Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

951-Riverside

(7,234 posts)
3. +1000. The 1st and 2nd amendments are the problem here
Mon May 4, 2015, 06:07 PM
May 2015

Racist hate mongers like Pam Geller would have been jailed long ago for her hate speech in progressive countries like Britain. Our first amendment allows trash like her to put others in harm way over so-called "free speech" just like the 2nd amendment allowed the 2 perpetrators to obtain military grade firearms.

I'm all for a constitutional convention to abolish or update both.

She has a right to say whatever Aerows May 2015 #1
That should be a universal message. AngryDem001 May 2015 #19
As a species, we have got to start Aerows May 2015 #36
Actually There are Exceptions itcfish May 2015 #143
agreed samsingh May 2015 #27
Exactly..nt Jesus Malverde May 2015 #41
The more attention people like her get Aerows May 2015 #54
That's correct. The Constitution gives people the right The Velveteen Ocelot May 2015 #2
someone decides that you can't wear the color green and will become violent if you do. samsingh May 2015 #28
what if youd never worn green before elehhhhna May 2015 #48
A better analogy might be: Chemisse May 2015 #71
beheading and shooting people is far more cruel than anything you've described samsingh May 2015 #73
So now you are equating Islam with terrorism. Chemisse May 2015 #121
these scarce few are killing thousands? what is being done to stop them? samsingh May 2015 #135
I disagree with you. bvar22 May 2015 #138
yes that is bad. but the drones emerged after the attack on us. samsingh May 2015 #139
children being crippled or worse is horrible samsingh May 2015 #140
Wearing green isn't "speech" unless it symbolizes something. The Velveteen Ocelot May 2015 #99
I must (respectfully) disagree Telcontar May 2015 #122
That's true. Thank you for the correction. The Velveteen Ocelot May 2015 #137
+1000. The 1st and 2nd amendments are the problem here 951-Riverside May 2015 #3
Abolish free speech? SickOfTheOnePct May 2015 #5
Progressive nations like Britain are doing just fine without those amendments n/t 951-Riverside May 2015 #47
Yay for Britain SickOfTheOnePct May 2015 #51
Last time I looked, we weren't in Britain, GGJohn May 2015 #68
This message was self-deleted by its author Jake Stern May 2015 #102
Ditto on the 'right to keep and bear arms' as well. VScott May 2015 #57
I'm personally not in favor SickOfTheOnePct May 2015 #58
That's a slippery slope. The Velveteen Ocelot May 2015 #6
951 fancies himself to be the arbiter of what's allowed... cherokeeprogressive May 2015 #69
You attitude scares me as much as the fundamentalists. Throd May 2015 #10
Any constitutional convention that was even remotely representative... Lizzie Poppet May 2015 #11
The one thing in our Constitution that scares the shit out of me is... Lochloosa May 2015 #15
You can have your own version of sharia law to yourself seveneyes May 2015 #16
after this incident, i respect Pam Geller samsingh May 2015 #29
You respect her? gollygee May 2015 #88
good point. i respect the bravery in free speech - i don't respect samsingh May 2015 #90
That makes more sense gollygee May 2015 #93
at least one of the would be killers was known to be in contact with terrorists samsingh May 2015 #158
I respect her willingness to say anything JustAnotherGen May 2015 #155
Lulz always so provocative. Jesus Malverde May 2015 #44
Yakno, Some day we will be able to ARREST people for saying stuff we don't like! Warren DeMontague May 2015 #157
Fuck. No. Adrahil May 2015 #152
What about hate speech against hate groups? Matrosov May 2015 #154
At the very least this incident should put her 'Freedom Defense Initiative' in a high risk category tanyev May 2015 #4
well, I have to look at it this way, if she wants to hollysmom May 2015 #7
i think the terrorists are the bad people samsingh May 2015 #31
I think if they'd taken out Gellar with themselves I would not give a rip elehhhhna May 2015 #55
she hasn't or threatened to kill anyone. how is she in the same league as those disgusting samsingh May 2015 #61
she provoked them and got exactly what she hoped for. elehhhhna May 2015 #145
again blame the victim mentality. sickening. samsingh May 2015 #148
so there are terrorists and the only question is what they will attack? samsingh May 2015 #32
No, I won't, for I don't accept your hair-splitting. WinkyDink May 2015 #8
Especially if it's paid for speech. Re: Faux Noise, et al. n/t freshwest May 2015 #9
Hate speech maligns persons as a group or class. Yo_Mama May 2015 #12
I call bullshit. delrem May 2015 #14
Yes she is a hater but her anti-Muslim crusade is not racist. totodeinhere May 2015 #20
Oh, cut the bullshit semantics. delrem May 2015 #21
How can being anti-Muslim be racist when Islam is a religion, not a race? totodeinhere May 2015 #24
http://pamelageller.com/ delrem May 2015 #38
alright - she's very disgusting too. atlas shrugs - ewwwwwww. samsingh May 2015 #64
yes. she is. delrem May 2015 #67
anyone who support atlas shrugged is sick and twisted in my opinion samsingh May 2015 #85
Then stop it. delrem May 2015 #98
because in the United States and Europe, "Islam" is heavily racialized, particularly by islamophobes Scootaloo May 2015 #43
thanks for that. delrem May 2015 #49
islamists have beheaded thousands of people in the middle east. i don't have any support for that samsingh May 2015 #72
You're supporting Pamela Geller. delrem May 2015 #78
don't try to say i'm supporting geller. i hate atlas. your name calling is interesting and samsingh May 2015 #82
You have been channelling Geller like nobody's business, samsingh. delrem May 2015 #87
both are evil samsingh May 2015 #91
Which has nothing to do with what I just explained to you Scootaloo May 2015 #96
You have your facts wrong. In the United States for instance 30% of Muslims are whites. totodeinhere May 2015 #104
You knowthat 30% is not "most" by any measure, correct? Scootaloo May 2015 #105
I didn't say "most," I said a plurality. totodeinhere May 2015 #106
I said most are not white. And they are not. Scootaloo May 2015 #108
I have to go to bed. But my definition of "impute" is... totodeinhere May 2015 #110
Because it nearly always goes hand in hand with prejudice against scary evil brown people. nomorenomore08 May 2015 #109
Fuck the bullshit and semantics seveneyes May 2015 #35
http://pamelageller.com/ delrem May 2015 #37
You made the claim seveneyes May 2015 #39
http://pamelageller.com/ delrem May 2015 #42
i call bullshit but not against Geller. samsingh May 2015 #34
http://pamelageller.com/ delrem May 2015 #40
should we link to islamist fundamentalist sites and isis? i would feel very dirty samsingh May 2015 #50
http://pamelageller.com/ delrem May 2015 #53
i would feel dirtier on the other sites. but then beheading tens of thousands samsingh May 2015 #62
Well, it's you that makes a choice in favor of exonerating Pamela Geller. delrem May 2015 #75
i think the constant terrorist attacks are worse than geller samsingh May 2015 #84
Isn't religion a protected class in the US? gollygee May 2015 #94
protected from your right to free speech? Warren Stupidity May 2015 #125
That's not what I'm responding to gollygee May 2015 #129
there are no laws against hate speech. Warren Stupidity May 2015 #133
I specifically said that gollygee May 2015 #134
There is no law against hate speech nor should there be. Warren Stupidity May 2015 #124
Let us say instead: "Pam Geller has limited free speech." Binkie The Clown May 2015 #13
Oh really. delrem May 2015 #17
shooting people up in the name of a religion may prove the 'those' comments to have some truth samsingh May 2015 #26
Only to a racist who impugns an entire people for the acts of a few. delrem May 2015 #52
what's a few? is isis only a few? samsingh May 2015 #66
ISIS is the current US enemy in the war on terror. delrem May 2015 #70
house of saud i not good guys. that's the disgusting joke samsingh May 2015 #79
Your broadbrush. delrem May 2015 #81
you forgot to post your link samsingh May 2015 #83
I responded directly to your post. delrem May 2015 #86
btw-you have posted alot of geller - i understand - she's pathetic samsingh May 2015 #92
The two nutcases are dead. Geller is thriving. Thanks to people like you. delrem May 2015 #97
you must have issues - i didn't even know about her until today samsingh May 2015 #113
What broadbrush? Implying that Muslims, as a group, are responsible for these atrocities. nomorenomore08 May 2015 #112
So instead of blaming Germans for WWII Binkie The Clown May 2015 #107
So the other 80-85% should be lumped in with the terrorists and radicals, and treated accordingly? nomorenomore08 May 2015 #114
That's NOT what I'm saying. Binkie The Clown May 2015 #116
For one thing, speaking out against extremism is punishable by death in some places. nomorenomore08 May 2015 #118
The poster mentioned women's voting. Either it's allowed in Muslim countries or it is not. Facts WinkyDink May 2015 #126
Since the first amendment uses the phrase "freedom of speech" muriel_volestrangler May 2015 #18
Re-read the OP. nt delrem May 2015 #22
It's wrong. If appears to not understand what the word 'freedom' means, and what 'free speech' muriel_volestrangler May 2015 #23
The OP provides context for a distinction. delrem May 2015 #45
she is exercising free speech and the attack by the two jihidists samsingh May 2015 #25
And further, her right to it is not in question Scootaloo May 2015 #30
"her right to it is not in question"? Not if you've been reading DU! WinkyDink May 2015 #128
Whatever gets you through the night. DefenseLawyer May 2015 #33
Somebody always has to clean up Aerows May 2015 #46
I'm sorry but, no, Keefer May 2015 #56
That security guard PAID for her speech. Blue State Bandit May 2015 #59
I can't stand Geller. But drawing Mohammed is not hate speech. boston bean May 2015 #60
did you read who the actual organizers / speakers at this event were? Skittles May 2015 #80
I think it gets a pass. delrem May 2015 #100
THAT is not illegal in the United States. WinkyDink May 2015 #130
NO ONE SAID IT WAS ILLEGAL Skittles May 2015 #144
so what if it was? Our right to free speech is not limited to "non hate speech". Warren Stupidity May 2015 #127
No, we should educate those that say she does not have free speech seveneyes May 2015 #63
That's what the founders of the nation called it Depaysement May 2015 #65
This OP has got its facts upside down Yorktown May 2015 #74
I don't consider most such depictions "hate speech" either. nomorenomore08 May 2015 #115
Well, you nailed the snag about Islam. Yorktown May 2015 #117
Much the same can be said of the Christian Bible. People were executed for "blasphemy" and "sodomy" nomorenomore08 May 2015 #119
No, there is one big difference: the assumed writer. Yorktown May 2015 #120
I think you underestimate the number of Christians who still take the Bible literally (or claim to). nomorenomore08 May 2015 #151
You are right in practical terms, not in theoretical terms. Yorktown May 2015 #153
I always feel bad when I hurt someone's feelings fadedrose May 2015 #76
I'm fairly certain that what the Founders were after was a protection from a tyrannical government. Erich Bloodaxe BSN May 2015 #132
that this has to be explained on DU is pitiful Skittles May 2015 #77
Actually, depicting any living person or animal is forbidden. alphafemale May 2015 #89
R#21 & K n/t UTUSN May 2015 #95
She is a demagogue. Hissyspit May 2015 #101
That's the nicest thing a person could say about her, and still be true. nt delrem May 2015 #103
She wishes to ASPIRE to being a demagogue! WinkyDink May 2015 #131
No CBGLuthier May 2015 #111
no. Freedom of speech - aka "free speech" is the exact language used to describe this right. Warren Stupidity May 2015 #123
+1 nomorenomore08 May 2015 #149
Pam Geller Has Free Speech GOLGO 13 May 2015 #136
how did the Boston marathon insult the boston bombers? samsingh May 2015 #141
In case any body is curious, this was the winning cartoon: (warning-depiction of Mohammed) EX500rider May 2015 #142
Hatespeech is absolutely constitutionally protected,and I'm gonna engage in hate speech in this post Shoulders of Giants May 2015 #146
Am I free to disagree? lumberjack_jeff May 2015 #147
I don't have a problem with her use of the Constitution, I have a problem with her and her kind. Rex May 2015 #150
Sorry, I'll blaspheme all I want. Thanks. Warren DeMontague May 2015 #156
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Can We Stop Saying "...»Reply #3