 |
 | |
 |  |
| 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. |
In the United States, freedom of speech, (and freedom of religion) are covered in the Constitution of the United States, specifically in the Bill of Rights. house.gov house.gov some additional sites for information: senate.gov senate.gov The First Amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." Silicon Investor has "Terms of Use": techstocks.com , including, "B. You agree not to use the service for illegal purposes or for the transmission of material that is unlawful, harassing, libelous, invasive of another's privacy, abusive, threatening, harmful, vulgar, obscene, tortious, improper or otherwise objectionable, or that infringes or may infringe the intellectual property or other rights of another. Anyone na‹ve enough to believe that their First Amendment rights have been violated due to having their membership revoked or having a post removed from SI needs to peruse the above. Beyond that, it appears there must be some sort of dividing line on SI between what is ".harassing, libelous, invasive of another's privacy, abusive, threatening, harmful, vulgar, obscene, tortious, improper or otherwise objectionable." and what is not. Never was this line more indistinct than in the case of religion and religious belief. For example, I personally believe that calling someone of a different religious persuasion "evil" or "blind" is not only abusive, it is harmful and threatening. Further, since I believe that one's religion is an intensely personal matter, I believe that making public judgments about another's religious persuasion could be invasive of their privacy. I believe that a person's religion should never be the butt of vitriolic attacks. Many people believe that "anything goes" on SI; I am not one of them. Some people believe that if they are "right", they can say whatever they want, in whatever way they want, because they "know they are right". In other words, some people believe that in the case of religion, "the end justifies the means". I don't agree with that philosophy. As a matter of fact, I find it offensive in the extreme. I think our planet is littered with corpses that would agree with me if they could speak. But, that's just my own opinion. I find religious attacks on anyone to be offensive. So, I believe that if someone feels an overwhelming need to discuss religion on SI, they would be viewed in a better light if they were tolerant, if not respectful, of people who don't believe the same thing they do, and restrict their discussion to posts that fully abide by the Terms of Use and appear only on selected threads that have been created specifically for religious discussion. I think it's "off topic" anywhere else. | ||||||||||||
|
| Home | Hot | SubjectMarks | PeopleMarks | Keepers | Settings |
| Terms Of Use | Contact Us | Copyright/IP Policy | Privacy Policy | About Us | FAQ | Advertise on SI |
| © 2025 Knight Sac Media. Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News |