Attack on the first amendment already under way

[kiwiman127]

Well, I was one of those who isn't to crazy about the idea of gay marriages. I leaned towards the Civil Unions are enough crowd as noted by posts previous to the Supreme's decision.
So, OK my side of the issue lost. I was also against Citizens United, lost that one too.
I didn't go on and on about the loss, I sure didn't agree with the decision, but I have to live with it. Same with Gay Marriages.
But then, I was thinking for myself on all of those issues, so I didn't have ideological talking heads stroking my anger and telling me the US of A was lost forever..

 

[Silhouette]

Well, I was one of those who isn't to crazy about the idea of gay marriages. I leaned towards the Civil Unions are enough crowd as noted by posts previous to the Supreme's decision.
So, OK my side of the issue lost. I was also against Citizens United, lost that one too.
I didn't go on and on about the loss, I sure didn't agree with the decision, but I have to live with it. Same with Gay Marriages.
But then, I was thinking for myself on all of those issues, so I didn't have ideological talking heads stroking my anger and telling me the US of A was lost forever..

People don't cast aside heaven or hell convictions that easily pal. Citizen's United wasn't spoken of in the Bible as bearing the punishment of eternal damnation. Spreading the cult of homosexuality was spoken of in the Bible though...with the promise of eternal damnation (Jude 1, New Testament). (Marriage would be the easiest way to normalize/spread that). This one's not going to get buried and forgotten. You can count on that..

 

[kiwiman127]

It seems that every liberal emulates their master in Washington, D.C.. Their master blows so much hot air out of his mouth that it's a wonder that he can keep his head from imploding. I guess he gots a super dense skull that can keep itself from being crushed by the earths atmosphere but how does the average democrat keep that from happening to them. When they don't speak the air builds up inside there skull which stabalizes air pressure thus keeping their skulls from imploding but when they do speak the air is drawn from there skull and leaves. A vacuum is created between their ears and, under current laws of physics, there skulls should collapse. Why doesn't that happen? Are they as dense as their master in Washington?

Well, I was one of those who isn't to crazy about the idea of gay marriages. I leaned towards the Civil Unions are enough crowd as noted by posts previous to the Supreme's decision.
So, OK my side of the issue lost. I was also against Citizens United, lost that one too.
I didn't go on and on about the loss, I sure didn't agree with the decision, but I have to live with it. Same with Gay Marriages.
But then, I was thinking for myself on all of those issues, so I didn't have ideological talking heads stroking my anger and telling me the US of A was lost forever..

People don't cast aside heaven or hell convictions that easily pal. Citizen's United wasn't spoken of in the Bible as bearing the punishment of eternal damnation. Spreading the cult of homosexuality was spoken of in the Bible though...with the promise of eternal damnation (Jude 1, New Testament). (Marriage would be the easiest way to normalize/spread that). This one's not going to get buried and forgotten. You can count on that..

Well. pal! The Bible is loaded with God's teaching in regards the taking care of HIS Earth and also taking care of the poor and weak.
Yet, I have yet to see you getting all worked up about your ideologies approach to those two items at all.
If you are going to reference God's Word, you have to reference all of God's teachings, not just the ones who suit your purpose.

 

[JakeStarkey]

A newspaper is not the government.

A newspaper is a private enterprise.

It does not have to accept anything it does not want to accept.

The ultimate libertarian position is being bitterly attacked from the fear mongering brain dead far right. The Cult of Silhouette is ranting, I see.

PS: I will be in Omaha next weekend. Who wants to get together?

 

[guno]

Well, I was one of those who isn't to crazy about the idea of gay marriages. I leaned towards the Civil Unions are enough crowd as noted by posts previous to the Supreme's decision.
So, OK my side of the issue lost. I was also against Citizens United, lost that one too.
I didn't go on and on about the loss, I sure didn't agree with the decision, but I have to live with it. Same with Gay Marriages.
But then, I was thinking for myself on all of those issues, so I didn't have ideological talking heads stroking my anger and telling me the US of A was lost forever..

People don't cast aside heaven or hell convictions that easily pal. Citizen's United wasn't spoken of in the Bible as bearing the punishment of eternal damnation. Spreading the cult of homosexuality was spoken of in the Bible though...with the promise of eternal damnation (Jude 1, New Testament). (Marriage would be the easiest way to normalize/spread that). This one's not going to get buried and forgotten. You can count on that..

wasn't spoken of in the Bible

Hint the United state law isn't your buy bull

 

[JakeStarkey]

The Cult of Silhouette denies reality, hating that the fight is over.

 

[The Rabbi]

I wouldnt call that an attack on the 1A. The newspaper is free to print or not print whatever it wants.
I will say it moves the ball towards the "if you oppose gay marriage you are a racist scum-sucking piece of filth and we will ruin your life for it" end of the playing field.
This will come out in myriad ways, dividing this country even further.

 

[JakeStarkey]

You folks already tried to divide it, Rab.

The good folks of America won't let you do it. You are part of us, and that will never change.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Some opinions are just not worthy of respect including those who cannot discuss this issue without being hateful. If there was ever any legitimate opposition to this it was soon swamped with some very ugly language from some very ugly people. Most of the opposition is just not capable of discussing the legal merits of this and go directly for the scare tactics and hate speech against homosexuals and anyone else who sided with them in their fight. Ignoring that shit is not only right but a sign of integrity.

To people like you "hate speech" is any disagreement at all.

Nonsense.

Hate speech is clearly defined and understood by the average reasonable person – speech intended to hurt, to marginalize, to make others unequal; the newspaper as a private entity has every right to refuse to print letters and emails it considers to be hateful and inappropriate, in no way 'violating' the First Amendment.

When government seeks to dictate to a newspaper through force of law what not to print, then there exists a potential First Amendment violation.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Grizz tries to master hate speech, but is not good at it. The hateful always fail in America in the end.

 

[Grizz]

Some opinions are just not worthy of respect including those who cannot discuss this issue without being hateful. If there was ever any legitimate opposition to this it was soon swamped with some very ugly language from some very ugly people. Most of the opposition is just not capable of discussing the legal merits of this and go directly for the scare tactics and hate speech against homosexuals and anyone else who sided with them in their fight. Ignoring that shit is not only right but a sign of integrity.

To people like you "hate speech" is any disagreement at all.

Nonsense.

Hate speech is clearly defined and understood by the average reasonable person – speech intended to hurt, to marginalize, to make others unequal; the newspaper as a private entity has every right to refuse to print letters and emails it considers to be hateful and inappropriate, in no way 'violating' the First Amendment.

When government seeks to dictate to a newspaper through force of law what not to print, then there exists a potential First Amendment violation.

I suggest you go back and actually read Occupied's post and how my response is completely appropriate

You do realize that the Constitution spells out what the Government CANNOT do to it's citizen's don y'tou?

 

[Grizz]

Grizz tries to master hate speech, but is not good at it. The hateful always fail in America in the end.

You seem to have developed a very unhealthy preoccupation with me jake.

Why don't you provide evidence of my "hate speech"?

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

Well, I was one of those who isn't to crazy about the idea of gay marriages. I leaned towards the Civil Unions are enough crowd as noted by posts previous to the Supreme's decision.
So, OK my side of the issue lost. I was also against Citizens United, lost that one too.
I didn't go on and on about the loss, I sure didn't agree with the decision, but I have to live with it. Same with Gay Marriages.
But then, I was thinking for myself on all of those issues, so I didn't have ideological talking heads stroking my anger and telling me the US of A was lost forever..

People don't cast aside heaven or hell convictions that easily pal. Citizen's United wasn't spoken of in the Bible as bearing the punishment of eternal damnation. Spreading the cult of homosexuality was spoken of in the Bible though...with the promise of eternal damnation (Jude 1, New Testament). (Marriage would be the easiest way to normalize/spread that). This one's not going to get buried and forgotten. You can count on that..

As you grab tight to your Bible it make me wonder what make you different from a ISIL member?

Now before you write you have never killed anyone or mistreated anyone please read your threads and responses and notice you have the same hatred in your heart and soul for those that do not follow your interpretation of the Bible. You would deny other humans the right to be treated equally because of your religious convictions, and I do believe if you thought you could get away with it you would kill in the name of God just like ISIL claim they are doing.

The United States of America religion is not Christianity and while you get ready to pounce on that please note the Founding Fathers were Christian but left their Christianity out of writing our laws and left the door open for us to worship however we want.

Now I know my response will be attacked by you because you believe the Bible should be the law of the land like ISIL believe the Quran should be the law of the land, and that is a sad and scary reality about Bible Thumpers...

 

[JakeStarkey]

Grizz tries to master hate speech, but is not good at it. The hateful always fail in America in the end.

You seem to have developed a very unhealthy preoccupation with me jake.

Why don't you provide evidence of my "hate speech"?

Why don't you demonstrate my "unhealthy" attitude toward you? Constructive criticism is good for the ailing soul. Slow down, smell the roses, enjoy life. I will be in Omaha soon, join me for a drink.

 

[occupied]

To people like you "hate speech" is any disagreement at all.

If you can use correct terms and state your opinion in rational manner then there are no forbidden topics. On the other hand there is no way to express hate rationally. You are as free as a bird to express your visceral hatred of whomever you wish but I do not have to treat it as a well reasoned and rational argument.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

what would the point be of continuing to print anti-gay marriage opinion pieces? the issue is decided.

It's been decided as a matter of law, not politics, where most on the right will continue to use it as a political wedge issue as is the case with privacy rights for women – it's the new litmus test for strict adherence to conservative dogma.

We've seen examples of this starting the day of the ruling, where many on the right contrived and began to propagate the lie that those who disagree with the ruling will be 'vilified' as 'bigots,' when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.

Indeed, millions of Americans who believe the ruling was correct and support the right of gay Americans to marry will also continue to believe that the religion they belong to shouldn't afford religious marriage rituals to same-sex couples, a position perfectly logical, appropriate, and consistent with the law.

 

[JGalt]

Reverse-McCarthyism? Truly this isn't my dad's Democratic Party.

That's right, so don't give any campaign money to our democrats wearing a rainbow lapel or arm band..as the case may be..

But as in the case of Hillary, they have absolutely no problem with accepting donations from countries which murder gays and oppress women.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Reverse-McCarthyism? Truly this isn't my dad's Democratic Party.

That's right, so don't give any campaign money to our democrats wearing a rainbow lapel or arm band..as the case may be..

But as in the case of Hillary, they have absolutely no problem with accepting donations from countries which murder gays and oppress women.

And you have no problem paying them so you can fill your gas tank...

 

[Grizz]

Grizz tries to master hate speech, but is not good at it. The hateful always fail in America in the end.

You seem to have developed a very unhealthy preoccupation with me jake.

Why don't you provide evidence of my "hate speech"?

Why don't you demonstrate my "unhealthy" attitude toward you? Constructive criticism is good for the ailing soul. Slow down, smell the roses, enjoy life. I will be in Omaha soon, join me for a drink.

Feel free to follow me around as you wish.

Of course you can show the hate speech you accused me of?

As to Omaha...what the hell are you talking about?

Is this some sort of deflection you think will work from my pointing out your unhealthy preoccupation?

 

[The Rabbi]

Some opinions are just not worthy of respect including those who cannot discuss this issue without being hateful. If there was ever any legitimate opposition to this it was soon swamped with some very ugly language from some very ugly people. Most of the opposition is just not capable of discussing the legal merits of this and go directly for the scare tactics and hate speech against homosexuals and anyone else who sided with them in their fight. Ignoring that shit is not only right but a sign of integrity.

To people like you "hate speech" is any disagreement at all.

Nonsense.

Hate speech is clearly defined and understood by the average reasonable person – speech intended to hurt, to marginalize, to make others unequal; the newspaper as a private entity has every right to refuse to print letters and emails it considers to be hateful and inappropriate, in no way 'violating' the First Amendment.

When government seeks to dictate to a newspaper through force of law what not to print, then there exists a potential First Amendment violation.

That isnt the issue. There is no such thing as "hate speech" nor would it be a crime.
I agree the newspaper is entitled to print what they want, within legal limits. The disturbing aspect is their dismissal of anyone who disagrees with them as bigots and hate mongers. This will inevitably filter into law and people expressing anti gay marriage views will end up getting fired and hounded.