Racism or Freedom of Speach

http://www.fox4news.com/news/pro-con...ty-free-speech


First Amendment

Why can't it be both? The flag depicted on the billboard is not a Confederate flag at all but rather the battle standard of Northern Virginia. It was adopted in various forms by Confederate land and naval forces as battlefield identification. Probably becayse the first few iterations of Confederate flags were too similar to the Union flag and resulted in several Confederate friendly fire incidents. Later, the battle flag of Northern Virginia was hijacked by racists, neo-confederates and neo-nazis and remains an icon of hate, racism and intolerance to present day.

All members of the Confederacy were traitors to the Union but were later granted blanket amnesty after the war. Many historians operate on the premise that Union forces fought to preserve the Union and Confederate forces fought to perserve the institution of chattel slavery as a State right. Consequently, if one embraces the notion of white supremacy and gender inequality then the traitorous battle flag of Northern Virginia is an appropriate icon to represent your heritage.

Hate speech and the public display of iconic symbols of racism in private venues are protected under the First Amendment of the US Constitution. This has been upheld in subsequent case law. On the other hand,explicit discrimination or acts of violence inspired by hate speech are not. And no....I'm not a lawyer but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. I hope this clears things up for you.

Why can't it be both? Originally Posted by Whisky_1

You forgot to mention that the racists were all democrats.

You forgot to mention that the racists were all democrats. Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

I disagree. Most racists tend to be spawned from the dominant societal group. In America the dominate demographic group on prima facie basis are older conservative authoritarian white males. I would suspect most hail from thd religious and political right which today are usually Republicans. Prior to the Dixiecrats jumping ship in the late 1940's political identity was not a significant variable in America's racial apartitide. Simply stated most whites discriminated against most people of color. I would suggest that before the extinction of the Dixiecrats explicit and implicit discrimination in America was leveraged mainly by white males of all political parties against females and non-whites.

I disagree. Originally Posted by Whisky_1

I'm not surprised.

I'm sure there was a minute fraction who weren't Democrats, but for the most part the Klan members were Democrats and of course ...

... here is Mr. Democrat himself ...



JFK was reluctant to embark upon getting a "civil rights" bill through Congress, because he was concerned he would lose the South in his re-election bid ... and in those years the Democrats "ruled" the South ... which included Texas.

But there's always the "bright side" of the Democratic Party .... it seems to continue drifting farther away from the "good ole" days they enjoyed with a strangle hold on local governments as a backlash to Reconstruction (it's etched into most Southern Constitutions, including Texas) and a pound of cure to keep carpetbaggers from driving their states into oblivion ... as they are attempting to do themselves today ..... by allowing them to be invaded with illegal voters.

And as the ad goes: "We've come a long way baby!"



... the LOONS are still in charge!!!!!

I disagree. Most racists tend to be spawned from the dominant societal group. In America the dominate demographic group on prima facie basis are older conservative authoritarian white males. I would suspect most hail from thd religious and political right which today are usually Republicans. Prior to the Dixiecrats jumping ship in the late 1940's political identity was not a significant variable in America's racial apartitide. Simply stated most whites discriminated against most people of color. I would suggest that before the extinction of the Dixiecrats explicit and implicit discrimination in America was leveraged mainly by white vmales of all political parties against females and non-whites. Originally Posted by Whisky_1

Times have changed. Most "white people" don't think much about racism at all. Instead, it is the minority communities that are constantly bombarded with anti white rhetoric from the Main Stream Media and various "leaders" who have a vested interest in keeping victimhood at the forefront of Politics.

As for the billboard in the original post, it's childish and vulgar. it's meant to divide people and stir hate.

Which it is accomplishing.

As for the billboard in the original post, it's childish and vulgar. it's meant to divide people and stir hate.

Which it is accomplishing. Originally Posted by Jackie S

Yeah, while the discussion of Racism vs. Free Speech is a good one, I think the article in the OP is more about decency or vulgarity vs. Free Speech in the billboard which is also a good topic just not so much racial related.

Does the billboard cross a decency "law" is the main question being discussed.

Times have changed. Most "white people" don't think much about racism at all. Instead, it is the minority communities that are constantly bombarded with anti white rhetoric from the Main Stream Media and various "leaders" who have a vested interest in keeping victimhood at the forefront of Politics.

As for the billboard in the original post, it's childish and vulgar. it's meant to divide people and stir hate.

Which it is accomplishing. Originally Posted by Jackie S

Multicultural societies with grievance politics based upon race have ample opportunities for those who benefit from division to stoke hatred among the races.

America is too far gone. Our well equipped military and the worldwide usage of our currency is the thing which holds it all together.

LexusLover you speak of what was rather what is. Politics is not stagnant but rather shifts from left to right and back again like a pendulum as politicians flip flop on issues and policy decisions. Your post highlights a time in American history when explict racism was at a milestone marker as the more radical and far right leading politicians were absorbed into the Republican party. The exodus of conservative Democrats to the Republican party began a trajectory toward the far right. Consequently, the Republican party is now the political party of choice for right wing extremists, white separatists, white nationalists, white supremacists, neo-confederates, neo-nazis, other right wing hate groups and maybe a few good people. Today's Republican party is not the Republican party of old that existed in that segment of history when America was great. Today, the Republican party plays ring master of one of the greatest political shitshows on the planet. Decades from now global citizens will probably look back in retrospect and joke about the time the Electoral College of the American Republic installed an alleged Russian asset as the chief executive.

Times have changed. Most "white people" don't think much about racism at all. Instead, it is the minority communities that are constantly bombarded with anti white rhetoric from the Main Stream Media and various "leaders" who have a vested interest in keeping victimhood at the forefront of Politics.

As for the billboard in the original post, it's childish and vulgar. it's meant to divide people and stir hate.

Which it is accomplishing. Originally Posted by Jackie S

The bill board may violate community standards and be tested in the civil court system. Moreover, I am willing to concede that many "white people" may not think about race or the long shadow of racism in this country until they are adversely impacted. Based on my observations even racists usually do not like to be labeled as a racists. Furthermore, there is still a large segment of the American population that percieve any trajectory toward social justice rooted in ethical behaviors, religious tolerance as well as gender and racial equality in due process as a loss of privilege. The racial division and hate in this country is not new just more visible.

It's the urination being depicted that will likely get it removed, Miller v. California.

Racism is protected as long as it's not found to be inciting, Brandenburg v. Ohio

It's the urination being depicted that will likely get it removed, Miller v. California.

Racism is protected as long as it's not found to be inciting, Brandenburg v. Ohio Originally Posted by grean

LL, do you know if it has to fail just one or all three tests from miller v California? It fails by showing an excretory function but it isn't without a political message, one could argue.

The bill board may violate community standards and be tested in the civil court system. Moreover, I am willing to concede that many "white people" may not think about race or the long shadow of racism in this country until they are adversely impacted. Based on my observations even racists usually do not like to be labeled as a racists. Furthermore, there is still a large segment of the American population that percieve any trajectory toward social justice rooted in ethical behaviors, religious tolerance as well as gender and racial equality in due process as a loss of privilege. The racial division and hate in this country is not new just more visible. Originally Posted by Whisky_1

The only white people with "white privilege" are either rich or good looking.

All the other poor bastards have to earn a living the hard way or suffer like all the other shlubs.

Also, saying "white privilege" is a way of saying someone didn't earn what they have or created.

But when you consider how great a country America used to be, you have to give some credit to those responsible.

I agree that Teddy Kennedy didn't earn what he had, but that was because he had a rich daddy.

In a functioning free enterprise society, you have to put up with rich kids - even assholes like Teddy Kennedy.

Allowing the prosperous to help their kids is an excellent motivator for the productive. It is why capitalism mostly works when good people are in the system, and why socialism is usually a less productive and ironically unfair system.