Does the KKK have a right to Free Speech?

The old slippery slope argument, the last refuge of a man with no argument, no answer, take it to the extreme to say why an idea is bad. We're talking about the KKK here, no one else.

And your example isn't a good one, it's completely false as I just pointed out in light of Japanese American citizens having their right to a lawyer taken away from them. Just when those people needed their country the most, their rights were taken away, and rights aren't rights if they can be taken away, they're privileges. That's all you've got there, a list of temporary priveledges, and if you read the news even badly, you'll notice the list has gotten shorter in the past decade.

 

The man has a point.

And I dont even agree with him.

 

If you really want to get down to the facts of the matter, all so called "inalienable" rights can be taken away except for one.

 

Yes, the man (jamaican_youth) has a point, a good point. It's important to study history. But ... this is not the way our country is supposed to work. Bad things have happened in the past; there have been un-American activities by people in power. But I don't think they will happen again, if citizens are vigilant. That's why I belong to the ACLU -- the freedom of speech is not a privilege, it is a right. Anyone who says otherwise is not a true American.

 

Isn't The House of UnAmerican Activities (Tail Gunner Joe's Inquisition) the reason Writers and actors in Hollywood started changing their names, because their careers were taken away by one accusation.

All it takes is one read through the condensed version of the McCarthy era to see why everyone needs to be covered by the First Amendment, or none of us are.

It seems as though I'm being attacked as a friend of the KKK, but I'm not. I'm not white and I certainly am not Christian. I grew up around these people and I think they are despicable, but they have the same rights as everyone else; and anything less reduces our Constitution to nothing more than toilet paper.

Evidently, jamaican_youth, being in Australia, hasn't read our Constitution and is unaware of the constant struggle of organizations, such as the ACLU, to insure that everyone has the rights they are supposed to be guaranteed.

.

 

free speech, not free action

 

No we aren't. When you bring in the Bill of Rights we are now talking about several thousand individuals who each have the inalienable right to free speech.

I think our government just formally apologized for that MISTAKE.

.

 

Just a minor correction, the "unalienable rights" are contained in "The Declaration of Independence", which states "...certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness." Furthermore, it states that all men being created equal, in spite of the fact that slavery remained in existence at the time, that "they are ENDOWED by their Creator" with the stated rights. Obviously by the word Creator being capitalized "God" is implied, although I accept as fact that we are all creations, with or without a God. Having been endowed with rights by our creator, in my opinion eliminates government from being perceived in having any factor in providing these rights, but only stating what is being made a responsibility of the government to protect.

The "Bill of Rights", is where "free speech" is addressed, and the 1st Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law ... or abridging the freedom of speech..."

It does not exempt anyone from prosecution and punishment for speech. So everyone should be free to speak, recognizing that there can be consequences for what they say. So the KKK is well within their rights to say "I don't like Black persons" or "I don't want to live near a Black person", but if they say "Let's get our guns and go kill some Black persons" while they might maintain that they were exercising free speech, they should recognize their prosecution would be based on the actions their words were promoting, allowing a jury to then exercise free speech when stating "guilty as charged."

 

If you'll "parse" the sentence correctly you will see that I didn't say it was.

otherwise, I agree.

.

 

its hard to understand why the kkk is still around! They are a pretty sad reminder of somebodies version of what the south really needs! back when i was a kid though it was always fun to smoke a couple of joints and just watch their world come apart at the seams he he he

 

The "inalienable right to free speech" does not occur in either or any of the documents. And parsing my reply I was pointing out that "inalienable" was a word used in "The Declaration of Independence" not being applied to freedom of speech, and that the "1st Amendment", to the "U.S. Constitution", AKA "The Bill of Rights" does refer to freedom of speech, noting that Congress shall make no law abridging it, without using the word "inalienable." But, if we are to face reality, there is only one "right" that we can truly exercise which is, and will remain "inalienable."

 

Look at religion, it's been around much longer.

 

Ugh, bringing up interment of Japanese-Americans, or really anything that had happened in WORLD WAR TWO is such a cop out. We're not talking about what happens when the whole damn world is involved in the most bloody conflict ever. I guess Britain is just a crazy dictatorship too since they canceled elections during the war.

Also if we're going to talk about segregation and the past how about we mention the fact Australia had an immigration policy of whites only until the 1970's, didn't give its native people the right to vote until the late 1960's, and had blackface on national prime time TV even still in the 70's. Or heck even http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/nickbryant/2009/10/is_australia_unusually_racist.html that too, the BBC constantly does articles on racism in both the US and Europe, and even asia sometimes but has never made an article for any other country going "Is said country unusually racist?" See what happens when you bring up fuck ups from the past.

Oh yea, founding fathers were slave owners, women didn't have the right to vote, ect, ect.

Also I will play devil'd advocate and defend the internment of Japanese-Americans. The U.S. constitution specifically states the right of habeous corpus can be suspended in times of war and rebellion, so ladies and gentlemen of the jury my argument is the Japanese due to a perceived threat in a war time environment we're in fact being held without charge for the duration of the war as potential criminals in these interment camps.

 

fuck i hope not!!

 

To everyone who thinks the KKK doesn't have a right to free speech, please in 500 words or less explain why you do then.

 

sorry i dont have 500 words but i feel that their beliefs are about hatred, what good is that for this life?

 

That doesnt mean they should be silenced..


But now we are talking in circles.

 

Because they have a right to their asinine opinion just as much as people here do.

 

I'm going to have to disagree,not that i don't see what your saying i do.but its my opinion just like you have yours.

 

If we are going to censor what certain people say, then we have to expect that a lot of what we say will also be up for censoring.

Yes, they do spout a lot of hatred, but it is their opinion. You walk down the street and have Christians preaching, or Jehovah's witness' knocking on your door all trying to put their beliefs on you.

I don't agree with what they say, but if we take away peoples right to speak, then we ourselves will lose that in some way too.