Attack On Free Speech

Political stuff, stuff people love to hate.
User avatar
Blue Frost
SUPER VIP
SUPER VIP
Posts: 89028
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 1:01 am
Location: Yodenheim

Attack On Free Speech

Post: # 155349Unread post Blue Frost
Fri Apr 21, 2017 5:46 pm

Stuff like this isn't just about free speech, it's about Freedom itself.

The Anti-Free Speech Movement
UC Berkeley’s gravediggers of freedom.
April 20, 2017
Frontpage Editors
http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/266457/ ... ge-editors

UC Berkeley, birthplace of the Free Speech Movement, has stabbed free speech in the back once again.

Last week it effectively canceled a long planned speech by David Horowitz. Today it canceled a long planned speech by Ann Coulter scheduled for April 27.

As they did with Horowitz, UC officials, citing safety concerns, first tried to bureaucratically shrink the Coulter speech out of existence by informing Young Americans for Freedom, sponsors of the event, that Coulter could speak only in the afternoon when students were in classes; that only students could attend; and, in a Kafkaesque twist, that the location of the speech would be distant from the center of campus and not be announced until just before it occurred.

Coulter agreed to these conditions. But she added two stipulations that called the bureaucrats’ bluff that this was about public safety rather than the suppression of the free speech of conservatives. She asked that the Chancellor not require police to stand down in the face of anticipated violence by thugs, as he has in the past; and she asked that the UC administration make it clear than any student trying violently to disrupt the speech would be expelled.

The University replied by cancelling Coulter’s speech outright.

Berkeley officials are no doubt congratulating themselves that they have dodged another bullet and that the smokescreen created by their histrionic concerns for “public safety” will conceal their unwillingness to defend free speech and prevent their campus from being cleansed of conservative ideas.

They are as cowardly as they are hypocritical. A few weeks ago, their campus police stood by and allowed masked thugs to disrupt an appearance by Milo Yiannopoulos, committing over a hundred thousand dollars worth of university property while violently attacking bystanders. A week ago, campus police chief Andrew Yao took the lead in creating the conditions—an infeasible time, a distant off campus venue, and the requirement of a “security fee” of over five thousand dollars—that forced the cancelation of David Horowitz’s speech.

At Berkeley, those who should protect public safety and prevent violence and intimidation on campus, in other words, create the Orwellian rules that avert crisis by preventing speech. They are the gravediggers of freedom.

Only the left has free speech rights at UC Berkeley. Tenured radicals on the faculty will continue to make their classrooms into indoctrination chambers without impediment. Members of groups like Students for Justice in Palestine, a front group for the Hamas terrorists, will never have to worry that their hate speech will be curtailed, or that their anti Semitic speakers will be quarantined in a distant location. Far from having to post a “security fee,” this organization receives campus funding.

Groups such as the SJP will continue to spread their rancid ideology without inhibition or opposition because those who might challenge them are forbidden from speaking.

By threatening to return in force if someone expresses views they disagree with, the masked thugs UC bureaucrats and their police force allowed to trash the university now write the rules. By appeasing them, the school’s administrators have created the nation’s most powerful Anti Free Speech Movement and spit in the face of Berkeley’s own history and traditions.



User avatar
Blue Frost
SUPER VIP
SUPER VIP
Posts: 89028
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 1:01 am
Location: Yodenheim

Re: Attack On Free Speech

Post: # 155350Unread post Blue Frost
Fri Apr 21, 2017 5:59 pm

More NAZI Democrat BS .

Former FEC Chair: We Must Regulate Political Speech on the Internet
By Pamela Geller - on April 17, 2017
Free Speech
50 http://pamelageller.com/2017/04/former- ... rnet.html/


The fifth column. Crushing free speech is essential to leftists’ agenda of statism, and always has been. The National Socialist German Workers Party (the Nazis), the Communists, Stalinists, et al destroy freedom by first restricting free speech. The First Amendment is first for a reason. It is our most precious and most protected freedom. And political speech is the most protected speech.

It should give every American pause that anyone who was such an enemy of freedom of speech was FEC chairperson.

Freedom of speech is the foundation of a free society. Without it, a tyrant can wreak havoc unopposed, while his opponents are silenced. They blame truth and sites like the Geller Report for their crushing election defeat in November. So they mean to shut us down. Not once did they consider that the election was the result of their catastrophic failures. The Democrats are anti-freedom, anti-America, anti-individualism.

The left cannot win in the war of ideas, so they must silence the opposition. Crush freedom.

Putting up with being offended is essential in a pluralistic society in which people differ on basic truths. If a group will not bear being offended without resorting to violence, that group will rule unopposed while everyone else lives in fear, while other groups curtail their activities to appease the violent group. This results in the violent group being able to tyrannize the others.

If speech that offends a group is outlawed, that group has absolute power, and a free society is destroyed. A group that cannot be criticized cannot be opposed. It can work its will no matter what it is, and no one will be able to say anything to stop it.

Inoffensive speech needs no protection. The First Amendment was developed precisely in order to protect speech that was offensive to some, in order to prevent those who had power from claiming they were offended by speech opposing them and silencing the powerless.

A free society is by its nature one in which people exchange ideas and opinions. The alternative is a quiet authoritarian society in which only one opinion is allowed and the others are silenced, and ultimately sent to the camps.

Former FEC Chairwoman Calls for ‘Regulations’ of Political Speech on the Internet
The former Federal Election Commission chairwoman Ann M. Ravel says that political speech must be controlled on social media. She presented her remarks in a speech at UC Berkeley, calling for regulations against “fake news.”

By By Ian Miles Cheong | Heat Street April 14, 2017

Speaking at an event called “Future of Democracy,” Ravel argued the proliferation of “fake news” and political advertising on platforms like Facebook influenced elections. She warned that the lack of disclosure by the creators of these campaigns was becoming a huge problem.

“We know that there’s a lot of campaigning that’s moved to the internet, whether it’s through fake news or just outright advertising and there is almost no regulation of this, very little,” she said. “And so that the disclosure that we expect as to who is behind campaigns is not going to exist soon”

“Some people are even predicting that by 2020 most of the advertising is going to move from television to the internet, and I think this is a serious issue that requires a lot of discussion,” continued Ravel.

During her tenure as the chairwoman of the FEC, Ravel previously called for right-leaning websites like the Drudge Report to be “regulated,” and blamed hostile responses towards her proposals on “misogyny.” She claimed it was within the purview of the Federal Election Commission to oversee internet political activities, including the airing of political viewpoints.

In 2015, the Democrats tried, but failed to expand the FEC’s regulatory powers to cover social media posts and other forms of political speech on the Internet, which are not subject to the same scrutiny as political advertisements on old media. At the time, liberal watchdogs complained to the FEC with allegations that (then-probable) presidential candidates like Jeb Bush and Martin O’Malley were skirting finance laws to campaign. Conservatives managed to stall the vote, fearing that the additional powers would chill political speech on the Internet.

Since then, Revel has only doubled down. In her speech at UC Berkeley, Revel claimed that companies like Facebook have “no real knowledge” of who sponsors the posts of political viewpoints on their platforms.

“I think this is a really serious issue that we need to address,” she said.

User avatar
Gary Oak
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 6763
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 5:32 pm

Re: Attack On Free Speech

Post: # 155352Unread post Gary Oak
Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:52 pm

It does appear to me that our institutes of higher learning are actually institutes of higher indoctrination of liberal ideals. This makes it look like they are not for the thinking. Free speech is something that the great minds who created the American constitution felt was something very important to uphold. I agree with those great minds.

User avatar
Blue Frost
SUPER VIP
SUPER VIP
Posts: 89028
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 1:01 am
Location: Yodenheim

Re: Attack On Free Speech

Post: # 155353Unread post Blue Frost
Fri Apr 21, 2017 8:07 pm

Since Obama was in this stuff has been coming up way to often, and it sickens me that more people are not speaking out about it in a bad way.
These people need out of government, and teaching children. They need a good taste of shaming, and sent to some of these non free speech countries.

User avatar
Gary Oak
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 6763
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 5:32 pm

Re: Attack On Free Speech

Post: # 155371Unread post Gary Oak
Fri Apr 21, 2017 10:17 pm

I think that many people are speaking out about this attack on free speech like we are but none of us will ever get any airtime and I wouldn't be surprised if an educators career would be ended if he/she were to speak out about it either. Obama really mastered the fake smile but he and Justin Trudeau sicken me with their fake smiles whenever they do anything out of caring because the cost is always very high and it is always the wrong thing to do no matter how good a fake smile they have on their deceitful traitorous faces.
Blue Frost wrote:Since Obama was in this stuff has been coming up way to often, and it sickens me that more people are not speaking out about it in a bad way.
These people need out of government, and teaching children. They need a good taste of shaming, and sent to some of these non free speech countries.

User avatar
Blue Frost
SUPER VIP
SUPER VIP
Posts: 89028
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 1:01 am
Location: Yodenheim

Re: Attack On Free Speech

Post: # 155372Unread post Blue Frost
Fri Apr 21, 2017 10:20 pm

Well these so called educated people should know better, you are paying for an education, not indoctrination.
I remember going against the teachers in school, I got unfair bad grades occasionally, but the teacher knew I was right, and others did also.
I got kicked out of two classes for correcting a teacher several times with his BS statements.

User avatar
Blue Frost
SUPER VIP
SUPER VIP
Posts: 89028
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 1:01 am
Location: Yodenheim

Re: Attack On Free Speech

Post: # 155522Unread post Blue Frost
Tue Apr 25, 2017 2:10 pm

NYU Professor ‘Defends’ Free Speech On Campus…By Saying There Should Be None
Photo by Dan Kitwood/Getty Images [Photo by Dan Kitwood/Getty Images]
By:
Elliott Hamilton
April 25, 2017
http://www.dailywire.com/news/15729/nyu ... t-hamilton
New York University English Professor, Vice Provost for Faculty, Arts, Humanities, & Diversity, and leftist hack Ulrich Baer wrote an article in The New York Times claiming to "defend free speech." However, the article advocates a completely different view of the First Amendment that does not reflect any meritorious defense of free speech. The article, titled "What 'Snowflakes' Get Right About Free Speech," starts by talking about how free expression shifted from talking about logical arguments to conversations about people's feelings.

During the 1980s and ’90s, a shift occurred in American culture; personal experience and testimony, especially of suffering and oppression, began to challenge the primacy of argument. Freedom of expression became a flash point in this shift. Then as now, both liberals and conservatives were wary of the privileging of personal experience, with its powerful emotional impact, over reason and argument, which some fear will bring an end to civilization, or at least to freedom of speech.

Baer implored his readers to "not rehash those debates" because it would be problematic for a generation grown up in a tradition of expressing their traumatic experiences in response to issues of fact. Using the extreme case of Holocaust denial as an example of positions people take without much basis in reality, Baer argued that certain conversations and topics should be censored to help the public, especially those who are "not open to debate." He specifically alluded to issues of illegal immigration and racism, insinuating that minorities are incapable of arguing along rational, logical lines on tough topics.

What made Baer's article particularly asinine was his praise for the efforts of students who attempted to or successfully shut down individuals like Richard Spencer, Milo Yiannopoulos, and Charles Murray. In Baer's warped perspective, these students are the true advocates of free speech:

The recent student demonstrations at Auburn against Spencer’s visit — as well as protests on other campuses against Charles Murray, Milo Yiannopoulos and others — should be understood as an attempt to ensure the conditions of free speech for a greater group of people, rather than censorship. Liberal free-speech advocates rush to point out that the views of these individuals must be heard first to be rejected. But this is not the case. Universities invite speakers not chiefly to present otherwise unavailable discoveries, but to present to the public views they have presented elsewhere. When those views invalidate the humanity of some people, they restrict speech as a public good.

He also used this op-ed to talk about how the leftist "snowflakes" attempts to silence non-progressive voices are helping to heal a racist and sexist nation:

What is under severe attack, in the name of an absolute notion of free speech, are the rights, both legal and cultural, of minorities to participate in public discourse. The snowflakes sensed, a good year before the election of President Trump, that insults and direct threats could once again become sanctioned by the most powerful office in the land. They grasped that racial and sexual equality is not so deep in the DNA of the American public that even some of its legal safeguards could not be undone.

This is not a defense of free speech; this is an unapologetic defense of liberal fascism masquerading as social justice. The "snowflakes" that Baer champions as free speech advocates bastardize the First Amendment and rationalize their bruised feelings to act savagely toward those who disagree with them. Much of this behavior is normalized and encouraged by the Communist hacks in the ivory tower in which Baer and many of his colleagues reside; it directly correlated with President Trump's rise to the presidency. The American people are sick of seeing spoiled brats coming out of prestigious colleges and universities acting morally superior to people who have every legal right to express their opinion in a cordial, rational manner.

This is not a defense of free speech; this is an unapologetic defense of liberal fascism masquerading as social justice.

However, the Left has no intention of stopping its fight against the First Amendment. As Daily Wire Editor-in-Chief Ben Shapiro wrote in response to Howard Dean's asinine tweet regarding hate speech:

But the Democrats have long wanted to gut the First Amendment: they want to prohibit political spending from their opponents, they want to prohibit people from using biologically correct pronouns to describe transgender people, they want to ban “hate speech.” They hate the First Amendment because they see its protections as incompatible with the collective good – the collective good protecting “non-offensive” speech only.

It is for conservatives, libertarians, and classical liberals to take the Left to task and protect the First Amendment from the intellectual and moral cowards that run college campuses as fascist dystopias.

User avatar
Blue Frost
SUPER VIP
SUPER VIP
Posts: 89028
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 1:01 am
Location: Yodenheim

Re: Attack On Free Speech

Post: # 155585Unread post Blue Frost
Wed Apr 26, 2017 1:46 pm

Image

User avatar
Blue Frost
SUPER VIP
SUPER VIP
Posts: 89028
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 1:01 am
Location: Yodenheim

Re: Attack On Free Speech

Post: # 155586Unread post Blue Frost
Wed Apr 26, 2017 1:47 pm

Image

User avatar
Blue Frost
SUPER VIP
SUPER VIP
Posts: 89028
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 1:01 am
Location: Yodenheim

Re: Attack On Free Speech

Post: # 155706Unread post Blue Frost
Fri Apr 28, 2017 2:35 pm

I bet if it was the Koran, or a Marxist text they would be okay with that.

Professor Offended by Student Reading Bible, Calls Department Chair to Make Him Stop

[video][/video]

User avatar
Blue Frost
SUPER VIP
SUPER VIP
Posts: 89028
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 1:01 am
Location: Yodenheim

Re: Attack On Free Speech

Post: # 155710Unread post Blue Frost
Fri Apr 28, 2017 8:40 pm

[video][/video]

User avatar
Blue Frost
SUPER VIP
SUPER VIP
Posts: 89028
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 1:01 am
Location: Yodenheim

Re: Attack On Free Speech

Post: # 155734Unread post Blue Frost
Sat Apr 29, 2017 4:05 pm

So who is harassing who here, you may not agree with the religious stuff, but these kids have a right here that he is infringing on while acting like an idiot.
As for cells he is cells so lets abort him maybe. The thing is if you don't agree with someone you have a right to not listen to it.

[video][/video]

User avatar
Blue Frost
SUPER VIP
SUPER VIP
Posts: 89028
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 1:01 am
Location: Yodenheim

Re: Attack On Free Speech

Post: # 155871Unread post Blue Frost
Wed May 03, 2017 8:08 pm

School District: Berkeley Riot Organizers Tried To ‘Brainwash’ Students Into Left-Wing Activism

[video][/video]

User avatar
Blue Frost
SUPER VIP
SUPER VIP
Posts: 89028
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 1:01 am
Location: Yodenheim

Attack On Free Speech

Post: # 157122Unread post Blue Frost
Mon Jun 19, 2017 6:32 pm

Yes it's put in the mentally ill thread also

[video][/video]

User avatar
Blue Frost
SUPER VIP
SUPER VIP
Posts: 89028
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 1:01 am
Location: Yodenheim

Attack On Free Speech

Post: # 157289Unread post Blue Frost
Sat Jun 24, 2017 5:34 pm

Germany Raids Homes of 36 Accused of 'Hateful' Social Media Posts
“The still high incidence of punishable hate posting shows a need for police action.”
6.22.2017
News
Mark Tapson
http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/germany ... edia-posts

Amid a flurry of jihadist attacks in London, Manchester, Brussels, Paris, and elsewhere in Europe, Germany is getting tough -- on social media haters.

The New York Times reports that the German police on Tuesday raided the homes of 36 people accused of "hateful postings" on social media, including threats, coercion and incitement to racism.

Most of the raids were in response to -- predictably -- "right-wing incitement," according to the Federal Criminal Police Office. Police officers conducted home searches and interrogations for only two people accused of posts of left-wing extremist content. One person was accused of "making threats or harassment based on someone’s sexual orientation."

No jihadists were apprehended as a result of the coordinated operations, but social media users will think twice now about posting "hate." Good work, Germany.

“The still high incidence of punishable hate posting shows a need for police action,” said Holger Münch, president of the Federal Criminal Police Office. “Our free society must not allow a climate of fear, threat, criminal violence and violence either on the street or on the internet.”

Translation: our free society must not express forbidden opinions.

Justice Minister Heiko Maas is pushing a new law that would fine Facebook, Twitter and other outlets up to $53 million for failing to remove hate speech and other forms of illegal content. Experts have denounced the measure as unconstitutional.

Under German law, social media users are already subject to punishment for posting illegal material, including a prison sentence of up to five years for inciting racial hatred, according to the NYT.
Bernd Holznagel, a professor at the University of Münster and one of the aforementioned experts, said, “Our constitutional court will not allow such a statute. The statute sets up incentives to take out content if there is any doubt, so there is an incentive to erase speech, and that cannot be upheld.

“The second point is the other side of the coin, because if there is just an incentive to remove, what about the rights of the speaker who posts the content?” he added.

User avatar
Blue Frost
SUPER VIP
SUPER VIP
Posts: 89028
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 1:01 am
Location: Yodenheim

Attack On Free Speech

Post: # 157290Unread post Blue Frost
Sat Jun 24, 2017 5:36 pm

British Man Sentenced to 20 Months for Facebook Posts Against Muslims
Coming to America soon.


http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/british ... st-muslims

A 50-year-old man from Sussex, England, was just sentenced to 20 months in prison for posting his personal views about Muslims on Facebook. The Sussex police bragged about their accomplishment and warned others thinking about posting personal opinions that the police “will not tolerate this type of behavior and will act.”

The case against Nigel Pelham began in 2015 after police were tipped off to his “anti-Muslim commentary” online, which included “put a Muslim on top of a bonfire” and suggesting the UK launch a “bomb a Mosque day.” Pelham was charged with “eight counts of publishing threatening written material intending to stir up religious hatred against Muslims on dates between February 24 and November 16, 2015 on his own Facebook account,” according to a statement by Sussex Police. It is noted that the charge is so rare, they had to get approval from the attorney general.

In addition to his nearly two-year sentence, police said Pelham has to pay a “£100 victim surcharge and has had two hard drives and his tower computer confiscated.”

Sussex’s Police Hate Crime Sergeant — yes, they have one of those — Peter Allan made an example of Pelham to warn other citizens that the department is in crackdown mode and looking for offensive writings online:

Nigel Pelham used Facebook to express some truly offensive views, with no understanding of how serious his actions were. Many people see social media as a harmless and sometimes faceless place to air their opinions, however I hope this shows we will not tolerate this type of behaviour and will act when someone reports their concern about what someone is posting.

I hope the sentence handed down by the court on Friday acts as a deterrent to others and sends a reassuring message to those who may be directly targeted or are more widely affected by people’s use of social media to spread messages of fear and hate.

I encourage people who witness such content, to report it to the provider of the social media platform, but such reports can also be made to us online.

Allan noted that similar charges have been brought against four other people in England and Wales in 2016.

And this isn’t just happening in Jolly ol’ England. TruthRevolt Editor Mark Tapson reported this week on German police raiding the homes of 36 people who posted “hateful” things on social media. Leftists would love to follow a similar model and introduce it in the United States.

Sussex Police received pushback on its Twitter page after posting about Pelham's sentence:

User avatar
Blue Frost
SUPER VIP
SUPER VIP
Posts: 89028
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 1:01 am
Location: Yodenheim

Attack On Free Speech

Post: # 157291Unread post Blue Frost
Sat Jun 24, 2017 5:39 pm

The truth is bad, and lies are good :wacko:

Chicago Theaters Closing Doors on Critic Who Called Out Black-on-Black Violence
It is verboten to suggest that blacks examine their own community.

http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/chicago ... k-violence
A longtime Chicago theater critic who dared suggest that black-on-black violence might be more of a problem than cop-on-black violence is being denied invitations to review shows around town due to her "hate and ignorance."

The Chicago Tribune reports that on June 13 Hedy Weiss, who is white, reviewed Pass Over by New York playwright Antoinette Nwandu, which "riffs on Waiting for Godot by swapping the usual protagonists for two young black men, who are alternately seduced and terrorized by two white characters," one of whom is a police officer. Commenting on Nwandu's choice of villain, Weiss wrote, "No one can argue with the fact that this city… has a problem with the use of deadly police force against African-Americans. But, for all the many and varied causes we know so well, much of the lion's share of the violence is perpetrated within the community itself."

This blunt reality incensed a group of local artists calling itself the Chicago Theater Accountability Coalition (ChiTAC), which complained about what they called Weiss' lengthy pattern of "racism, homophobia, and body shaming found in her reviews." The group began circulating a petition at Change.org and claims that 70 of the city's 200-odd theaters have agreed not to provide Weiss with complimentary tickets to review a show.

Broken Nose Theatre, for example, posted a link on Facebook to the petition and said it already has a policy of "not inviting any critic who utilizes their reviews to unapologetically espouse and propagate racist, sexist, homophobic, or otherwise bigoted and malicious views." Representatives for Writers Theatre said "those who do choose to use language that espouses hate or ignorance will not be invited to attend as guests" of the theater.

But ChiTAC didn't stop with a petition. Unnamed sources in the theater community told the Tribune that ChiTAC has made repeated calls and sent emails to local theaters, pressuring them to sign the petition.

Weiss' critics pointed to offensive examples such as a 2013 review of a work about the racial profiling of Muslims in which she wrote, "What practical alternative to racial profiling do you suggest?" How is that offensive? She is also being criticized for "body-shaming" characters in a recent production of Mamma Mia! by referring to the "real women" figures onstage in contrast to "the perfect bodies of the terrific chorus dancers." Again, how is that offensive? Are we no longer allowed to point out the obvious fact that some people have better bodies than others? Or the undeniable fact that the vast majority of black victims of gun violence are victimized by other blacks, not white cops?

Apparently not, because Steppenwolf Artistic Director Anna D. Shapiro and Executive Director David Schmitz said in a statement that Weiss' review "once again revealed a deep-seated bigotry and a painful lack of understanding of this country's historic racism."

Tribune theater critic Chris Jones defended Weiss, telling the Tribune,

"The play in question here is a searing and highly potent response to... what it is like to live under the stress of constant gun violence. It also made unstinting allegations against the police, which have some justification, given what history has taught us. This is especially true in Chicago. The play had every right to make those charges. We could all do to discuss them.

"But anyone who writes such an incendiary play — wherein the police are, by symbolic implication, murderers — and any theater that produces it, should not try to silence strong oppositional reactions. It should welcome them. The solution to this problem requires us all to come together.

"I was stunned by the Steppenwolf statement accusing a critic they have welcomed with open arms for 25 years or more of long-standing, deep-seated bigotry."

Playwrights Idris Goodwin, who is black, and Kevin Coval, white, disagreed:

"This is about culturally white theater spaces and the white critics who preserve systemic inequity. Hedy is just a white person aligned with whiteness, no surprise there. But there are larger issues at play, among them the lack of racial equality and accountability in cultural institutions here and across the country. This is also an indictment of the media for its lack of diverse critical voices."

What none of Weiss' critics seems to want to address is the cold, hard truth of her comment about the scourge of black-on-black violence, which has devastated Chicago harder than just about anywhere in the country. Anyone who believes that black lives matter and wants to do something about it should begin by addressing that.

User avatar
Blue Frost
SUPER VIP
SUPER VIP
Posts: 89028
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 1:01 am
Location: Yodenheim

Attack On Free Speech

Post: # 163937Unread post Blue Frost
Wed Apr 18, 2018 3:10 pm

Hint, this is the first step in banning the Bible completely. Does that sound crazy, well look at the USSR, and other communist, and socialist places in history.
In any account it's unconstitutional, and just wrong.

California Democrats Seek To Ban Books, Speech That Violate LGBT Priorities
https://www.dailywire.com/news/29591/ca ... en-shapiro


This week, the assembly in the state of California could vote on a bill that would legitimately ban books, shut down churches, and close psychiatric offices all over the state. What, pray tell, is the purpose of the bill? To prevent anyone from being confronted with material that could advocate changing sexual behavior or gender expression. David French of National Review explains:

Assembly Bill 2943 would make it an “unlawful business practice” to engage in “a transaction intended to result or that results in the sale or lease of goods or services to any consumer” that advertise, offer to engage in, or do engage in “sexual orientation change efforts with an individual.” The bill then defines “sexual orientations change efforts” as “any practices that seek to change an individual’s sexual orientation. This includes efforts to change behaviors or gender expressions, or to eliminate or reduce sexual or romantic attractions or feelings toward individuals of the same sex.”

This is fully insane.

It’s bad enough for a state to intervene between clients and therapists with regard to changing orientations, as several states have already done — while conversion therapy tends to be ineffective, this is a free country in which people should be able to seek whatever therapy they choose.

But this bill goes further. By suggesting that any attempt to change behavior or gender expression amounts to illegal activity, the state of California essentially bars all transactions involving parenting and religious instruction not in line with the socially leftist worldview. It is a simple fact that most religious people believe that orientation and behavior are two different things, fully distinct: we may have urges toward behavior, but it is our job to sometimes forego that behavior. The state of California would make that perspective jail-able or fine-able. Furthermore, if you’re a parent of a three-year-old who says she feels more like a boy than a girl, you’d be forbidden from buying a counseling book urging you to teach that your girl will likely grow out of that perspective (statistically true) or offering strategies for preventing transgender behavior.

This is tyranny. Full stop. And it’s wildly unconstitutional. Under this law, it could be illegal to sell the Bible or buy the Bible; it could be illegal to attend a religious day school. And this asinine piece of garbage passed two separate committees with flying colors.

It’s nearly unthinkable that the Supreme Court would uphold this law. But stranger things have happened, and we live in an ugly time for advocates of personal and religious liberty.

User avatar
Blue Frost
SUPER VIP
SUPER VIP
Posts: 89028
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 1:01 am
Location: Yodenheim

Attack On Free Speech

Post: # 164053Unread post Blue Frost
Tue Apr 24, 2018 1:44 pm

for those that know about the Nazi Pug joke, and the UK's NAZI policy of so called hate crime.
It wasn't funny no, but neither was wasting tax money on being thought police.

[video][/video]

User avatar
Blue Frost
SUPER VIP
SUPER VIP
Posts: 89028
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 1:01 am
Location: Yodenheim

Attack On Free Speech

Post: # 164104Unread post Blue Frost
Thu Apr 26, 2018 6:16 pm

Start at 34:00

Diamond & Silk Testify Before Congress about their ordeal with Facebook's censorship, meddling, and ban.

[video][/video]

Quick Reply


This question is a means of preventing automated form submissions by spambots.
   
Post Reply