DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**Greapyjeory** · 02-03-2011, 03:49 PM

This is the key part. They were on public property assembling, expressing an opinion. They did not physically assault anyone, they did not physically prevent the funeral. They broke no laws. The debate comes down to whether someone is free to say "i hate you." In this country it should be obvisou that you are.

What is sad is we will now have a parade of posters saying they disagree with the ruling and that the govt should prevent people from expressing their opinion. Thats about as anti-american as you can get.

Call it whatever you like, but I'm pretty sure the majority is actually on your side, not mine.

I take more of a European view of the freedom of speech. I support most forms of free speech, but I think there are rational limits to speech that should be enforced. One of them involves harassing people during funerals. That violates common decency, IMHO.

02-03-2011, 03:49 PM	#8
Greapyjeory Join Date Nov 2005 Posts 405 Senior Member	This is the key part. They were on public property assembling, expressing an opinion. They did not physically assault anyone, they did not physically prevent the funeral. They broke no laws. The debate comes down to whether someone is free to say "i hate you." In this country it should be obvisou that you are. What is sad is we will now have a parade of posters saying they disagree with the ruling and that the govt should prevent people from expressing their opinion. Thats about as anti-american as you can get. Call it whatever you like, but I'm pretty sure the majority is actually on your side, not mine. I take more of a European view of the freedom of speech. I support most forms of free speech, but I think there are rational limits to speech that should be enforced. One of them involves harassing people during funerals. That violates common decency, IMHO.
	Quote