First Amendment, I hardly knew yee...

BigD · Post by **BigD** » Sun May 23, 2004 12:09 am

damn it again that is me ^ forgeting to log on again

Babaganoosh · Post by **Babaganoosh** » Sun May 23, 2004 9:09 am

Do your spitting in the form of a ballot.

Dill · Post by **Dill** » Sun May 23, 2004 10:02 am

Loved the Mill-esque quote their Denali, but yet again, you fail entirely to even attempt to appropriate my intentions in what I said. Exactly WHO was arguing for complete free speech?? Was it me? I dont remember ever arguing for that. Good game Denali, again you simply avoid making any reasonable point: that is, a point against what someone else was saying.

I just love the contradicvtions in your world view, they make me happy.

flame: dumbass.

Denali · Post by **Denali** » Sun May 23, 2004 1:33 pm

Denali wrote:I frequently meet many fools who believe that the first amendment gives the right for people to say whatever the hell they please.

http://www.etsu.edu/cas/history/docs/schenk.htm

fools = Dill

Denali

oneinfinity · Post by **oneinfinity** » Sun May 23, 2004 4:35 pm

the shopkeeper complained. the police should have reminded the shopkeeper that we have freedom of speech and that we shouldn't trample on it too lightly. oh but wait, we're becoming a police state, so the authorities will trample on your rights given the slightest provocation. and let us not taketh the lord george bush's name in vain for he shall rain righteous vengeance upon us and surely we will burn in hell for an eternity, for the president of these united states is above reproach as though he were sitting at the right hand of GOD himself.

Denali · Post by **Denali** » Sun May 23, 2004 4:56 pm

It wasn't even that he insulted the president. If that were the case many more people would be in jail. It was that he basically used the words FUCK YOU in public. If you wouldn't say that in front of your kids then why should he be exempt?

Denali

omgLerkHat! · Post by **omgLerkHat!** » Sun May 23, 2004 9:03 pm

What I would like to know is why "Fuck You" is considered so offensive. If I told someone "Screw Off", it's basically the same thing, but you would *never* get in serious trouble for it. When and where did the whole "omg bad words" thing start anyway?

Volmarias · Post by **Volmarias** » Sun May 23, 2004 10:49 pm

When the FCC decided that bad words destroy society.

breakerfall · Post by **breakerfall** » Mon May 24, 2004 8:39 am

omgLerkHat! wrote:What I would like to know is why "Fuck You" is considered so offensive. If I told someone "Screw Off", it's basically the same thing, but you would *never* get in serious trouble for it. When and where did the whole "omg bad words" thing start anyway?

Because it's generally accepted by society that the words "Fuck You" are offensive. Sure, they're just words, but in our society, they're seen as offensive... regardless of how you look at them. The whole "bad words" things started when someone used words to offend someone (I would guess).

I'm not sure how to see this particular case. The fact is, you can protest against the administration without the use of profanities or "offensive language". You don't need offensive language to get a point across and from what I know so far, it serves him right - especially if he was given 2 warnings prior to his arrest. The point Denali seems to be making here, is that the guy would have been arrested regardless of who the sign was aimed at.

Cc_Hairy · Post by **Cc_Hairy** » Mon May 24, 2004 9:14 am

The Supreme Court upheld my first amendment right to call your mom a "whore".

The Court found that under the First Amendment, an obvious satire or parody of a public figure remains protected speech, even if it causes emotional distress to that person.

text of the decision http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/comm/f ... stler.html

scan of the ad where Falwell admits his first time was while drunk in an outhouse with his mom http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/project ... elladL.jpg

Volmarias · Post by **Volmarias** » Mon May 24, 2004 1:05 pm

This isn't really satire, though.

Space Butler · Post by **Space Butler** » Mon May 24, 2004 1:20 pm

Yeah, this wasn't satire, it was just political speech.
I don't think he should have been busted unless he was actually causing a distruption, which I would find hard to belive. Holding a sign with an ambiguous reading shouldn't constitute disorderly conduct. Should I get fined for bringing a "Hey Bush, RTFC!" sign to a Bush event?

breakerfall · Post by **breakerfall** » Mon May 24, 2004 1:25 pm

If so, then you have to think about whether this was a breach of freedom of speech (because it was against the pres) or rather just the police taking action against what they believed to be disorderly conduct...

Basically, what I mean is, would they have took the same action had the sign not been directed at Bush?

Dill · Post by **Dill** » Tue May 25, 2004 4:37 am

i hereby declare that i believe that the 1st amendment gives any american the right to say what they want. I believe you should be able to shout "fire!" in a dark cinema, incite racial violence yadda yadda yadda.

only NOW do I qualify as that fool you described Denali. GG dumbass. You must be psychic knowing that you would find justification in the future, lmao.

[Myth] Cable Guy · Post by **[Myth] Cable Guy** » Tue May 25, 2004 7:19 am

Basically, what I mean is, would they have took the same action had the sign not been directed at Bush?

since it was another local shopkeeper, that complained about the sign, you can only assume that depending on who the sign was redirected at or how it was redirected would determine whether the shop keeper would find the sign just as offensive, and there for complain

and since neither of us know this shop keeper the only way we could answer your question would be maybe?