Reply With Quote
At what point does it start?
All of his posts in this thread are amazing.
At what point does it start?
How could the Nazi's censor speech before they were even in government?
Yes, duh, come on, everyone knows that
Not sure. Would need people to decide when a group is hurting the country. How many people, not sure. Guess that would have to be ironed out if I ever become President.
Correction: Not before they came to power, but before they started the actual war.
How would this group be chosen?
Now you are going down the wrong path.
I clearly said I don't want people inciting violence among the population. That could happen in 2010.
Crazy, 1984 type government censorships? Not happen in 2010.
Sigh
So, you're using the argument that we shouldn't allow public rallies because we might turn out like Germany, except you don't think we could censor everything anymore, which was a key component to the Nazis maintaining power.
Maybe elected officials can form a panel.
We already censor television broadcasts. Don't act surprised.
Yes, and I clearly meant the poison can spread and incite hatred and violence among the population
not that a government will take over the people or create crazy censorship
ugh, LnGrrrR...
I find it funny now that several of you are completely taking my posts out of context or trying to nitpick them with ridiculous comparisons....
try to understand what I am saying before posting
This one will eventually wind up in the SC, and will basically fall into Anthony Kennedy's lap. The good news about that for people who care about things like civil rights and our Cons ution is that Anthony Kennedy is basically a libertarian - he votes with the conservatives on economic issues and with the liberals on social issues. He's ruled in favor of civil rights for glbt people a number of times already.
Paraphrasing Judge Walker, "the fact that the people of California voted for Prop 8 is IRRELEVANT." Paraphrasing Rachel Maddow, "that's why they're called RIGHTS. Because they're not something you can vote on. They're what is protected by our Cons ution."
He also wrote a damn good, air tight, 138 page defense of his decision, which will be hard as for them to even find any grounds to appeal on. I am sure the antis will get some activist judge to push an appeal through, but Judge Walker has made their job hard with his excellent work here.
BTW, even if Judge Walker WERE gay (there's no evidence he is) how would that make him impartial? That logic would imply that no straight people could serve as judge in cases where the plaintiff is a gay person, no white person could serve as judge in a case where the plaintiff is a person of color. The job of a judge is to be impartial. THAT'S WHY THEY'RE JUDGES.
You probably should've used a better example than Nazi Germany then if you wanted to talk about rioting. I'm pretty sure that there were riots that didn't involve large groups of people coming to powers that you could've used as an analogy instead.
What if they decide you are starting a dangerous movement with your hate of those you consider mentally ill and jail you to stop it before it grows?
Why a panel? After all, a panel of people can still make a wrong decision. Look at how many people think the SCOTUS gets wrong decisions.
No, far safer to just put everything we should and should not censor in the hands of one sole arbiter, wouldn't you agree?
try to understand what you are saying before postingI find it funny now that several of you are completely taking my posts out of context or trying to nitpick them with ridiculous comparisons....
try to understand what I am saying before posting
I didn't think you would take it so far as to try to insult me and point out what you thought were contradictions before you even understood what I was saying.
In good faith, people should try to understand what the other is saying.
Clearly, I was saying that the Nazi's ideology spread like a poison. Merely referencing how people can be swayed by these things and hurt their fellow citizens, as I clearly said before several times.
Not everyone is going to be happy. We just have to do what we think is best and right for us. The SCOTUS does the best job they can and I think they are very effective. A decision has to be made SOMEHOW, otherwise we can argue for eternity.
In my opinion, it's better to stamp out poison than to let it fester for the sake of perceived total freedom, which does not and will never exist.
Yet, the KKK has not taken over the US even after all this time.
Why is that?
Because they already went through their rise and fall. Usually, the truth wins out, but not before the damage is done. I just would like to see it prevented before it ever spreads.
How big was the KKK at it's height of membership and power?
Here's the thing though... the ideology spread like poison BECAUSE THEY CENSORED THEIR POPULATION FROM SAYING OTHERWISE IN A PUBLIC VENUE.
That's my point. If there was no censorship, then people would have argued and there's a good chance that the "virus" wouldn't have spread the way it did. However, it spread because there was no one able to stand up and speak differently.
Quite large. Maybe five or six percent of the population.
It seems the United States survived and didn't need to become the thought police state you envision.
And I disagree. As you've noted, America has survived the KKK, and all the while maintaining a good deal of liberty while doing so.
Do you think that people won't cause violence if other people don't talk about it?
Because lots of Americans believe they have the right to never be offended.
How could the Nazi's censor anything when they weren't in government yet?
Before they got into power, before the elections, they went across Germany speaking to the public, and the public responded. They readily accepted his ideals. Blame this person, blame the jews, we lost World War 1 because of x people, etc and etc.
People are impressionable.
I don't think anyone here ever said to censor debate....
The only type of "censorship" I said I would like to see was to disallow large organized groups aimed at creating THIS SPECIFIC type of trouble, inciting violence, or hating others due to things they cannot possibly change.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
