Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Current Events & Hot Topics Current Events & Hot Topics
You do not have the right to braoadcast your bigotry. Agree?

How far you go in life depends on your being: tender with the young, compassionate with the aged, sympathetic with the striving and tolerant of both the weak and strong.  Because someday in life you would have been one or all of these.  GeorgeWashingtonCarver


by on Apr. 9, 2013 at 9:36 AM
Replies (11-20):
jessilin0113
by Platinum Member on Apr. 9, 2013 at 9:49 AM
1 mom liked this

Disagree.  They have a right to broadcast.  They just can't cry "suppression of free speech" if others use their rights to tell them to shut up.

gammie
by on Apr. 9, 2013 at 9:54 AM

Yes you have the right, and I have the freedom to walk away from you if I want.

katy_kay08
by on Apr. 9, 2013 at 9:56 AM
3 moms liked this

nope, don't agree.  They have a right to broadcast their bigotry.  What they don't have a right to is a compliant audience.  

lancet98
by Silver Member on Apr. 9, 2013 at 9:59 AM
1 mom liked this

It depends on exactly what the bigot says.

It is possible to cross a line from free speech over to stalking, threats, harrassment, and criminal or actionable (think lawsuit) behavior.

The law has a history of generally being  reasonable in this sense, but sometimes, the law's 'hands are tied'.   For example, the American Nazi party is free to preach their hatred, bigotry, and slime, but not to incite crime, riot, etc.. 

And sometimes there is a mighty fine line between free speech and inciting a crime or being party to a crime.

 If members are PRIVATELY arranging crimes, PRIVATELY going to much further extremes than their rhetoric actually comes out and blatantly says, those private actions have to be proven in court, separately from their public rhetoric.  A connection can be made to their public rhetoric if it shows a pattern, but generally isn't sufficient in and of itself - there still has to be some evidence the crime actually was committed bya specific person(s).

As an example, you have the right to say someone is wrong, stupid, a jerk, anything like that.   You have a right to say you think their politics are stupid or dangerous or unfair, or one sided, or too far to the left, or too far to the right.   You have a right to say you suspect someone of corruption or unfair dealings because of things you have noticed that they have done.

But free speech only allows a person to go so far, and then it is over the line and into criminal or actionabl behavior..

As an example, you can rant against the Catholic church and say all Catholics are going to Hell.

But you can't say you're going to HELP them get to Hell by killing them.

You can say, 'I wish you would die', but you can't say 'I'm going to kill you'.

You can say you SUSPECT someone of corruption, but you can't say they are GUILTY of corruption, or have been CONVICTED of corruption, unless a court actually has charged them, tried them, and found them guilty - of corruption.

You can say a person is treating their child wrong, but you can't follow them for hours and scream at them.   You can't stalk or harrass them.

And the law isn't really all that grey of an area when it comes to the internet.   Anything that would be criminal or actionable in person or on a piece of paper, has the same effect if posted on the internet, whether it is done 'anonymously' (there really is no such thing) or not.  

Further, much of what is not CRIMINAL behavior, is STILL ACTIONABLE.   You may not be criminally guilty, but you stilll can get sued.

Sueing someone for defamation or the like isn't a trivial or easy matter, though.   Generally, there has to be some hard evidence that you were actually damaged by their statements.  

As an example, a person who coached junior dog handlers is suspected of sexual abuse of children.   A parent complains to the police, and the charges have yet to be investigated.

You can say the person is UNDER INVESTIGATION of child sexual abuse, but you CANNOT tell people they are CONVICTED.    You can say someone is a liar, only if they ARE a liar.   Otherwise you can be in trouble.

Yu can say bad things about people, but they have to be TRUE or you can find yourself in trouble.   Slyly IMPLYING things isn't really free of possible consequences either - people only THINK it is.

For example, a woman in a dog club REPEATEDLY insinuated another dog trainer was a "known pedophile" and told parents not to take their kids to him for junior handler lessons.   She didn't come out and say it - she said, 'All's I know is you better keep your kids away from him, that's all I know".     She literally said that to hundreds of people, for YEARS.

But there was no legal documentation of him being charged as a PEDOPHILE.  HE MAY HAVE BEEN, but you can't say someone is unless they are convicted of such charges.

 Her comments WERE, in fact, actionable.   She could have been sued and she DID lose him work and he COULD document that.   No one happened to sue her, but not because of the lack of validity of such a suit.   It was a good suit and it could have been pressed.   EVEN IF he had been convicted of other, unrelated charges.   EVEN if he was a jerk in many ways. 

 

Clairwil
by Ruby Member on Apr. 9, 2013 at 10:01 AM

Bigotry is the state of mind of a bigot: someone who, as a result of their prejudices, treats other people with hatred, contempt, and intolerance on the basis of a person's race, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, religion, language, socioeconomic status, or other status.

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr. described bigotry in the following quotation: "The mind of a bigot is like the pupil of the eye; the more light you pour upon it, the more it will contract."

One who is narrrowly or intolerantly devoted to his or her opinions and prejudices.

a prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from their own.

tambrathegreat
by on Apr. 9, 2013 at 10:03 AM

I agree, people do have the right to be bigots.  I also have the right to heap public derision on their asses for being so stupid.

mommysangelface
by on Apr. 9, 2013 at 10:05 AM


Quoting ..MoonShine..:

I disagree. They can broadcast it if they like, it's a first amendment right (there are limitations, of course, but in general).
Posted on CafeMom Mobile
TruthSeeker.
by Milami on Apr. 9, 2013 at 10:06 AM
Disagree. You can broadcast your bigotry all you want unless you are inciting a riot or violence them your right is limited.
Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
rfurlongg
by on Apr. 9, 2013 at 10:07 AM
Yep

Quoting romalove:

You have the right to be a bigot, and you have the right to express it, provided you are not advocating violence to others.

Others have the right to tell you how despicable you are.

Freedom of speech.

Posted on CafeMom Mobile
JoshRachelsMAMA
by JRM on Apr. 9, 2013 at 10:08 AM
1 mom liked this
First Amendment there kiddo.
Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)