- Portals
- The Current Year
- ED in the News
- Admins
- Help ED Rebuild
- Archive
- ED Bookmarklet
- Donate Bitcoin
Contact an admin on Discord or EDF if you want an account. Also fuck bots.
Freedom of speech: Difference between revisions
imported>Mantequilla Reverted edits by Clayharmon!!1! (talk) to last revision by 81.71.53.254 |
imported>Hipcrime →Idiots: moved section to talk page. all images are absent |
||
| Line 58: | Line 58: | ||
Or you can just point out starting fires in public streets is illegal and that freedom of speech only protects what you *say*, not what you *do*. Remember, freedom of speech allows you to say what you want, but it also means other people have the right to call you a moron for it. | Or you can just point out starting fires in public streets is illegal and that freedom of speech only protects what you *say*, not what you *do*. Remember, freedom of speech allows you to say what you want, but it also means other people have the right to call you a moron for it. | ||
==See Also== | ==See Also== | ||
Revision as of 00:19, 5 September 2011
Honorary Ed Lolington
Freedom of speech
is part of a series on
Internet Law.
[With Liberty and Drama for All]
- Detective
- E-lawyers
- Internet court
- Internet guilty
- Internet jail
- Internet lawsuit
- Internet license
- Internet military
- Internet money
- Internet police
- Internet settlement
- Internet trial
- Internet Vigilante Group
- Legal action
Laws
Internet Crimes
Internet Defenses
Other Topics
Case Law
We are all qualified attorneys at lol and every word of these articles is sound legal advice.
Missing something? You can help by adding moar!
Well over 100 years ago, the Americunt forefathers took a break from the slaughter of Injuns and beating their slaves to decide that all land-owning white men had certain inalienable rights. These rights were established as the Bill of Rights and was the beginning of the Americunt constitution. The first of which, is the much vaunted and much hallowed First Amendment. And on the internets, it is 103% likely to be invoked completely fucking wrongly by someone that hasn't taken the time to actually read the mother fucker.
The First Amendment
—The First Amendment |
Anywhere that there is stupid fucking attention whores that have no idea what they are talking about, there will undoubtedly be a call to the First Amendment for protection. The bastardization of the First Amendment has given free reign for any retard to BAW when they get banned for being a twat from a forum or call some black person a black person.
A Helpful Primer
If you are getting ready to invoke the First Amendment to stand up to your brutal oppression by that Nazi moderator at furaffinity.com, you should ask yourself the following questions.
- Is my oppressor the United States law-making body?
- Is my oppressor trying to form a law?
- Is my oppressor a United States law-making body trying to form a law?
- Is my understanding of the First Amendment solid?
- ????
- PROFIT!
If the answer to any of these questions is no; then you should probably shut the fuck up and follow the rules you agreed to when you joined. Allow ED to help you in your striving for free internets speech.
That is the operative phrase. If the GOVERNMENT is stifling your free speech then speak up. Otherwise, shut the fuck up.
But my E-Feelings!
Nowhere in the Bill of Rights or United States Constitution are your feelings protected. In fact, the idea that they would be is utterly laughable when you consider the Americunt way of life. The country was founded on genocide and slavery, all men are created equal so long as they are white land-owners, and women should be seen and not heard. This was our way of life for centuries. Yet, retards honestly believe that the forefathers wanted to protect their faggotry in situations they voluntarily put themselves in. It is clear the forefathers of the United States believed in survival of the fittest to an extent.
Doing it wrong
Though corporations are basically our overlords at this point, they still are not the congress. Those draconian Terms of Use one agreed to are perfectly legal in outlining what is acceptable and unacceptable to say in their service. Why is this? BECAUSE YOU CAN LEAVE AT ANY TIME. Oh the humanity of it all! Much fun can be had in the typical online service with this knowledge under one's belt.
- World of Warcraft has an extremely large player base of people that don't know how to read a legal agreement. That thirteen year old kid who won't shut the fuck up and keeps blabbering on with profanity? Just report him for verbal harassment. Someone screaming at you over some stupid bullshit that no one cares about? Report them for verbal harassment.
- PRO-TIP: Be sure to inform them that you are reporting them and do not swear back at them, as the GMs check the log of both sides and will banhammer both parties. They will scream about how if you do not like swearing to turn on the filter. Then you can taunt them with being too stupid to read the Terms of Use to know its still a bannable offense. This usually doesn't work on PVP servers but everything else is pretty much fair game.
In Practice
The Americunt government still manages to weasel its way around the First Amendment to control the flow of information from the media. Is this a conspiracy theory? Reptilian overlords? The Illumanti? No, it is something far more simple and insidious. Press passes.
A press pass is a document that has shown an individual is clear to enter an area that they normally would not be allowed to. It gives reporters the ability to attend meetings in the White House with the Press Secretary and other press events. So while mainstream media is onboard with the government by being major corporate interests who help fund those individuals get into office, individual reporters are kept in check with press passes. If a reporter asks the Press Secretary or a politician a tough question that puts them on the spot or is "out of bounds", they will have their pass for those events revoked. Usually this will be the start of the end of that reporters career since all major media outlets are owned by a handful of conglomerate corporations. How could a system like this possibly go wrong?
- Example: The War in Iraq. Everyone howls for the blood of the Neo-Cons and W because of entering a war under false pretenses. But who is actually responsible? The media is another check against the power of government. And by being hosed with simple things like press passes, it makes reporters fearful of their careers and futures thus preventing them from asking hard questions to our Overlords. Questions like, "Can we see the evidence before millions of people suffer and die that justifies going to war?" Wars do sometime need to be fought, but the flow of information pertaining to them needs to be freely available. Not controlled by the people that said information is critical of.
Yet we live in a free country.
Tolerance
The following video will enrage military, former military, military families, anyone with a friend that has died in action, and Rightards.
—-Harry S. Truman |
Tolerance is exactly that, tolerance. You can still hate the shit out of it but being able to respect the right of expression is a two way street. It is understandable why this would so thoroughly enrage the individuals that it does. It feels like a knife in the back after the suffering and anguish they've experienced and the horrors of war they've bore witness to. But the Americunt ideal is not a flag. The flag is just a representation of it. It seems reasonable to say that this sort of behavior isn't acceptable to a symbol of the country. Where does it end? The Church of $cientology already brainwashes and destroys people while sheltering itself under the First Amendment. LRH proposed early on to infiltrate sections of government under Operation Snow White, and they did with quite some success.
So what would happen if those individuals got into a position to say a type of criticism is wrong? Then everything the individuals who suffered for the ideals behind that burning flag would be ashes in the wind. Hate the person's message, hate their expression; but let them express it. Otherwise the liberty given to us by those that have made the ultimate sacrifice to protect that Amendment is at risk.
Or you can just point out starting fires in public streets is illegal and that freedom of speech only protects what you *say*, not what you *do*. Remember, freedom of speech allows you to say what you want, but it also means other people have the right to call you a moron for it.
See Also
External Links
- A Documentary on Media Manipulation - An hour long documentary on media manipulation without normal conspiracy theory bullshit like the NWO and Alex Jones. Very plain and easy to see in simple terms for the average idiot.
- Welcome to the Depths of Stupidity A forum for people that got banned from other forums.