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.

Politics : The Obama - Clinton Disaster -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John who wrote (39175)	10/6/2010 5:08:58 PM
From: Cage Rattler	3 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 103300

John, individual freedoms should not infringe upon the rights of fellow citizens. The Constitutional right to Own and bear firearms, for example, does give you the right to shoot someone with whom you disagree. Where in their Bible do those protesters find justification for behavior? Does anyone really believe you would find Christ carrying any such signs under such mournful circumstance? Those protesters should be protesting their own genetic issues not adding grief to a funeral.

To: John who wrote (39175)	10/6/2010 6:40:07 PM
From: Neeka	Respond to of 103300

Mr. Phelps attorney isn't arguing to stop speech, he's arguing to stop harassment.

To: John who wrote (39175)	10/6/2010 7:31:42 PM
From: GROUND ZERO™	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 103300

Those protesters are disregarding the sanctity of life, they should show some restraint and some respect for the pain and dignity of those in mourning... this is something very human and very basic, free speech has nothing to do with it... any fool would know better than to jeer and taunt those in deep mourning, it's just basic human common sense... the question of free speech is irrelevant, as it is irrelevant to prevent someone from yelling "BOMB" at an airport or "FIRE" in a crowded theater... GZ

To: John who wrote (39175)	10/6/2010 9:27:13 PM
From: Wayners	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 103300

"limit to the free-speech rule to permit lawsuits against those who target ordinary citizens with especially personal and hurtful attacks." If you want to know where this is going, give this phrase the broadest most stretched interpretation you possibly can the same way they interpret the unlimited powers under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. Obama would say, "....you criticized Obamacare and that hurt my lil feelings in the blog you wrote. I can now take the full power of the Justice Department to sue you for everything you have."