Posted on 09/24/2016 8:21:57 AM PDT by wtd
You can ban speech that advocates war against the country, teaches how to do it, promulgates it, recruits for it, plans for it, and carries it out.
Islam is an ideology of world conquest thinly disguised as a religion.
And to carry the argument until its logical conclusion, free speech should not protect pedophilia porn which it currently does, or books on grooming children, etc.
What real world - the one with escalating terrorist attacks? You should read more history. There will come a time when the murderers finally go to far. And then they will be banned, and exterminated from the planet as the vermin they are.
I just pray it doesn't take a nuke to do it. The problem is that people like you are demanding a nuke before you drop your denial. Before God, the blood you require to admit the truth is on your head.
The trigger, for me, is the crossing into action. For example, pedophilia porn requires actual pedophilia to be made.
But Islam is a war plan, and the Koran is the hub of that plan. Islam is a whole different scale - it should be treated as we would treat an incoming giant asteroid - if we don't destroy it, we're all dead.
Pedophiles support each other and get ideas/plans/sources vie the printed word including books/internet. Advocating illegal acts to the point of “how to” manuals should not be protected free speech, and pedo-porn is fine as long as no actual children are used; very young 18 yr olds (supposedly 18) are fine, as are computer generated stuff, which can be, and afaik often is, real film just turned into computer generated stuff.
If pedophiles had none of that, the problem would be much smaller.
All speech/images etc promoting both pedophilia and Islam should not be protected, and in the minds of the men who wrote and signed the Constitution, were not meant to be.
Patriotism Populism Tradition wrote: " I think (correct me if I’m wrong) that the people behind Gates of Vienna are Europeans."
Blog authors, Dymphna and Baron Bodissey of Gates of Vienna blog are citizens of the USA, however they do carry a lot of global news on their site and have an international army of devoted translators notable for their "Rosetta Stone" articles.
The Baron and Dymphna are about as conservative as they come. May I suggest spending a wee bit more time exploring the Gates of Vienna blog prior to presuming otherwise.
The problem, IMO, is that free speech covers study and research. You can read books on Nazism, etc for that reason. The absolute maximum protection must be given it, because the overall benefit to society requires it.
On the other hand, it’s not absolute - people extremely interested in Nazism, pedophilia, bomb making, etc draw attention to themselves as well.
As an absolute murder cult though, I see no benefit in allowing Islam any protection. Islam IS the limit of freedom, because it is defined by its hatred of freedom.
Here is the answer, written by someone a lot more intelligent than myself.
Men are qualified for civil liberty in exact proportion to their disposition to put moral chains upon their own appetites, — in proportion as their love to justice is above their rapacity, — in proportion as their soundness and sobriety of understanding is above their vanity and presumption, — in proportion as they are more disposed to listen to the counsels of the wise and good, in preference to the flattery of knaves. Society cannot exist, unless a controlling power upon will and appetite be placed somewhere; and the less of it there is within, the more there must be without. It is ordained in the eternal constitution of things, that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters.
Edmund Burke
bkmk
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.