Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Don't Ask Rambi -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Philosopher who wrote (46458)	2/4/2000 12:24:00 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71178

You can waive anything you want on your PRIVATE property- and OTHERS have every right to think you are disgusting. You can wear a white sheet- but people have the right not to wish to associate with you- you have the right of free speech as do they, and we all have the right of free association- so if your neighbors revile you, they have every right to do that as long as they don't physically injure you. What the state does on it's own property grants the imprimatur of the state- and thus should be governed by what the will of the people is as manifested through their representatives.

To: The Philosopher who wrote (46458)	2/4/2000 12:56:00 PM
From: Rambi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71178

am I not to be allowed to appreciate symbols that are important to me because they may offend other people Here is where I am getting confused.... do you mean you-CH? Or you the state of SC--- or you the US -or you the KKK? Because of course if you or or I want to fly the Confederate flag, or put a manger in our front yard, or paint a swastika on our barn, then that is our business. (We do it knowing, however, that to some, it will be offensive or that they might think we are racist pigs or religious nuts- but we decide what's more important to us.) If you mean the state of SC, I'm not sure I do agree, and I'm not convinced it's censorship or a violation of individual rights. I admit that I haven't a clue what laws govern this or if there are any. If there aren't, then I guess SC can fly anything it damn well wants. UNLESS a majority of the people pass some law banning it. Ot take it to the Supreme Court or whatever. Or should even hurtful speech be protected and countered with speech that shows its hurt and makes people voluntarily abandon it? Yes!wouldn't that be nice? Too bad, it doesn't seem too terribly effective, I believe this is the better way. That's exactly what I was trying to say yesterday when I gave the little example of two neighbors and the flag. I think Freddy's anger goes far beyond this issue, and that's why he got so upset This is just one example of what he sees happening everywhere and I think he was reacting to a total picture that he has read a lot about and studied and that we weren't considering-- because of course we don't have the same base- so all we can do-- him and us- is try to listen and understand rather than go off on people.