Home Archives Random Quotes Latest Comments Top 100 Submit Quote Search Log In

Quote# 88690

[In response to someone calling banning pro-gay media fascist.]
True.....but the whole concept of self government allows the people’s representatives to pick and choose what they wish to make illegal. We used to do the same thing...censorship of movies and books according to the prevalent moral code of the people was always present in our country. Our ancestors were smart enough to know the difference between protected POLITICAL SPEECH and immorality. And gutsy enough to enforce it.

mick, Free Republic 40 Comments [7/31/2012 3:33:42 AM]
Fundie Index: 40
Submitted By: Sergeant343
WTF?! || meh
Username:
Comment:



1 2
OhJohnNo

"Free speech, therefore, censorship".

7/31/2012 4:00:38 AM

Filin De Blanc

So you'd be okay with it if the people's representatives made membership of Free Republic illegal? You certainly aren't in line with your country's prevalent moral code.

7/31/2012 4:12:21 AM

shykid

I was once told by one of your ilk that holding hands with my boyfriend in public was "trying to make a political statement and shove it in everyone's face," so I reckon it is protected political speech.

7/31/2012 4:16:06 AM

Doubting Thomas

Yeah, if the founding fathers wanted free speech, they'd have written it into the Constitution or something.

7/31/2012 4:36:37 AM

Percy Q. Shunn

Oh, you mean your kind of freedom; not the other guy's kind.

7/31/2012 4:55:30 AM

Reynardine

Even though the first version of Lady Chatterly's lover, which was sold in this country before the third and final one was allowed in, was the more authentic, that had a lot more to do with the Freudian misogyny coupled with the substitution of his idealized self for a real gamekeeper D.H. Lawrence injected into the rewrite than with the uplifting effect of censorship. Censorship is not uplifting. Education in literary appreciation is uplifting. Education in critical thinking is uplifting. Education in ethics is uplifting. And guys like you are trying to *censor* all that.

7/31/2012 5:00:03 AM

TGRwulf

Translation: "I'm all for free speech... as long as you agree with me."

7/31/2012 5:13:16 AM

John_in_Oz

Freedom. You're still doing it wrong.

7/31/2012 5:18:29 AM

Kinderklein

"Our ancestors were smart enough to know the difference between protected POLITICAL SPEECH and immorality. And gutsy enough to enforce it."

Which is why later generations fled England.
USA, however, was much more forgiving.

7/31/2012 5:24:07 AM

Filin De Blanc

It's always interesting to see these people make up bullshit about why their desires are totally constitutional; this time it's the "when the founding fathers said that nothing shall abridge the freedom of speech, there was unspoken "unless it's by people who disagree with me" on the end" defence.

7/31/2012 5:26:11 AM

Mister Spak

"but the whole concept of self government allows the people’s representatives to pick and choose what they wish to make illegal."

So it's OK for Obama to shut down free republic?

7/31/2012 5:26:21 AM

Bad Wolf

Censorship is, first and foremost, an act of pure cowardice. If you are so terrified of a few words, put together in a certain sequence, then you really shouldn't be playing with the adults.

7/31/2012 5:27:54 AM



"True.....but the whole concept of self government allows the people’s representatives to pick and choose what they wish to make illegal."

No. The purpose of our constitution is so that the current representatives can't arbitrarily change the rules on a whim. If you want to make a change to our freedom of speech, you can do it, but you need a super-majority vote in both houses and a ratification by 3/4 of the states. That (hopefully) keeps d-bags like you from being able to shove your form of persecution down our throats.

"Our ancestors were smart enough to know the difference between protected POLITICAL SPEECH and immorality. And gutsy enough to enforce it."

Some of our ancestors also allowed race-based slavery, school segregation, denial of voting rights to everyone who wasn't a white male, etc. Sounds like you're in good company.

7/31/2012 5:31:01 AM

VoiceofKane

Funny how these guys will incorrectly pull out the first amendment whenever people are mean to them, but whenever they envision a scenario involving censorship of sinners they entirely forget about it.

7/31/2012 6:03:12 AM

Ebon

There are no words for how wrong you are.

7/31/2012 6:39:15 AM

dionysus

That's called the tyranny of the majority. The US Constitution was set up specifically to combat that. While the majority pretty much gets their way most of the time, when it comes to violating the rights of the minority, that no longer becomes the case. You can no more ban pro-gay media than Catholics and Protestants can ban Mormonism or Protestants can ban Catholicism. The Constitution can be amended and has been amended but the spirit of the Constitution is one of freedom. And your right to swing your arms wildly in the air ends at someone else's face and their right to not get punched.

7/31/2012 6:41:23 AM

Rabbit of Caerbannog

Just what kind of freedom does Free Republic advocate anyway?

7/31/2012 7:06:34 AM

Vman

@ Rabbit:

The kind where you do EXACTLY as I say.

7/31/2012 7:30:39 AM

JSS

It was once immorality to insult the king of England.
It was once immorality to dump tea into a harbor in protest of the monarchy.
It was once immorality to declare independence from a dictator.
It was once immorality to start a nation based upon freedom, liberty and justice for all.

I could go on. You can't suppress free speech simply because you don't like it, and use the buzzword of 'immorality' as an excuse for a legitimate legal means for doing so. So get up, wipe off the crocodile tears and deal with it.

7/31/2012 7:37:24 AM

Seeker Lancer

So you admit it's fascism and you're okay with it?

It's not even worth arguing with you at that point.

7/31/2012 7:56:05 AM

Skyknight

@Rabbit: I'd guess to them, freedom ultimately "just" means (the quotation marks are because they think most other proper freedoms are just subsets of the one I'm about to name) freedom to attain your inborn zenith. Government regulations and their ilk, precisely because they regulate, can only retard the attainment of personal power. Remember that we've had at LEAST one comment here from another sharp-right who extolled the Old South's belief in hierarchy as opposed to equality/egalitarianism. Corollary: Some are born immutably inferior to others, and ought not do more than accept their fate. It's the naturalistic fallacy at work--what is inborn is Right and Proper™®, and anything that doesn't just let it play out, no matter who (else) gets harmed, is Monstrosity™®.

I wonder if you could analogize this to what Nietzsche called master-morality (and please note that while Nietzsche detested slave-morality, he didn't really have that much use for master-morality, either).

7/31/2012 8:17:30 AM

Berny

Your Founders protected free speech in the Constitution. A succession of oppressive governments tried unsuccessfully to restrict this free speech with various censorship measures, which the Supreme Court rightfully struck down as unconstitutional.
You right-wing fuckwits are slow to learn when you're on the losing side of an issue.

7/31/2012 8:26:04 AM

farpadokly

"censorship of movies and books according to the prevalent moral code of the people". Doubt it. "The people" were always much more libertine than the self-appointed censors.
I can't think what would be gained by pretending that homosexuality doesn't exist.

7/31/2012 9:16:28 AM

Meeeh

You can't claim to have free speech when the government through FCC is censoring speech - makes absolutely no sense!

7/31/2012 9:41:44 AM

Ozymandias

@Bad Wolf

I dunno, a lot of the sentences I hear from Republicans scare the shit outta me, because they're coming from people with power...

7/31/2012 9:47:36 AM
1 2