(01-16-2011 04:35 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(01-16-2011 02:28 PM)aTxTIGER Wrote:  

(01-16-2011 02:17 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(01-16-2011 01:25 AM)aTxTIGER Wrote:  

(01-14-2011 12:39 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  I fail to see how their stupidity matches the litmus test for abuse of the 1st amendment: yelling fire in a crowded theater.

Their protests will cause no physical harm to anyone. They are not initiating force.

+1

They are completely in their right to protest regardless of how douchey they are.

No, they're not. The first amendment doesn't give you rights at everyone else's expense.

You can't take away someones First Amendment rights just because you don't like what they say.

No duh.

That's the point. No one is taking away their rights. But as Owl 69 put it, those rights aren't unlimited.

You tell me how telling them to protest across town takes away a single one of their rights.

So it's OK to demand that protesters cannot protest on the Mall in DC, so long as you direct their protest to a hay field in New Jersey. I hate these guys as much as everyone else, but free speech is widely by far more unlimited than limited. And the "shout fire" is not equivalent here.

(01-16-2011 05:37 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(01-16-2011 04:35 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(01-16-2011 02:28 PM)aTxTIGER Wrote:  

(01-16-2011 02:17 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(01-16-2011 01:25 AM)aTxTIGER Wrote:  +1

They are completely in their right to protest regardless of how douchey they are.

No, they're not. The first amendment doesn't give you rights at everyone else's expense.

You can't take away someones First Amendment rights just because you don't like what they say.

No duh.

That's the point. No one is taking away their rights. But as Owl 69 put it, those rights aren't unlimited.

You tell me how telling them to protest across town takes away a single one of their rights.

So it's OK to demand that protesters cannot protest on the Mall in DC, so long as you direct their protest to a hay field in New Jersey.

When straw man arguments are all I get in response, I'll take that to confirm my assertion is valid.

(01-17-2011 08:32 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(01-16-2011 05:37 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(01-16-2011 04:35 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(01-16-2011 02:28 PM)aTxTIGER Wrote:  

(01-16-2011 02:17 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  No, they're not. The first amendment doesn't give you rights at everyone else's expense.

You can't take away someones First Amendment rights just because you don't like what they say.

No duh.

That's the point. No one is taking away their rights. But as Owl 69 put it, those rights aren't unlimited.

You tell me how telling them to protest across town takes away a single one of their rights.

So it's OK to demand that protesters cannot protest on the Mall in DC, so long as you direct their protest to a hay field in New Jersey.

When straw man arguments are all I get in response, I'll take that to confirm my assertion is valid.

No, don't be so obtuse, you know the logical outcome of allowing a bureaucrat to determine when and where protests are allowed.

(01-17-2011 08:54 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  When straw man arguments are all I get in response, I'll take that to confirm my assertion is valid.

No, don't be so obtuse, you know the logical outcome of allowing a bureaucrat to determine when and where protests are allowed.
[/quote]

I don't know that. And if that's the case, then petition against that legitimate grievance. Don't distort the original amendment while trying to protect some obviously flawed and perverted definition of "liberty."

(01-16-2011 05:37 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(01-16-2011 04:35 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(01-16-2011 02:28 PM)aTxTIGER Wrote:  

(01-16-2011 02:17 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(01-16-2011 01:25 AM)aTxTIGER Wrote:  +1

They are completely in their right to protest regardless of how douchey they are.

No, they're not. The first amendment doesn't give you rights at everyone else's expense.

You can't take away someones First Amendment rights just because you don't like what they say.

No duh.

That's the point. No one is taking away their rights. But as Owl 69 put it, those rights aren't unlimited.

You tell me how telling them to protest across town takes away a single one of their rights.

So it's OK to demand that protesters cannot protest on the Mall in DC, so long as you direct their protest to a hay field in New Jersey. I hate these guys as much as everyone else, but free speech is widely by far more unlimited than limited. And the "shout fire" is not equivalent here.

yup.

(01-17-2011 11:02 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  I don't know that. And if that's the case, then petition against that legitimate grievance. Don't distort the original amendment while trying to protect some obviously flawed and perverted definition of "liberty."

I'm not distorting or protecting anything. The reality is staring you in the face. Let's make this simple.

Are you willing to let some bureaucrat decide when and where a person can exercise free speech. Yes or no.