tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7152221.post109653841086017803..comments2024-03-23T07:49:50.940-05:00Comments on The Middle Ground: The Strawman of Political Dissent and First Amendment Rights (Part I)Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7152221.post-1096695526625807582004-10-02T00:38:00.000-05:002004-10-02T00:38:00.000-05:00Robert...excellent points. I agree completely. W...Robert...excellent points. I agree completely. We have all of our rights as long as all of the other rights are upheld,including the right to own a gun. I do find it interesting that the folks that are screaming about their "right to free speech" would be the first to wipe out the other rights in an attempt to form the "utopian" society.<br /><br />Like the interesting PC laws that Canada has passed concerning certain language being "hate" speech and can be fined or prosecuted with criminal laws.<br /><br />These laws are not required under the United States constitution because the right to free speech is balanced by the "clear and present" danger interpretation. Like the white power groups. They may say whatever they like about different groups, blacks, jews, catholics, etc, but the minute they advocate killing said groups and/or act on that speech, they have thrown away their right to free speech.<br /><br />I don't have to like Aryan brotherhood or people like Louis Farrakhan, but they can speak. I will ignore them until they do something against me or another person that clearly violates their rights. Then they are criminals and should be prosecuted.<br /><br />In which case, I can uphold the right of protestors to do so and at the same time abhor their message. While I might wish for the sake of our country that they would shut the hell up, I will not say they can't say it. Unless they start torching things or beating up people. Then they have become criminals that have forfeited their rights.Kathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05208095650375780838noreply@blogger.com