1st Amendment right to free speech

For discussion of liberty, freedom, government and politics.
freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

1st Amendment right to free speech

Post by freedomforall »

As so many people exclaim as they swear, blaspheme, rant about whatever they want and wherever they want, sometimes incessantly, even here on the forum...don't we, those who don't care to listen to it and would like to see some impeding done, also have a right to tell them to SHUT UP? Or is free speech only granted to loud mouths? I would think it is a TWO-WAY street.
To top that off, what about those that appear to have narcissistic tendencies? They can be asked to not talk a certain way, and they totally ignore the request and even come on stronger with their ranting to show everyone just how conceited and disrespectful they can be. Is this practice under free speech or just plain arrogance and being obstinate?
Where does free speech end and annoyance begin?

Silver
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5247

Re: 1st Amendment right to free speech

Post by Silver »

freedomforall wrote: July 16th, 2017, 9:34 pm As so many people exclaim as they swear, blaspheme, rant about whatever they want and wherever they want, sometimes incessantly, even here on the forum...don't we, those who don't care to listen to it and would like to see some impeding done, also have a right to tell them to SHUT UP? Or is free speech only granted to loud mouths? I would think it is a TWO-WAY street.
To top that off, what about those that appear to have narcissistic tendencies? They can be asked to not talk a certain way, and they totally ignore the request and even come on stronger with their ranting to show everyone just how conceited and disrespectful they can be. Is this practice under free speech or just plain arrogance and being obstinate?
Where does free speech end and annoyance begin?
Bwahahaha! This is classic and a keeper.

It appears that Little Lord Fauntleroy is upset that people say stuff he doesn't like on a forum that he doesn't own. Quick, somebody make him a moderator so he can exercise his authority over opinions that differ from his own.
Attachments
little lord fauntleroy.jpg
little lord fauntleroy.jpg (22.78 KiB) Viewed 2128 times

freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: 1st Amendment right to free speech

Post by freedomforall »

Oh, and what about those that just can't stand it when they can't have the last word? They have to speak and be heard at any cost, not to be outdone by anyone. Is this another narcissistic trait? Is it an illness? Does it fall under the saying "I just can't help it?" Or is it under the phase, "the Devil made me do it?"
There are times when free speech can be very aggravating! No?

freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: 1st Amendment right to free speech

Post by freedomforall »

So it looks like everyone here have no issues. I suppose it falls under tolerance and political correctness, being too hesitant to let out their true feelings for fear of hurting feelings.
Or could it be that ranters are just plain so pushy, so bent on spreading gossip and stirring up contention that those who don't like it merely give up and let the childish persons have their way?

I guess Christ had to deal with people like that as well.
My discontent is backed by scripture. I can't say the ranters can claim this fact. Do they have their own agenda?

One said that he is here to turn everyone against Trump, and that he will not decease and desist until he accomplishes this (as if he is some kind of ruler to be obeyed).

Doesn't or shouldn't this bother anyone. Is it right to let this type of person come on board and dictate to people until they join him in spewing hate and discord?

Is this the Christian way? You decide.

If it is, then carry on. I will continue in using scripture to stand against it.

Silver
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5247

Re: 1st Amendment right to free speech

Post by Silver »

My friend, thank you for exercising your 1st amendment right to free speech by joining the thread.

You know, we're all curious about how getting admission information to the Adichunchanagiri Institute of Medical Science might be helpful to us here. The OP, as you notice, even clicked the magic button and offered you his thanks. Further, would you mind telling us what Adichunchanagiri means in English? Only slightly off-topic now, but have you ever seen the movie Chandramukhi starring the Super Star, Rajinikanth? I really enjoyed that movie. I saw it once in a theater in Otsu, Japan, and then, a few years later, I bought the DVD in Texas at a Indian grocery store. My favorite Indian food restaurant in my town is called India Palace. The food is fantastic. The customers on any given night look like a mini-United Nations gathering and the atmosphere is always so pleasant. I frequently find myself wishing that the whole world could be like the inside of that restaurant. What's cool is they have a card that they punch after every meal you purchase. When your card has been punched 6 times, your next meal is free. Free, I tell you! It's awesome. Well, closing now, I'd like to invite you to meet and listen to the missionaries of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. They have a message of peace and love that transcends all the hate and prejudice and bombings and drone attacks and strife that is so persistent among God's children. After you meet with the missionaries, I hope you'll tell us all about the experience.

freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: 1st Amendment right to free speech

Post by freedomforall »

How many people know that the longest name for a hill is: Taumatawhakatangihangakoauauotamateaturi ?

freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: 1st Amendment right to free speech

Post by freedomforall »

How many people know that Mount Everest is not the closest peak to the stars? Of all other peaks, which one is closest to the stars? And how?
Last edited by freedomforall on July 18th, 2017, 11:25 am, edited 1 time in total.

Silver
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5247

Re: 1st Amendment right to free speech

Post by Silver »

freedomforall wrote: July 18th, 2017, 11:22 am How many people know that Mount Everest is not the closest peak to the stars? Of all other peaks, which one is closest to the stars?
That would be the Caloris Montes.

Matchmaker
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2266

Re: 1st Amendment right to free speech

Post by Matchmaker »

freedomforall wrote: July 17th, 2017, 4:15 pm So it looks like everyone here have no issues. I suppose it falls under tolerance and political correctness, being too hesitant to let out their true feelings for fear of hurting feelings.
Or could it be that ranters are just plain so pushy, so bent on spreading gossip and stirring up contention that those who don't like it merely give up and let the childish persons have their way?

I guess Christ had to deal with people like that as well.
My discontent is backed by scripture. I can't say the ranters can claim this fact. Do they have their own agenda?

One said that he is here to turn everyone against Trump, and that he will not decease and desist until he accomplishes this (as if he is some kind of ruler to be obeyed).

Doesn't or shouldn't this bother anyone. Is it right to let this type of person come on board and dictate to people until they join him in spewing hate and discord?

Is this the Christian way? You decide.

If it is, then carry on. I will continue in using scripture to stand against it.
I don't know exactly what the Lord had in mind as the definition of free speech when he directed our forefathers to include it in our Constitution, but my heart tells me that bullies and screamers should temporarily loose their right to participate in any discussion until they can show respect and civility toward others. However, I just don't know how anyone could enforce this kind of a limitation in real life, with the media being so corrupt these days.

freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: 1st Amendment right to free speech

Post by freedomforall »

Silver wrote: July 18th, 2017, 11:24 am
freedomforall wrote: July 18th, 2017, 11:22 am How many people know that Mount Everest is not the closest peak to the stars? Of all other peaks, which one is closest to the stars?
That would be the Caloris Montes.
I just returned from doing some errands.

It appears that my question was a little ambiguous. I meant the highest peak on earth, closest to the stars.

It is: Chimborazo (Spanish pronunciation: [tʃimboˈɾaso]) is a currently inactive stratovolcano in the Cordillera Occidental range of the Andes. Its last known eruption is believed to have occurred around 550 C.E.[5]

With a peak elevation of 6,263 m (20,548 ft), Chimborazo is the highest mountain in Ecuador. It is the highest peak near the equator. Chimborazo is not the highest mountain by elevation above sea level, but its location along the equatorial bulge makes its summit the farthest point on the Earth's surface from the Earth's center.

01°28′09″S 78°49′03″W

freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: 1st Amendment right to free speech

Post by freedomforall »

Matchmaker wrote: July 18th, 2017, 1:39 pm
freedomforall wrote: July 17th, 2017, 4:15 pm So it looks like everyone here have no issues. I suppose it falls under tolerance and political correctness, being too hesitant to let out their true feelings for fear of hurting feelings.
Or could it be that ranters are just plain so pushy, so bent on spreading gossip and stirring up contention that those who don't like it merely give up and let the childish persons have their way?

I guess Christ had to deal with people like that as well.
My discontent is backed by scripture. I can't say the ranters can claim this fact. Do they have their own agenda?

One said that he is here to turn everyone against Trump, and that he will not decease and desist until he accomplishes this (as if he is some kind of ruler to be obeyed).

Doesn't or shouldn't this bother anyone. Is it right to let this type of person come on board and dictate to people until they join him in spewing hate and discord?

Is this the Christian way? You decide.

If it is, then carry on. I will continue in using scripture to stand against it.
I don't know exactly what the Lord had in mind as the definition of free speech when he directed our forefathers to include it in our Constitution, but my heart tells me that bullies and screamers should temporarily loose their right to participate in any discussion until they can show respect and civility toward others. However, I just don't know how anyone could enforce this kind of a limitation in real life, with the media being so corrupt these days.
My opinion is: without freedom of speech we would be less able to govern ourselves, less able to act, or being acted upon would become much easier for evil minded people that thrive on bullying, controlling or directing the thoughts and actions of mankind at will. Without freedom of speech we could not teach the gospel to those who, at first, reject the gospel, but as they receive added contacts, become less resistant and more willing to hear the message.
Without free speech, we couldn't stand for truth and conviction of our testimonies. Without free speech we would be puppets, even more so than those willing to accept evil and ultimately embracing it.

What one generation TOLERATES, the next generation EMBRACES.

Without free speech illegals would come into our country and demand that we live as they do, believe as they do and never assimilate into our way of life under the Constitution.

freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: 1st Amendment right to free speech

Post by freedomforall »

A home owner asks a landscaper to plant 10 trees, only, creating 5 rows of four trees each. How would the landscaper accomplish this task?

User avatar
Durzan
The Lord's Trusty Maverick
Posts: 3728
Location: Standing between the Light and the Darkness.

Re: 1st Amendment right to free speech

Post by Durzan »

freedomforall wrote: July 18th, 2017, 7:14 pm A home owner asks a landscaper to plant 10 trees, only, creating 5 rows of four trees each. How would the landscaper accomplish this task?
A good question... and one that I do not know how to answer. However, what does this have to do with the topic introduced to us by the OP... aka: free speech? I seriously hope you are going somewhere with this.

freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: 1st Amendment right to free speech

Post by freedomforall »

Durzan wrote: July 19th, 2017, 11:27 am
freedomforall wrote: July 18th, 2017, 7:14 pm A home owner asks a landscaper to plant 10 trees, only, creating 5 rows of four trees each. How would the landscaper accomplish this task?
A good question... and one that I do not know how to answer. However, what does this have to do with the topic introduced to us by the OP... aka: free speech? I seriously hope you are going somewhere with this.
The OP speaks for itself. I asked some direct questions requiring direct and sincere answers. I left no room for guesses, conjecture or supposition.

Irrelevant
captain of 100
Posts: 140

Re: 1st Amendment right to free speech

Post by Irrelevant »

freedomforall wrote: July 18th, 2017, 7:14 pm A home owner asks a landscaper to plant 10 trees, only, creating 5 rows of four trees each. How would the landscaper accomplish this task?
In a star pattern.

Freedom of speech inevitably includes freedom to say undesirable things. If we wish to enjoy freedom to say what we like we must allow the same, even though it means we may hear things that offend us.

We have the right to tell someone to shut up but not the right to shut them up. If we don't care to listen we have the right not to do so. I don't believe that there's a place where free speech ends and annoyance begins- surely no matter what is being said, there will be someone who would find it annoying.

User avatar
Robin Hood
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 13111
Location: England

Re: 1st Amendment right to free speech

Post by Robin Hood »

freedomforall wrote: July 18th, 2017, 4:27 pm but its location along the equatorial bulge makes its summit the farthest point on the Earth's surface from the Earth's center.

Not so, if the Earth is flat. :) ;)

User avatar
Robin Hood
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 13111
Location: England

Re: 1st Amendment right to free speech

Post by Robin Hood »

Here's a question.
Why is freedom of speech an amendment to the Constitution rather than part of the original?

User avatar
Durzan
The Lord's Trusty Maverick
Posts: 3728
Location: Standing between the Light and the Darkness.

Re: 1st Amendment right to free speech

Post by Durzan »

Robin Hood wrote: July 20th, 2017, 7:08 am Here's a question.
Why is freedom of speech an amendment to the Constitution rather than part of the original?
Because the Bill of Rights were added as an after thought designed to appease the anti-federalists. The constitution was designed to address how the government was supposed to be set up to function in general, not specify what the government as a whole can and can't do (though that is kinda a moot point since government can basically do whatever they want as long as they have the real power anyway). The constitution is essentially supposed to be an instruction manual, and you don't put unnecessary details in a construction manual. Inalienable Rights were included in the constitution after the fact through the amendment process because they didn't really pertain to defining how the government was structured and how it would function as a governing unit.

Thats not to say that Inalienable Rights are not important; far from it. It sort of just went without saying in those days, at least for the Federalists, so there was no need to address it in the main document, save for in the preamble.

freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: 1st Amendment right to free speech

Post by freedomforall »

Irrelevant wrote: July 20th, 2017, 6:40 amWe have the right to tell someone to shut up but not the right to shut them up.

Tell this to:


freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: 1st Amendment right to free speech

Post by freedomforall »

Silver wrote: July 16th, 2017, 9:48 pmIt appears that Little Lord Fauntleroy is upset that people say stuff he doesn't like on a forum that he doesn't own.
As if you are saying that you own the forum, so you can rant and spew venom at will and no one can say anything against it? This is a typical narcissistic response if I ever heard one!

You can put your name calling where the sun don't shine because this forum is not yours either to use as a platform for name calling. Do you want to keep your priceless, #1 position as a spokesman for the left...on this forum, and to lose all credibility and attention as well as all your many, many friends?

You called eddie a lapdog. I wonder how Brian would respond to that tidbit.
You now refer to me as being Little Lord Fauntleroy, both clearly an infraction of forum rules, Brian's rules that is.
Come to think of it, your quite suited in name calling just by reading some of your posts. I can't say that is a lofty goal to be aspired to. Some people are just to inept at being civil.

And you've got the audacity to tell me about a forum I do not own? Well guess what, I'd like to see you man-up and quit using dichotomies as a method of attempting to make your points. A lot of things you say can, and probably will, come right back and hit you on the backside.

Silver
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5247

Re: 1st Amendment right to free speech

Post by Silver »

freedomforall wrote: July 20th, 2017, 10:50 pm
Silver wrote: July 16th, 2017, 9:48 pmIt appears that Little Lord Fauntleroy is upset that people say stuff he doesn't like on a forum that he doesn't own.
As if you are saying that you own the forum, so you can rant and spew venom at will and no one can say anything against it? This is a typical narcissistic response if I ever heard one!

You can put your name calling where the sun don't shine because this forum is not yours either to use as a platform for name calling. Do you want to keep your priceless, #1 position as a spokesman for the left...on this forum, and to lose all credibility and attention as well as all your many, many friends?

You called eddie a lapdog. I wonder how Brian would respond to that tidbit.
You now refer to me as being Little Lord Fauntleroy, both clearly an infraction of forum rules, Brian's rules that is.
Come to think of it, your quite suited in name calling just by reading some of your posts. I can't say that is a lofty goal to be aspired to. Some people are just to inept at being civil.

And you've got the audacity to tell me about a forum I do not own? Well guess what, I'd like to see you man-up and quit using dichotomies as a method of attempting to make your points. A lot of things you say can, and probably will, come right back and hit you on the backside.
If you can't see the irony in your own original post, I feel sorry for you.

freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: 1st Amendment right to free speech

Post by freedomforall »

Silver wrote: July 20th, 2017, 11:03 pm
freedomforall wrote: July 20th, 2017, 10:50 pm
Silver wrote: July 16th, 2017, 9:48 pmIt appears that Little Lord Fauntleroy is upset that people say stuff he doesn't like on a forum that he doesn't own.
As if you are saying that you own the forum, so you can rant and spew venom at will and no one can say anything against it? This is a typical narcissistic response if I ever heard one!

You can put your name calling where the sun don't shine because this forum is not yours either to use as a platform for name calling. Do you want to keep your priceless, #1 position as a spokesman for the left...on this forum, and to lose all credibility and attention as well as all your many, many friends?

You called eddie a lapdog. I wonder how Brian would respond to that tidbit.
You now refer to me as being Little Lord Fauntleroy, both clearly an infraction of forum rules, Brian's rules that is.
Come to think of it, your quite suited in name calling just by reading some of your posts. I can't say that is a lofty goal to be aspired to. Some people are just to inept at being civil.

And you've got the audacity to tell me about a forum I do not own? Well guess what, I'd like to see you man-up and quit using dichotomies as a method of attempting to make your points. A lot of things you say can, and probably will, come right back and hit you on the backside.
If you can't see the irony in your own original post, I feel sorry for you. Who the heck invited you and your derogatory remarks, here, in the first place?
I don't require any sorrow from you, so cut out the pretenses. My OP is directed to people like you that are bent on spreading hate and turmoil as a hobby..and that those of us that know of your agenda have the right to tell you to shut up. Free speech is a two way fact, one can use it for evil, whereas another can use it for good. Those who are sick of hearing bad from the same source ad nauseam have the right to tell them to simmer down, because asking them nicely apparently is not an understood or respected question. You find these stupid college words like irony to hopefully trip me up, but you can't, but even if you could, I would reciprocate in kind, double.

BTW, if you're against the OP as a valid concern and reality, then I have to assume you are for saying your peace no matter how hurtful, but don't want to allow anyone else to speak their mind, because your itty-bitty feelin's would be hurt. In other words, you can dish it out but can't take it in return.

Irony...someone that speaks evil of others at will, yet has no clue they are hurting themselves even more.

Irony...someone that speaks like a reprobate by speaking evil of others incessantly and, apparently, having no conscience.

Irony...someone who assumes a paramecium can think.

freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: 1st Amendment right to free speech

Post by freedomforall »

Robin Hood wrote: July 20th, 2017, 7:05 am
freedomforall wrote: July 18th, 2017, 4:27 pm but its location along the equatorial bulge makes its summit the farthest point on the Earth's surface from the Earth's center.

Not so, if the Earth is flat. :) ;)
Good one, Robin Hood, very good.

Hey, think of this: The heavens and everything in it must be flat because in scripture we read:

Isaiah 34:4
4 And all the host of heaven shall be dissolved, and the heavens shall be rolled together as a scroll: and all their host shall fall down, as the leaf falleth off from the vine, and as a falling fig from the fig tree.

Silver
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5247

Re: 1st Amendment right to free speech

Post by Silver »

Put another way, FFA, I do not like America's choice for president and his cabinet so I post my feelings about them along with articles that explain better than I can the many ways Trump is not good for America and the world. You may argue with me about my feelings, you may ignore me, or you may gently try to persuade me. However, just because you vainly imagine that I am abusing your right to free speech, it doesn't mean that you have a right to take away my ability to post. That's what your original post was really all about. You don't like something I wrote, therefore you think I should be "impeded." Would you like to be treated that way? Just because someone disagreed with what you wrote?

You and I actually agree about many things regarding the miraculous beginnings of our country and the greatness of the founding fathers. We recognize that there are secret combinations. We are also brothers in the same Church. It is on Trump we differ. However, calling me the "#1 spokesman for the left" is about as silly a charge as could be thrown against me. You should really take a deep breath or two before trying to lambaste me because the ostrich egg on your face is embarrassing -- or should be. I'm pro-Constitution and a believer of Ezra Taft Benson's views on the proper role of government. I have respect for the positions of the John Birch Society. Does that sound like a spokesman for liberals?

Therefore, as I've declared before, I will not stop posting my feelings about Trump until his supporters here repudiate him or BrianM boots me off the forum. That's my position and I will not budge from it. I've been consistent with that message. Trump supporters, on the other hand, have to rationalize away much wickedness in his past and present to stay on his side. Too bad, but since 96% of all Americans voted for evil in the presidential election I'm figuring the sackcloth and ashes days are not far away. Weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth will be on constant display then.

Silver
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5247

Re: 1st Amendment right to free speech

Post by Silver »

freedomforall wrote: July 20th, 2017, 11:33 pm
Silver wrote: July 20th, 2017, 11:03 pm
freedomforall wrote: July 20th, 2017, 10:50 pm
Silver wrote: July 16th, 2017, 9:48 pmIt appears that Little Lord Fauntleroy is upset that people say stuff he doesn't like on a forum that he doesn't own.
As if you are saying that you own the forum, so you can rant and spew venom at will and no one can say anything against it? This is a typical narcissistic response if I ever heard one!

You can put your name calling where the sun don't shine because this forum is not yours either to use as a platform for name calling. Do you want to keep your priceless, #1 position as a spokesman for the left...on this forum, and to lose all credibility and attention as well as all your many, many friends?

You called eddie a lapdog. I wonder how Brian would respond to that tidbit.
You now refer to me as being Little Lord Fauntleroy, both clearly an infraction of forum rules, Brian's rules that is.
Come to think of it, your quite suited in name calling just by reading some of your posts. I can't say that is a lofty goal to be aspired to. Some people are just to inept at being civil.

And you've got the audacity to tell me about a forum I do not own? Well guess what, I'd like to see you man-up and quit using dichotomies as a method of attempting to make your points. A lot of things you say can, and probably will, come right back and hit you on the backside.
If you can't see the irony in your own original post, I feel sorry for you. Who the heck invited you and your derogatory remarks, here, in the first place?
I don't require any sorrow from you, so cut out the pretenses. My OP is directed to people like you that are bent on spreading hate and turmoil as a hobby..and that those of us that know of your agenda have the right to tell you to shut up. Free speech is a two way fact, one can use it for evil, whereas another can use it for good. Those who are sick of hearing bad from the same source ad nauseam have the right to tell them to simmer down, because asking them nicely apparently is not an understood or respected question. You find these stupid college words like irony to hopefully trip me up, but you can't, but even if you could, I would reciprocate in kind, double.

BTW, if you're against the OP as a valid concern and reality, then I have to assume you are for saying your peace no matter how hurtful, but don't want to allow anyone else to speak their mind, because your itty-bitty feelin's would be hurt. In other words, you can dish it out but can't take it in return.

Irony...someone that speaks evil of others at will, yet has no clue they are hurting themselves even more.

Irony...someone that speaks like a reprobate by speaking evil of others incessantly and, apparently, having no conscience.

Irony...someone who assumes a paramecium can think.
Of course you have the right to tell me to shut up. However, that's a very different thing from actually making me shut up. You can post "SHUT UP" after every post of mine. That will not work as intended, but you're free to do so.

I don't use words like "irony" to be clever, by the way. I employed that word because it was the best word to describe your original post. Can't you see that you having the power to shut me up simply because you don't like what I say could be your fate someday? Besides what gives you the right to decide who should be impeded? Most people who don't like what I write simply ignore me; they don't demand that I shut up. Do you like that painting by Arnold Friberg of Samuel the Lamanite on the wall of Zarahemla preaching to the Nephites? I think it's so cool. Why is it, do you think, that the wicked Nephites in Zarahemla couldn't just ignore Samuel? Why couldn't they just shake their heads and walk away? Why did they have to try to kill him?

Post Reply