Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Seems pretty clear on its face. Yet in recent years the Government has introduced the concept of "Hate Speech".

Now let's be clear: Free Speech does not give anyone a Free Pass to threaten physical violence, or yell "Fire" in a crowded Theatre. And these actions have always been regarded as illegal. But "Hate Speech"? That gives the Government the authority to define any views they feel are inappropriate as a Crime.

Just this week the Obama Administration admitted it was seriously discussing prosecution for "Climate Change Deniers". Yes, denying "Man-Made Climate Change" is hateful. An assault on Free Speech ?

And in the past few days the Media has informed us that denying a Speaker, invited to an event, the right to speak at all, is an "Affirmation of the First Amendment". Even if physical force and assault is used to stop the Speaker from addressing the crowd.

So denying another person their First Amendment Right to Speak AFFIRMS the 1st Amendment ?

Quote from: SalemCat on March 13, 2016, 09:05:42 AMSo denying another person their First Amendment Right to Speak AFFIRMS the 1st Amendment ?

No.  Your first amendment rights are a two way street, but end when you prevent someone else from expressing theirs. 

The Chicago protest event was organized on the UCI campus and social media a week before the event, with the explicit purpose to shut-down Trump's event.  It should have required a permit.     

Quote from: SalemCat on March 13, 2016, 09:05:42 AM
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Seems pretty clear on its face. Yet in recent years the Government has introduced the concept of "Hate Speech".

Now let's be clear: Free Speech does not give anyone a Free Pass to threaten physical violence, or yell "Fire" in a crowded Theatre. And these actions have always been regarded as illegal. But "Hate Speech"? That gives the Government the authority to define any views they feel are inappropriate as a Crime.

Just this week the Obama Administration admitted it was seriously discussing prosecution for "Climate Change Deniers". Yes, denying "Man-Made Climate Change" is hateful. An assault on Free Speech ?

And in the past few days the Media has informed us that denying a Speaker, invited to an event, the right to speak at all, is an "Affirmation of the First Amendment". Even if physical force and assault is used to stop the Speaker from addressing the crowd.

So denying another person their First Amendment Right to Speak AFFIRMS the 1st Amendment ?

Yes. If you are a liberal.

Someone told me, just this week, that a specific current candidate for President should be assassinated. Really ?!

I changed the subject real quick. Fortunately, successfully.

But think of it ... why would you want any Candidate assassinated ?

There's only ONE valid reason. You must believe that person is going to WIN. And you wish to deny other Americans the RIGHT TO VOTE ! You wish to subjugate Democracy.

Yes, as tempting as it is to embrace such ideas, if there is a Road To Hell, shutting down Free Speech and murdering Candidates is it.

Quote from: SalemCat on March 13, 2016, 11:33:59 AM
Someone told me, just this week, that a specific current candidate for President should be assassinated. Really ?!

I changed the subject real quick. Fortunately, successfully.

But think of it ... why would you want any Candidate assassinated ?

There's only ONE valid reason. You must believe that person is going to WIN. And you wish to deny other Americans the RIGHT TO VOTE ! You wish to subjugate Democracy.

Yes, as tempting as it is to embrace such ideas, if there is a Road To Hell, shutting down Free Speech and murdering Candidates is it.

Who was it that was suggesting that a candidate should be assassinated?

I am just curious if it was a liberal or not.

Although, if I had to law odds, I"d bet money, it was a liberal Sanders supporter.

Quote from: daidalos on March 21, 2016, 10:56:56 AM
Who was it that was suggesting that a candidate should be assassinated?

I am just curious if it was a liberal or not.

Although, if I had to law odds, I"d bet money, it was a liberal Sanders supporter.

Hillary Voter

But Sanders Voter is a good guess.