News Is the U.S. Losing Its Freedom of Speech?

[mheslep]

... when Obama said that the decision to build a mosque in Manhattan was misguided? ...

You are mistaken.

"I was not commenting and I will not comment on the wisdom of making the decision to put a mosque there," Obama told reporters in Florida.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Obamas-Clintonian-speech-pulls-rug-from-under-mosque-supporters-100716539.html

 

[drankin]

Those threads get blocked. I don't believe people here can condemn or insult a paritcular religion as it is against the forum guidelines IIRC.

Yes, of course, but I've been here long enough to know they are rarely blocked even though they are obvious insults.

 

[turbo]

I estimate 30 minutes to thread lock. Poor Evo!

 

[drankin]

I estimate 30 minutes to thread lock. Poor Evo!

Has anyone contacted her yet? She'd lock this quicker than spit.

 

[rootX]

Yes, of course, but I've been here long enough to know they are rarely blocked even though they are obvious insults.

I disagree.

 

[Gokul43201]

You are mistaken. http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Obamas-Clintonian-speech-pulls-rug-from-under-mosque-supporters-100716539.html

Correction noted and accepted. The line of questioning following that statement is retracted.

But for all practical purposes, when someone says they are not going to comment on the wisdom of a particular action, it almost inevitably conveys their disapproval. And that's why your article is titled "Obama's Clintonian speech pulls rug from under mosque supporters".

 

[DaveC426913]

Everything should be worked for, just like every other life form on this planet.

So you are an anarchist. You believe the very notion of 'civilization' is not something we are entitled to. OK.

Thing is, you live in a country where that is not the way it works. Would you consider moving somewhere where you would have to fight for everything?

No, didn't think so.

Personally, I think there is no such thing as a bona fide anarchist, only armchair anarchists.

 

[mheslep]

I can understand why some would find a book burning offensive. I can't understand why anybody would find a community center offensive. There is no double standard, you're looking at two very different events. One is an act of destruction, the other is an act of construction.

Well said, I almost missed this one.

Really? I understand disagreement, but you really contend you "can't understand" why an overwhelming majority oppose the mosque?

When asked if they "support or oppose the proposal to build the Cordoba House," New Yorkers said they oppose the facility, which is expected to cost $100 million, by a 63-27 percent margin. At the same time, by a 64-to-28 percent margin, New Yorkers say Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf has the constitutional right to build it.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co...community-center-recognize-constitutionality/

 

[Gokul43201]

Ugh, this is going to go a little off-topic ...

Yes, of course, but I've been here long enough to know they are rarely blocked even though they are obvious insults.

If there are any direct insults, the posts should be reported. Do you report them when you see them? If not, why not?

 

[mugaliens]

Trust me, if I had my way, humans would have the right to air and to defend themselves if necessary.

We don't? Please say this isn't so! I spent twenty years in the military, laying my life on the line in defense of our Constitution and the American way of life. I'd hate to think that was all for nothing!

Everything should be worked for, just like every other life form on this planet.

Agreed. I started to say, "Last time I checked, no other animal on our planet has welfare or retirement," but that's not quite true. Communal societies from ants to dolpins and chimps always have some members who work harder than most, and others who don't work nearly hard enough, but are usually kept on because they provide some benefit to the group.

 

[DaveC426913]

Really? I understand disagreement, but you have no really contend you "can't understand" why an overwhelming majority oppose the mosque?

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co...community-center-recognize-constitutionality/

Sorry, I'm feeling a little dense. I don't get your point. Unless it's that this is a budget issue...

I was merely trying to highlight the sage words that one is an act of destruction while the other is an act of construction.

It's kind of harder to get offended at an act that builds and provides.

 

[turbo]

Really? I understand disagreement, but you have no really contend you "can't understand" why an overwhelming majority oppose the mosque?

Do you have any links to polls that show that an "overwhelming majority" of Americans oppose the construction of a Muslim-funded community center in lower Manhattan? If you pose poll questions in inventive ways to support your ideology, you can produce about any outcome you like. How about an honest poll? Got anything?

If you link to a poll, please link to the questions that the poll presented. It's only fair.

 

[Jack21222]

Really? I understand disagreement, but you have no really contend you "can't understand" why an overwhelming majority oppose the mosque?

I do contend that I can't understand it. All of the opposition seems to be based on ignorance. The only connection between this interfaith community center being built by a Sufi and Al Qaeda is that they're both related to Islam. Beyond that, there is NO CONNECTION AT ALL.

Almost all of the opposition stems from people assigning importance to that superficial connection. A small amount of the opposition is just rooted in xenophobia. I've never heard a rational argument against the community center.

 

[mheslep]

Almost all of the opposition stems from people assigning importance to that superficial connection. A small amount of the opposition is just rooted in xenophobia. I've never heard a rational argument against the community center.

"Almost all of the opposition stems from people assigning ..."? You know most think this way how?

 

[Jack21222]

"Almost all of the opposition stems from people assigning ..."? You know most think this way how?

Based on a sample size of every argument I've ever heard from anyone, whether it be on the internet, in person, or on the television. Not a scientific study, but it's all I'm able to go on.

 

[turbo]

"Almost all of the opposition stems from people assigning ..."? You know most think this way how?

Do you have any links to polls that show that an "overwhelming majority" of Americans oppose the construction of a Muslim-funded community center in lower Manhattan? If you pose poll questions in inventive ways to support your ideology, you can produce about any outcome you like. How about an honest poll? Got anything?

If you link to a poll, please link to the questions that the poll presented. It's only fair.

I have already asked once. Please link us to your sources, with the questions that produced the "poll" numbers. Forum rules state that you must provide substantiation for such claims.

 

[drankin]

I have already asked once. Please link us to your sources, with the questions that produced the "poll" numbers. Forum rules state that you must provide substantiation for such claims.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2011799,00.html

Can I help?

 

[mheslep]

I have already asked once. Please link us to your sources, with the questions that produced the "poll" numbers. Forum rules state that you must provide substantiation for such claims.

Yes I provided a link in post 98 for New Yorkers:
https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=2873955&postcount=98
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co...community-center-recognize-constitutionality/

 

[turbo]

Yes I provided a link in post 98 for New Yorkers:
https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=2873955&postcount=98
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co...community-center-recognize-constitutionality/

The story does not explain what questions the poll was based on, which is critical to how such polls are steered. Still, it is clear that NYC residents support the right for the community center to be built. The right is construing such opinions very loosely, in order to portray the Democrats and Obama as radicals. Can you do better than that?

 

[drankin]

The story does not explain what questions the poll was based on, which is critical to how such polls are steered. Still, it is clear that NYC residents support the right for the community center to be built. The right is construing such opinions very loosely, in order to portray the Democrats and Obama as radicals. Can you do better than that?

He, gave you a poll. Can we move on?

 

[Jack21222]

I'd say the poll doesn't actually matter. Even if 99% of the population thought the location of the community center was offensive, I'd call that 99% of the population irrational.

 

[JaredJames]

Out of curiosity, in a democratic society, if say 99% of the population opposed the community centre, does that not count as a majority rule? Could action be taken to prevent it (despite the 'rights' of the people building it), due to the fact the majority could vote against it?

 

[mheslep]

The story does not explain what questions the poll was based on, which is critical to how such polls are steered. Still, it is clear that NYC residents support the right for the community center to be built. The right is construing such opinions very loosely, in order to portray the Democrats and Obama as radicals. Can you do better than that?

Poll questions on page 6 here:
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CBUQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.siena.edu%2Fuploadedfiles%2Fhome%2Fparents_and_community%2Fcommunity_page%2Fsri%2Fsny_poll%2F10%2520August%2520SNY%2520Poll%2520Release%2520--%2520FINAL.pdf&ei=E5aJTKjxCcb_lgf9rtTnCA&usg=AFQjCNG_Dq8JVdlEewVp7kfv4vkZoan6xw&sig2=JrgAh-NfiZ9L7bKxiftEFg

 

[turbo]

He, gave you a poll. Can we move on?

There are polls, and "polls". I have gotten innumerable calls from "number not known" sources that ask me to take a poll, and then pose ridiculously slanted questions of the "have you stopped beating your wife?" type. Such "polls" can give a political organization fictitious "results" that they can quote in the more compliant areas of the press. If you have enough money, you can buy exposure for lies almost anywhere.

What questions were asked? What was the initial set-up? Who agreed to be polled?

 

[Jack21222]

Out of curiosity, in a democratic society, if say 99% of the population opposed the community centre, does that not count as a majority rule? Could action be taken to prevent it (despite the 'rights' of the people building it), due to the fact the majority could vote against it?

Depends on the specific form of government you're talking about. In a constitutional republic, probably not.

 

[mheslep]

He, gave you a poll. Can we move on?

I was happy to respond. turbo's completely in keeping with the PF way of doing things to ask for a source, and even to keep going and to ask for original source material when there's suspicion that the source is misleading or misrepresented by the poster (accidentally or otherwise). IMO we should be doing more backtracking of sources, not less.

 

[DaveC426913]

Out of curiosity, in a democratic society, if say 99% of the population opposed the community centre, does that not count as a majority rule? Could action be taken to prevent it (despite the 'rights' of the people building it), due to the fact the majority could vote against it?

Majority rule does not trump law, and it does not trump human rights.

And it is not up for vote.

 

[mheslep]

Out of curiosity, in a democratic society, if say 99% of the population opposed the community centre, does that not count as a majority rule? Could action be taken to prevent it (despite the 'rights' of the people building it), due to the fact the majority could vote against it?

Depends on the specific form of government you're talking about. In a constitutional republic, probably not.

Exactly. In this constitutional republic there are some protections against which the majority may not infringe.

 

[drankin]

I was happy to respond. turbo's completely in keeping with the PF way of doing things to ask for a source, and even to keep going and to ask for original source material when there's suspicion that the source is misleading or misrepresented by the poster (accidentally or otherwise). IMO we should be doing more backtracking of sources, not less.

Well let this be a lesson for ya!

 

[JaredJames]

Majority rule does not trump law, and it does not trump human rights.

And it is not up for vote.

But surely majority rule can change laws? Again, human rights are laughable, any situation can be turned to show human rights violations.

What about in terms of the UK (where I am)? I don't even know what type of society we have, it's supposed to be democratic but that's debatable.

Although slow, surely if people voted in enough members of parliament who agreed with their view of say, banning all religious clothing, they could get a law passed.