You DO NOT have the right to burn the Koran.

[Kludge]

So if I buy a Koran... it's not my property? If i'm not allowed to destroy or deface it... how can it be my property? same with an american flag or <insert religious or nationalist symbol here>

When you become a citizen of a nation, you forfeit all natural rights and are forced to struggle to keep as many rights (legal rights) as possible.

It isn't just Korans and this isn't something new.

You do not own your computer. You may not do with it as you please. Improper use will lead to confiscation.

You do not own your gun. You may not do with it as you please. Improper use will lead to confiscation.

You do not own your land. You may not do with it as you please. Improper use will lead to confiscation.

You do not own your car. You may not do with it as you please. Improper use will lead to confiscation.

You do not own your food. You may not do with it as you please. Improper use will lead to confiscation.

Everything we "own" is subject to the government's terms and conditions. They are the ultimate owners, for our own good, perhaps.

 

[Dr.3D]

Well, I'm damned tired of being protected from myself.

 

[tpreitzel]

http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/201...koran-shouting-fire-in-a-crowded-theater.html

So says Justice Breyer claiming the 'fire in a crowded theater' rule. IMO if you express yourself, no matter how offensive, and somebody gets violent, that person is the problem, not you.

Now before anyone starts, I do not want to burn a Koran, Im not a support of Rev. Wolfman Muttonchop and I would advise anyone planning on burning any Holy Book to refrain out of common decency, but my purpose in posting this is to ask this question: if we chip away at our right to express ourselves out of fear of violence, doesnt it set a very dangerous precedent? Effectively, the most violent groups sensitivites become law.

Well, so much for SCJ Breyer's intelligence, i.e. lack thereof. I can yell "fire" in a crowded theater all I want. The other stooges in the theater are responsible for their potentially irresponsible actions, i.e. trampling one another, etc. My words are simply words. FIRE! FIRE! FIRE! Damn it, FIRE Justice Breyer!

 

[idirtify]

You DO NOT have the right to burn the Koran.

So says Justice Breyer claiming the 'fire in a crowded theater' rule. IMO if you express yourself, no matter how offensive, and somebody gets violent, that person is the problem, not you.

Breyer didn’t really say that at all. He only said the SC would probably come to a decision based on that concept over a series of cases (paraphrased).

 

[phill4paul]

When you become a citizen of a nation, you forfeit all natural rights and are forced to struggle to keep as many rights (legal rights) as possible.

It isn't just Korans and this isn't something new.

You do not own your computer. You may not do with it as you please. Improper use will lead to confiscation.

You do not own your gun. You may not do with it as you please. Improper use will lead to confiscation.

You do not own your land. You may not do with it as you please. Improper use will lead to confiscation.

You do not own your car. You may not do with it as you please. Improper use will lead to confiscation.

You do not own your food. You may not do with it as you please. Improper use will lead to confiscation.

Everything we "own" is subject to the government's terms and conditions. They are the ultimate owners, for our own good, perhaps.

That clappy black-and-white Orson Wells clappy thingy. That I didn't cut-paste.

The one where he is black-and-white, and in a black-and-white tuxedo and he is in a seat and clapping. He appears to be really enthused.

That one.

 

[torchbearer]

I like to see him try to stop me.

 

[Vessol]

That clappy black-and-white Orson Wells clappy thingy. That I didn't cut-paste.

The one where he is black-and-white, and in a black-and-white tuxedo and he is in a seat and clapping. He appears to be really enthused.

That one.

 

[QueenB4Liberty]

I don't want to live in a society where people have the right to burn crosses and other crass things in an attempt to incite hatred and riots.

It doesn't have to be a federal issue, because the constitution doesn't have the power to deal with it, nor should it have the power to deal with it.

But local government can, and should have the power to handle this.

So you're okay with banning burning inanimate religious objects because it might offend someone? Didn't you say you were atheist?

 

[LibertyVox]

I think the OP was well meaning but it would have been better received if it was posted as a positive suggestion. One can do it, but should one? Of course context is always important.

 

[erowe1]

http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/201...koran-shouting-fire-in-a-crowded-theater.html

So says Justice Breyer claiming the 'fire in a crowded theater' rule. IMO if you express yourself, no matter how offensive, and somebody gets violent, that person is the problem, not you.

Now before anyone starts, I do not want to burn a Koran, Im not a supporter of Rev. Wolfman Muttonchop and I would advise anyone planning on burning any Holy Book to refrain out of common decency, but my purpose in posting this is to ask this question: if we chip away at our right to express ourselves out of fear of violence, doesnt it set a very dangerous precedent? Effectively, the most violent groups sensitivites become law.

No need for your third paragraph. Breyer is out to lunch. The fact that he thinks that just makes me want to burn one more.

 

[LibertyVox]

No need for your third paragraph. Breyer is out to lunch. The fact that he thinks that just makes me want to burn one more.

so you've already burned one? lol

 

[jkr]

well now i GOTTA burn one...LOSERS!

 

[ARealConservative]

So you're okay with banning burning inanimate religious objects because it might offend someone? Didn't you say you were atheist?

it's more complicated then that.

What I said is I'm ok with concept of empowering local government to hinder the use of rights as that gives us all the best chance of creating an environment where the largest number of rights are capable of being defended.

I learned long ago that it doesn't matter what rights you are born with. If people don't want to fight to help you protect your rights, they don't stand a chance of surviving

 

[ARealConservative]

so you've already burned one? lol

 

[Thrashertm]

I don't want to live in a society where people have the right to burn crosses and other crass things in an attempt to incite hatred and riots.

It doesn't have to be a federal issue, because the constitution doesn't have the power to deal with it, nor should it have the power to deal with it.

But local government can, and should have the power to handle this.

You want to live somewhere with less Freedom. Hah, go live on a college campus!

 

[heavenlyboy34]

As someone that truly understand how wonderful, and fragile freedom is, I can accept allowing local limitations to ensure that the concept of freedom survives.

You remind me of what Freud said in his essay on group psychology. He cited Gustave LeBon (noted for his works promoting racial superiority and how individuals become "dumb" when in crowds-the latter of which he makes valid observations about) in asserting that the individual's nature is "drowned" in the context of society. It's indeed sad that you accept such archaic European notions that diminish the individual in favor of "society".

 

[heavenlyboy34]

You want to live somewhere with less Freedom. Hah, go live on a college campus!

lolz!

 

[heavenlyboy34]

I don't want to live in a society where people have the right to burn crosses and other crass things in an attempt to incite hatred and riots.

It doesn't have to be a federal issue, because the constitution doesn't have the power to deal with it, nor should it have the power to deal with it.

But local government can, and should have the power to handle this.

You already do. The government uses fear-mongering (though not quite so obvious) to manipulate the masses on a regular basis.

 

[PreDeadMan]

When you become a citizen of a nation, you forfeit all natural rights and are forced to struggle to keep as many rights (legal rights) as possible.

It isn't just Korans and this isn't something new.

You do not own your computer. You may not do with it as you please. Improper use will lead to confiscation.

You do not own your gun. You may not do with it as you please. Improper use will lead to confiscation.

You do not own your land. You may not do with it as you please. Improper use will lead to confiscation.

You do not own your car. You may not do with it as you please. Improper use will lead to confiscation.

You do not own your food. You may not do with it as you please. Improper use will lead to confiscation.

Everything we "own" is subject to the government's terms and conditions. They are the ultimate owners, for our own good, perhaps.

I understand that government can take away our property or treasures without a reason.... the funny part is where do they get the moral power to RULE over me? take away my property... i refuse to participate in this idiotic corrupt system voting is a sham whoever gets into office government always slips in.

 

[QueenB4Liberty]

it's more complicated then that.

What I said is I'm ok with concept of empowering local government to hinder the use of rights as that gives us all the best chance of creating an environment where the largest number of rights are capable of being defended.

I learned long ago that it doesn't matter what rights you are born with. If people don't want to fight to help you protect your rights, they don't stand a chance of surviving

But you don't have a right not to be offended.