Search results

of course, the more important point is that EVERYBODY has the civil rights to speak their mind, and express opinions, even those that bigots like zzz... find "hateful" , "oppressive" or just plain icky this right applies to christians, wiccans, buddhists, communists, and anybody else -whether...

just for the sake of semantical clarity, it is reasonable to claim this is a christian nation, since the VAST majority of citizens ARE christian depends what you mean by christian nation but it's arguable we have a secular GOVERNMENT though. this is NOT a christian government, that...

"Or do you forget that they made a special exception for the Bin Laden family following 9/11, flew them out of the country when all other planes were grounded, without even asking them any questions...." - quote from zzz... you can channel michael moore all you want, but this has been...

blair is a far left quasi socialist great guy, but he is the LABOR PARTY for pete's sake get real

"You have now stated the school has the right to declare the venue..... " a college professor WITHIN a classroom IS the lord of his classroom" Then I say to you.... " a Principal WITHIN a school IS the lord of his school"" false... the case law, and common sense makes this abundantly...

"no.... i think he finally woke up to the lies of the neocon cabal." neocons like hillary clinton, ed koch, elie weisel, rudy guiliani, etc?

i get very bored with sophistry, and you know that is exactly what you are addressing, so i will make this simple for you "The fanatics opinion is that murder should be done. This is not a question of sophistry. It is a real question of where you draw the line if at all. with free speech. I...

thanks, yeayo. that sounds reasonable.

the founding fathers are rolling over in their grave paying US taxes = patriot lol not that i'm not a hyooge neil young fan. neil rocks. although I did think lynrd skynrd had something to say about ol neil :)

can somebody answer this question? because nobody yet has. i'm not saying this is fair. i have no idea. but nobody who is criticizing HAL/Bushco on this issue has explained this. i';m the first to criticize bushco when i think they are wrong, which they often are. WHO else COULD do it...

from Volokh. Note that Canada HAS so called criminal hate speech statutes. we do not. and that it is illegal to expose people (even as members of a group, in a frigging newspaper ad), to "hatred, ridicule" or "belittle"ment. that;s what free speech is FOR especially, the ridicule part...

2 points 1) the coverage of Katrina was primarily New Orleans. New Orleans has a very high black population. hence, this created the FALSE impression that Katrina disproportionately affected blacks. Actually, when one takes the ENTIRE gulf region (not just the sexy city of New Orleans) it...

"Generally the ACLU doesn't step up to help bigots or racists." generally, you are wrong ever hear of Skokie?

zzz is just using his classic orwellian stalinist speech model (tm) again... it's bigotry, it's hate, etc. it's a simple (and simplistic) way to demonize ideas that scare him and that he doesn't agree with. it conveniently ignores the content of the issue and instead relies on insults...

lol. it takes a VILLAGE (or a hamlet)

www.reason.com this is a GREAT libertarian (small L) website. they are kind of the populist version of cato.org (the latter being more wonkish and academically based) in terms of libertarian opinion i disagree with the libertarians on many policy issues, but i find them (in general) very...

yes. exactly. the problem is that this whole thing started off with the school TAKING a position on a moral, and contentious type of issue that really is not their place to do (it is the parent's place) and then took umbrage when a student DARED to disagree with the Official Big Brother State...

this reminds me of a case that came out some time ago. a teacher asked the students in her class to come up with a historical figure that was heroic to them, for a paper topic one of the students chose jesus the teacher/school said that the student could not CHOOSE to write a paper on...

the problem is that CHRISTIAN theatrical events cannot advertise in this PUBLIC forum, but secular ones can now, england doesn't HAVE a first amendment (or free speech i might add), but this is very typical advertising a RELIGIOUS play could offend people, but advertising the Vagina...

the ACLU has actually been pretty darn good about supporting free speech in these kind of cases. i suggest a visit to www.thefire.org for some great case law examples the only amendment that the ACLU ignores (generally) is the 2nd amendment. they are pretty good and fair on the 1st...