Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech

[AnnaLisaW]

The major drawback of any legislation is that it can be used to remove our freedom. When the idea of “political correctness” was first introduced, it was meant as a guideline for those of us who desired to live in peace with our neighbors. “Hate Speech” seems to have been an outgrowth of the desire to reduce “hate crimes” since they are intimately related. Unfortunately, those who hide behind laws instead of truly learning to live in peace with their neighbors have allowed the legislators to infringe on our basic freedoms. I am old enough to remember a time when a verbal insult could result in a slap across your face and the community at large would laugh at you if you tried to press charges. Rudeness was not socially acceptable and it didn’t occur to us to reward rude people. Now slapping a rude person earns you jail time and a year’s probation. Odd thing is, we have more violence and hate speech now than we ever had then. Laws don’t keep us safe. Being good neighbors keeps us safe. You cannot legislate morality and any attempt to do so results in the loss of personal freedom.
-ALW

[Mark Chiang]

What is it parents tell kids? "Use your words!" It seems like we haven't come very far.

While I'd agree any legislation can limit our freedom, I'd point out the same can be said about morality, and of course you're bound to have disagreements over different versions of it as well. The standards you set on whatever level has both the potential to limit your freedom and to "keep you safe" - it's kind of the nature of limitations and adhering to a rigid structure. I for one endeavor to be less rigid to adapt to the situation at hand, it tends to encourage freedom of mind and emotion. It seems unrealistic to return to a simpler structure, so challenging as it may be to work with a structure with a higher degree of complexity AND dysfunction, it can only improve our ability to adapt if we try to work with it.

[Valley Oak]

Excellent reasoning!

Thank you,

Edward

What is it parents tell kids? "Use your words!" It seems like we haven't come very far.

While I'd agree any legislation can limit our freedom, I'd point out the same can be said about morality, and of course you're bound to have disagreements over different versions of it as well. The standards you set on whatever level has both the potential to limit your freedom and to "keep you safe" - it's kind of the nature of limitations and adhering to a rigid structure. I for one endeavor to be less rigid to adapt to the situation at hand, it tends to encourage freedom of mind and emotion. It seems unrealistic to return to a simpler structure, so challenging as it may be to work with a structure with a higher degree of complexity AND dysfunction, it can only improve our ability to adapt if we try to work with it.

[thewholetruth]

I don't agree at all. The problem is that parents aren't walking the walk anymore. Integrity, dignity, rigorous honesty - esPECially rigorous honesty - are all out the door with Baby Boomers in favor of whatever floats your boat. Kids today have no decent role models, not even in their homes. Who gives a crap what parents "tell kids"? It's NEVER been about what parents tell them. It's always been about how parents actually live their lives and treat each other. So the Baby Boomer generation, in love with Self and alcohol and pot and other medication, are the crappiest role models yet, which is why this generation of kids is the most lost ever, a generation of addicts, lost sexually, no self esteem at all. Self esteem doesn't come from Self, ya know. It comes from living a life of integrity and dignity, truly feeling good about oneself because of practicing principles like being rigorously honest, doing it with love, treating others with respect/compassion/tolerance/patience, managing a little self-discipline, sacrificing for others sometimes, secret selfless acts of kindness, setting and working toward goals - that is the stuff that self-esteem is made of. Baby Boomers collectively are the most selfish, self-centered, drug/alcohol addicted generation in Denial that America has ever had, and we are raising children who are worse than us.

There is NO excuse for giving away our most vital of freedoms, the freedom of speech. NO excuse is valid. We're leaving our children an inheritance of crap if it doesn't come with freedom of speech, and guess what? Our largely pot head, alcoholic, deluded generation just gave that freedom away, trying to keep people's feelings from being hurt. When our children ever actually study American history, they're gonna be pissed when they learn that we used to be able to express ourselves openly in this country. They'll wonder what that was like.

Don

What is it parents tell kids? "Use your words!" It seems like we haven't come very far.

While I'd agree any legislation can limit our freedom, I'd point out the same can be said about morality, and of course you're bound to have disagreements over different versions of it as well. The standards you set on whatever level has both the potential to limit your freedom and to "keep you safe" - it's kind of the nature of limitations and adhering to a rigid structure. I for one endeavor to be less rigid to adapt to the situation at hand, it tends to encourage freedom of mind and emotion. It seems unrealistic to return to a simpler structure, so challenging as it may be to work with a structure with a higher degree of complexity AND dysfunction, it can only improve our ability to adapt if we try to work with it.

[Mark Chiang]

That is not what I meant. I was not commenting on what kids are taught by parents, but rather that idea of "using your words" to encourage kids to talk about things rather than physical acting out like hitting, although of course parenting is an important issue in itself.

My main point was how a fixed structure of any type, be it physical or mental has the double-edged sword of providing safety (or at least familiarity) as well as being a limitation on one's freedom. Now obviously, when it comes to parenting you have to have some structure - otherwise there would be nothing to do and you just let the kid raise him/herself which of course wouldn't work very well. However, in the context of having a dialogue of meaningful exchange as adults, it is just a matter of keeping an open mind in order to understand, so as to have a more meaningful interchange, rather than a mutual monologue of guy A says this and B says that, and nobody listens to the other. You have no obligation to subscribe to the others values, but chances are you're also in a better position to make a convincing argument by understanding the others point of view.

I should have been clearer and offered examples, and I suppose I should make the basic distinction of structures that are natural to human beings and others that are only additional burdens that create division and conflict - in interpersonal exchange, for example. Clearly there are some patterns that, although being limitations to freedom (in an absolute sense, ie we don't have wings to fly like a bird) it provide safety in a very real sense. But when it comes to specific intellectual views, it is often a matter of strong feelings and very little exchange of ideas or coming to any understanding. You start seeing ad hominem arguments that attack the person and all sorts of information that actually has nothing to do with the subject under discussion, and there is a tendancy for *that* to spiral out of control so that it becomes personal rather than about the larger issue at hand - although of course the persons involved FEEL that's more important in that moment. This is what I would consider an additional burden, an unnecessary structure that only serves to divide.

And actually, having said that I will even concede this kind of ego defensive behavior is even natural to some extent, but I should hope it is also something we outgrow. One would hope you no longer need someone else to tell you to "use your words" as a mature adult, and if you do it's dialogue that is actually meaningful rather than simply an expression of hate, including the passive-aggressive type.

So in terms of the concerns you bring up here, I actually agree in that if there is to be a self esteem that naturally arises from being a mature individual, it is certainly not based on a small-minded narcissistic focus on one's own "happiness" as an individual, without regard for the whole. In fact if the only concern a person really has is feeling good and avoidance of anything less, (which amounts to avoiding a very real and pretty big part of life) there isn't much of a self to have any esteem over, be it high or low. This would be an example of what I meant by hanging on to a simpler structure, because unless one was a very sophisticated and high-functioning narcissist, such selfish concerns tend to be rather simple and only operate on the level of stimulus-response. Even without looking at it from a moral standpoint, it is just not particularly intelligent.

But I don't want to end on a note that only focuses on the state of the individual, because as well meaning and even well thought out as some ideas may be, without mutual dialogue it always runs the risk of being a limited viewpoint that leaves something out. If there is going to be any kind of cooperative effort we can't look at it in terms of "who can come up with the right answer", if the "who" in question is an individual. We have to work together to come up with the answer.

I don't agree at all. The problem is that parents aren't walking the walk anymore. Integrity, dignity, rigorous honesty - esPECially rigorous honesty - are all out the door with Baby Boomers in favor of whatever floats your boat. Kids today have no decent role models, not even in their homes. Who gives a crap what parents "tell kids"? It's NEVER been about what parents tell them. It's always been about how parents actually live their lives and treat each other. So the Baby Boomer generation, in love with Self and alcohol and pot and other medication, are the crappiest role models yet, which is why this generation of kids is the most lost ever, a generation of addicts, lost sexually, no self esteem at all. Self esteem doesn't come from Self, ya know. It comes from living a life of integrity and dignity, truly feeling good about oneself because of practicing principles like being rigorously honest, doing it with love, treating others with respect/compassion/tolerance/patience, managing a little self-discipline, sacrificing for others sometimes, secret selfless acts of kindness, setting and working toward goals - that is the stuff that self-esteem is made of. Baby Boomers collectively are the most selfish, self-centered, drug/alcohol addicted generation in Denial that America has ever had, and we are raising children who are worse than us.

There is NO excuse for giving away our most vital of freedoms, the freedom of speech. NO excuse is valid. We're leaving our children an inheritance of crap if it doesn't come with freedom of speech, and guess what? Our largely pot head, alcoholic, deluded generation just gave that freedom away, trying to keep people's feelings from being hurt. When our children ever actually study American history, they're gonna be pissed when they learn that we used to be able to express ourselves openly in this country. They'll wonder what that was like.

Don

[Mark Chiang]

In looking at the title again, it occurs to me we might consider hateful thought vs. freedom of thought - since speech is just thoughts expressed. Hateful thought would tend to be rather single minded - it is against whatever the object of hate is. Freedom of thought on the other hand brings to my mind the full spectrum of the capabilities of the human mind. Aside from specialization in a certain field where someone just has more expertise, it would also involve the full range of possibilities. Hate, on the other hand is limited to only one and negating that one possibility.

[thewholetruth]

The term "hate speech" was the object of this thread initially. Granted, it stems from "hate thought". However, the PC community that tries to protect their feelings doesn't acknowledge any problem with hate thought. They just have a problem with us having the right to express those thoughts.

PC, in and of itself, is an apt example of those who aren't intelligent enough to really think things through, but stop short of the big picture, restricted and limited by FEELINGS and THOUGHTS, which they deem of most importance. In reality, feelings and thoughts are often random, always temporary, and oftentimes the result of incomplete/inaccurate information. Amazing to me that some folks actually let them (feelings and thoughts) be the guiding force behind their actions, ultimately driving them through LIFE. That's called reacting to life, btw, rather than being proactive in one's life. Those proactive in life have recognized that thoughts and feelings just ARE, and aren't a very good foundation for facilitating my next comment or action.

Which, of course, is where prayer comes in, the seeking of higher wisdom and understanding. But I digress...again.

Don

In looking at the title again, it occurs to me we might consider hateful thought vs. freedom of thought - since speech is just thoughts expressed. Hateful thought would tend to be rather single minded - it is against whatever the object of hate is. Freedom of thought on the other hand brings to my mind the full spectrum of the capabilities of the human mind. Aside from specialization in a certain field where someone just has more expertise, it would also involve the full range of possibilities. Hate, on the other hand is limited to only one and negating that one possibility.

[Mark Chiang]

Well I suppose we might look at it in terms of horizontal and vertical dimensions, your typical random thoughts and deeper/higher thought (or if you like, where the thought comes from - as thought is an expression of something else just as speech tends to be an expression of thought) which is reflected in gaining some perspective, seeing patterns in the big picture. Although the former may be inclusive, without some organizational principle it tends to amount to amassing data with little understanding.

Of course I wouldn't want to sound like I'm poo-pooing both thoughts and feelings, it's just a matter of whether you're putting the cart before the horse or however that saying goes.

Although I'm not a Christian, if you were to use that as the definition of prayer it is certainly a reasonable one. For that matter some may take issue with the idea of prayer only when in a Judeo-Christian context, possibly a reaction to experiences while growing up - but if it's Tibetan Buddhists or something there may be a very different attitude. There again the structure or form could be limiting or distracting, (specifically a failure to acknowledge the role one's own thoughts and feelings play in the interaction) the bottom line is whether the intent is a deeper understanding.

[Braggi]

I don't agree at all. The problem is that parents aren't walking the walk anymore. Integrity, dignity, rigorous honesty - esPECially rigorous honesty - are all out the door with Baby Boomers in favor of whatever floats your boat. Kids today have no decent role models, not even in their homes. ...

Speak for yourself and your own kids. My child lives with good role models, has a close (and large) circle of good role model adult friends and a whole lot off peers who are living their lives in integrity and honesty the likes of which I never experienced at their ages. They not only speak their minds, there is a lot going on in those minds that never would have happened 43 years ago when I was their age.

Kids are so much more sophisticated and aware now then they ever were before, it's amazing you, Don, could be missing out on that.

Freedom of speech is about a lot more than the freedom to spew racist, sexist, homophobic vitriol. It's about the ability to develop sophisticated models of relating and complex systems of interacting and being able to communicate that to your peers. Our kids have come a long way and to ignore all that is to condemn the future through ignorance of the valuable reality that exists and the precious resource that is our younger generation.

... So the Baby Boomer generation, in love with Self and alcohol and pot and other medication, are the crappiest role models yet, which is why this generation of kids is the most lost ever, a generation of addicts, lost sexually, no self esteem at all. ...

Wow. What community do you live in? Do you get all your information from sitcoms on TV? You seem to live in a reality that is very far off from the one I live in.

... Self esteem doesn't come from Self, ya know. It comes from living a life of integrity and dignity, truly feeling good about oneself because of practicing principles like being rigorously honest, doing it with love, treating others with respect/compassion/tolerance/patience, managing a little self-discipline, sacrificing for others sometimes, secret selfless acts of kindness, setting and working toward goals - that is the stuff that self-esteem is made of. ...

OK, so we agree on some of the most important things in life. I know a lot of kids with healthy, well earned self esteem. My kid's school is full of them, and a few losers, but that will always be the case.

... Baby Boomers collectively are the most selfish, self-centered, drug/alcohol addicted generation in Denial that America has ever had, and we are raising children who are worse than us. ...

I think there is a lot of that going on. I also think there is a lot of healing going on from alcohol and drug addiction that has been passed down for many generations. I think this is the first generation to look at the problem rationally and honestly. It was always in the closet before us. I think a lot of children are doing it better than their parents ever did. My wife and I certainly are. Almost all of our friends are. To ignore that is ... sad.

... There is NO excuse for giving away our most vital of freedoms, the freedom of speech. NO excuse is valid. We're leaving our children an inheritance of crap if it doesn't come with freedom of speech, and guess what? ...

Don, you've been challenged on this more than once and I don't recall seeing an answer: what things would you like to say that you can't?

I would offer that it's our "conservative" misadministration taking away freedom of speech in this country. I don't say a lot of what I used to be able to say in emails because I know they are being monitored. It's not about PC. It's about appearing on "terrorism" watch lists which I understand are now about 900,000 strong. And once you get on, you never get off, because there is no mechanism for removing people; unless a trip to Gitmo can be considered removal.

Hate speech is alive and well and coming from the White House on a daily basis. Freedom of speech is curtailed, not by the preachers of PC, but by an increasingly noxious and intrusive government that wishes to control our very thoughts.

Set your sights on reality, Don, and maybe you'll be able to do something healthier than complain.

-Jeff

[MsTerry]

.

There is NO excuse for giving away our most vital of freedoms, the freedom of speech. NO excuse is valid. We're leaving our children an inheritance of crap if it doesn't come with freedom of speech, and guess what? Our largely pot head, alcoholic, deluded generation just gave that freedom away, trying to keep people's feelings from being hurt. When our children ever actually study American history, they're gonna be pissed when they learn that we used to be able to express ourselves openly in this country. They'll wonder what that was like.

Don

Yes Don, just like Braggi, I'd like to know what you are not able to say. Maybe it is the way you say it or the time and place you say it.
The "right" to offend is not the same as freedom of speech.
Common decency has now been replaced with constant confrontation.

[thewholetruth]

Jeff, I hope you can get over the need to personally attack me when what you're responding to is my comments. Of course, it seems to be the road most traveled here on this board, so, really, whatever. It is what it is here.

"Speak for yourself and your own kids."

I'll speak about anyone I want, Jeff. LOL It's pretty arrogant of you to speak to me that way. Who died and made you the Speech Police? I'm speaking in general, so you needn't be so defensive that you become offensive, like you did here. I've got two girls who graduated recently from high school, Jeff. I've got 8 recent years of a close up view of other people's kids from two different high schools, bro. My girls were also active in the largest dance studio in Santa Rosa for 12 years, so I got to observe, meet and get to know many kids from all over the area, and outside the area. I don't just spew crap out of my ass, Jeff, like you're about to do with your next comment (see your next set of quotes). My observations are just that: observations, not unfounded opinions.

"Freedom of speech is about a lot more than the freedom to spew racist, sexist, homophobic vitriol."

Perhaps you could clarify where you pulled that comment out of, Jeff. I'm not tracking with you here. That is, I don't see where your comment is relevant, as no one here has ever suggested otherwise. Can you clarify, or was it just more defensiveness to the point of offensiveness? If it's that, I understand.

"What community do you live in?"

Rincon Valley, Jeff.

"Do you get all your information from sitcoms on TV?"

I don't watch sitcoms, Jeff. Is that what sitcoms are about these days?

"You seem to live in a reality that is very far off from the one I live in."

And you seem to live in a reality where you give yourself permission to be rude and insulting without anyone having provoked you. I agree, I must live in a very different reality than you. I praise God for that.

"Don, you've been challenged on this more than once and I don't recall seeing an answer: what things would you like to say that you can't?"

And I've answered more than once, Jeff. Try to keep up, bro. I answered that question already, and I answered it when YOU asked it. Perhaps you aren't really interested in COmmunication, as long as you get your licks in, or you would have read my response already, Jeff. Here, let me answer your question again: Anything I want, Jeff. That's what I would like to say that I can't. Anything I want. I want FREEDOM of speech back for ALL OF US, Jeff. It's gone now.

"I would offer that it's our "conservative" misadministration taking away freedom of speech in this country. I don't say a lot of what I used to be able to say in emails because I know they are being monitored. It's not about PC. It's about appearing on "terrorism" watch lists which I understand are now about 900,000 strong. And once you get on, you never get off, because there is no mechanism for removing people; unless a trip to Gitmo can be considered removal."

LOL Sorry, Jeff, but that just sounds like classic Liberal paranoid propaganda. Do you really think you might end up on some "Terrorism Watch List"? LOL I've never once even considered the possibility regarding anything I've ever posted or emailed to anyone. Perhaps you have reason to worry about that. I don't know what kinds of things you email to people. Re: "...a trip to Gitmo..." LOL You're right, Jeff. We live in two completely different realities. No one I know has ever been paranoid about anything like that. THAT fear is not remotely close to reality, where I live.

"Hate speech is alive and well and coming from the White House on a daily basis."

Quite the accusation, Jeff. So since it's "on a daily basis", why don't you educate some of the ignorant masses and post some "hate speech...coming from the White House" yesterday? Or some "hate speech" from the White House the day before, perhaps? I'm CHALLENGING you now to back up your accusation with proof of hate speech from the White House "on a daily basis", and I look forward to reading your quotes.

"Set your sights on reality, Don, and maybe you'll be able to do something healthier than complain."

Set your sights on God, Jeff, and maybe you won't be so rude to people who have done nothing to earn your angst. It's just message board, bro, where people are able to - lo, SUPPOSED TO - exchange views and opinions. No one's throwing rocks at your house, Jeff. Perhaps try praying before you respond next time. I know it helps me temper my comments when I pray first.

Don

My child lives with good role models, has a close (and large) circle of good role model adult friends and a whole lot off peers who are living their lives in integrity and honesty the likes of which I never experienced at their ages. They not only speak their minds, there is a lot going on in those minds that never would have happened 43 years ago when I was their age.

Kids are so much more sophisticated and aware now then they ever were before, it's amazing you, Don, could be missing out on that.

Freedom of speech is about a lot more than the freedom to spew racist, sexist, homophobic vitriol. It's about the ability to develop sophisticated models of relating and complex systems of interacting and being able to communicate that to your peers. Our kids have come a long way and to ignore all that is to condemn the future through ignorance of the valuable reality that exists and the precious resource that is our younger generation.



Wow. What community do you live in? Do you get all your information from sitcoms on TV? You seem to live in a reality that is very far off from the one I live in.



OK, so we agree on some of the most important things in life. I know a lot of kids with healthy, well earned self esteem. My kid's school is full of them, and a few losers, but that will always be the case.



I think there is a lot of that going on. I also think there is a lot of healing going on from alcohol and drug addiction that has been passed down for many generations. I think this is the first generation to look at the problem rationally and honestly. It was always in the closet before us. I think a lot of children are doing it better than their parents ever did. My wife and I certainly are. Almost all of our friends are. To ignore that is ... sad.



Don, you've been challenged on this more than once and I don't recall seeing an answer: what things would you like to say that you can't?

I would offer that it's our "conservative" misadministration taking away freedom of speech in this country. I don't say a lot of what I used to be able to say in emails because I know they are being monitored. It's not about PC. It's about appearing on "terrorism" watch lists which I understand are now about 900,000 strong. And once you get on, you never get off, because there is no mechanism for removing people; unless a trip to Gitmo can be considered removal.

Hate speech is alive and well and coming from the White House on a daily basis. Freedom of speech is curtailed, not by the preachers of PC, but by an increasingly noxious and intrusive government that wishes to control our very thoughts.

Set your sights on reality, Don, and maybe you'll be able to do something healthier than complain.

-Jeff

[thewholetruth]

"I'd like to know what you are not able to say."

Anything I want, MsTerry. Time was that I could stand on a street corner and say anything I wanted to say. Not today. My freedom to say whatever I want is gone. Freedom of speech in America is now gone.

Don

Yes Don, just like Braggi, I'd like to know what you are not able to say. Maybe it is the way you say it or the time and place you say it.
The "right" to offend is not the same as freedom of speech.
Common decency has now been replaced with constant confrontation.

[Braggi]

"I'd like to know what you are not able to say."

Anything I want, MsTerry. Time was that I could stand on a street corner and say anything I wanted to say. Not today. My freedom to say whatever I want is gone. Freedom of speech in America is now gone.
Don

That's not an answer, Don, and you know it.

It's no wonder you have trouble seeing the other side of COmmunication.

-Jeff

[shellebelle]

Now AINT THAT THE TRUTH!
Sign it sister (so to speak)!


And here is where so many go wrong! Why would I ever agree with someone who berates me? Its amazing to me that verbal abuse is a crime yet adults do it often in pubic to each other and beyond and call it "freedom of speech".

So how about we try some new ways the old are well OLD. Tired, worn out. And why not some new ideas. I mean make love not war is sweet but doesn't help anyone. How about starting a fund to help veterans? Worried about homeless - volunteer.

Move to action and stop the words. Words are nice but actions always speak louder!

Common decency has now been replaced with constant confrontation.

[thewholetruth]

Wrong, sir. That's MY answer, Jeff. I still remember when I saw the term "hate speech" first used in the paper. I was outraged, because I saw the writing on the wall. Ray Charles coulda' seen the writing on the wall: NO MORE FREE SPEECH.

Please don't tell me my answers aren't answers, Jeff. They're mine, sir, not yours to make.

"It's no wonder you have trouble seeing the other side of COmmunication. "

3 fingers pointing right back atcha' there, Jeff. See em' now?

Don

That's not an answer, Don, and you know it.

It's no wonder you have trouble seeing the other side of COmmunication.

-Jeff

[Valley Oak]

This is where I need to learn a big lesson. Whenever I read something outrageous, I find it nearly impossible not to criticize the other person for it. Keeping in mind what ShelleyRae said in her post, below, I only succeed in alienating people when I respond that way and close the door to understanding and agreement or at least getting them to look at my point of view.

Thanks,

Edward

Now AINT THAT THE TRUTH!
Sign it sister (so to speak)!


And here is where so many go wrong! Why would I ever agree with someone who berates me? Its amazing to me that verbal abuse is a crime yet adults do it often in pubic to each other and beyond and call it "freedom of speech".

So how about we try some new ways the old are well OLD. Tired, worn out. And why not some new ideas. I mean make love not war is sweet but doesn't help anyone. How about starting a fund to help veterans? Worried about homeless - volunteer.

Move to action and stop the words. Words are nice but actions always speak louder!

[theindependenteye]

>>"I'd like to know what you are not able to say."

>Anything I want, MsTerry. Time was that I could stand on a street corner and say anything I wanted to say. Not today. My freedom to say whatever I want is gone. Freedom of speech in America is now gone.

Do you not understand why some of us might truly see this as a non-answer? For myself, I wasn't asking this question just as as a rhetorical flourish. What I gather from your response is (a) that you believe people once could say virtually anything anywhere in America, (b) that homosexuals invented the term "hate speech" and passed it into law, and therefore, (c) all free speech in America is gone. Sorry, but you've lost me on that one.

But perhaps to offer you some comfort: After Katrina, the director of Repent America, said, "We take no joy in the death of innocent people, but we believe that God is in control of the weather. The day Bourbon Street and the French Quarter was flooded was the day that 125,000 homosexuals were going to be celebrating sin in the streets. We're calling it an act of God." In 1998, Pat Robertson warned Orlando, Fla., that a gay celebration the city hosted would bring the wrath of God upon the city: "terrorist bombs, earthquakes, tornadoes, and possibly a meteor." In 2001, Jerry Falwell blamed gays and lesbians, feminists, abortionists, and the ACLU for 9/11: "I point the finger in their face and say, 'You helped this happen.'"

Given that none of these people has thus far been fined or imprisoned, I think your concern for your own safety may be somewhat exaggerated. I should warn you, though, that if you make your way into a speech by a top government official and shout, "End the War" or even so much as reveal a teeshirt saying that, you'll be in the slammer pretty damn fast.

So your blanket statement of deprivation is really out of sync with the world as I know it. If I'm too dumb or inexperienced to see the obvious, then it's probably not worth your while talking to me -- we'll just frustrate one another.

Peace & joy--
Conrad

[MsTerry]

Please don't tell me my answers aren't answers, Jeff. They're mine, sir, not yours to make.

Don

nananananananananananananananananananananaana
Exsqueeze me for interrupting this exchange of intellectual insults, but can someone tell me who is telling who not to tell someone what not to tell to someone?

[theindependenteye]

>>However, the PC community that tries to protect their feelings doesn't acknowledge any problem with hate thought. They just have a problem with us having the right to express those thoughts.

I thought "PC" was a term used by right-wingers to label any idea they disagreed with as coming from "those who aren't intelligent enough to really think things through." So I guess the "community" part means all of us on the list who aren't intelligent enough to agree with you. Which truly makes me wonder why you waste your time with us.

>>Amazing to me that some folks actually let them (feelings and thoughts) be the guiding force behind their actions, ultimately driving them through LIFE. Which, of course, is where prayer comes in, the seeking of higher wisdom and understanding.

So we shouldn't be guided by what we feel, nor should we be guided by trying to think things through. We should be guided instead by God's response to our prayers, and, if I'm not extrapolating unduly, by our particular denomination's interpretation of scriptures on the relevant issue.

So I gather we're not really debating you, we're debating God. I feel a bit outmatched. But seriously, have you asked God, in your prayers, whether in fact your freedom of speech is as dead as you claim? And how would you know if He said, "No, you're wrong." Do you hear actual words spoken, or do you just feel it in your heart? And if so, how is *your* feeling different from and more valid than *my* feeling?

-Conrad

[thewholetruth]

"Do you not understand why some of us might truly see this as a non-answer?"

Brother, I'm the one who brought this up, and this is why I brought it up: I can't say anything I want in public anymore. Perhaps you wanted me to say something you could complain about, like "I hate gays" (which I don't). Sorry, Conrad, that's not my answer because that's not my problem. My problem is about losing our freedom of speech. We had to give up one of our nation's most precious freedoms so that gay folks don't get their feelings hurt. That about sums it up. It's not about feminists. They don't throw that term around like gays do. Neither do Blacks or Hispanics or Jews or Whites, so it's not about race. It's used in America, almost exclusively, to protect homosexuals from getting their feelings hurt. I think we paid too high a price just to protect 1-3% of the population's feelings, which seem to get hurt anyway, despite the protection of the "hate speech" label.

"For myself, I wasn't asking this question just as as a rhetorical flourish."

And I wasn't answering it as if I thought it were rhetorical flourish. I told you the truth.

"What I gather from your response is (a) that you believe people once could say virtually anything anywhere in America, (b) that homosexuals invented the term "hate speech" and passed it into law..."

Incorrect, sir. I'm not sure who "invented the term", but attorneys for homosexuals are the folks who use it most.

"...and therefore, (c) all free speech in America is gone. Sorry, but you've lost me on that one."

Correction, Conrad. Please pay attention to what I write, and stop bastardizing my comments. I didn't say "all free speech in America is gone". I said FREEDOM OF SPEECH IS NO LONGER A RIGHT here in America. It's no longer one of our rights.

Are you clear now? Are you going to pretend you don't see a difference between the two?

Perhaps we won't be able to have an intelligent, respectful conversation and may, as you say, frustrate one another. I don't know why that is (it's usually a person's choice, IMO), but it seems so borderline as it is.

Don

>>"I'd like to know what you are not able to say."

>Anything I want, MsTerry. Time was that I could stand on a street corner and say anything I wanted to say. Not today. My freedom to say whatever I want is gone. Freedom of speech in America is now gone.

Do you not understand why some of us might truly see this as a non-answer? For myself, I wasn't asking this question just as as a rhetorical flourish. What I gather from your response is (a) that you believe people once could say virtually anything anywhere in America, (b) that homosexuals invented the term "hate speech" and passed it into law, and therefore, (c) all free speech in America is gone. Sorry, but you've lost me on that one.

But perhaps to offer you some comfort: After Katrina, the director of Repent America, said, "We take no joy in the death of innocent people, but we believe that God is in control of the weather. The day Bourbon Street and the French Quarter was flooded was the day that 125,000 homosexuals were going to be celebrating sin in the streets. We're calling it an act of God." In 1998, Pat Robertson warned Orlando, Fla., that a gay celebration the city hosted would bring the wrath of God upon the city: "terrorist bombs, earthquakes, tornadoes, and possibly a meteor." In 2001, Jerry Falwell blamed gays and lesbians, feminists, abortionists, and the ACLU for 9/11: "I point the finger in their face and say, 'You helped this happen.'"

Given that none of these people has thus far been fined or imprisoned, I think your concern for your own safety may be somewhat exaggerated. I should warn you, though, that if you make your way into a speech by a top government official and shout, "End the War" or even so much as reveal a teeshirt saying that, you'll be in the slammer pretty damn fast.

So your blanket statement of deprivation is really out of sync with the world as I know it. If I'm too dumb or inexperienced to see the obvious, then it's probably not worth your while talking to me -- we'll just frustrate one another.

Peace & joy--
Conrad

[shellebelle]

Good catch Ed, I hope a few more catch it also.

The main point is "Move to Action".

To quote a man being remembered this past week "I have a dream!" yet he certainly wasn't sitting ideal and waiting for someone else to fulfill it for him.

This is where I need to learn a big lesson. Whenever I read something outrageous, I find it nearly impossible not to criticize the other person for it. Keeping in mind what ShelleyRae said in her post, below, I only succeed in alienating people when I respond that way and close the door to understanding and agreement or at least getting them to look at my point of view.

Thanks,

Edward

[thewholetruth]

Wow. It had to take an effort to respond like you did. LOL

I'll get back to you and I promise I'll clarify everything for you. You've jumped to so many conclusions that it amazes me.

Heading to MidiMusic right now, before they close.

Don

>>However, the PC community that tries to protect their feelings doesn't acknowledge any problem with hate thought. They just have a problem with us having the right to express those thoughts.

I thought "PC" was a term used by right-wingers to label any idea they disagreed with as coming from "those who aren't intelligent enough to really think things through." So I guess the "community" part means all of us on the list who aren't intelligent enough to agree with you. Which truly makes me wonder why you waste your time with us.

>>Amazing to me that some folks actually let them (feelings and thoughts) be the guiding force behind their actions, ultimately driving them through LIFE. Which, of course, is where prayer comes in, the seeking of higher wisdom and understanding.

So we shouldn't be guided by what we feel, nor should we be guided by trying to think things through. We should be guided instead by God's response to our prayers, and, if I'm not extrapolating unduly, by our particular denomination's interpretation of scriptures on the relevant issue.

So I gather we're not really debating you, we're debating God. I feel a bit outmatched. But seriously, have you asked God, in your prayers, whether in fact your freedom of speech is as dead as you claim? And how would you know if He said, "No, you're wrong." Do you hear actual words spoken, or do you just feel it in your heart? And if so, how is *your* feeling different from and more valid than *my* feeling?

-Conrad

[Valley Oak]

Jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber........

[thewholetruth]

I have a feeling I'm going to be sorry I engaged you in this nonsense, but here I go anyway:

"I thought "PC" was a term used by right-wingers to label any idea they disagreed with as coming from "those who aren't intelligent enough to really think things through.""

That's not my understanding, Conrad. I understand PC to mean "whatever codepends people into voting for/liking you, regardless if it's intelligent, logical or reasonable". But that's just my take on it. You may be right.

"So I guess the "community" part means all of us on the list who aren't intelligent enough to agree with you."

No, that's not accurate. The "community" part of "PC community" is anyone who subscribes to that codependent philosophy, which may or may not be anyone on this board. I wasn't referring to you, Conrad, or anyone else on this board specifically. I was referring to the PC community at large.

"Which truly makes me wonder why you waste your time with us."

Whether or not it's a waste of time will have much to do with whether or not you want to keep it real and engage in intelligent discussion, or whether you prefer to let the discussion digress into common Liberal vs. Conservative, Right vs. Left rhetoric, name-calling and false accusations. At this point, I don't think you're giving yourself enough credit here, because I don't consider this a waste of time yet.

"So we shouldn't be guided by what we feel, nor should we be guided by trying to think things through."

That isn't what I said. I said that people who let their thoughts and feelings dictate their actions are oftentimes way lost and spend their lives reacting to life, not being proactive in their lives, Conrad.

"We should be guided instead by God's response to our prayers, and, if I'm not extrapolating unduly, by our particular denomination's interpretation of scriptures on the relevant issue."

That isn't what I said. I said that prayer and meditation, coupled with thoughtful consideration is a far more productive method of living one's life, transforming a reactionary life into a more purposed life. I said nothing about denominations or relevant issues. Why would you conclude such ridiculous crap as that, Conrad, unless you...oh, I see. Unless you were just engaging in the common Liberal vs. Conservative, Right vs. Left rhetoric, name-calling and false accusations that I mentioned a moment ago. *sIgH*

"So I gather we're not really debating you, we're debating God."

So right about here, your brain appears to have shut down completely and you seem to be running solely on feelings, with very little thoughtfulness before you type. I say that because I've seen you post relatively intelligent and respectful stuff here before now, but this certainly can't be considered "intelligent discussion" nor respectful, now can it. (Rhetorical question, Conrad. That means the answer is obvious.)

"I feel a bit outmatched."

Perhaps you are at this point. You've certainly digressed to a level of discussion wherein you are the only participant left.

"But seriously, have you asked God, in your prayers, whether in fact your freedom of speech is as dead as you claim? And how would you know if He said, "No, you're wrong." Do you hear actual words spoken, or do you just feel it in your heart? And if so, how is *your* feeling different from and more valid than *my* feeling?"

Wow. Perhaps we can discuss this when you wake up, Conrad. This is a far cry from intelligent or respectful. Have I offended you in some way, by posting my thoughts, observations and opinions here, Conrad? If so, what specifically did I say that caused you to become so belligerent all of a sudden? If I owe you an apology for offending you, I'll surely offer it up, if only you'll tell me where that point of offense actually took place.

An intelligent person, if truly interested in understanding that which he does not understand, would ask an intelligent question in order to achieve clarification. Your conclusionary b.s., however, isn't worthy of a response, sir.

Perhaps that was your intention.

Don

>>However, the PC community that tries to protect their feelings doesn't acknowledge any problem with hate thought. They just have a problem with us having the right to express those thoughts.

I thought "PC" was a term used by right-wingers to label any idea they disagreed with as coming from "those who aren't intelligent enough to really think things through." So I guess the "community" part means all of us on the list who aren't intelligent enough to agree with you. Which truly makes me wonder why you waste your time with us.

>>Amazing to me that some folks actually let them (feelings and thoughts) be the guiding force behind their actions, ultimately driving them through LIFE. Which, of course, is where prayer comes in, the seeking of higher wisdom and understanding.

So we shouldn't be guided by what we feel, nor should we be guided by trying to think things through. We should be guided instead by God's response to our prayers, and, if I'm not extrapolating unduly, by our particular denomination's interpretation of scriptures on the relevant issue.

So I gather we're not really debating you, we're debating God. I feel a bit outmatched. But seriously, have you asked God, in your prayers, whether in fact your freedom of speech is as dead as you claim? And how would you know if He said, "No, you're wrong." Do you hear actual words spoken, or do you just feel it in your heart? And if so, how is *your* feeling different from and more valid than *my* feeling?

-Conrad

[thewholetruth]

Hey Ed, I thought you were ignoring me. Remember those 20 or 30 posts about how you were ignoring me? Did you change your mind, or is this directed at what someone else has said? *Polite smile*

Don

Jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber, jabber........

[theindependenteye]

>>You've certainly digressed to a level of discussion wherein you are the only participant left.

Sorry.

>>Wow. Perhaps we can discuss this when you wake up, Conrad.

Not likely.

>>Have I offended you in some way, by posting my thoughts, observations and opinions here, Conrad?

No.

>>An intelligent person, if truly interested in understanding that which he does not understand, would ask an intelligent question in order to achieve clarification.

Tried it, failed. You feel I miss your point and I feel you miss mine. Since we've started to repeat ourselvss, it's time for me to retire from the field. Ok, fine, we've all lost our free speech.

-Conrad

[Valley Oak]

I hope you don't mind my asking you for a little help here but what would be a good, first 'Move to Action?'

Thanks again,

Edward

Good catch Ed, I hope a few more catch it also.

The main point is "Move to Action".

To quote a man being remembered this past week "I have a dream!" yet he certainly wasn't sitting ideal and waiting for someone else to fulfill it for him.

[thewholetruth]

I understand.

Don

>>You've certainly digressed to a level of discussion wherein you are the only participant left.

Sorry.

>>Wow. Perhaps we can discuss this when you wake up, Conrad.

Not likely.

>>Have I offended you in some way, by posting my thoughts, observations and opinions here, Conrad?

No.

>>An intelligent person, if truly interested in understanding that which he does not understand, would ask an intelligent question in order to achieve clarification.

Tried it, failed. You feel I miss your point and I feel you miss mine. Since we've started to repeat ourselvss, it's time for me to retire from the field. Ok, fine, we've all lost our free speech.

-Conrad

[thewholetruth]

"Ok, fine, we've all lost our free speech."

We no longer have the right of freedom of speech, Conrad. Time was when we could lay claim to that: "We have freedom of speech in America". That's simply no longer true. Today, the truth has become "We can speak out about many things in America". Huge difference there.

Hope that clarifies my point for you. I can see that I haven't been able to communicate it to you in a way that you understand it.

Don

>>You've certainly digressed to a level of discussion wherein you are the only participant left.

Sorry.

>>Wow. Perhaps we can discuss this when you wake up, Conrad.

Not likely.

>>Have I offended you in some way, by posting my thoughts, observations and opinions here, Conrad?

No.

>>An intelligent person, if truly interested in understanding that which he does not understand, would ask an intelligent question in order to achieve clarification.

Tried it, failed. You feel I miss your point and I feel you miss mine. Since we've started to repeat ourselvss, it's time for me to retire from the field. Ok, fine, we've all lost our free speech.

-Conrad

[Braggi]

... We no longer have the right of freedom of speech, Conrad. Time was when we could lay claim to that: "We have freedom of speech in America". That's simply no longer true. Today, the truth has become "We can speak out about many things in America". Huge difference there.

Hope that clarifies my point for you. I can see that I haven't been able to communicate it to you in a way that you understand it. ...

If anyone reading here understands what Don is talking about, please educate me. I have no idea what Don wants to say that he feels he can't. He mentions the lawyers of homosexuals, as if they were somehow preventing him from speaking. I don't get it.

The only speech that I know of that will now get you arrested, possibly without due cause or process, has to do with the US federal government and their "War on Terror," which, of course, is just another wing of the Law Enforcement Growth Industry which is a part the Military Industrial Political Complex. If there are restrictions on freedom of speech, it is the current White House and their lackeys in Congress that are to blame, not the lawyers of homosexuals.

But just for clarity, Don, since you are anonymous on this board, can you give us an example of what you mean since none of us can figure it out? Just go ahead and give us an example of what you are afraid to say. You can even use blanks or [censored] or whatever if there are certain words we'll just have to guess at.

I'm baffled.

-Jeff