Shooting at Mohammed "art" contest

[ulukinatme]

Hey! I am the one who pointed that out when YOU posted the pic!

I know, and I'm very sorry I first posted this offensive drawing

 

[kmoose]

It certainly makes no difference what I believe. The event organizers were trying to bait them into an attack. And we do not have to believe it was right for the attackers to come in with guns blazing to understand that.

You certainly don't know that the organizers' intent was to draw(no pun intended) an attack.

 

[connor_in]

I know, and I'm very sorry I first posted this offensive drawing

Twice now?

Man, I am gunna miss you

 

[Irish#1]

It certainly makes no difference what I believe. The event organizers were trying to bait them into an attack. And we do not have to believe it was right for the attackers to come in with guns blazing to understand that.

I usually try to keep a very open mind and normally find you to be reasonable. But you just contradicted one of your well used comments. In some of the police posts you have mentioned how we really don't know the intention of someone, yet here you know that the organizers were trying to bait them into an attack. Can't have it both ways.

 

[GoIrish41]

I know, and I'm very sorry I first posted this offensive drawing

Since IE posters are incapable of being offended by mere words, when should we expect NJNP and Pat to be invited back? They got the IE death penalty because they offended others, but this newfound open mindedness offers an opportunity for the sticks and stones gang here to correct their wrong-headed mistake. I am sure all of the 1st amendment supporters in this thread will be on board.

 

[IrishLax]

Since IE posters are incapable of being offended by mere words, when should we expect NJNP and Pat to be invited back? They got the IE death penalty because they offended others, but this newfound open mindedness offers an opportunity for the sticks and stones gang here to correct their wrong-headed mistake. I am sure all of the 1st amendment supporters in this thread will be on board.

lol no they didn't... they got the death penalty for violations of this site's rules...

 

[GoIrish41]

lol no they didn't... they got the death penalty for violations of this site's rules...

Not like the committed violence against anyone. Are we violating their constitutional rights or do we get to pick and choose when they apply? Because you seem to be picking and choosing here. Or are there are limits to free speech that nobody seems to want to acknowledge?

 

[IrishLax]

Not like the committed violence against anyone. Are we violating their constitutional rights or do we get to pick and choose when they apply? Because you seem to be picking and choosing here.

What on God's green earth do constitutional rights have to do with whether someone is banned from an internet forum?

This thread has some serious masterwork in obfuscation.

 

[greyhammer90]

Since IE posters are incapable of being offended by mere words, when should we expect NJNP and Pat to be invited back? They got the IE death penalty because they offended others, but this newfound open mindedness offers an opportunity for the sticks and stones gang here to correct their wrong-headed mistake. I am sure all of the 1st amendment supporters in this thread will be on board.

Since you're clueless about the first amendment I wouldn't expect you to know the difference between a public and private forum. You're not a troll but your opinions are so nonsensical and uninformed you might as well be at this point.

 

[Irish YJ]

Actually not a big fan of Bil Maher. I think he brings his views on religion into every discussion whether it fits or not and he is needlessly offensive to people of faith. I also get the feeling that he looks at himself as a bit of an intellectual, but his typical schtick really isn't that deep. However, in his defense, he speaks out more against political correctness than almost anyone I can think of.

As to the rest -- yes, "don't be mean spirited" is a fairly concise way of putting it. Western society. for all its merits, has plenty of warts, too. I don't think it is advisable to simply accept them as part of the package.

Bill is a baiter. Bill must die.

 

[greyhammer90]

Not like the committed violence against anyone. Are we violating their constitutional rights or do we get to pick and choose when they apply? Because you seem to be picking and choosing here. Or are there are limits to free speech that nobody seems to want to acknowledge?

Holy cow...

 

[GoIrish41]

So I should just ignore all of this ....

There is a huge and well defined difference between "fighting words" (what you described above, which is not protected in our society) and political/religious/social speech (what happened at this contest). So immediately this comparison holds no water.



Because these people have a right to say what they want to in a peaceful manner.



BECAUSE THESE PEOPLE HAVE A RIGHT TO SAY WHAT THEY WANT TO IN A PEACEFUL MANNER.



YES. This is a free society. If someone disagrees with you, you ignore them or debate them.



Literally every other group, religion, and political party is taunted every day. Any violence they take would NEVER and should NEVER be blamed on the citizens exercising their rights to hate them in a peaceful manner.



The organizers endangered nothing and nobody. They were speaking their minds about a religious group they fundamentally disagree with in a peaceful way. They weren't in any Muslim's home. They weren't threatening Muslims. They were excercising the same rights the Muslims have if they want to respond in a legal manner.



They have the same rights the rest of us have. The same rights Catholics have when people call them child molesters. The same rights Gays have when people tell them they disagree with their lifestyle or that they're going to hell. The same rights black people have when they're confronted with racism. It's live and let live. It's called living in a free society.



No one was being harassed. This was a group of individuals coming together to discuss a religion they hate. Again, this is freedom.

I know it is a silly example but just applying your logic above seems to lead one to believe that you think that people have to right to say whatever they wish in a peaceful manner. They did not threaten anyone but the sentiment on IE was pretty hostile toward both of these guys and the post banning high congrats and stories about how much these guys were off base seem a bit disingenuous all of the sudden. I wouldn't think that would be the case from folks who were so in tune with the concept of free speech even if and almost especially since this is on a message board. And I am not picking on your post. There are lots that defend people for saying anything they please so long as they do not threaten anyone. Again, if people really feel this strongly about it why do we have a banned users thread? All opinions should be welcome, right? Just ignore them. I am speaking out against words that actually resulted in a man being wounded and two others killed. That seems like a much bigger deal than if someone was annoying on a message board. I understand that it is not a first amendment issue but all the phony outrage about people's right to say what they please seems like, well, phony outrage. Let's give civility a shot.

 

[ulukinatme]

Since IE posters are incapable of being offended by mere words, when should we expect NJNP and Pat to be invited back? They got the IE death penalty because they offended others, but this newfound open mindedness offers an opportunity for the sticks and stones gang here to correct their wrong-headed mistake. I am sure all of the 1st amendment supporters in this thread will be on board.

You're comparing apples to oranges again, NJNP and Pat weren't banned for offending people, they were banned for failing to follow the rules (And in Pat's case I think it was multiple offenses). NJNP and Pat violated forum rules and they were punished as a result. I'm sure the mods can better explain the reasons each was banned, but in Pat's case I think it was attacking other posters and with NJNP it was trolling in the Ferguson thread or repetitive negative posting, I can't say which it was and I don't care to go back and dig through all that. The art show violated no rules or laws, the extremists violated those laws and as a result they were punished.

I think LA put it best in the server rules: "Posting is a privilege and not a right." NJNP and Pat had the privilege of using this forum and they failed to abide by it's laws, so the forum police did what was necessary to maintain peace and they booted both of them.

 

[greyhammer90]

So I should just ignore all of this ....



I know it is a silly example but just applying your logic above seems to lead one to believe that you think that people have to right to say whatever they wish in a peaceful manner. They did not threaten anyone but the sentiment on IE was pretty hostile toward both of these guys and the post banning high congrats and stories about how much these guys were off base seem a bit disingenuous all of the sudden. I wouldn't think that would be the case from folks who were so in tune with the concept of free speech even if and almost especially since this is on a message board. And I am not picking on your post. There are lots that defend people for saying anything they please so long as they do not threaten anyone. Again, if people really feel this strongly about it why do we have a banned users thread? All opinions should be welcome, right? Just ignore them. I am speaking out against words that actually resulted in a man being wounded and two others killed. That seems like a much bigger deal than if someone was annoying on a message board. I understand that it is not a first amendment issue but all the phony outrage about people's right to say what they please seems like, well, phony outrage. Let's give civility a shot.

I'm done talking about the Constitution with you. Your base understanding of Free Speech is so out of wack that I might as well be talking to a wall. You don't understand what a policy argument is. You don't understand the concept or the danger of an overbroad law. You don't understand who the Constitution applies to or what it promises. You refuse to appreciate the vast difference between a private group and a public townhouse. You call my sincere concern that an American citizen would propose such a nebulous and dangerous law "phony" while continuing to post the same illogical rhetoric that you started this conversation with. You are so much worse than a troll. You are a contrarian who is willing to place a distorted and laughably childish sense of political-correctness over a basic fundamental freedom.

 

[Irish YJ]

I'm done talking about the Constitution with you. Your base understanding of Free Speech is so out of wack that I might as well be talking to a wall. You don't understand what a policy argument is. You don't understand the concept or the danger of an overbroad law. You don't understand who the Constitution applies to or what it promises. You refuse to appreciate the vast difference between a private group and a public townhouse. You call my sincere concern that an American citizen would propose such a nebulous and dangerous law "phony" while continuing to post the same illogical rhetoric that you started this conversation with. You are so much worse than a troll. You are a contrarian who is willing to place a distorted and laughably childish sense of political-correctness over a basic fundamental freedom.

 

[kmoose]

So I should just ignore all of this ....



I know it is a silly example but just applying your logic above seems to lead one to believe that you think that people have to right to say whatever they wish in a peaceful manner. They did not threaten anyone but the sentiment on IE was pretty hostile toward both of these guys and the post banning high congrats and stories about how much these guys were off base seem a bit disingenuous all of the sudden. I wouldn't think that would be the case from folks who were so in tune with the concept of free speech even if and almost especially since this is on a message board. And I am not picking on your post. There are lots that defend people for saying anything they please so long as they do not threaten anyone. Again, if people really feel this strongly about it why do we have a banned users thread? All opinions should be welcome, right? Just ignore them. I am speaking out against words that actually resulted in a man being wounded and two others killed. That seems like a much bigger deal than if someone was annoying on a message board. I understand that it is not a first amendment issue but all the phony outrage about people's right to say what they please seems like, well, phony outrage. Let's give civility a shot.

You just wasted an awful lot of thought and words. If you keep talking about them getting banned for offending people, it still won't be true. No matter how often you mention it. They were allowed to stay, despite pissing off just about everyone on the site. However, when they broke board rules, THAT is when they were dismissed. And no matter how much you talk about it being for offending people, that still isn't going to make it true. I'm sorry, but you are reaching for straws at this point.

 

[GoIrish41]

You're comparing apples to oranges again, NJNP and Pat weren't banned for offending people, they were banned for failing to follow the rules (And in Pat's case I think it was multiple offenses). NJNP and Pat violated forum rules and they were punished as a result. I'm sure the mods can better explain the reasons each was banned, but in Pat's case I think it was attacking other posters and with NJNP it was trolling in the Ferguson thread or repetitive negative posting, I can't say which it was and I don't care to go back and dig through all that. The art show violated no rules or laws, the extremists violated those laws and as a result they were punished.

I think LA put it best in the server rules: "Posting is a privilege and not a right." NJNP and Pat had the privilege of using this forum and they failed to abide by it's laws, so the forum police did what was necessary to maintain peace and they booted both of them.

Look at what they got banned for in your post. Let's say those are the reasons. If that is the case posters in this thread should be up in arms. Negative posts? Mean posts? It is their God-given right to say as they please!!! (So long as they do not physically anyone -- lets be clear on that). The posters here think that they had every right to say whatever comes to mind, no matter if it puts unknowing participants in danger. End the tyranny! Bring back NJNP and Pat!

 

[Wild Bill]

I'm done talking about the Constitution with you. Your base understanding of Free Speech is so out of wack that I might as well be talking to a wall. You don't understand what a policy argument is. You don't understand the concept or the danger of an overbroad law. You don't understand who the Constitution applies to or what it promises. You refuse to appreciate the vast difference between a private group and a public townhouse. You call my sincere concern that an American citizen would propose such a nebulous and dangerous law "phony" while continuing to post the same illogical rhetoric that you started this conversation with. You are so much worse than a troll. You are a contrarian who is willing to place a distorted and laughably childish sense of political-correctness over a basic fundamental freedom.

Stealing this line. Thanks.

 

[GoIrish41]

I'm done talking about the Constitution with you. Your base understanding of Free Speech is so out of wack that I might as well be talking to a wall. You don't understand what a policy argument is. You don't understand the concept or the danger of an overbroad law. You don't understand who the Constitution applies to or what it promises. You refuse to appreciate the vast difference between a private group and a public townhouse. You call my sincere concern that an American citizen would propose such a nebulous and dangerous law "phony" while continuing to post the same illogical rhetoric that you started this conversation with. You are so much worse than a troll. You are a contrarian who is willing to place a distorted and laughably childish sense of political-correctness over a basic fundamental freedom.

It has nothing to do with political correctness or morality. A man was shot ... Because of this event put on by this group that was designed to create the scenario that unfolded. That is a public safety issue. I do not think that people should be permitted to create that situation.

 

[T Town Tommy]

It has nothing to do with political correctness or morality. A man was shot ... Because of this event put on by this group that was designed to create the scenario that unfolded. That is a public safety issue. I do not think that people should be permitted to create that situation.

Then move to Russia, China, or another country that does not allow free speech. The same law that allows extremist Muslim clerics to spread their hatred is the same law that protects an AMERICAN group of individuals wanting to spread theirs.

 

[ulukinatme]

Look at what they got banned for in your post. Let's say those are the reasons. If that is the case posters in this thread should be up in arms. Negative posts? Mean posts? It is their God-given right to say as they please!!! (So long as they do not physically anyone -- lets be clear on that). The posters here think that they had every right to say whatever comes to mind, no matter if it puts unknowing participants in danger. End the tyranny! Bring back NJNP and Pat!

Your argument about free speech on this website doesn't apply with Pat and NJNP. Again, I don't know the specifics on why each was banned as I didn't catalog all the offenses, and I'm not a mod that was privy to the information behind the scenes, I was guessing on what they were each banned for based on the posts I did read. The fact is that this forum has established rules, and everyone is subject to those rules. Rules were broken by NJNP and Pat, and they were subsequently banished. In this case the board rules supersede some free speech because this is a private forum where membership is based on abiding by the established rules. When you join the forum you're agreeing to abide by the rules established and the owners reserve the right to open, close, delete, or edit any discussion as they see fit and for any reason. In essence, when you register you're agreeing to give up some free speech so the community isn't overrun by trolls, malcontents, harrassment, etc.

Check this out: Free Speech in Online Communities: The Delusion of Entitlement

 

[Grahambo]

Dude, give it up.

 

[ulukinatme]

Dude, give it up.

It's alright, I'm off the clock now I do most of my debate while I'm getting paid, time to relax for the evening.

 

[connor_in]

It has nothing to do with political correctness or morality. A woman was raped... Because of the outfit put on by this woman that was designed to create the scenario that unfolded. That is a public safety issue. I do not think that people should be permitted to create that situation

Is this how you would feel about a rape?

 

[Grahambo]

It's alright, I'm off the clock now I do most of my debate while I'm getting paid, time to relax for the evening.

ha.

Wasn't at you. Some people just don't understand. My job right now gives me insights and such into terrorists, their groups, what they are REALLY after, etc. Not every terrorist is created equal. A lot of wrong being spewed in this thread.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

Among the extremeists in this situation are the morons who put on this event. Their actions were designed to trigger a response. They got one. I hope they are proud of themselves. Glad to hear everyone is OK, but lets not place the blame on the "Islamic extremists" when the event organizers were antagonizing them to prove some arcane point about free speech. Freedoms come with responsibilities.

You and I disagree 95% of the time, but I usually enjoy debating with you. This was the weakest and dumbest post I've seen from you on IE. And you deserved all the backlash you got for it.

The First and Tenth Amendments were written not just for you, but because of people like you. I pray this country never becomes the UK where one can be arrested for "offensive speech", whether it be Michael Moore or Ann Coulter.

 

[Irish#1]

It has nothing to do with political correctness or morality. A man was shot ... Because of this event put on by this group that was designed to create the scenario that unfolded. That is a public safety issue. I do not think that people should be permitted to create that situation.

No, a man was shot because someone decided he didn't like the show and decided to express his opinion with violence.

In the last 10-15 years or so, the KKK has put on a couple of demonstrations around here. Their intent is to incite, yet no fights, no one got hurt, let alone shot.

 

[NDgradstudent]

As usual, Steve Sailer nails it:

Free Speech vs. Hate Speech vs. Who/Whom Speech

What’s the difference between Free Speech and Hate Speech?

Who is speaking at whom. Promoting hoaxes about straight white male gang rapists, for example, is, by definition, social justice, not hate speech. Writing your Harvard doctoral dissertation on psychometrics is, by definition, hate speech.

 

[texbender]

I live within a 20 minute walk of the facility, 5 minute car ride. My daughter graduated from the high school adjacent to the facility. This event came basically in response to a January Islamic event at the facility that had lots of "outside" protestors, so the school District (facility owner) should have known this event (by outsiders, not locals) would surely stir the pot.
While I question how wise that decision was, the reasons given why it was allowed are more complex than I want to spend time laying out. In the end, folks, 2 MFers showed up in body armor with 100 round clip ARs with the sole intent on killing lots of people. Kudos to the Garland cop, who with only his sidearm(Glock 9mm), took out both after they wounded an unarmed school District cop. If he hadn't, we'd be talking about probably dozens of killed attendees.
Welcome to Texas, we don't let that sh*t happen. Making excuses for people bent on killing people for speaking their mind has no place. Remember, these people behead folks because they worship Christ.

 

[potownhero]

It has nothing to do with political correctness or morality. A man was shot ... Because of this event put on by this group that was designed to create the scenario that unfolded. That is a public safety issue. I do not think that people should be permitted to create that situation.

By your standard then if a girl wore a short skirt and was raped it would be her fault for wearing something too enticing. She got raped because of her clothes, right? She was just asking for it. Your hypocrisy is unbelievable.