0
IanHarrop

U.S. Supreme Court rejects challenge by KKK

Recommended Posts

Quote

Think ive explained enough to get the point across.



Far from it. Your argument has no weight. You're trying to allow a group of people from wearing a particuliar piece of clothing based on their beliefs. Wearing a hood is not harmful to anyone. You nor anyone else can explain how someone wearing a white hood is hurting anyone. You entire argument is based on things they could do. Bad argument. Come back with something stronger.



Forty-two

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is clothing, in and of itself (which is the basis of your argument), protected by the 1st Amendment?

If, as your argument appears to be, that it is, then wouldn't the act of not wearing clothing also be protected?

Can an individual choose to not wear clothing where ever and when ever they choose? Can an individual choose to appear without clothing on television during a Superbowl half-time show?

When you can answer this question Tuna . . . then get back to me.
quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

It's -exactly- what all the rest of us are talking about.



Nah. Go back and read from the beginning.



I was certainly talking about clothing - and how it should not be worn to protect someones identity.

I also broached the topic of no-clothes... which is again part of my debate.

The reason I suggested not explaining this all to you... is I have been very clear to understand the point (IMHO) so perhaps it is you that should go back and read from the beginning.

The point is very clear - Wearing masks is an enabler to group violence (not a cause) and this is why it is sometimes necessary to enable policing to remove this problem.

Bodyflight Bedford
www.bodyflight.co.uk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The point is very clear - Wearing masks is an enabler to group violence (not a cause) and this is why it is sometimes necessary to enable policing to remove this problem.

***

Agreed.
Mummery inhibition was a big story here. Today, most of us feel sure it's fully OK.

KKK should fall under a similar law.

dudeist skydiver # 3105

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


Why is it that most US citizens actually believe that the rest of the world is behind in civil liberties? :S



Our perspectives may be different given that many of us consider high levels of taxation to be an infringement on civil liberties, as are gun laws, hate speech laws, and huge, unaccountable meta-states, such as the EU.
---------------------------------------------------------------
There is a fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'.
--Dave Barry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Is clothing, in and of itself (which is the basis of your argument), protected by the 1st Amendment?



Yes

Quote

If, as your argument appears to be, that it is, then wouldn't the act of not wearing clothing also be protected?



Most people don't want to see other people nude, let alone have their 7 year old see it. That means broadcast on television with lot of people watching. You are free to watch naked people in strip club or in private, even a theater. You are not free to show yourself to a child.

--------------------------------------------------
the depth of his depravity sickens me.
-- Jerry Falwell, People v. Larry Flynt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


Most people don't want to see other people nude, let alone have their 7 year old see it.



But it's not about what YOU want to see or what you want your 7 year old child to see, but rather how you're allowed to express yourself. That's the crux of the issue.

Certainly I don't want to see members of the KKK at all and I doubt a large percentage of people want to expose their 7 year old children to the KKK either, so your argument just doesn't fly as it pertains to the 1st Amendment.

So, if exceptions to the 1st Amendment can and are made in the name of decency, to protect the eyes of 7 year olds (most of whom, btw already know what a penis and vagina are because, let's face it they probably have at least one of them), certainly exceptions can be made in the name of public safety where there is a real danger of people actually getting hurt.

I'm pretty certain that no 7 year olds were actually hurt by the Superbowl incident and I'm equally certain that none where actually hurt as a result of the more recent MNL football episode.
quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

BUt it's not about what YOU want to see or what you want your 7 year old child to see, but rather how you're allowed to express yourself.



What is the message you are trying to convey by being naked?? Do naked people stand for something? Society is not prepared to permit people to be naked in public irrespective of why they are naked.

Quote

Certainly I don't want to see members of the KKK at all and I doubt a large percentage of people want to expose their 7 year old children to the KKK either, so your argument just doesn't fly as it pertains to the 1st Amendment.



No, you don't want to see people with views that you disagree with.

Quote

So, if exceptions to the 1st Amendment can and are made in the name of decency, to protect the eyes of 7 year olds (most of whom, btw already know what a penis and vagina are because, let's face it they probably have at least one of them), certainly exceptions can be made in the name of public safety where there is a real danger of people actually getting hurt.



The danger is from a disagreement with a message. Because you don't lije the message, doesn't meant that you can censor that message. There is a time and place for everything. The right to gather in peaceably public is nothing flashing people.

Would you agree with making a list of KKK members available to the public? Why or why not?

--------------------------------------------------
the depth of his depravity sickens me.
-- Jerry Falwell, People v. Larry Flynt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


No, you don't want to see people with views that you disagree with.



Really?

You should do a search on this web site for how often I engage people with view that are different than my own.

Also, you should do another search to see what I've said about the KKK having a 1st Amendment right to free speech.

The issue in this particular case isn't what they -say- it's simply the hood.

They have every right in the US to peaceably assemble, speak, march, but the hood is something else -entirely- as it facilitates non-peaceful acts.
quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

No, you don't want to see people with views that you disagree with.



From reading a lot of Quade's posts I have to agree with this. Trying to say people shouldn't have the same 1st amendment rights as others based on their beliefs is a perfect example of this.

Freedom includes everyone in this country, Quade...wether you like them or not.



Forty-two

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

They have every right in the US to peaceably assemble, speak, march, but the hood is something else -entirely- as it facilitates non-peaceful acts.



No, it allows people to make a statement of belief without repurcussions from people who disagree with them. You are concerned not with the KKK lynching people but the people that hate them from causing a riot. When was the last KKK riot??

--------------------------------------------------
the depth of his depravity sickens me.
-- Jerry Falwell, People v. Larry Flynt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i gotta say that they should wear whatever they want. unless there is a law against wearing a mask .

but dave . how is driving a car a "privaledge". i paid for the fucking road and the bastard s' salary thats trying to tell me its a privaledge to drive.....ain't that a bitch.
_________________________________________

people see me as a challenge to their balance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Well - I think it's positive that we can all have fun and drop the serious stuff when we choose to.
In the entire world - there are probably less than 100 000 skydivers.. and the truth is - I'm glad I'm one of them. "

This message is definitely worth bearing in mind.
Some things are more important than mere politics.B|
--------------------

He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

When you can answer this question Tuna . . . then get back to me.



Come on Quade, you should know better than that. Tuna doesn't answer questions. He only offers remarks, usually of the one line kind, usually trying to incite some kind of heated response. When he is proven wrong he just disappears and resurfaces in a different thread, starting all over again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

but the hood is something else -entirely- as it facilitates non-peaceful acts.



Well then I guess "colors" should be illegal as well.

Thats it folsk no more red or blue out in public...It COULD cause a problem.:S

I also guess that camoflauge should be out lawed...I mean it is the clothing of choice for snipers.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

i gotta say that they should wear whatever they want. unless there is a law against wearing a mask .

but dave . how is driving a car a "privaledge". i paid for the fucking road and the bastard s' salary thats trying to tell me its a privaledge to drive.....ain't that a bitch.



There seems to be a mindset, especially from the right, that anything not explicitly mentioned in the Bill of Rights is just a privilege.

I strongly dispute that position. If the Bill of Rights, which is considerably shorter than the agreement I signed to buy my car, is an exhaustive list of the rights of Americans, then any claim to be the most free country is clearly hollow.
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ron . . . I dare you to walk into a liquor store after sunset in Perris while wearing a ski mask covering your face.

It's not the physical piece of clothing or even what it represents, it's the context.
quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Ron . . . I dare you to walk into a liquor store after sunset in Perris while wearing a ski mask covering your face.



I have no reason to wear that mask. Now I would do it in Michigan in the middle of winter.

Or if I belonged to a group that wanted to protest the snowbirds moving to FL and that was the uniform I would.

Your problem is you are against the KKK and since you don't like them you feel it is ok that they have their rights trampled.

I however don't like the KKK, but I respect their rights under the Constitution to assemble in peace and wear what they want while they do it....You don't.

Quote

It's not the physical piece of clothing or even what it represents, it's the context.



What contect? The fact you don't like the KKK and are willing to let their rights be trampled due to that?

I say let them wear what they want. And if they start trouble come down on them just like I would want anyone else charged if they did the SAME THING.

I want them to have the right to be treated like anyone else. You want to treat them differently since you don't like them. Thats like saying Jews need to wear stars all the time.

Thats wrong.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0