Gun Control & RKBA

Starboard Tack

(11,181 posts)

46. Speech doesn't need laws to protect it. It is a fundamental right.

Sun Dec 2, 2012, 03:28 PM

Dec 2012

Laws are made to restrict freedoms, both here in the US and elsewhere. The Bill of Rights is a great document and a great idea, but it is not a law. It is a codified list of rights. It is not perfect. The courts are there to iron out the kinks and the issue of hate speech has come up repeatedly, but as yet, not properly dealt with.
Nothing is absolute in terms of rights. They are always subject to interpretation.

SCOTUS will eventually be the one to determine whether any legislation passed is constitutional or not.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

57 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Trayvon Martin Shooting Target [View all] Berserker Dec 2012 OP

No words for such poor excuse for humanity nt newfie11 Dec 2012 #1

Old News ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #7

Agree. There are many such things, e.g toilet paper with Bush or Obama's picture on each sheet. jody Dec 2012 #2

Many countries still support freedom of speech yet have sensible legislation against hate speech. Starboard Tack Dec 2012 #9

NO,NO,NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! kossp Dec 2012 #10

Why? So that we may learn from others, that's why. Starboard Tack Dec 2012 #14

I'm not about isolationism, where did you get that? kossp Dec 2012 #15

So when the RW in America gets to define "hate speech" hack89 Dec 2012 #16

Try reading the laws as enacted in other countries Starboard Tack Dec 2012 #19

I don't understand why you think that we should care about other countries laws kossp Dec 2012 #20

Ain't that great? Starboard Tack Dec 2012 #29

You are an odd fellow former-republican Dec 2012 #44

Thanks! I take that as a compliment. Starboard Tack Dec 2012 #45

" I don't understand why you think that we should care about other countries laws". Jenoch Dec 2012 #31

Why would the tea baggers pass laws identical to those laws? hack89 Dec 2012 #21

If you read any of the laws enacted in other democratic countries you would know Starboard Tack Dec 2012 #30

They are created by a political process involving politicians hack89 Dec 2012 #33

Tell me specifically what you have a problem with Starboard Tack Dec 2012 #38

We don't need them hack89 Dec 2012 #39

It's not about getting insulted. Individuals can be insulted and insuly anyone. Starboard Tack Dec 2012 #51

We have laws against threatening behavior hack89 Dec 2012 #54

And if such a Hate Speech law got passed in the US... MicaelS Dec 2012 #53

Bullshit. Doesn't work like that. Starboard Tack Dec 2012 #57

By the way. kossp Dec 2012 #23

You always have the right to march. The restrictions are only on hate speech Starboard Tack Dec 2012 #25

Who DEFINES hate speech? Jenoch Dec 2012 #32

The laws do. Read them and get back. Let me know what you think. Starboard Tack Dec 2012 #37

You missed my point. Jenoch Dec 2012 #42

Speech doesn't need laws to protect it. It is a fundamental right. Starboard Tack Dec 2012 #46

Post removed Post removed Dec 2012 #48

Take your bigotry somewhere else, like back to the Tea Party where you obviously belong Starboard Tack Dec 2012 #49

There should be no restrictions on any speech kossp Dec 2012 #41

Then you'd better start telling SCOTUS to review the following decisions Starboard Tack Dec 2012 #47

You don't understand free speech very well. GreenStormCloud Dec 2012 #55

Oh boy! I'm speechless. Starboard Tack Dec 2012 #56

I don't really see the benefit. Glaug-Eldare Dec 2012 #12

I disagree with you on room for something else. kossp Dec 2012 #13

Maybe you don't see the benefit. Starboard Tack Dec 2012 #27

should we repeal the 17th Amendment gejohnston Dec 2012 #34

In answer to your question. No! Starboard Tack Dec 2012 #36

I'm talking about Parliamentary sovereignty Glaug-Eldare Dec 2012 #35

How do you propose "1A and 2A need to be revisited" when they are unalienable/inalienable rights? jody Dec 2012 #18

So you think Canada and all of Europe is totalitarian? Starboard Tack Dec 2012 #26

The Sedition Act of 1798 is one reason. nt jody Dec 2012 #40

1A & 2A are fine just like they are. GreenStormCloud Dec 2012 #22

Um...no they don't Riftaxe Dec 2012 #24

Most dedicated gun forums don't allow politics. ileus Dec 2012 #3

Disaster capitalism at its finest. nt rrneck Dec 2012 #4

rrneck how do you get "Disaster capitalism" from some idiot's target? IMO we have enough idiots jody Dec 2012 #5

Capitalizing on human misery for profit. rrneck Dec 2012 #6

I would change it from "Shock Doctrine" to "Punk Doctrine".... Eleanors38 Dec 2012 #8

Yes this is some sick shit. Starboard Tack Dec 2012 #11

What the Berserker Dec 2012 #17

Is that what you were hoping for? Starboard Tack Dec 2012 #28

Words fail me. catbyte Dec 2012 #43

We discussed this back in May(?) when it was news. ManiacJoe Dec 2012 #50

Sorry did not Berserker Dec 2012 #52