Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They may claim otherwise, but actions speak louder than words. I am convinced that most people would be okay with restrictions on free speech for those who espouse political, religious, and social beliefs that are contrary to their own. From what I've seen, the right and the left are equally guilty in trying to shape their own version of America, everyone else's opinions be damned. Often these people do not consider what they are doing to be censorship or infringing upon the rights of others.
"There are many who do not know they are fascists but will find it out when the time comes." - For Whom the Bell Tolls
Some examples:
- The American Library Association has documented more than 6,000 challenges to books in the United States between 1990 and 2000, typically by community or parent organizations complaining about everything from homosexuality and violence to "secular humanism" and witchcraft
- In 2002, shortly after 9/11, the First Amendment Center's annual survey found 49 percent of Americans felt the First Amendment gave people "too much freedom"
- Absurd survey results from the State of the First Amendment 2007:
1) 55 percent of Americans said they believe that the Constitution establishes a Christian nation
2) 97 percent of Americans felt the right to practice their own religion was "essential", but only 56 percent felt the freedom to worship as one chooses extends to ALL religious groups
3) 74 percent of Americans would prevent public school students from wearing clothing "offensive" slogans
- San Franciscans try to ban everything that does not fit into their notion of what a healthy, green lifestyle should be like. Some things San Franciscans have voted to ban in recent years: plastic bags in large chain stores, bottled water in City Hall, the sale of soft drinks on government property, the declawing of cats, forbidding city departments from doing business with companies that were involved in the pre–Civil War slave trade (are you kidding me?), and McDonald's Happy Meals. Next on the chopping block: circumcision
Americans are tired of the diversity BS!
America wants conformists.
All those who aren't white, christian, anti-intellectual should pack their bags and git outta da country! Pronto!
I guess the problem is that initially most of the relatively few settlers in the US had a) similar views and values due to their European origin, and b) enough space to just go elsewhere. All that has completely changed, so now you have hundreds of millions of people with all kinds of views from every corner of the world living close to each other...
I am not so sure the constitution would be as liberal as it is if it were drafted today.
What freedom is SF going to ban next? If they pass a law preventing me from dumping my toxic industrial waste in lakes and streams or preventing me from walking my pet mountain lion boo-boo off leash in the city, I tell ya I'm outta here to some place that actually values my freedom to do whatever the hell I want to.
Most people want to be assured that their worldview is the only correct view.
If it was not correct they could be living an improper life and might be threatened with hellfire and damnation. To avoid this fate all people must believe as they do. If they ever figured out that their externally imposed restrictions were only for the benefit of the restrictors all manner of reactions might occur. None of them any good for the oppressors.
I have learned about the "conservative" view point from reading these posts. I do not want them to stop posting. That is their right. I will not put restrictions on others that I would find intolerable. All I ask is they do not put restrictions on me.
What freedom is SF going to ban next? If they pass a law preventing me from dumping my toxic industrial waste in lakes and streams or preventing me from walking my pet mountain lion boo-boo off leash in the city, I tell ya I'm outta here to some place that actually values my freedom to do whatever the hell I want to.
Except both of your sarcastic examples involve potential serious harm to others. I am not a free rights absolutist - if there is actual harm, it should not be permitted. However, usually when SF is trying to ban something it is because it offends them.
Contrary to what most people believe, you do not have a constitutional right not to be offended.
To a certain extent the question seems to be whether or not government at any level should be allowed to guide the development of the society it is responsible for?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
