America Bush Style

The First Amendment is the most delicate of balancing acts. The summer before her senior year of college, my daughter worked as a temp at Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston, a teaching hospital affiliated with Harvard Medical School. SHe worked in a stomach cancer ward. An anti-abortion protestor spat in her face one morning on her way to work.
That's about the level of those folks. But, did he have the right to spit on her? Particularly when he didn't know who she was and why she was there.

0 Replies

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You lefties will always find something to be outraged about. It's this today, it will be somehing else tomorrow. I will continue to watch and laugh

McGentrix,

I am certain that you have in some way benefitted from some left wing protest. When things need correcting, it is a moral duty to either correct them or call attention to them.

0 Replies

Karzak wrote:

The first amendment is not an absolute right.

But more to the point, these idiots were asked to leave, they still could have their first amendment rights, and wear the Tshirts elsewhere, they just were told they couldn't be disruptive, and their aim was clearly to be disruptive.

They were asked to leave, and they refused, so they were guilty of trespass.

It is funny how the libs have no problem keeping abortion protesters away from abortion clinics, isn't that a free speech issue as well?

examples and links to that satatement about abortion clinics?

Also, links and examples of bush protesters who have bombed and murdered bush rallies, as abortion protesters have done?

bushinc assists the liberation of freedom fighters in Iraq, breaking many eggs for the bushincaburton omelette, but arrests American citizens for wearing "objectionable" t-shirts.....nice. Keep bleeting pal.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

If they were truly doing nothing, then they would not have been hasseled.

This is the kind of argument that has been used to defend authority from time immemorial. I can just imagine hearing that in Germany during the '30s, when various minorities were rounded up and taken away. "If they were truly doing nothing, then they would not have been hasseled [sic]."

The only people who have to fear authority are the wrong-doers, eh, McG?

0 Replies

If you're the missing link, you don't have to provide links.

0 Replies

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

examples and links to that satatement about abortion clinics?

1994 Federal law, Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances. Where were your screams of no free speech when clinton did this?

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

Also, links and examples of bush protesters who have bombed and murdered bush rallies, as abortion protesters have done?

Cause everyone knows that political figures are never murdered by the opposition

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

but arrests American citizens for wearing "objectionable" t-shirts.....nice. Keep bleeting pal.

LOL, they were not arrested for wearing T shirts, they were arrested for tresspassing, try to deal with the facts, OK?

0 Replies

There will be designated protest areas, this July in Boston, at the DNC. I think you have to have a permit to visit/participate in the areas.

0 Replies

The couple in question were not trespassing--they had purchased tickets to the event.

0 Replies

Restricting access to a ligitimate business is a violation in most cities, counties and states. Clinton just made it a national law and a Republican controlled legislature passed it. Alluding to crazy conspiracy theories continues to make that person appear more and more the fool.

0 Replies

Lightwizard wrote:

Restricting access to a ligitimate business is a violation in most cities, counties and states. Clinton just made it a national law and a Republican controlled legilature passed it. Alluding to crazy conspiracy theories continues to make that person appear more and more the fool.

Rightomondo LW

The problem was that Pro-lifers were forcibly preventing woman from entering clinics. They were not prevented from protesting they just could no longer block entrance. See if you attack someone, or prevent movement that is no longer a "civil" protest.

Two people buying tickets to a public event that is sponsered by and paid for by the American people and who have a T-Shirt on does not begin to compare with the unlawful actions often times perpetrated at Clinics that provide WOMAN'S HEALTH.

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

The couple in question were not trespassing--they had purchased tickets to the event.

They were asked to leave. They refused, they were arrested for tresspassing.

Having tickets does not take away managements right to eject troublemakers.

0 Replies

Redheat wrote:

Two people buying tickets to a public event that is sponsered by and paid for by the American people and who have a T-Shirt on does not begin to compare with the unlawful actions often times perpetrated at Clinics that provide WOMAN'S HEALTH.

What does that statement have to do with this?

The event is sponsered by the ticket purchasers, tickets are a contract, if you look into that contract you will find that the tickets do not give you the right not to be ejected when you make a nusance of yourself.

These two idiots committed unlawful actions, period, end of story.

As far as abortion clinics, half the people who go into them die. Hardly sounds womans health to me.

And clintons anti free speech law against abortion protesters is not limited to allowing access, it does stifle protest rights.

0 Replies

In what way were these two troublemakers?

It remains a mystery to me why the Bush butt kissers believe Bush's comfort somehow supercedes the rights of citizens to protest his actions. He is the POTUS and is answerable to us. He and his campaign are violating the first amendment by blocking otherwise lawful protest. I thought his oath required him to support the constitution.

0 Replies

Sagamore wrote:

In what way were these two troublemakers?

It remains a mystery to me why the Bush butt kissers believe Bush's comfort somehow supercedes the rights of citizens to protest his actions. He is the POTUS and is answerable to us. He and his campaign are violating the first amendment by blocking otherwise lawful protest. I thought his oath required him to support the constitution.

Exactly! Plus what protest? They weren't chanting, or yelling they simply were wearing a T-Shirt that was not favorable to Bush. How does any of this translate into "trespassing" or "uncivil protest"?

If a cop came up to a Righty as they were standing in line for their daily 12 pack, and told them they MUST leave the premises because their moronic looking face was scarying away the customers Would the cops be right? or would the customer be right to resist such an apparent violation of the law?

0 Replies

Redheat wrote:

They weren't chanting, or yelling they simply were wearing a T-Shirt that was not favorable to Bush. How does any of this translate into "trespassing" or "uncivil protest"?

LOL, "Charleston Police Sgt. R.E. Parsons said Nicole and Jeff Rank were in a no-trespassing area and refused to leave."

Try dealing with the actual facts, OK?

0 Replies

Redheat wrote:

Sagamore wrote:
In what way were these two troublemakers?

It remains a mystery to me why the Bush butt kissers believe Bush's comfort somehow supercedes the rights of citizens to protest his actions. He is the POTUS and is answerable to us. He and his campaign are violating the first amendment by blocking otherwise lawful protest. I thought his oath required him to support the constitution.

Exactly! Plus what protest? They weren't chanting, or yelling they simply were wearing a T-Shirt that was not favorable to Bush. How does any of this translate into "trespassing" or "uncivil protest"?

If a cop came up to a Righty as they were standing in line for their daily 12 pack, and told them they MUST leave the premises because their moronic looking face was scarying away the customers Would the cops be right? or would the customer be right to resist such an apparent violation of the law?

So, if a couple were to go to a women's rights conference wearing shirts that said "Women are dumb C*nts" that would be OK, because they had tickets?

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

Redheat wrote:
Sagamore wrote:
In what way were these two troublemakers?

It remains a mystery to me why the Bush butt kissers believe Bush's comfort somehow supercedes the rights of citizens to protest his actions. He is the POTUS and is answerable to us. He and his campaign are violating the first amendment by blocking otherwise lawful protest. I thought his oath required him to support the constitution.

Exactly! Plus what protest? They weren't chanting, or yelling they simply were wearing a T-Shirt that was not favorable to Bush. How does any of this translate into "trespassing" or "uncivil protest"?

If a cop came up to a Righty as they were standing in line for their daily 12 pack, and told them they MUST leave the premises because their moronic looking face was scarying away the customers Would the cops be right? or would the customer be right to resist such an apparent violation of the law?

So, if a couple were to go to a women's rights conference wearing shirts that said "Women are dumb C*nts" that would be OK, because they had tickets?

Yes unless the facility itself had a policy agaisnt profanity. Plus I would LOVE to see someone do that. Trust me there would be NO need to call the police.

See either you have a principle or you don't, when you pick and choose according your personal bias that principle ceases to exist.

I hate, loath some of the things I hear uttered by people like Rush and Ann Coulter. I think they harm the country and are just pure hate. HOWEVER and here is where you and I differ. I would NEVER EVER say they had NO RIGHT to speak those words. See I don't believe in Censoship and have a deep abiding belief in the Freedom of Speech. Therefore even when books like the 'turner diaries" are written and people say the most abhorent things I wouldn't ever do anything to inpeded their rights. I would actually FIGHT for them.

It appears to me that the Busy Loyalist fail to grasp the concept of American Freedoms. Almost 1,000 dead in Iraq fighting for American values and principles. American blood spread all over here and Europe defending the rights that are spelled out in the Constitution. Yet you righties don't have enough conviction to admit when it's just plain wrong. So in my book you choose Bush OVER America and that is not being the Patriots so many of you claim yourselves to be.

I'd like to add McGent that it's ironic that you use a picture dedicated to Reagan while supporting Bush on these kinds of issues. While I don't think Reagan deserves all the praise he gets, he would have been OUTRAGED at the kinds of suppression tactics used by this administration. So you not only show your lack of conviction but disgrace the name of Reagan to boot!

0 Replies

Redheat wrote:

It appears to me that the Busy Loyalist fail to grasp the concept of American Freedoms.

LOL, again, stick to the facts. These two morons who snuck in with the Tshirts hidden to do an illegal protest were asked by poilice to leave, then told to leave, then arrested for breaking tresspassing laws.

They were stupid, they deserved to be arrested, end of story.

0 Replies

So, you agree then that merely wearing a tshirt can be a disturbance. That couple went to the gathering with no other purpose than to be disruptive and garner publicity. That's it. There is no higher meaning behind their actions, they were publicity hounds seeking attention.

They were free to do as they wish, they went in, showed their t-shirts. Then the police freely escorted them out. You seem to feel that the left's rights are more important than the rights. What about the people that went to see Bush speak? Don't they have the right not to be bothered by demonstrations? Doesn't Bush have the right to be able to speak in public without protestor trying to drown him out?

That's why they created the free speech zones, so publicity hounds can seek their attention there with infringing on the rights of others.

So, don't give me crap aboput not understanding rights. I understand them perfectly. Apparently, it's the morons like this couple that got arrested that aren't quite clear.

0 Replies

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Karzak-your idea of "facts" has no basis in law. These people were in violation of no law. They just had something to say that wasn't popular with the Bush campaign. It is Bush, his minions and you who are defending the indefensible and are acting in a manner most Un-American. You should all be ashamed of yourselves.

0 Replies

America Bush Style

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know