Wanna see a picture of a steaming turd?

[kallend 1,619]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Breaking the rules for the sake of breaking the rules as an Antiauthoritarian attitude is essentially a douchebag move. If you are against something, effect change at the source instead of causing headaches for others in the spirit of "flexing your rights".

You mean like Rosa Parks, Martin King, Henry Thoreau and Mahatma Gandhi?
Were they douchebags?

You serious? Those were famous people that got recoginzed for doing something important.

What was Rosa Parks famous for BEFORE her act of disobedience?

...

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

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

What was Rosa Parks famous for BEFORE her act of disobedience?

She was already quite well known in the community. A couple of other girls did the same thing previously but were not given much attention. So they decided that Rosa - the local NAACP secretary, wife of an NAACP lawyer and light skinned - would do it. And she became famous.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[brenthutch 383]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Freedom of speech does not give someone the right to be openly disrespectful to anyone.

That is exactly what freedom of speech does. In countries without it, this girl would probably be in jail or worse.

You said it before I could. Even many "democratic" countries might criminalize this. The first amendment does not just protect popular speech, it's also intended to protect extremely unpopular and offensive conduct. Ironically, that's the real beauty of the US's first amendment.

I spent 20 years defending her right to be a complete jerk. I feel the same about flag burning. I don't like it but that is exactly what the 1st amendment is for. Unlike many, I do not feel anyone has the right to not be offended. If you wish not to be offended....take no offence.

[DJL 232]

You all are wasting keystrokes on this idiot. Public service announcement.

"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

[havoc996 0]

forcibly removing her is also "performing violence." But would be within the duties of the guards, though I do not see that she specifically violated any rule other than displaying inappropriate levity on hallowed ground.

[rockola 0]

Quote

Unlike many, I do not feel anyone has the right to not be offended. If you wish not to be offended....take no offence.

But wouldn't that be... exercising said right?

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

However, How can you say she didn't violate any rules when the sign clearly states Silence AND RESPECT.

It sure seems she did violate those rules. (On a personal note- morally, I find it very offensive, FWIW.) But since her conduct was on public property, and not on private property, enforcement of those rules just might be unconstitutional.

Exercise of constitutional rights - or any similar rights in any similar democratic country - is very frequently messy. But these discussions/debates are very healthy.

[brenthutch 383]

Quote

Quote

Unlike many, I do not feel anyone has the right to not be offended. If you wish not to be offended....take no offence.

But wouldn't that be... exercising said right?

There is no right to not be offended.

[wolfriverjoe 1,339]

Wow. First off, it's publicly owned property. I'd love to see a legal definition of "hallowed ground" or "sacred ground." I don't think that they superceed the first amendment.
If she had been disruptive, she probably would have gotten a ticket. Disorderly conduct or something similar. And if she had had the time, inclination and (mostly) money, she could have fought the ticket. And I believe she would have ultimately "won" (won is in quotes because it would have been a very expensive victory - look up the case of the guy claiming flashing headlights is speech for a good example).

And I very highly doubt that the guards would have done anything more than politely asking her to stop and calling the park police if she didn't. If you think that they would have "dragged her out back and beat the crap out of her" as has been suggested, get real. The guards are way too professional to pull that sort of stunt.

And freedom of speech is the right to be offensive. To be a douchebag. To piss people off. Do you think that the KKK, the Illinois Nazi Party or the Westboro Baptists are trying to convince people of anything? Or are they just trying to get into people's faces and piss them off? (I hate Illinois Nazis)

And Nerdgirl (remember her?) had this up on Facebook:

http://www.businessinsider.com/lindsey-stone-2012-11

Interesting commentary.

I think the girl is going to learn that there are consequences for actions. Speech may be free, but there are consequences for saying unpopular things. Ask Sinead O'Connor or the Dixie Chicks about that.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[nanook 1]

What happened to Nerdgirl. I miss the learning.

_____________________________

"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln

[wolfriverjoe 1,339]

Quote

What happened to Nerdgirl. I miss the learning.

She got sick of all the garbage.

She is on Facebook a lot. That's where she had the article I linked.

Travelling the world, hanging out with the brass, making pithy but very insightful and intelligent comments.
No real change there.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[SkyDekker 1,119]

Quote

And Nerdgirl (remember her?) had this up on Facebook:

http://www.businessinsider.com/lindsey-stone-2012-11

Interesting commentary.

There is some refreshing commentary in that article.

Some samples I wholehartedly agree with

Quote

The blind adoration of the military and its personnel is getting creepy

Quote

questioning institutions and individuals, including the military and its troops, is good and healthy

Quote

That which is left unexamined eventually becomes invisible, and as a result, few Americans today are giving sufficient consideration to the full range of violent activities the government undertakes in their names.