Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Should it be legal to distribute leaflets calling for the execution of homosexuals?
Yes 28 32.56%
No 53 61.63%
Not sure 5 5.81%
Voters: 86. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-12-2012, 10:36 AM
 
Location: Top of the South, NZ
22,216 posts, read 21,655,217 times
Reputation: 7608

Advertisements

It seems like a good sense law to me. It's law abiding citizens they would like to execute after all. Who's next, children?, black people?, people from Baltic countries?, muslims, disabled people? people with buck teeth?- Anyone you want to, if you believe asking for people (who haven't broken the law) to be murdered, is of utmost importance.

People should be able to feel free from implied threats (death in this instance), from losers who just want to murder people, because they don't like them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-12-2012, 10:52 AM
 
Location: London UK & Florida USA
7,923 posts, read 8,843,540 times
Reputation: 2059
We already have this kind of disgusting behaviour in the USA and the first amendment allows it.
A good example of this is the Westboro Baptist Church who can really only be called a hate group yet they can peddle their hatred openly in the USA.
Freedom of speech is important here but should not be used to spread hate and fear. It seems that their is some double standards with free speech. Recently two British tourists were barred from entry into the USA because they wrote what was seen as threats to the USA.
A clear definition must now be made of what is acceptable and what is not as far as free speech is concerned. In everything we do boundaries are made to make sure that abuse of a system does not occur. This should also be the case with free speech
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-12-2012, 11:00 AM
 
17,468 posts, read 12,930,218 times
Reputation: 6763
Quote:
Originally Posted by PullMyFinger View Post
Seriously, 6 yes votes?

That's just hate is what that is. No place in America for that. You should be ashamed of yourselves.
It's went up to 13, this is shocking. What the hell are people thinking. I like you as long as you agree with our way
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-12-2012, 11:05 AM
 
17,468 posts, read 12,930,218 times
Reputation: 6763
Quote:
Originally Posted by nimchimpsky View Post
Exactly. I don't think the leaflet is direct enough to incite violence, but if it was phrased more directly, like "Let's kill all the gays!" it would be.

However, if any action is taken up that makes the leaflet no longer hypothetical, then that is inciting violence.
It's the propaganda, that they take to their circle. This leaflet would help them to have a case, against gays. This is scary for people to not see it could go further then Freedom of Speech.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-12-2012, 11:09 AM
 
Location: SWUS
5,419 posts, read 9,193,173 times
Reputation: 5851
Should it be legal? Yes, it's protected under the first amendment...
Will it win the Muslim community in the US any fans? Nope.

When it comes to Muslims, Europeans seem to be far more Islamophobic than we do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-12-2012, 11:12 AM
 
17,468 posts, read 12,930,218 times
Reputation: 6763
Quote:
Originally Posted by JordanJP View Post
Should it be legal? Yes, it's protected under the first amendment...
Will it win the Muslim community in the US any fans? Nope.
Well, the polling is showing a little different. Thank goodness this is just CD, but makes one wonder that's unless, most people voting are Muslims.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-12-2012, 11:13 AM
 
Location: The Brightest City On Earth
1,282 posts, read 1,903,290 times
Reputation: 581
Quote:
Originally Posted by geeoro View Post
We already have this kind of disgusting behaviour in the USA and the first amendment allows it.
A good example of this is the Westboro Baptist Church who can really only be called a hate group yet they can peddle their hatred openly in the USA.
Freedom of speech is important here but should not be used to spread hate and fear. It seems that their is some double standards with free speech. Recently two British tourists were barred from entry into the USA because they wrote what was seen as threats to the USA.
A clear definition must now be made of what is acceptable and what is not as far as free speech is concerned. In everything we do boundaries are made to make sure that abuse of a system does not occur. This should also be the case with free speech
No no no. Because the government will draw "boundaries" you don't like sooner or later. That is why the Framers were wise enough not to put "exceptions" in the First Amendment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-12-2012, 11:15 AM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 84,442,711 times
Reputation: 27720
Wow..I saw the poll results and nearly 1/2 of you think it's ok to distribute flyers calling for the death of other human beings.

I think the US is going to Hell in a handbasket and seeing results like this just confirms that we deserve anything and everything that is coming to us.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-12-2012, 11:27 AM
 
Location: Purgatory
2,615 posts, read 5,397,900 times
Reputation: 3099
There's a big difference between exercising free speech to protest against something and inciting hatred. THIS is a case of inciting hatred with intent to cause harm to a group (or groups) of people. I agree with the court's verdict and the sentencing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-12-2012, 11:29 AM
 
Location: London UK & Florida USA
7,923 posts, read 8,843,540 times
Reputation: 2059
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vegas Joe View Post
No no no. Because the government will draw "boundaries" you don't like sooner or later. That is why the Framers were wise enough not to put "exceptions" in the First Amendment.
I'm afraid that as a race....... Human beings do NOT have self control, if they did then a blanket free speech could work well. Just saying we have free speech protected by the first amendment does NOT make it workable.
We already have restrictions on what can be said for example on TV with words muted or bleeped out......... isn't that a restriction on free speech....... no threats are being made.
We seem to be selective when using the first amendment.... don't we?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:16 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top