[skeeter]

Because liberty loving patriotic Americans abhor and are repelled by what this guy represents, the answer is yes.

Progressives DO want to limit free speech rights and protect the likes of that guy.

[dp0622]

yeah, straw man arguments about an abortionist that was killed 20 years ago or the inquisition are used to show that Christians are just as evil. DU and Kos thrive on that nonsense

[bird4four4]

I find gay marriage offensive, think they’ll stop talking about it to be ‘sensitive’ to my feelings? (Maybe if I blow up a few gay weddings then they’d stop?). / liberal logic

[driftless2]

Actually, after visiting DummyUnderground, a great many Dummies agree that, no matter how much they despise Geller, she had all the right in the world to say what she said.

That puts them morally and ethically above a number of "conservatives" who believe that people who kill apostates, infidels, homosexuals, and women who do not obey their husbands should not be insulted.

[Stayfree]

How does anyone know what dirtbag mohammed looked like anyway if it was against their religion to display a picture of him??

[fruser1]

Need to remember who started this conflict.

I find hypocrisy in that folks say Geller should not have had the contest because it’d PO the terrorists, but in fact, the contest is a RESPONSE to Geller getting PO’d at the terrorists.

So shouldn’t the terrorists stop what their doing so they won’t be protested in this fashion?

It’s not like nothing was happening and she just got up one day and said, “Hey, maybe I’ll try to PO some muslims today”.

[Blood of Tyrants]

The same NYTimes who defended the “Piss Christ” artist is now condemning Pamela Gellar for being too provocative.

[Billthedrill]

I will confess to being sorely disappointed in both O'Reilly and Van Susteren on a topic that has seldom been in the least controversial, at least during my lifetime. When media celebrities concede that freedom of speech needs to be throttled they throttle themselves, sooner or later. It is simply astonishing that a core value such as freedom of speech is so blithely questioned; is even considered questionable.

What astonishes me is how many fascists there are out there rabid to get Hate Speech laws in place, and worse, how many of them are putative conservatives. It's the sort of behavior one normally would expect from state totalitarians, whose ranks appear of late to have been swelled by progressives, not conservatives.

This thing can't be negotiable or the entire social contract falls apart. O'Reilly, Van Susteren, and the rest have chosen a side, and it isn't our side. In fact, it isn't even their side.

[Ruy Dias de Bivar]

*** progressives have been falling all over each other to demand sensitivity based “limits” on the First Amendment. ****

Remember when Larry Flint was shot by a racist serial killer who was upset HUSTLER Magazine had an interracial couple getting it on?

Did ANY of the Libs say Flint had “pushed” too far and brought it on himself by antagonizing racists?
Did any of them say Flint needed to be more sensitive to the felings of the racists?