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.
Would it be more in line with your idea of free speech if the NY Times was somehow forced to run Pamela Geller's screed? If she wants the ad run, there's probably a Murdoch rag that will be happy to oblige.
I don't care who she is. The ad she submitted was a mirror image of the anti-Christianity ad the paper chose to run a few days earlier. This is a double standard. This is pure bias or intimidation. Take your pick.
Everyone knows that Christians pose no real threat (except for all the disingenuous liberals on CD who claim they're just as, if not more, skeered of dem Christians!) so that makes them fair game. Muslims? Can't touch 'em.
If liberals didn't have double standards, they'd have no standards at all.
I don't care who she is. The ad she submitted was a mirror image of the anti-Christianity ad the paper chose to run a few days earlier. This is a double standard. This is pure bias or intimidation. Take your pick.
Limited "Freedom of Speech". In the interests of National Security. What else is new.
And some people don't understand why we turn to FOX or the Blaze or Breitbart?
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.
