Posted on 05/30/2017 1:06:59 PM PDT by C19fan
As his city mourns two men who were killed after confronting a man screaming anti-Muslim slurs, Mayor Ted Wheeler (D) is calling on federal officials to block what he called “alt-right demonstrations” from happening in downtown Portland, Ore.
His concern is that the two rallies, both scheduled in June, will escalate an already volatile situation in Portland by peddling “a message of hatred and of bigotry.” Although the organizers of the rallies have a constitutional right to speak, “hate speech is not protected by the First Amendment,” Wheeler told reporters.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
"Hate speech" being defined by me, and I define "hate speech" as anything I disagree with.
So-called “hate speech” is a sujective matter of opinion. Therefore is constitutional. Otherwise all the alphabet news agencies would be commuting hate speech crimes with their hateful lies against Trump et.AL.
The mayor will get his way up through the courts all the way to the USSC. He will lose there but he will have got his way with the demonstrators, either preventing them or busting a lot of heads and putting them in jail.
This is an attempt to stop the ‘alt right’ based on the Portland stabber.
Problem is the guy’s a Bernie supporter who did a Hitler salute at a Trump rally only to be promptly tossed out. He said he was a master of ‘psy ops.’
A mental case, he may have murdered so Trump would be blamed. A compliant MSM cooperated with his ruse.
The First Amendment was never intended to protect our right to criticize the government—particularly leftist government. No, the Framers just wanted to make sure we could have porn, dirty lyrics, and hippies defecating on police cars.
From the article:
“Jeremy Joseph Christian, 35, whom the Southern Poverty Law Center had described as someone who holds racist and extremist beliefs, is facing aggravated murder and other charges in connection to the killings. According to the hate watch group, Christian was seen at an earlier free-speech rally held by the same organizers. A photo shows him giving the Nazi salute.”
Of course, no mention that he was kicked out of the rally and that he was a Bernie supporter. Selective amnesia much, washington post?
Political speech is the exact speech the first amendment was written to protect, but Lefties like the mayor think it was to protect porn.
Try to take the first? We’ll use the second.
The man was actually a leftist. They leave that out, don’t they?
Pretty much the only way you can become a liberal.
What is covered by the First Amendment?
I say that Hate Speech is any kind of speech that goes against the Constitution.
That said, anyone criticizing the Second Amendment should go to prison for uttering Hate Speech against a civil right!
Leftists are always looking for a way to squelch free speech.
One man’s “hate speech” is another man’s truth!
Cultural Marxism from a Cultural Marxist.
And again, the Left doesn't believe in a "bourgeois" right to "free speech" as most people understand it. It is only the "thesis" of history that has this right so it may perform its "historic mission." Opposition to the "thesis" is counterrevolution, and is outlawed by every Leftist government.
I wish more people would understand this.
If he had gone to my daughter's high school, he would have gotten an A, based on the leftist Howard Zinn-inspired indoctrination they tried to ram down her throat (unsuccessfully, I'm proud to say).
Constitutional scholar Volokh noted how such policy is divergent from the Supreme Court’s condemnation of the “Heckler’s Veto”:
“Sometimes the government says: ‘We need to suppress this guy who’s speaking on the street corner because we’re afraid somebody will get so upset at him that they’ll throw a punch, or worse.’
There, the Court says ‘Nope, you can’t do that.’ You can’t allow hecklers to essentially force the suppression of a person’s speech by threatening violence. You need to protect the speaker against the violence rather than suppressing the speaker.”
It demonstrates their intellectual capability. Their very statements are hateful - so they should shut themselves up by their own definition ;p
It’s astonishing that they’ve really convinced themselves that “hate speech” is something that can be carved out from free speech and fail to see that it’s in the eye of the beholder.
Clueless.
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.