• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Do you support Cindy Sheehan's antics in protesting the war in Iraq?

Do you support Cindy Sheehan's antics in protesting the war in Iraq?

  • Yes

    Votes: 11 37.9%
  • No

    Votes: 18 62.1%

  • Total voters
    29
Navy Pride said:
And if you do those things you will be arrested.......The problem is the penalty is not enough.........If it was up to me I would lock the scum up and throw away the key.......

Because you're a NAZI.
 
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
The Supreme Court has ruled that the Freedom of Speech is limited in respect to speech which will cause immediate societal harm; such as incitement to revolution, riot, or violence, calling for the overthrow of the Government would certainly fall under that equation.

And thanks to them and the Administration with its 'patriot act' this country is no longer free.

I am glad that you have gotten part of what you want for this country and have shat in the face of our founding fathers in doing so.

Why don't you and Navy go celebrate by doing some Heil Hitler's then go to bed together?
 
Saboteur said:
And thanks to them and the Administration with it 'patriot act' this country is no longer free.
Why do you think you should be free to yell "FIRE!" in a theater?
 
Goobieman said:
Why do you think you should be free to yell "FIRE!" in a theater?

Why do you think people don't have enough honor to conduct themselves in a mature and resposible manner without having a law against everything one can possibly think of?
 
Saboteur said:
Why do you think people don't have enough honor to conduct themselves in a mature and resposible manner without having a law against everything one can possibly think of?

You didn't answer the question.
Why do you think you should be able to yell "fire" in a theater?

And in any case, it seems to me that most, if not all, criminal law is predicated on the idea that some people will not 'have enough honor to conduct themselves in a mature and resposible manner'.
 
Saboteur said:
Because you're a NAZI.

I don't know how you get away with not getting banned for making comments like that........

And this.........

Why don't you and Navy go celebrate by doing some Heil Hitler's then go to bed together?
 
Goobieman said:
You didn't answer the question.
Why do you think you should be able to yell "fire" in a theater?

And in any case, it seems to me that most, if not all, criminal law is predicated on the idea that some people will not 'have enough honor to conduct themselves in a mature and resposible manner'.

I did not say I should be free to yell fire in a theater did I? No, I didn't.

But fine, since it has been assumed that I did I will further explain the answer I already gave since you cannot, or won't admit that you can, understand my previouse answer.

I do not think that it is okay to yell fire in a theater. And I do not think that there needs to be a law against it on the state or federal level either. As a general rule of theaters people aren't supposed to talk at all. I think that most laws create the crimes they are supposed to deter. So I suppose there should be a law against talking in theaters altogether so we have some real trials in the courts as opposed to those frivolous malpractise suits right?
 
Saboteur said:
I did not say I should be free to yell fire in a theater did I? No, I didn't.

But fine, since it has been assumed that I did I will further explain the answer I already gave since you cannot, or won't admit that you can, understand my previouse answer.

I do not think that it is okay to yell fire in a theater. And I do not think that there needs to be a law against it on the state or federal level either. As a general rule of theaters people aren't supposed to talk at all. I think that most laws create the crimes they are supposed to deter. So I suppose there should be a law against talking in theaters altogether so we have some real trials in the courts as opposed to those frivolous malpractise suits right?

You DO know why its (usually) illegal to yell fire in a theater, right?
 
Navy Pride said:
I don't know how you get away with not getting banned for making comments like that........

And this.........

Me either, but I figure if Trajan can write profane words like fuc/k in threads out side of the basement. And all you prolifers can call me a murderer whenever you want. You can take a little flak when the forum heats up.;)

If I get banned big deal. This is just congregation of conservative crack pots stroking each other with their hateful rhetorric anyway. I'm just here trying to get you folks to take off the blinders and live in reality. If I fail too bad.
 
Goobieman said:
You DO know why its (usually) illegal to yell fire in a theater, right?

Yes because it would cause a panic and people would start trampling each other in an effort to save themselves.

While I on the other hand would stay in my seat until I could see if there actually was a fire. And if there was I would encourage people to remain calm and leave the theater in an orderly manner. Not that I think it would do any good. But I'd have to try and while doing so I would probably die. But at least I wouldn't go down like a terrified spineless jerk that would push a little kid out of my way so I could save myself.

Now....

Care to answer my question?
 
Saboteur said:
If I get banned big deal. This is just congregation of conservative crack pots stroking each other with their hateful rhetorric anyway. I'm just here trying to get you folks to take off the blinders and live in reality. If I fail too bad.

Odd.
I saw that someone was banned for having the nerve to disagree with a liberal moderator, a moderator who was doing the exact same thing he said he banned the poster.

And if you want to see the liberal left's idea of how Free Speech should work, I suggest you visit the Democratic Undergoroud.
 
Goobieman said:
Odd.
I saw that someone was banned for having the nerve to disagree with a liberal moderator, a moderator who was doing the exact same thing he said he banned the poster.

And if you want to see the liberal left's idea of how Free Speech should work, I suggest you visit the Democratic Undergoroud.

Just curious. How do you think free speech should work?
 
Saboteur said:
Just curious. How do you think free speech should work?

As long as you dont endanger someone else, or incite public violence, or work to overthrow a legitimate government, you should lbe able to say pretty much whatever you want.

The guys at the DU ban you for disagreeing with them - and they tell you that they will when you sign up.
 
Goobieman said:
Odd.
I saw that someone was banned for having the nerve to disagree with a liberal moderator, a moderator who was doing the exact same thing he said he banned the poster.

And if you want to see the liberal left's idea of how Free Speech should work, I suggest you visit the Democratic Undergoroud.

Oh and don't blame me for the decisions of the moderators.

If I don't get banned for having some balls and not copping out like most liberals do when they're cornered you're just going to have to deal.
 
Goobieman said:
As long as you dont endanger someone else, or incite public violence, or work to overthrow a legitimate government, you should lbe able to say pretty much whatever you want.

The guys at the DU ban you for disagreeing with them - and they tell you that they will when you sign up.

Then why are you here and not protesting the existance of the KKK?
 
As for the whole, yelling 'fire' in a theater situation; I think law restricting our behavior should be made out of necessity, rather than principle. I don't think yelling 'fire' in a theater should be illegal (though I would expect whoever did so would not be welcome back in said theater), unless of course there is some epidemic sweeping across the country where people are yelling 'fire' in the theater.

This standard of lawmaking is founded in our constitution. Prohibitive amendments are not the strong point of the constitution. Amendments that secure our rights are. That is why, for example, prohibition didn't work, and why amendments against, say, gay marraige or flag burning won't work either.
 
Saboteur said:
Then why are you here and not protesting the existance of the KKK?
Why would I?
Why aren't you?

See, you equate "disagree with what they say/do" with "you must act against them". Just because someone says something that I dont agree with or that I think they don't have the right to say doesnt in any way means I must "protest" their existence.
 
Mikkel said:
As for the whole, yelling 'fire' in a theater situation; I think law restricting our behavior should be made out of necessity, rather than principle. I don't think yelling 'fire' in a theater should be illegal (though I would expect whoever did so would not be welcome back in said theater), unless of course there is some epidemic sweeping across the country where people are yelling 'fire' in the theater.
Its not protected by the 1st because it puts people in danger.
Note that the laws that prohibit it do not explicitly prohibit the exclamation itself, but prohibit actions that are dangerous to the general public -- public endangerment, or whatnot.
 
Goobieman said:
Its not protected by the 1st because it puts people in danger.
Note that the laws that prohibit it do not explicitly prohibit the exclamation itself, but prohibit actions that are dangerous to the general public -- public endangerment, or whatnot.

I didn't say it was protected by the first amendment, or any amendment for that matter.

I'm saying that the spirit of the constitution upholds, fundamentally, that we shouldn't have laws against something unless there is a necessity for a law to be put in place.

People shouldn't make laws just because it comes to them. They make laws because there has been an incident, or a number of incidents, where actions by a person have been harmful or intrusive to others.

A good example of this is the Patriot act. Regardless of whether or not you think it's a good thing, it would have never passed Congress before 9/11. It took the actions of terrorists on that day, in the minds of those congressmen and women, to necessitate the act.
 
Mikkel said:
I'm saying that the spirit of the constitution upholds, fundamentally, that we shouldn't have laws against something unless there is a necessity for a law to be put in place.

People shouldn't make laws just because it comes to them. They make laws because there has been an incident, or a number of incidents, where actions by a person have been harmful or intrusive to others.

Then you shouldnt have much problem with it being illegal to yell "fire" in a theater.
 
Goobieman said:
Then you shouldnt have much problem with it being illegal to yell "fire" in a theater.

As long as there have been incidents in the past to warrant the illegality, then no, I don't.
 
Stinger said:
Why does that make her any smarter on foreign policy and national security issues?

I am NOT impressed with our "intelligence", nor our "national security"..

It seems to be based on fear and ignorance. Apparently nothing was learned from Vietnam.

Fools cannot learn from their mistakes..

This is one hell of a dilemma; one can but hope that there is progress.
I do not believe the media, nor the administration...
Yet we must support our troops...
 
Goobieman said:
Why would I?
Why aren't you?

I have and do. They hide behind the 1st Amendment just like Larry Flint.

See, you equate "disagree with what they say/do" with "you must act against them". Just because someone says something that I dont agree with or that I think they don't have the right to say doesnt in any way means I must "protest" their existence.

Well you've just majorly contradicted yourself...

You say you must act against me if what I say is a statement regarding the overthrow of the government.

I don't appreciate being accused of something YOU are doing.
 
Last edited:
Goobieman said:
As long as you dont endanger someone else, or incite public violence, or work to overthrow a legitimate government, you should lbe able to say pretty much whatever you want.

The guys at the DU ban you for disagreeing with them - and they tell you that they will when you sign up.

So when President Bush said "Bring it on!" to the terrorists and insurgents, which they did, and it resulted in the deaths of thousands of innocent people. He was breaking the law.

He should be impeached.
 
Saboteur said:
Well you've just majorly contradicted yourself...
You say you must act against me if what I say is a statement regarding the overthrow of the government.
I said nothing of the sort.
I said you can be acted against by the government and the 1st won't protect you.
 
Back
Top Bottom