Bourgeois_Rage Wrote:First I'm not super familiar with this case, but I don't think the kid had his feelings hurt he was pushing the limits on purpose to see what would happen. It turned into a much larger case than I'm sure he expected.

The interesting thing that has come out of the court is where is the line between student speech and educational control.

Quote:I can't speak for Swoosh, but your description doesn't fit me at all. As an example, when Marilyn Manson was touring and cities were banning him from coming to town, I was for letting the guy perform where ever he wanted. Would I ever go to a MM show? No. Do I support his message? No, in fact I am exactly the opposite. But I support free speech and would defend MM's right to it, no matter what.

Hey I agree with you right there. Let the loonies have their message. But won't you also extend that freedom to those who protest the loonies, even if they are also loonies? As long as they are not infringing on the first loony's freedom, then why shouldn't they be allowed to protest? And just as they are free to protest, flyingswoosh should also be free to laugh at them.

In reply to the first part, I too am not that familiar with this case. Although I am totally for free speech, in some instances you lose that right, based on decisions that were previously made. For example, if I go to work for a company and while working there I tell the president/CEO/owner that I think he is a complete a-hole, it is protected speech under the constitution (as it is my opinion, if I said he was an a-hole and he could prove he wasn't, it is libel). However, in this instance I work for him and he can choose to fire me. Although, I am allowed to say whatever I want, he too is allowed to fire me if he wants. There are consequences to the choices we make. If I was to equate that to this situation, it fits up to the point that the business (i.e. school) is essentially owned by the government (because it is public).

As for part 2, I am not against the demonstrating or writing letters I am against the actual repression. In the first instance, Marilyn Manson was actually not allowed to perform in certain cities. His rights were actually taken away.

In another case someone sued someone else because they had a nativity scene, but the other religions were not represented. I don't see how this affected the person who sued. They weren't prevented from worshiping how they wanted. In fact by not allowing the nativity scene, they were actually infringing on the rights of the person who had it displayed. Why is there the need to butt in there? To kill someone else's joy?

Quote:As for part 2, I am not against the demonstrating or writing letters I am against the actual repression. In the first instance, Marilyn Manson was actually not allowed to perform in certain cities. His rights were actually taken away.

I'm not familiar with the specific MM case, but yeah that's bull. He should be able to play. The only reason he shouldn't is because nobody bought tickets. Because some protesters decided to raise a ruckus, they took choice away from other people.

Quote:In another case someone sued someone else because they had a nativity scene, but the other religions were not represented. I don't see how this affected the person who sued. They weren't prevented from worshiping how they wanted. In fact by not allowing the nativity scene, they were actually infringing on the rights of the person who had it displayed. Why is there the need to butt in there? To kill someone else's joy?

In most of the nativity cases I have seen, the city councils generally are given the option of taking away access from the nativity group or allowing equal access to other groups who want it. I'd rather have equal access, but if the councils choose not to allow anyone, I'm fine with that too. I guess the question one should ask themselves is "Would I be upset if a Islamic group had set up a religious display on public land?" Personally, I don't see why people feel the need to express their religious displays in public spaces anyway.

I really think we're more or less on the same wavelength, blah. I was kinda playing devil's advocate with swoosh's comment anyway. I don't think protesters should be able to change policy, but I do think they should have the right to protest. The difference between him and I (or so I think) is that when he drives by abortion protesters, he says "get a life." When I drive by, I'm glad to see people out exercising their rights. Yeah, I might disagree with them, and it might be a complete waste of their time, but it is their right to do so.

Here is another one...The KKK. Towns can choose not to give them a permit to demonstrate their. Is that taking away their freedom of speech? Is what they say hate speech?

My personal opinion on the KKK, is that we let them march (without weapons) and then we allow the surrounding dissenting crowd to have weapons. I also feel the same about flag burners.

Bourgeois_Rage Wrote:

Quote:In another case someone sued someone else because they had a nativity scene, but the other religions were not represented. I don't see how this affected the person who sued. They weren't prevented from worshiping how they wanted. In fact by not allowing the nativity scene, they were actually infringing on the rights of the person who had it displayed. Why is there the need to butt in there? To kill someone else's joy?

In most of the nativity cases I have seen, the city councils generally are given the option of taking away access from the nativity group or allowing equal access to other groups who want it. I'd rather have equal access, but if the councils choose not to allow anyone, I'm fine with that too. I guess the question one should ask themselves is "Would I be upset if a Islamic group had set up a religious display on public land?" Personally, I don't see why people feel the need to express their religious displays in public spaces anyway.

I don't have a problem with anyone displaying religious symbolism as long as it doesn't affect my right to do so. The problem with Christmas is that it is a Christian holiday (If you want to split hairs, it started out as the celebration to Saturnalia, but then there aren't a lot of Roman pagans around today). Anyways, it would seem to me that is when people would want to show their pride and devotion to their religion. Why would Muslims want to horn in on that holiday. I would totally understand it if they had a display during Ramadan. I would also question any Christian who opposed this or wanted to have Christian symbolism during this obvious non-Christian holiday.

I only use Islam because it is the hated religion du jour. I don't think that there have been any high profile cases of Muslims putting up displays in the public square.

As for Christmas, I think it is usually Jewish who wish to erect a menorah or Kwanzaa celebrants who wish to put a display up. I think next year I'll petition to put up a festivus pole.

It's a festivus MIRACLE!

Bourgeois_Rage Wrote:I only use Islam because it is the hated religion du jour. I don't think that there have been any high profile cases of Muslims putting up displays in the public square.

As for Christmas, I think it is usually Jewish who wish to erect a menorah or Kwanzaa celebrants who wish to put a display up. I think next year I'll petition to put up a festivus pole.

Ok, I'm with you, but Jews don't want to put displays for Christmas, they want to put up displays for Hannakuh and African-Americans may want to celebrate Kwanzaa, but that isn't a religious holiday and also isn't Christmas.

So, if someone wants to have a Christmas scene, why would someone else want to not let them do it? Or to add non-Christmas related items to the scene? How does it infringe on their rights? It makes no sense to me.

No one told them that they can't have a Hannakuh or Kwanzaa scene (I for one would like to see a Kwanzaa scene, as I am not even sure what that entails).

I know you like playing the Devil's Advocate, but I just don't know how you justify it. I am obviously on the conservative side of things, but even I can see that not allowing Marilyn Manson to perform, no matter how much I disagree with his message, isn't right. Why can't you see that denying someone to put up a Christmas display without making it a multi-holiday montage is the same? Would you have a problem if cities allowed Marilyn Manson to play but only if he followed strict guidelines?

Quote:Ok, I'm with you, but Jews don't want to put displays for Christmas, they want to put up displays for Hannakuh and African-Americans may want to celebrate Kwanzaa, but that isn't a religious holiday and also isn't Christmas.

Yeah, but they happen at the same time of the year, obviously they are not the same holiday. If there is a Christmas display and a Jewish group wishes to have a Hannakuh display of equal prominence, you can't turn them away without showing preference to Christianity.

I'm not against people putting a display up. I just want to see equal access. The problem arise when a group petition to have a display and they are urned down even though other groups might have had a display for many years. So if you grant group religious use of a public space you have the allow every religious group other wise you show preference to a religion.

Some people interpret this to take down all displays, that is one option, but equal access is my preferred route. When you take access rights from everyone it just makes me think of the majority as taking their ball home so nobody can play.

Quote:Why can't you see that denying someone to put up a Christmas display without making it a multi-holiday montage is the same?

I'm not saying every city that has a Christmas display needs it to include each and every religious tradition. I'm saying that if there are members of the city/community who wish to also erect a separate but equal display they should/can not be turned down. If nobody in that community wishes to erect one then there is no need to do so.

every religion should be allowed to put their sh*t up, what the hell do i care? My ancestors were jewish, yet i wouldn't care if the neo-nazis put up a display. I don't think like them and i don't pay attention to them. As they aren't waking me up before 10.

as you've probably figured out, it's difficult to offend me.