Does the 'right to free speech' actually exist in the US?

Who do you feel can better adjudicate civil disputes?

 

Are you sure that you quoted the correct post?

 

Trump openly calls out the press when they print inaccurate, false, stories. At least Trump is not using his beef with the news media, to use our federal agencies to engage in spying on the news media like Obama did.

Eric Holder invoked the Espionage Act to spy on a Fox News journalist, James Rosen.

The Obama administration also spied on the Associated Press reporters, confiscating phone and email records.

Obama also spied on James Risen, a New York Times reporter

 

Sorry I am overwhelmed with alerts today.

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
Yes. Do you finally understand?

WHY couldn't you answer that question You seem to always have more questions than facts.

Why couldn't you address: It upheld and protected it..

All people have the right of bodily autonomy.

Take it away and you have slaves.

It's a basic human right.

IF abortion is banned then women would not have the right of bodily autonomy.



I don't think you know what bodily autonomy is.

If someone said ," I need a new heart, I'll take YOURS", would you want it to be legal for them to take yours?

 

We would first need the courts to dehumanize the person as a non-human blob of cells. Then you can surely kill them for the sake of your convenience.

 

I'm not talking about "attacks on the media". I'm talking about completely shutting down all communication. Obama never shut down all communication. Trump did. Obama never threatened with shutting down any source of free speech. Trump has.. and still is...

The press... leaking? How can the press "leak" classified material. I don't know of any journalist who has a security clearance.

If you meant publish information leaked to them.. absolutely they should be immune! Everybody should be immune to leaking classified material unless it was classified because it posses a threat to national security, or because it puts American lives or interest (during a negotiation, for example) in jeopardy, ... and there may be other exceptions. But in no case should anybody be prosecuted for leaking information that was classified for the sole purpose of keeping legitimate information from the American people.

Well.... the lady dancing completely nude in front of Trump's secret police (and that they shot at) might not be what my grandma would have called "innocent". But it didn't look like she had anything on her that might help burn down a federal building.

Amazing. You don't even know what question you yourself asked.

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
Yes. Do you finally understand?

WHY couldn't you answer that question You seem to always have more questions than facts.

Why couldn't you address: It upheld and protected it..

All people have the right of bodily autonomy.

Take it away and you have slaves.

It's a basic human right.

IF abortion is banned then women would not have the right of bodily autonomy.



I don't think you know what bodily autonomy is.

If someone said ," I need a new heart, I'll take YOURS", would you want it to be legal for them to take yours?

Are you talking about women? because that is exactly what some righties want to do to them...

 

Good point! Trump lies (exercising his free speech) on a regular basis. And the media calls him on it every time.
Perhaps the media criticizing Trump for speaking untruths is seen by the right, as a threat to freedom of speech.

 

Who in government has called for Trump to be silent on political views no matter how wrong they appear. One might remember Wilson imprisoning his political foes or FDR interning the Japanese. But somehow Trump is worse. WHY?

 

I'm not sure how that question applies to my post, (I referred to media not government)....
but have heard more than once Trump's own people have warned him that certain remarks and tweets are not helpful.

 

I am referring to government and not media but under common law in the US, precedent is too often used to set federal law. For example, the requirement to require auto insurance from private insurers was quickly passed on to state authorities in the respective state legislatures which Obama used as precedent to forcing people to buy his health insurance plan. This is why I favor civil law over common law.

University law (which is essentially state and federal law) restricting speech will likely be used as precedent to restrict speech on first the state and then federal level.

 

All speech is protected by the first amendment. But, as I said, the first amendment does not protect the speaker from the consequences of what he says. A call for violence is protected speech. The government cannot stop you from calling for violence. If it actually causes violence then there can be some legal consequences. You should also know that the bill of rights applies only to government action and not to the public. Individuals and businesses can impede speech to their heart's content. Only government is restricted from censorship.

 

Agreed and if one haplessly wanders into an area where the demographic is different from them and starts disrespecting those in the bar or wherever, then I say God help you cause I don’t care.

 

The media is not restricted by the first amendment. Only government is.

 

So far. I see that changing.

 

Not without abandoning the constitution entirely.

 

Should government officials be restricted from deliberately lying? Would that be violating their Constitutional rights?

 

The US constitution is ignored all the time usually because it is considered a living document subject to liberal (not in the political sense) interpretation.

 

Again, all speech is protected by the first amendment. Government can't stop a politician from lying. But there can be consequences.

 

What the hell is "a rightie."

Who the hell is dehumanizing women so they can kill women??

 

There is no group more combatively right wing and dehumanizing of women than Muslims but the left defends them at every step. It literally makes no sense!!

 

That's why you need to get away from using the term liberal so loosely. Their are people who #walkaway from the left. They describe themselves as liberals, in the more classic sense. I have heard these people identifying as a center left libertarian. The Democrats like Rep. Pelosi are leftists, or some form of Marxist, but they are not liberals, they do not believe in liberty (freedom).

Out of respect for people transitioning away from the Democrats and the left, so I've endeavored to be more precise in my language. I've run up against more and more people calling themselves liberal, because they do not even want to be identified with "the left," or Democrats.

 

That's because murderous Islamists are not competing with Democrats for political power. It's all about putting the power and unity of the Democratic Party before everything else. It's why they will call for open borders, if it means flooding their sanctuary cities and states with enough illegals to gain a new seat in the US House of Representative, and an Electoral College vote. to hell what illegal immigration is doing to their cities, it's all about political power.

 

Omg this is disgusting but so clearly true!