Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: I "get" that you don't "get" the idea underlying the First Amendment [View all]TBF
(32,098 posts)141. Ah, more going on -
thank you for the back story.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
244 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I "get" that you don't "get" the idea underlying the First Amendment [View all]
cthulu2016
Dec 2013
OP
Citizens United was narrowly decided by a far right wing supreme court majority.
Enthusiast
Dec 2013
#121
I don't read it that way, and the OP's endorsement of our historical level of freedom of expression-
X_Digger
Dec 2013
#9
Agreed, AND the disagreement is about whether a country can specify a method for whistleblowing.
stevenleser
Dec 2013
#73
You're right, Snowden had his 'safe haven' with the whistleblowing laws already on the books.
randome
Dec 2013
#107
If you haven't seen those wishing to put their thumb on the scales of the 'balance'..
X_Digger
Dec 2013
#19
Historically, we permitted slavery and racial discrimination. We aren't stuck in history.
JDPriestly
Dec 2013
#86
But the 'harm' in a country of 300 million people cannot be reliably determined...
randome
Dec 2013
#112
Yelling fire in a theatre is usually not merely legal but praiseworthy.
Donald Ian Rankin
Dec 2013
#74
I do not believe that the government should censor hate speech unless it is associated with a crime.
JDPriestly
Dec 2013
#93
It's an area where we are "DIFFERENT" than the bulk of the rest of the world
jberryhill
Dec 2013
#15
But we put up with it because we recognize that deciding what speech is OK and what is not
JDPriestly
Dec 2013
#96
I think what many people don't understand is that while we are free to say or write what we wish to
LanternWaste
Dec 2013
#21
There is also the point that while you are free to say essentially anything you want
Fortinbras Armstrong
Dec 2013
#219
I "get" that you don't "get" that shaming consumers of sexualized violence doesn't mean banning
redqueen
Dec 2013
#23
Slut shaming is never OK. Imputing what you consider a negative sexual practice to someone is ugly
stevenleser
Dec 2013
#36
So, because you failed to get me PPR'd for saying that people post MRA talking points here,
redqueen
Dec 2013
#37
You said "Your" meaning the OP's "precious, precious rape porn". OP has never said they consume that
stevenleser
Dec 2013
#39
No, sorry, not even close. If someone does not indicate they have a particular sexual practice and
stevenleser
Dec 2013
#50
No, again, that's not the way it works. You clearly havent thought this through.
stevenleser
Dec 2013
#64
Close enough. You are defending an ad-hominem, slut-shaming accusation based on no evidence
stevenleser
Dec 2013
#90
Not only didn't the OP ever say they consumed rape porn, they've not said they consume ANY porn
stevenleser
Dec 2013
#75
'The Supreme Court has addressed pornography more often than almost any other issue of
elleng
Dec 2013
#31
Let's not forget, between the cries of "Liberty!" that this argument is about rape porn.
Squinch
Dec 2013
#33
I imagine that for many people, that same principle is simply a mask to hide a specific point.
LanternWaste
Dec 2013
#44
The OP does point out that the 1st Amendment covers Holocaust denial
muriel_volestrangler
Dec 2013
#46
But the crucial difference is that Holocaust denial does not subject more people to the Holocaust.
Squinch
Dec 2013
#143
There is no evidence of causation for either and people concerned about it for both.
stevenleser
Dec 2013
#147
The rape porn genre includes depictions of actual rapes that are sold for entertainment.
Squinch
Dec 2013
#148
Possibly. I'm willing to take your word for it on that. But the discussion was causation.
stevenleser
Dec 2013
#151
The rape porn genre includes depictions of actual rapes being sold for entertainment. nt.
Squinch
Dec 2013
#152
I read it the first time and that still has no bearing on our conversation. nt
stevenleser
Dec 2013
#153
Nice try at moving the goalposts. No. I accept the underhanded tactic as your surrender in this
stevenleser
Dec 2013
#163
Don't agree with the first two paragraphs but the last two are an important reminder
stevenleser
Dec 2013
#80
"even dangerously unfettered speech and expression".... Not exactly. We outlawed incitement to
WinkyDink
Dec 2013
#51
That's right - people should have freedom of speech to say things that I agree with
el_bryanto
Dec 2013
#59
Perhaps, but political speech and consensual intimate behavior by adults in private are intrinsic
stevenleser
Dec 2013
#98
Are any of us on DU the arbiter of anything? What kind of ridiculous argument is that?
stevenleser
Dec 2013
#130
I know you were doing everything except coming up with anything substantive and non-fallacious
stevenleser
Dec 2013
#133
Is that what you think you posted after your non-sequitur subject and straw man opening?
stevenleser
Dec 2013
#137
LOL, no I didn't and no you didn't. That would require a link to case law, which you don't have. nt
stevenleser
Dec 2013
#146
You've never read that case have you? It completely proves my point. Its nearly impossible for
stevenleser
Dec 2013
#198
Can we ban "pretend" child porn, where the actor seems to be underaged, but is claimed not be?"
redqueen
Dec 2013
#127
I used to describe people who disagreed with my opinions as "throwing entitled tantrums" also.
LanternWaste
Dec 2013
#149
"How wonderful to be able to enjoy graphic depictions of consensual, erotic sex.
sibelian
Dec 2013
#225
Well said. Anyone who says "freedumz" to mock political rights is a spoiled brat
LittleBlue
Dec 2013
#167
I don't take anyone that calls quotation marks "scare quotes" at all seriously.
Egalitarian Thug
Dec 2013
#224
The first amendment means little without ecoomic/social freedom. Only the powerful get a voice then.
freshwest
Dec 2013
#194
Yes, the fear of the full extent of the human erotic imagination's spectrum is frightening.
sibelian
Dec 2013
#226
Honestly, I think some of it has to do with DU's peculiar demographics.
Warren DeMontague
Dec 2013
#232
I wish I had 10 dollars for every time someone argued against consenting adult behavior using
Warren DeMontague
Dec 2013
#244