at the Goldwater Institute in Arizona. And Robert Shibley, vice president of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), has praised the Goldwater bill, saying, “There is little doubt that passage of this model legislation would represent a real improvement in free speech protections.
    https://www.jamesgmartin.center/2017...s-free-speech/

    The SCOTUS has ruled that the Westboro Baptist Church protesters have a First Amendment right to say what they like at a time and place cruelly calculated to inflict terrible emotional pain on that soldier's loved ones -- his funeral.

    So kindly read this very brief decision, and show me where you feel the SCOTUS got it wrong.

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/09-751.ZS.html

    Also, if you are a citizen of a "better" system of government than the U.S.'s, as to this point, please explain how your government would have dealt with the WBC protesters.

    @galatin, @Leo2, @Dangermouse, @Dr.Knuckles, @The Man

    Let the games begin!
    Last edited by Madeline; 1st June 2017 at 05:57 PM.
    Thanks from Minotaur

  2. #2
    Galactic Ruler Spookycolt's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2012
    Posts
    59,342
    Thanks
    10856

    From
    By the wall
    The first amendment isn't about emotion.

    Of course they made the right decision.

    And sorry but no bill is going to outdo an amendment.

    If you want to change it you have to go through the process and that is highly unlikely to happen.
    Thanks from Madeline

  3. #3
    Veteran Member Madeline's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    51,342
    Thanks
    29705

    From
    Cleveland, Ohio
    In America, the SCOTUS has ruled the citizens' right to free speech is protected no matter what they say, when and to whom. (There are some exceptions, which I do not think are relevant here. But I could be wrong about that!)

    OUR cure for noxious protesters' speech is COUNTER-PROTESTING.



    Not GOVERNMENT censorship or other means of oppressing citizens who say highly unpopular things, in the opinion of the GOVERNMENT.

    China: Strangulation of Free Expression Now Almost Total | Time.com

    Why is it I suddenly feel as if this is a unpopular POV for any American to hold?
    Thanks from nic

  4. #4
    Veteran Member Madeline's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    51,342
    Thanks
    29705

    From
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by Spookycolt View Post
    The first amendment isn't about emotion.

    Of course they made the right decision.

    And sorry but no bill is going to outdo an amendment.

    If you want to change it you have to go through the process and that is highly unlikely to happen.
    I could not agree with you more, sir! Nice to have some company on the side of FREEDOM over here.

    Last edited by Madeline; 1st June 2017 at 04:29 PM.

  5. #5
    A Character Tennyson's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1,379
    Thanks
    302

    From
    Barsoom
    The Supreme Court got it wrong for several reasons:

    The court relied on a 1960s era Supreme Court doctrine that collapsed the redress and petition clause with the speech clause. They are two seperate clauses with two different meanings.

    The ruling had no constitutional basis.

    The Supreme Court's oath of office states that a justice will uphold the Constitution, not stare decisis.

    The First Amendment is not under federal jurisdiction.

  6. #6
    Galactic Ruler Spookycolt's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2012
    Posts
    59,342
    Thanks
    10856

    From
    By the wall
    I don't like when the 1st targets my side but the constitution doesn't pick sides.

    It will be here long after WBC freaks are long gone.

    That is the power of it.
    Thanks from Madeline

  7. #7
    The Un-Holy One The Man's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    33,804
    Thanks
    19356

    From
    Toronto
    They are banned from entering Canada, though some sneaked in anyhow, back in 2008: Church members enter Canada, aiming to picket bus victim's funeral - Manitoba - CBC News

    This is exactly why we need a wall along the US border...
    Thanks from Madeline

  8. #8
    Veteran Member Madeline's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    51,342
    Thanks
    29705

    From
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by Tennyson View Post
    The Supreme Court got it wrong for several reasons:

    The court relied on a 1960s era Supreme Court doctrine that collapsed the redress and petition clause with the speech clause. They are two seperate clauses with two different meanings.

    The ruling had no constitutional basis.

    The Supreme Court's oath of office states that a justice will uphold the Constitution, not stare decisis.

    The First Amendment is not under federal jurisdiction.
    The SCOTUS has ruled.

    End of.

    Thanks from Rasselas

  9. #9
    Veteran Member Madeline's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    51,342
    Thanks
    29705

    From
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by The Man View Post
    They are banned from entering Canada, though some sneaked in anyhow, back in 2008: Church members enter Canada, aiming to picket bus victim's funeral - Manitoba - CBC News

    This is exactly why we need a wall along the US border...
    Wow, really? They have no history of any criminal activity here in the US.

    Canada banned them because they say such hideous things, and for no other reason?

  10. #10
    A Character Tennyson's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1,379
    Thanks
    302

    From
    Barsoom
    Quote Originally Posted by Madeline View Post
    The SCOTUS has ruled.

    End of.

    That is not the argument nor does it satisfy as an answer to my post.

Page 1 of 12 12311 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Second Amendment
    By MaryAnne in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 196
    Last Post: 5th October 2015, 02:44 PM
  2. 2nd amendment
    By IronFist in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 1st June 2015, 07:43 PM
  3. First Amendment
    By MaryAnne in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 6th August 2014, 11:50 AM
  4. What of the first amendment?
    By Cicero in forum Opinion Polls
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 7th September 2013, 09:40 AM
  5. The First Amendment is Gone
    By michaelr in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 6th July 2010, 06:05 AM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed