Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Free Beacon)   Handing out copies of the U.S. Constitution to fellow students at the University of Hawaii? The '60s are over man, you better get your ass over to the Free Speech zone   (freebeacon.com ) divider line
    More: Asinine, University of Hawaii, U.S. Constitution, Hawaii, free speech zone, fellow students, Young Americans for Liberty, First Amendment  
•       •       •

5001 clicks; posted to Main » on 26 Apr 2014 at 5:08 PM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



258 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2014-04-26 06:09:51 PM  

jaytkay: ElLoco: MFAWG: Conservative poutrage at it's finest, reported by one of the house organs of Conservative poutrage.

I'm guessing you and several of the others up there didn't read the article? It was a Young Americans for Liberty group.

Oh, look, "libertarians".

/ Fiercely independent thinkers who vote Republican


Im a libertarian...ane i voted for obama. Twice.

Your point? Invalid now. Have a seat.
 
2014-04-26 06:10:17 PM  
Dinki [TotalFark]
2014-04-26 03:05:03 PM


Both Burch and her friend, the complaint alleges, were at an outdoor event featuring other student groups who were distributing literature from various tables set up for that purpose. Burch claims she left her table and approached other students, and an administrator told her and her friend to get behind their table.

Oh look, another conservative that thinks the rules don't apply to them. Because obviously the message they were trying to get out was so much more important than everyone elses.

Oh look another liberal fascist who believes in ordering people into zones where Inalienable rights can be "expressed".


From the same libtards that support "free speech zones" be guarded by police with assault rifles and contained behind chain-linked fences.

Because they're the party of "Freedom".
 
2014-04-26 06:11:26 PM  

iheartscotch: ArkAngel: Mugato: Nabb1: You sure do love authority, don't you? Why should there be rules on a public campus about peaceably assembling and distributing pamphlets? Does the notion of that activity offend you so? We have a state school, political speech, and it seems no one was being disruptive. Why does this activity trouble you? Is it because they are conservative?

Did you RTFA? They weren't being stopped from handing out the Constitution, just to sit at one of the tables like everyone else. And how do you know they were conservative, was the Second Amendment highlighted and the 4th whited out?

Did you RTFA? They were also restricted to a "free speech zone" when they tried to protest. Either one is a restriction on the right to freedom of speech.

There's a reason universities adopted the concept of a Free Speech Zone.

Anybody can go there and pass out whatever. From Neo- nazis passing out swasticas to hellfire and damnation preachers. The reason it's like that is; any group there doesn't disrupt the entire campus.

If it wasn't like that; you'd have to pass 20 or 30 idiots spouting verbal trash everyday. This way; if you want to go listen, you can. If you want to avoid it, you can.

/ the idea is; you have right to free speech, but, I have the right to avoid your cardboard demogogary

// there's a hellfire preacher that inhabits the kansas state university free speech zone from 8-10am, every Saturday for the last 10 years; he ran out of new and interesting material 5 years ago and just rants about Obama, the Illuminati, ravenous sluttitude, the government and EBT cards.

/ I know this because it has become very popular to go and heckle him


There's far more constitutional ways to police disruption - i.e. a disturbing the peace arrest. No one is saying that there should be no rules. Disrupting classes or speakers is a problem that must be dealt with. But forcing all protesters to register in advance and reserve a tiny area is not legal. Ask federal courts, who have continuously struck down free speech zones and speech codes on campuses across the nation
 
2014-04-26 06:11:56 PM  
Maybe I should start handing out questionable literature at the UW campus and get me a payday. I gotta get me some of this free speech money before the bubble pops.
 
2014-04-26 06:13:18 PM  

aerojockey: iheartscotch: Free speech zones are absolutely clogged with people promoting one cause or another. It's not crowded all the time; but, especially on weekends, you can run into all sorts of interesting individuals.

Imagine that, when you give people 200 square feet to engage in free speech, all of them end up that one place.


I understand what you are saying; and I agree that free speech is important.

But, can you imagine the havoc if 30 or 40 Neo-nazis descended on a school and started goose stepping down the halls? I can almost guarantee that someone would lose their temper.

What if Fred Phelp's ( I know, he's been removed as head winner) merry band of winners show up? Do they get to run all over campus with their signs?

True enough, most of the people are harmless and want to promote a message; but, I don't need to hear hellfire and damnation sermons while I'm renewing all of my certs.

/ your right to speak freely doesn't trump my right to not listen to you
 
2014-04-26 06:13:35 PM  
If people want to be belligerent and obnoxious in spreading the word about their personal beliefs, so long as their not actually violating the rights of others, just let them.  The more annoying they are, the less likely anyone is to take them seriously.  The worst thing you can do is actually convince or force them to behave reasonably and risk someone being taken in by them.

Nothing cures a bad idea like hearing it from someone you don't respect.
 
2014-04-26 06:13:41 PM  

The more you eat the more you fart: jaytkay: ElLoco: MFAWG: Conservative poutrage at it's finest, reported by one of the house organs of Conservative poutrage.

I'm guessing you and several of the others up there didn't read the article? It was a Young Americans for Liberty group.

Oh, look, "libertarians".

/ Fiercely independent thinkers who vote Republican

Im a libertarian...ane i voted for obama. Twice.

Your point? Invalid now. Have a seat.


I didn't realize your self-identification and experience was indicative of the vast majority of self-described "libertarians".

Boy, am I embarrassed!
 
2014-04-26 06:13:52 PM  

Baz744: Fark It: "In order to protect the 1st Amendment, we must abridge it!"

In order to protect (public safety, the president, an assembly VIPs for some event, etc.) we must temporarily establish a perimeter within which members of the public might not be allowed at all, much less engage in speech activities.

But because morons like you insist on giving "free speech zone" a sinister spin, we can no longer set aside areas within those perimeters where protestors may permissibly engage in orderly speech activities.

Instead, in the interest of protecting free speech from your sinister zones "outside of which speech is banned," we'll just have to temporarily speech within those perimeters altogether.

No more evil zones "outside of which speech is banned." We'll just ban speech altogether within a limited area and for a limited time. No biggie.


Seriously? You're OK with this? Seriously, you typed that out and that doesn't sound even the least bit scary or draconian to you? At all?
 
2014-04-26 06:14:14 PM  
Democrats also got police to try to make these people get back to their assigned tables.

www.learnnc.org

media.npr.org

historyz.com
The party of "freedom" hasn't changed a bit.
 
2014-04-26 06:15:13 PM  
they're, not their

/sigh
 
2014-04-26 06:16:30 PM  

iheartscotch: aerojockey: iheartscotch: Free speech zones are absolutely clogged with people promoting one cause or another. It's not crowded all the time; but, especially on weekends, you can run into all sorts of interesting individuals.

Imagine that, when you give people 200 square feet to engage in free speech, all of them end up that one place.

I understand what you are saying; and I agree that free speech is important.

But, can you imagine the havoc if 30 or 40 Neo-nazis descended on a school and started goose stepping down the halls? I can almost guarantee that someone would lose their temper.

What if Fred Phelp's ( I know, he's been removed as head winner) merry band of winners show up? Do they get to run all over campus with their signs?

True enough, most of the people are harmless and want to promote a message; but, I don't need to hear hellfire and damnation sermons while I'm renewing all of my certs.

/ your right to speak freely doesn't trump my right to not listen to you


Plus, if they aren't students or aren't supposed to be in that classroom, then they are trespassing.
 
2014-04-26 06:17:00 PM  
Hawaii trifecta in play
 
2014-04-26 06:17:02 PM  

jaytkay: The more you eat the more you fart: Listen, captain obvious...there shouldnt BE a "free speech zone." We already have one...it's called "the whole damn country" according to the constitution.

I visited my local elementary school unannounced with a bullhorn, passing out little American flags and exhorting the kids to "CELEBRATE FREEDOM"!

The staff and police were not appreciative.

They are fascists who hate America.


lol!

Funnied that one, I did.
 
2014-04-26 06:17:16 PM  

OnlyM3: The party of "freedom" hasn't changed a bit.


Now I know you're trolling. Or you don't know that the parties were completely different then. Annoying or ignorant,  either one.
 
2014-04-26 06:18:17 PM  
TuteTibiImperes [TotalFark]

, I'd assume that student groups were restricted to proselytizing from the tables only to maintain some semblance of order.
Yes the world will fall into disorder if a person hands you a piece of paper outside of a government approved zone.

You'd be the one reporting this disorderly "degenerate".
cdn.twentytwowords.com
 
2014-04-26 06:18:26 PM  

iheartscotch: aerojockey: iheartscotch: Free speech zones are absolutely clogged with people promoting one cause or another. It's not crowded all the time; but, especially on weekends, you can run into all sorts of interesting individuals.

Imagine that, when you give people 200 square feet to engage in free speech, all of them end up that one place.

I understand what you are saying; and I agree that free speech is important.

But, can you imagine the havoc if 30 or 40 Neo-nazis descended on a school and started goose stepping down the halls? I can almost guarantee that someone would lose their temper.

What if Fred Phelp's ( I know, he's been removed as head winner) merry band of winners show up? Do they get to run all over campus with their signs?

True enough, most of the people are harmless and want to promote a message; but, I don't need to hear hellfire and damnation sermons while I'm renewing all of my certs.

/ your right to speak freely doesn't trump my right to not listen to you


Your right to not listen doesn't trump their right to speak, either. If they are in a public place, they are free to say what they want, just like you are free to ignore it. But you can't make them go away just because you disagree.
 
2014-04-26 06:18:32 PM  

Fark It: Lorelle: Mugato: Nabb1: You sure do love authority, don't you? Why should there be rules on a public campus about peaceably assembling and distributing pamphlets? Does the notion of that activity offend you so? We have a state school, political speech, and it seems no one was being disruptive. Why does this activity trouble you? Is it because they are conservative?

Did you RTFA? They weren't being stopped from handing out the Constitution, just to sit at one of the tables like everyone else. And how do you know they were conservative, was the Second Amendment highlighted and the 4th whited out?

Evidently the girl and her friend weren't getting any attention while sitting at their table, so they decided to take their literature and force it on others.

Citation needed.  Handing out literature, of any sort, is allowed in this country.  It doesn't matter who does it, or what they believe, or which political party occupies the White House.

[4.bp.blogspot.com image 850x529]

Hawaii and Alaska included.


This.

Also included: Puerto Rico, Guam, US Virgin Islands, Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa.
 
2014-04-26 06:18:57 PM  
Baz744:
So I can walk onto a military base any time and hand out flyers any place I want so long as they're not advertisements?

You're gonna have to produce a citation for this proposition, counselor.

I'm not holding my breath.


No, you will need a permit to be on that base.  To get a permit, one way or another, you are going to sign a form and waive your rights to certain things, one of which will be soliciting on that property.  This applies to both civilian and military personnel.

This may also apply to college campuses.  However, I still want someone to explain to me why a copy of the U.S. Constitution could be considered forbidden "propaganda."  I want someone to tell me why it is important that people not be informed as to the rules to which our government is supposed to adhere, the rules we all live under in the U.S.
 
2014-04-26 06:20:33 PM  

OnlyM3: Democrats also got police to try to make these people get back to their assigned tables.

[www.learnnc.org image 850x664]

[media.npr.org image 850x687]

[historyz.com image 700x489]
The party of "freedom" hasn't changed a bit.


I go from agreeing with most "conservatives" in this thread to reading your late to the party idiocy.
 
2014-04-26 06:20:53 PM  

jaytkay: The more you eat the more you fart: jaytkay: ElLoco: MFAWG: Conservative poutrage at it's finest, reported by one of the house organs of Conservative poutrage.

I'm guessing you and several of the others up there didn't read the article? It was a Young Americans for Liberty group.

Oh, look, "libertarians".

/ Fiercely independent thinkers who vote Republican

Im a libertarian...ane i voted for obama. Twice.

Your point? Invalid now. Have a seat.

I didn't realize your self-identification and experience was indicative of the vast majority of self-described "libertarians".

Boy, am I embarrassed!


You seem alright, so I'll go up on my internet soapbox again.

img.fark.net

There are people attempting to shoehorn in all those who care about civil liberties and the Constitution with some fringe right wingers. This is totally deceptive.

The authoritarians are the problem, and they're found in both parties.
 
2014-04-26 06:21:44 PM  

Kit Fister: It is apropriate to protest any time a right is denied or substantively abridged, whatever your politics.

The only people who protest and make cat-calls and otherwise create a nuisance are the ineffective and powerless passengers of society who have nothing better to do. Everyone else works within the system, yea rather, are indeed the system.

That's right, what society needs is a bunch of loons who can't function within it making all the decisions and  bringing forth those ideas by a combination of temper tantrums and intimidation by mob behaviour.
 
2014-04-26 06:23:17 PM  

EggSniper: Nothing cures a bad idea like hearing it from someone you don't respect.


"This", as the young people say.
 
2014-04-26 06:23:56 PM  

Nabb1: Dinki: Both Burch and her friend, the complaint alleges, were at an outdoor event featuring other student groups who were distributing literature from various tables set up for that purpose. Burch claims she left her table and approached other students, and an administrator told her and her friend to get behind their table.

Oh look, another conservative that thinks the rules don't apply to them. Because obviously the message they were trying to get out was so much more important than everyone elses.

You sure do love authority, don't you? Why should there be rules on a public campus about peaceably assembling and distributing pamphlets? Does the notion of that activity offend you so? We have a state school, political speech, and it seems no one was being disruptive. Why does this activity trouble you? Is it because they are conservative?


"public campus"

You know how I know you've never worked in education?

Because you're unaware that college/university campuses are on private property.
 
2014-04-26 06:23:58 PM  

Back Alley Proctologist: Those little bastards are lucky a porno professor didn't feel "triggered", then steal their shiat and unleash a self-righteous ass-whoopin' on them. Emotionally-violent pieces of shiat.


encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com
 
2014-04-26 06:24:02 PM  
Mugato [TotalFark]

So I can just walk into a classroom during a lecture and start passing out propaganda?
That's some total fark level idiocy there.
Not only is the USC now "propaganda" this nutter now claims "Would you like a copy" with Barging into a classroom and shouting down the instructor.

Thank godparticle the TF flag alerts us when this level of stupid will crop up.
 
2014-04-26 06:25:00 PM  

Fark It: I'm not a conservative, and they should be "allowed" to hand out literature anywhere, especially at a public university, as per the 1st Amendment.


CRtwenty: What's the big deal here? It's not like they weren't allowing them to spread their message or censoring them. If they didn't want to follow the rules they should have chosen another location.


 The real problem is that they WERE being allowed to distribute them. The fact they were not being 'oppressed' is almost certainly what peeved them. So they started distributing them in a way not allowed, then finally started protesting that there were rules about how things can be distributed in the first place.
 The real goal of the exercise was not to hand out copies of the Constitution - they were allowed to do that. The real goal was to get 'liberals' to 'repress' them in order to feed the faux outrage machine, and they just kept pushing the boundaries until they reached their goal.
 
2014-04-26 06:28:30 PM  

ArkAngel: iheartscotch: ArkAngel: Mugato: Nabb1: You sure do love authority, don't you? Why should there be rules on a public campus about peaceably assembling and distributing pamphlets? Does the notion of that activity offend you so? We have a state school, political speech, and it seems no one was being disruptive. Why does this activity trouble you? Is it because they are conservative?

Did you RTFA? They weren't being stopped from handing out the Constitution, just to sit at one of the tables like everyone else. And how do you know they were conservative, was the Second Amendment highlighted and the 4th whited out?

Did you RTFA? They were also restricted to a "free speech zone" when they tried to protest. Either one is a restriction on the right to freedom of speech.

There's a reason universities adopted the concept of a Free Speech Zone.

Anybody can go there and pass out whatever. From Neo- nazis passing out swasticas to hellfire and damnation preachers. The reason it's like that is; any group there doesn't disrupt the entire campus.

If it wasn't like that; you'd have to pass 20 or 30 idiots spouting verbal trash everyday. This way; if you want to go listen, you can. If you want to avoid it, you can.

/ the idea is; you have right to free speech, but, I have the right to avoid your cardboard demogogary

// there's a hellfire preacher that inhabits the kansas state university free speech zone from 8-10am, every Saturday for the last 10 years; he ran out of new and interesting material 5 years ago and just rants about Obama, the Illuminati, ravenous sluttitude, the government and EBT cards.

/ I know this because it has become very popular to go and heckle him

There's far more constitutional ways to police disruption - i.e. a disturbing the peace arrest. No one is saying that there should be no rules. Disrupting classes or speakers is a problem that must be dealt with. But forcing all protesters to register in advance and reserve a tiny area is not legal. Ask federal courts, who have continuously struck down free speech zones and speech codes on campuses across the nation


I agree that there is probably a better way to police disruptions.

I've just got this image in my head of PETA setting up in the cafeteria to protest meat. Or a hellfire and damnation preacher setting up somewhere in the biology department with a bullhorn. Or a young earther setting up in the Geology department.

The point is; there have to be rules about protesting or some ass is going to set up an illuminati display right across from the trigonometry class, for reasons.

/ the thing about it is; those rules are likely to impinge on the 1st amendment
 
2014-04-26 06:28:52 PM  

Kit Fister: Baz744: Fark It: "In order to protect the 1st Amendment, we must abridge it!"

In order to protect (public safety, the president, an assembly VIPs for some event, etc.) we must temporarily establish a perimeter within which members of the public might not be allowed at all, much less engage in speech activities.

But because morons like you insist on giving "free speech zone" a sinister spin, we can no longer set aside areas within those perimeters where protestors may permissibly engage in orderly speech activities.

Instead, in the interest of protecting free speech from your sinister zones "outside of which speech is banned," we'll just have to temporarily speech within those perimeters altogether.

No more evil zones "outside of which speech is banned." We'll just ban speech altogether within a limited area and for a limited time. No biggie.

Seriously? You're OK with this? Seriously, you typed that out and that doesn't sound even the least bit scary or draconian to you? At all?


I don't know what you're talking about. I was offering a solution to the problem of those evil free speech zones, outside of which speech is banned. They won't exist anymore under my proposal.

Presidential debate protestors, for example, can be treated just like everyone else. They won't be forced at gunpoint into some free speech zone where they'll be within sight of the building where the debate is being held, where the candidates themselves will almost have to see their signs as they walk into the building, and where the media will have easy access to them.

No more such tyranny. They can stay 6 blocks away outside the perimeter like everyone else.

First you were b*tching about free speech zones. Now you're calling me "draconian" when I suggest getting rid of them.

Surely you're not the kind of mental midget who can't grasp why situations like presidential debates or armed insurgencies against federal law enforcement call for establishing secure perimeters.

What's the matter then? Doesn't anything suit you?
 
2014-04-26 06:28:59 PM  

The more you eat the more you fart: jaytkay: ElLoco: MFAWG: Conservative poutrage at it's finest, reported by one of the house organs of Conservative poutrage.

I'm guessing you and several of the others up there didn't read the article? It was a Young Americans for Liberty group.

Oh, look, "libertarians".

/ Fiercely independent thinkers who vote Republican

Im a libertarian...ane i voted for obama. Twice.

Your point? Invalid now. Have a seat.


I have always voted Libertarian until last time when the Republicans went to far with how douchebaggy their candidates were. My ideologies are right leaning but I the GOP is awful.
 
2014-04-26 06:31:48 PM  

iheartscotch: ArkAngel: iheartscotch: ArkAngel: Mugato: Nabb1: You sure do love authority, don't you? Why should there be rules on a public campus about peaceably assembling and distributing pamphlets? Does the notion of that activity offend you so? We have a state school, political speech, and it seems no one was being disruptive. Why does this activity trouble you? Is it because they are conservative?

Did you RTFA? They weren't being stopped from handing out the Constitution, just to sit at one of the tables like everyone else. And how do you know they were conservative, was the Second Amendment highlighted and the 4th whited out?

Did you RTFA? They were also restricted to a "free speech zone" when they tried to protest. Either one is a restriction on the right to freedom of speech.

There's a reason universities adopted the concept of a Free Speech Zone.

Anybody can go there and pass out whatever. From Neo- nazis passing out swasticas to hellfire and damnation preachers. The reason it's like that is; any group there doesn't disrupt the entire campus.

If it wasn't like that; you'd have to pass 20 or 30 idiots spouting verbal trash everyday. This way; if you want to go listen, you can. If you want to avoid it, you can.

/ the idea is; you have right to free speech, but, I have the right to avoid your cardboard demogogary

// there's a hellfire preacher that inhabits the kansas state university free speech zone from 8-10am, every Saturday for the last 10 years; he ran out of new and interesting material 5 years ago and just rants about Obama, the Illuminati, ravenous sluttitude, the government and EBT cards.

/ I know this because it has become very popular to go and heckle him

There's far more constitutional ways to police disruption - i.e. a disturbing the peace arrest. No one is saying that there should be no rules. Disrupting classes or speakers is a problem that must be dealt with. But forcing all protesters to register in advance and reserve a tiny area is not legal. Ask federal courts, who have continuously struck down free speech zones and speech codes on campuses across the nation

I agree that there is probably a better way to police disruptions.

I've just got this image in my head of PETA setting up in the cafeteria to protest meat. Or a hellfire and damnation preacher setting up somewhere in the biology department with a bullhorn. Or a young earther setting up in the Geology department.

The point is; there have to be rules about protesting or some ass is going to set up an illuminati display right across from the trigonometry class, for reasons.

/ the thing about it is; those rules are likely to impinge on the 1st amendment


Not at all. The courts have determined that there can be reasonable restrictions on free speech, like yelling fire in a theater or printing invasion plans before the invasion. Preventing people from setting up protests in a classroom is very reasonable.
 
2014-04-26 06:35:16 PM  
img.fark.net
 
2014-04-26 06:37:00 PM  

Baz744: Kit Fister: Baz744: Fark It: "In order to protect the 1st Amendment, we must abridge it!"

In order to protect (public safety, the president, an assembly VIPs for some event, etc.) we must temporarily establish a perimeter within which members of the public might not be allowed at all, much less engage in speech activities.

But because morons like you insist on giving "free speech zone" a sinister spin, we can no longer set aside areas within those perimeters where protestors may permissibly engage in orderly speech activities.

Instead, in the interest of protecting free speech from your sinister zones "outside of which speech is banned," we'll just have to temporarily speech within those perimeters altogether.

No more evil zones "outside of which speech is banned." We'll just ban speech altogether within a limited area and for a limited time. No biggie.

Seriously? You're OK with this? Seriously, you typed that out and that doesn't sound even the least bit scary or draconian to you? At all?

I don't know what you're talking about. I was offering a solution to the problem of those evil free speech zones, outside of which speech is banned. They won't exist anymore under my proposal.

Presidential debate protestors, for example, can be treated just like everyone else. They won't be forced at gunpoint into some free speech zone where they'll be within sight of the building where the debate is being held, where the candidates themselves will almost have to see their signs as they walk into the building, and where the media will have easy access to them.

No more such tyranny. They can stay 6 blocks away outside the perimeter like everyone else.

First you were b*tching about free speech zones. Now you're calling me "draconian" when I suggest getting rid of them.

Surely you're not the kind of mental midget who can't grasp why situations like presidential debates or armed insurgencies against federal law enforcement call for establishing secure perimeters.

What's the matter then? Doesn't anything suit you?


I call attempts to keep peaceful protests away from the eyes of those it's meant to target a bit draconian. I should be able to picket outside the whitehouse, have a sign at a presidential debate (if we had real presidential debates), show up at a gun show with anti NRA material, whatever.

The only exceptions to this is when it directly intercedes with law enforcement, and I'd argue that the civil disobedience of the 60s was far more in your face than any of this.
 
2014-04-26 06:37:15 PM  

Kit Fister: iheartscotch: aerojockey: iheartscotch: Free speech zones are absolutely clogged with people promoting one cause or another. It's not crowded all the time; but, especially on weekends, you can run into all sorts of interesting individuals.

Imagine that, when you give people 200 square feet to engage in free speech, all of them end up that one place.

I understand what you are saying; and I agree that free speech is important.

But, can you imagine the havoc if 30 or 40 Neo-nazis descended on a school and started goose stepping down the halls? I can almost guarantee that someone would lose their temper.

What if Fred Phelp's ( I know, he's been removed as head winner) merry band of winners show up? Do they get to run all over campus with their signs?

True enough, most of the people are harmless and want to promote a message; but, I don't need to hear hellfire and damnation sermons while I'm renewing all of my certs.

/ your right to speak freely doesn't trump my right to not listen to you

Your right to not listen doesn't trump their right to speak, either. If they are in a public place, they are free to say what they want, just like you are free to ignore it. But you can't make them go away just because you disagree.


It's not about wether I agree or disagree with the message; it's about the delivery. I have always wondered if people consider how pontificating over a bullhorn makes them look. It's an annoyance and you aren't going to win the hearts and minds of anybody by shouting slogans at them.

/ Like I said upthread; there needs to be rules for protesting or you'll get Neo-nazis protesting in a holocaust museum.
 
2014-04-26 06:42:27 PM  

Kit Fister: call attempts to keep peaceful protests away from the eyes of those it's meant to target a bit draconian. I should be able to picket outside the whitehouse, have a sign at a presidential debate (if we had real presidential debates), show up at a gun show with anti NRA material, whatever.

The only exceptions to this is when it directly intercedes with law enforcement, and I'd argue that the civil disobedience of the 60s was far more in your face than any of this.


I see. So you are the kind of mental midget who can't grasp the need for secure perimeters in situations like presidential debates and armed insurgencies against federal law enforcement. That's why your argument just blows right past security and public safety issues like they don't even exist.

Well young man, I can see you've got a a lot to learn yet. But I can also see you'll be a passionate debater once you reach high school!
 
2014-04-26 06:43:11 PM  
 
2014-04-26 06:45:04 PM  

Baz744: Kit Fister: call attempts to keep peaceful protests away from the eyes of those it's meant to target a bit draconian. I should be able to picket outside the whitehouse, have a sign at a presidential debate (if we had real presidential debates), show up at a gun show with anti NRA material, whatever.

The only exceptions to this is when it directly intercedes with law enforcement, and I'd argue that the civil disobedience of the 60s was far more in your face than any of this.

I see. So you are the kind of mental midget who can't grasp the need for secure perimeters in situations like presidential debates and armed insurgencies against federal law enforcement. That's why your argument just blows right past security and public safety issues like they don't even exist.

Well young man, I can see you've got a a lot to learn yet. But I can also see you'll be a passionate debater once you reach high school!


I guess that makes you a masterdebater.
 
2014-04-26 06:45:32 PM  
Free speech ain't free if it's restricted to the free speech zone. It's funny how these 60's anti-establishment types are now the establishment and crushing free speech just like the establishment of the 60's did.

/too much use of the word establishment
//er, did it again
///stop
 
2014-04-26 06:45:49 PM  

doyner: I guess that makes you a masterdebater.


I sometimes masterdebate several times a day.
 
2014-04-26 06:49:10 PM  

Kit Fister: iheartscotch: aerojockey: iheartscotch: Free speech zones are absolutely clogged with people promoting one cause or another. It's not crowded all the time; but, especially on weekends, you can run into all sorts of interesting individuals.

Imagine that, when you give people 200 square feet to engage in free speech, all of them end up that one place.

I understand what you are saying; and I agree that free speech is important.

But, can you imagine the havoc if 30 or 40 Neo-nazis descended on a school and started goose stepping down the halls? I can almost guarantee that someone would lose their temper.

What if Fred Phelp's ( I know, he's been removed as head winner) merry band of winners show up? Do they get to run all over campus with their signs?

True enough, most of the people are harmless and want to promote a message; but, I don't need to hear hellfire and damnation sermons while I'm renewing all of my certs.

/ your right to speak freely doesn't trump my right to not listen to you

Your right to not listen doesn't trump their right to speak, either. If they are in a public place, they are free to say what they want, just like you are free to ignore it. But you can't make them go away just because you disagree.


Attention whores are attention whores no matter what they're saying. You're only acting all huffy about this group because you agree with then politically.

Get out of my Farking way, I'm trying to get to class and I don't care about your Farking politics. I came to college to learn, and to a lesser extent drink and fark.
 
2014-04-26 06:50:10 PM  

Thunderpipes: Can't believe liberals actually now think the 1st amendment should go away too


They dont
Thats all you sunshine
 
2014-04-26 06:52:53 PM  

The Homer Tax: Get out of my Farking way, I'm trying to get to class


Were these people any more of an obstacle than the shrubbery by the stairs ?
 
2014-04-26 06:53:05 PM  

iheartscotch: It's not about wether I agree or disagree with the message; it's about the delivery. I have always wondered if people consider how pontificating over a bullhorn makes them look. It's an annoyance and you aren't going to win the hearts and minds of anybody by shouting slogans at them.

/ Like I said upthread; there needs to be rules for protesting or you'll get Neo-nazis protesting in a holocaust museum.


You realize that neo-nazis get to protest at holocaust museums, right?  It's kinda important that we let them do that, too.

As to the delivery, I don't recall anything about a bullhorn being used, nor did I see anything about someone else's right to be there being obstructed.

Amusingly enough, the only thing about this that I don't get is that conservatives are handing out copies of the Constitution.  Aren't they afraid people will actually read it?  It's a pretty damn liberal document, even mentions such socialism as promoting the general welfare, and things like a right to have government not support religion, a right to be free from unreasonable searches, automatic citizenship for people who are born here, a ban on slavery, and a right to due process.
 
2014-04-26 06:53:08 PM  
another thread filled with logical fallacies and beliefs based on them.
 
2014-04-26 06:55:01 PM  

OnlyM3: Democrats also got police to try to make these people get back to their assigned tables.

[www.learnnc.org image 850x664]

[media.npr.org image 850x687]

[historyz.com image 700x489]
The party of "freedom" hasn't changed a bit.


Those were "Southern Democrats", southern conservatives who only belonged to the Democratic Party because, after losing the civil war, southerners had a deeply ingrained and entrenched hatred of Lincoln and wanted nothing to do with his Republican Party. After the passing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by Johnson, also southern Democrat, many white southerners began voting Republican. Beginning with Nixon and continuing through Reagan , the Southern Democrat conservative bloc gradually switched to Republican. The southern Democrats of the Jim Crow era are the Republicans of today.
 
2014-04-26 06:55:11 PM  

Baz744: So you are the kind of mental midget who can't grasp the need for secure perimeters in situations like presidential debates and armed insurgencies against federal law enforcement


(paraphrased) Those who give up their liberty for more security neither deserve liberty nor security
 
2014-04-26 06:56:57 PM  

oryx: Free speech ain't free if it's restricted to the free speech zone. It's funny how these 60's anti-establishment types are now the establishment and crushing free speech just like the establishment of the 60's did.

/too much use of the word establishment
//er, did it again
///stop


Your repeated use of the word establishment has been established. The current establishment has taken notice of your noticing the previous establishment's continued establishment.

/establishment.
 
2014-04-26 06:57:02 PM  

Fark It: Dinki: Both Burch and her friend, the complaint alleges, were at an outdoor event featuring other student groups who were distributing literature from various tables set up for that purpose. Burch claims she left her table and approached other students, and an administrator told her and her friend to get behind their table.

Oh look, another conservative that thinks the rules don't apply to them. Because obviously the message they were trying to get out was so much more important than everyone elses.

Those awful conservatives and the message they're trying to get out.

[www.tucsonsentinel.com image 850x977]

pic related

How dare someone think they can hand this out in public.


Except nobody was stopping them from handing it out. Thanks for playing.
 
2014-04-26 07:03:23 PM  

DarkVader: iheartscotch: It's not about wether I agree or disagree with the message; it's about the delivery. I have always wondered if people consider how pontificating over a bullhorn makes them look. It's an annoyance and you aren't going to win the hearts and minds of anybody by shouting slogans at them.

/ Like I said upthread; there needs to be rules for protesting or you'll get Neo-nazis protesting in a holocaust museum.

You realize that neo-nazis get to protest at holocaust museums, right?  It's kinda important that we let them do that, too.

As to the delivery, I don't recall anything about a bullhorn being used, nor did I see anything about someone else's right to be there being obstructed.

Amusingly enough, the only thing about this that I don't get is that conservatives are handing out copies of the Constitution.  Aren't they afraid people will actually read it?  It's a pretty damn liberal document, even mentions such socialism as promoting the general welfare, and things like a right to have government not support religion, a right to be free from unreasonable searches, automatic citizenship for people who are born here, a ban on slavery, and a right to due process.


I realize that Neo-nazis can protest outside of a holocaust museum. What I am saying is, with out rules, they'd be inside the holocaust museum.

The right to protest is important; but, not to the point that it is disruptive or violent.

As to the constitution itself; both sides need to reread the constitution and bill of rights.
 
2014-04-26 07:05:09 PM  

Fark It: I'm not a conservative, and they should be "allowed" to hand out literature anywhere, especially at a public university, as per the 1st Amendment.


Should they be allowed to enter a lecture theatre or seminar room during a lecture or seminar and hand it out then? During a classical music concert?
 
2014-04-26 07:06:05 PM  

fugeeface: Fark It: Lorelle: Mugato: Nabb1: You sure do love authority, don't you? Why should there be rules on a public campus about peaceably assembling and distributing pamphlets? Does the notion of that activity offend you so? We have a state school, political speech, and it seems no one was being disruptive. Why does this activity trouble you? Is it because they are conservative?

Did you RTFA? They weren't being stopped from handing out the Constitution, just to sit at one of the tables like everyone else. And how do you know they were conservative, was the Second Amendment highlighted and the 4th whited out?

Evidently the girl and her friend weren't getting any attention while sitting at their table, so they decided to take their literature and force it on others.

Citation needed.  Handing out literature, of any sort, is allowed in this country.  It doesn't matter who does it, or what they believe, or which political party occupies the White House.

[4.bp.blogspot.com image 850x529]

Hawaii and Alaska included.

This.

Also included: Puerto Rico, Guam, US Virgin Islands, Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa.


Thank you for remembering us, although the bill of rights is a somewhat moot point here.
We've got no say in the body that holds ultimate authority and the local politicians can pretty much get away with murder.

/In the literal sense, on some occasions...
 
Displayed 50 of 258 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report