Skip to comments.
Court: Web site liable for postings
GOPUSA ^
| May 17, 2007
| UPI Staff (United Press International)
Posted on 05/17/2007 9:03:16 AM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-54 last
To: Steve_Seattle
And liberals claim to be AGAINST intrusive, in-your-bedroom government? They're trying to make straight people get more gay roommates, whether forced or accidentally (because they weren't allowed to ask), and they're hoping for conversions.
To: PGalt
The rotting robes adjudicating themselves into a coroner? I've gotta ask... Was "coroner" a typo or a pun?
Either way - LOL! ;-P
42
posted on
05/17/2007 9:53:01 AM PDT
by
MortMan
(Good health is merely the slowest possible rate at which one can die.)
To: MortMan
43
posted on
05/17/2007 9:58:09 AM PDT
by
PGalt
To: antiRepublicrat
Just wait for more lawsuits against on-line dating / match making services. There’s one that advertises on TV a lot, which have only opposite sex couples featured talking about how they met via that web site. I expect a lawsuit in Massachusetts since it’s clearly discrimination because same-sex marriage is legal there.
There is a slippery slope but some in the gay community want to deny there is a slippery slope.
To: ElkGroveDan
Based on that reasoning the dating services will be next. How dare anyone ask about gender while looking for a romantic relationship! Mark my words. I long ago stopped saying "That's ridiculous, the government would never do that." I was proven wrong too many times.
To: KarlInOhio
Great. How convenient for all concerned.
46
posted on
05/17/2007 10:01:16 AM PDT
by
Cicero
(Marcus Tullius)
To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
47
posted on
05/17/2007 10:03:36 AM PDT
by
Cacique
(quos Deus vult perdere, prius dementat ( Islamia Delenda Est ))
To: antiRepublicrat
Free Republic...does not guide our content in any way.Ahmmmm, ZOTee's might take issue with you there...
48
posted on
05/17/2007 10:04:19 AM PDT
by
GoldCountryRedneck
("The American Indians found out what happens when you don't control immigration."- unknown)
To: antiRepublicrat
“Sites like Free Republic have safe harbor because we as the posters have 100% control over the content we post.”
The latest dust up and purge of Rudy backers may contradict that.
49
posted on
05/17/2007 10:16:26 AM PDT
by
Bob J
(nks)
To: Al Gator
I thought the first ammendment guranteed a right to freely associate. This right to associate implies a converse right to dis-associate or associate with folks other than those who are not of like mind etc...
If one case, just one case were argued from this point of view, maybe these Fair Housing, everybody MUST mingle Nazis would get their a$$es kicked.
BINGO!
Accourse, before this decision, you woulda thought neccesity for such a lawsuit would have been preempted by common sense.
I visited the website to see for myself exactly how the menus were worded but declined to wade through the membership signup process that you have to go through first.
50
posted on
05/17/2007 10:19:25 AM PDT
by
Titan Magroyne
("Shorn, dumb and bleating is no way to go through life, son." Yeah, close enough.)
I disagree with the 9th circus. There is no substantive differenced between providing check boxes and providing for free form input. In either case the poster is responsible for the data.
51
posted on
05/17/2007 10:31:53 AM PDT
by
webboy45
To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
I'm confused.
They that "unlawful information" is being exchanged or transmitted.
What percisely is the "unlawful information"?
Information that a particular individual is interested in finding a roommate of a particular race, religion, or any other preference?
Those individuals have ever right to have those preferences.
If other individuals voluntarily provide such information so that they can find a roommate, the US government has no business interfering with them.
I would even expect that gay rights activists would consider this to be governmental discrimination against them, though homosexuality isn't a Constitutionally protected right, so that argument isn't particularly sound.
To: B4Ranch; JackRyanCIA; glock rocks; calcowgirl
"If this survives the circuit, we are done for."Fortunately, it's the Ninth Circuit, so the chances of survival are reasonably remote.
53
posted on
05/17/2007 3:37:24 PM PDT
by
Czar
( StillFedUptotheTeeth@Washington)
To: antiRepublicrat
>They’re trying to make straight people get more gay roommates, whether forced or accidentally (because they weren’t allowed to ask), and they’re hoping for conversions.<
Conversions to natural fertilizer sounds perfect to me.
54
posted on
05/17/2007 4:37:03 PM PDT
by
B4Ranch
(Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-54 last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson