Letter: Homosexual lobby forgets free speech

Why is it that some people who have been discriminated against or perceive they have, when they protest, are themselves unfairly discriminatory? The latest such group is the burgeoning gay and lesbian coalition. Read more
First Prev
of 3
Next Last
Scott

Long Beach, CA

#1 May 3, 2009
The government didn't limit anyone's speech in any of the cases mentioned above. For those who need a civics lesson, that's what "free speech" is about.

You are free to speak, and I am free to call you a bigot. Please don't confuse the first amendment with being unpopular.
No longer curious

United States

#2 May 3, 2009
Prejean opinion wasn't censured. She gave an incoherent response to a legitiamate question with no consideration to her audience. End of story; let's move on.
Tom

Somerville, MA

#3 May 3, 2009
A lesson that Donald Polzin has yet to learn is that freedom of speech means you can say what you want, not that there can be no consequences after the fact. People are constitutionally empowered to boycott your business because of what you say, or choose not to vote you Miss USA. That's THIER freedom of speech and THEIR freedom of association. So if you choose to speak out to call for my civil rights to be taken away, or to falsely accuse me of violating your right to free speech, don't expect to be seeing any of my money at your business, and don't expect me to vote for you to be Miss USA. Next time the Miss USA pageant calls me to ask me to be a judge, I'll be sure not to vote for Mr. Polzin.

“Rut Ro Raggy!”

Since: May 08

Amsterdam NL

#4 May 3, 2009
So, using your logic, it is perfectly fine to ruin a person's livelihood because you don't agree with their ideology?
Take that one step further. What if those that are offended by YOUR politics put several bullets into your skull? Isn't that the same thing?
What about simply allowing others their opinions and ideologies without feeling the need to harm them for speaking out?
Tom wrote:
A lesson that Donald Polzin has yet to learn is that freedom of speech means you can say what you want, not that there can be no consequences after the fact. People are constitutionally empowered to boycott your business because of what you say, or choose not to vote you Miss USA. That's THIER freedom of speech and THEIR freedom of association. So if you choose to speak out to call for my civil rights to be taken away, or to falsely accuse me of violating your right to free speech, don't expect to be seeing any of my money at your business, and don't expect me to vote for you to be Miss USA. Next time the Miss USA pageant calls me to ask me to be a judge, I'll be sure not to vote for Mr. Polzin.

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#5 May 3, 2009
The Scoob wrote:
So, using your logic, it is perfectly fine to ruin a person's livelihood because you don't agree with their ideology?
Take that one step further. What if those that are offended by YOUR politics put several bullets into your skull? Isn't that the same thing?
What about simply allowing others their opinions and ideologies without feeling the need to harm them for speaking out?
<quoted text>
Everyone has a right to free speech, and to hold personal beliefs.

The term is defined by the government not criminalizing freedom of speech, even distasteful speech. It has NEVER meant that other Americans cannot or should not respond to what we say.

In a word, speaking freely doesn't mean that others can't respond to your speech.

If I announce that I hate black people on the Friday Night News, I would expect that the majority of black folks would exercise their right to free speech by calling me a bigot. And If I ran a business, I would expect black people to boycott it.

I would expect people who do not tolerate such bigotry, but were of other races, to do the same.

Just as I might expect that others who held my same views might speak in support of me, and go out of their want to support my business.

I would not, however, expect to be jailed for my speech. And in this case, no one will be. So no one's right to free speech has been violated in any way.

“www.benehrmann.c om”

Since: Nov 08

White Suburbia, CA

#6 May 3, 2009
To the writer; if Ms. Prejean had worded her answer articulately (ie. "opposite-sex marriage" is only stated by morons) and actually answered the question (not proposed her personal vendetta against same-sex marriage), she may very well be wearing the crown.

The question was (paraphrased), "Do you think every state should follow Vermont and legalize same-sex marriage?" Her response was a bunch of gibberish with a closing of "no offense."

She's an idiot; a Stepford wife; plain and simple.
peyronie jim

United States

#7 May 3, 2009
Gay marriage is a misnomer since it does not fit the definition of marriage. Homosexuality is a sin against God and man. An abomination.

“Marriage=Love+Co mmitment.....”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#8 May 3, 2009
peyronie jim wrote:
Gay marriage is a misnomer since it does not fit the definition of marriage. Homosexuality is a sin against God and man. An abomination.
The, "definition of marriage?"
That would be when a man sells his daughter to marry a man she may not know, may not like, and has no say in the matter. And let's hope he doesn't already have 3-4 wives, because that puts her at a disadvantage. But if she can't have children ,she could always allow her husband to rape her servant and produce a baby. Just like in the Bible, right?
Kat

Naperville, IL

#9 May 3, 2009
LindaS wrote:
<quoted text>
The, "definition of marriage?"
That would be when a man sells his daughter to marry a man she may not know, may not like, and has no say in the matter. And let's hope he doesn't already have 3-4 wives, because that puts her at a disadvantage. But if she can't have children ,she could always allow her husband to rape her servant and produce a baby. Just like in the Bible, right?
You left out the traditional Marriage ceremony in this. Once the man engages in sex with the woman they are officially married. Sorry girls no fancy dresses and such.
Rational Thinker

Barstow, CA

#10 May 4, 2009
The Scoob wrote:
So, using your logic, it is perfectly fine to ruin a person's livelihood because you don't agree with their ideology?
Take that one step further. What if those that are offended by YOUR politics put several bullets into your skull? Isn't that the same thing?
What about simply allowing others their opinions and ideologies without feeling the need to harm them for speaking out?
<quoted text>
In a word, yes. If a business owner put swastikas in his windows and Aryan Nation posters in the store, don't you think the public would be justified in not shopping there and driving him out of business? No violence. Just not shopping there. Your example of shooting someone is ridiculous.
Rational Thinker

Barstow, CA

#11 May 4, 2009
peyronie jim wrote:
Gay marriage is a misnomer since it does not fit the definition of marriage. Homosexuality is a sin against God and man. An abomination.
And I exercise my right to call you a bigot and boycott so-called Christian organizations and other groups that believe in ancient fairy tales. This in no way hinders your free speech rights.

“Rut Ro Raggy!”

Since: May 08

Amsterdam NL

#13 May 4, 2009
Rational Thinker wrote:
<quoted text>
In a word, yes. If a business owner put swastikas in his windows and Aryan Nation posters in the store, don't you think the public would be justified in not shopping there and driving him out of business? No violence. Just not shopping there. Your example of shooting someone is ridiculous.
The similarity between you and I is that I would not shop there either. The difference between us is that while I would not enrich his business with mine, I would let it stop there.
Your motive would be to destroy his business and his livelihood because you dislike his ideology.
Not doing business with him is not enough for you and many like yourself and THAT is the point I was making.
Would I be justified in making a concerted effort to wipe your business out because you disagreed with me in this forum? Setting fire to your business would have a similar effect and I wouldn't have to wait so long. The action you suggested you would take against this business would have the same result, but with a longer time span.

Having said that, I'll add this scenario:

Let's say I found a list of names of local businesses that actively supported groups that fought prop 8. Let's say that I chose to organize others with the purpose of destroying those businesses through boycott and public stigma....and was successful.
Would I be considered a champion of my cause or looking at 'Hate Crime' charges?
I would wager the latter would be likely due to the subject of the battle.

“Rut Ro Raggy!”

Since: May 08

Amsterdam NL

#14 May 4, 2009
Rational Thinker wrote:
<quoted text>
And I exercise my right to call you a bigot and boycott so-called Christian organizations and other groups that believe in ancient fairy tales. This in no way hinders your free speech rights.
True! But it would prove to the world that you are a hateful and intolerant person with convictions so strong that you would destroy others because of them. Hmmm, the very same traits of those you appear to despise so much.
Rational Thinker

San Diego, CA

#15 May 4, 2009
The Scoob wrote:
<quoted text>The similarity between you and I is that I would not shop there either. The difference between us is that while I would not enrich his business with mine, I would let it stop there.
Your motive would be to destroy his business and his livelihood because you dislike his ideology.
Not doing business with him is not enough for you and many like yourself and THAT is the point I was making.
Would I be justified in making a concerted effort to wipe your business out because you disagreed with me in this forum? Setting fire to your business would have a similar effect and I wouldn't have to wait so long. The action you suggested you would take against this business would have the same result, but with a longer time span.
Having said that, I'll add this scenario:
Let's say I found a list of names of local businesses that actively supported groups that fought prop 8. Let's say that I chose to organize others with the purpose of destroying those businesses through boycott and public stigma....and was successful.
Would I be considered a champion of my cause or looking at 'Hate Crime' charges?
I would wager the latter would be likely due to the subject of the battle.
Hey, I'm not the one suggesting shootings and fire to solve your problems faster.

You would be within your rights to boycott anti-Prop 8 groups. And be remembered in history similarly to the intolerant bigots who fought slavery and civil rights, women's right to vote, etc.
Rational Thinker

San Diego, CA

#16 May 4, 2009
The Scoob wrote:
<quoted text>
True! But it would prove to the world that you are a hateful and intolerant person with convictions so strong that you would destroy others because of them. Hmmm, the very same traits of those you appear to despise so much.
I simply am choosing to not do business with intolerant people who in the supposed name of Christ choose to take away the right of others. If enough people feel the same way and it harms their business, so be it. Perhaps they should stick to business and not tell others how to run their personal lives?
Fly on the wall

Chico, CA

#17 May 4, 2009
Republocrat wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh no, the 15,000 gays in this country are going to boycott my business boo hoo i could care less, I wouldnt give business to you anyways.
You wouldn't know if you were...stupid statement. That aside, if you advertise your homophobia, they wouldn't patronize your business.

So what is your business...just so I know to "stay away" from you and you won't have to worry about earning a living?
Joe Sixpack

Manteca, CA

#18 May 4, 2009
The letter writer is spot on. It seems that whenever there's a seemingly justified movement to rectify some issue, extremists get ahold of it. This happened with the tea party people. Crazies on the fringe co-opted the movement and made it a laughingstock. The same is happening to the legitimate gay marriage movement. The extremists in that camp are resorting to Stalinist methods to intimidate people who disagree with their views. The extremists in the gay marriage movement will alienate moderates who approve of gay marriage.
Jim Crosley Scoob

United States

#19 May 4, 2009
You fudgepackers can shove your gay mentality. You twist and turn everything to suit your fruit agenda. Not gonna fly, Bruce. Your credo also sucks:
If you are not for us, you must be against us..........
Be very afraid of the GAY

Chico, CA

#20 May 4, 2009
Jim Crosley Scoob wrote:
You fudgepackers can shove your gay mentality. You twist and turn everything to suit your fruit agenda. Not gonna fly, Bruce. Your credo also sucks:
If you are not for us, you must be against us..........
You are a sad and pathetic individual. I pity your sad existence. You and your ilk are going to lose this fight and sooner than you think. State by state this country is legalizing gay marriage and it's only a matter of time before the U.S. Supreme Court validates gay marriage. It is inevitable.

Be VERY careful what you tell us to shove and where you tell us to shove it... ;)

“www.benehrmann.c om”

Since: Nov 08

White Suburbia, CA

#21 May 4, 2009
The Scoob wrote:
<quoted text>
True! But it would prove to the world that you are a hateful and intolerant person with convictions so strong that you would destroy others because of them. Hmmm, the very same traits of those you appear to despise so much.
People boycott Walmart for their poor treatment of workers; people also boycott for businesses for their poor treatment of minorities and LGBT persons. I, for one, would enjoy playing a role in dismantling businesses which held bigoted views.

We can choose to spend/donate our money where ever we wish; that is our right.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Sacramento Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
why do Jim and Mike double team? (Apr '09) 59 min hamilton snark 40
News Vacaville schools official: Measure A projects ... Sat Latricia 2
The Corner Coffee Shop: The new NOTHING Thread (Jan '08) Sat hamilton snark 6,780
White Guys: Would you date a black girl? Elaborate (Nov '07) Mar 27 Taylor 5,296
more from Roberta Mar 26 Corvalis Petrocelli 3
Varekai from Cirque du Soleil is coming to town... Mar 24 malloryciliberti 1
I want gay sex now! Mar 22 alwayshorny335 1
Sacramento Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Sacramento People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]