Freedom of Speech?
Posted on November 19, 2005
Hat tip: Rhymes With Right
Now, I’m not the homophobic type that many on the left probably think I am. Religiously and therefore morally , I find it wrong, but this is the Country of the free, and I think to each their own. I don’t think marraige should be extended to them, but otherwise, if they want to live that way, let them be. On the other side of the coin, since this is the Country of the free, I also believe our Constitution gives the freedom to express views against homosexuality. Apparantly, certain players in the judicial field feel otherwise.
A U.S. District Court judge has dismissed a lawsuit by a Staten Island clergyman who claimed his civil rights were violated when two billboards he ordered denouncing homosexuality were ordered covered up.
It was the second time that the Rev. Kristopher Okwedy has had his case dismissed. After Judge Nina Gershon originally threw out the case in 2003, Okwedy went to a state Appeals Court which ordered the case revisited.This week Gershon again dismissed the case.
Okwedy was attempting to sue former Borough President Guy V. Molinari and PNE Media of violating his First Amendment rights when Molinair ordered the removal of two billboards.
Okwedy had paid PNE $2,500 for two signs that quoted biblical passages condemning homosexuality.
Molinari said at the time that the billboards violated the city’s human rights ordinance protecting gays from discrimination and that he feared the billboards would inspire anti-gay violence. PNE complied.
Judge Gershon ruled that Okwedy had failed to prove that the human rights law was unconstitutional as applied to him because it collided with his religious and free speech rights.
Rhymes With Right asks:
Have freedom of speech and freedom of religion been eviscerated in this country because of the hyper-sensitivity and political clout of the sodomy lobby?
The short answer: Yes! Political Correctness has taken priority over freedom of speech. Homosexuals are now granted special rights, and anyone who speaks against it are treated as second class citizens.
» Filed Under 1st Amendment, ACLU, Activist Judges, Homosexual Agenda, News
Trackback URL
Comments
10 Responses to “Freedom of Speech?”
-
Affiliations
The Giants
-
Advertise
Donate
Our Store
Click the design to visit our store and help Stop the ACLU!
Stop the ACLU blogburst
-
More blogs about the ACLU
Syndicate Me
Word. I’m not homophobic either. I mean, it’s wrong in every imaginable light, but whatever floats people’s boats is fine by me, because this is America. However, it pisses me off that I can’t publicly target people with hateful messages on the basis of their sexual orientation, even though I would have no motivation to do this, of course, ’cause, you know, this is America, and to each his own, and I’m not homophobe.
Seriously, what constitutes homophobia in your mind? Outright violence, murderous or otherwise?
I’m guessing you don’t fear and loathe Arabs, pro-choicers, or educated people, either. You just want this country purged of them so we can all be more secure and you can feel better about yourself.
This from the same wizard who was complaining that department stores’ swapping of “Merry Christmas” for “Happy Holidays” is a step toward the eradication of Christianity. Who is it that wants special treatment again? If someone put up a bunch of billboards mocking a half-dead Christ on the cross and a judge ordered it taken down, would you label him or her a liberal activist?
Keep it up. This is some of your best work yet. A parodist couldn’t do better than you and you’re doing your best to be sincere.
Hey rump pumper, you are an idiot. If someone wants to mock Christianity they certainly have the freedom to do so. As for the Merry Christmas thing…you are waaaaaaaay off. What is happening here is not that I so much object to the use of “happy holidays” as I object to the censoring of “Merry Christmas.” If someone that works there wants to say it they should be able to shout it out. And for a company to “include” Kwanza, and all the other religious names of the holidays and exclude Christmas is censoring speech, and being exclusive, not inclusive.
First of all, don’t call me or anyone an idiot. The world is overrun with lunatic irony as it is. Second, show me one example of the “censoring” of Christmas — specifically, a workplace where employees have been warned against using the phrase “Merry Christmas” or an instance in which mention of Christmas has been expressly barred.
Try this. It may not be exactly what you’re looking for, but it’s close. And all you had to do was google “WalMart no merry christmas.”
Here’s the link. Just in case you forget how to use google.
http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/business/article.adp?id=20051111062209990003
Well, Scott, in the linked article I saw evidence of a Catholic group’s anger over a Wal-Mart employee’s historical characterization of Christmas, but I didn’t see anything about a corporate policy forbidding the use of the term “Merry Christmas,” and I saw no suggestion that Wal-Mart is singling out Christmas for active exclusion. All I saw is that employees are being encouraged to use salutations that take into account the range of seasonal celebrations.
If I change my sports fandom from “Go Yankees” to “Go A.L. East,” am I actively denigrating New York clubs? An idiot from the Bronx might think so, but a thinking person wouldn’t.
If you believe that a lack of special treatment equates to mistreatment, I’m not surprised — a lot of Christians walk around with this particular chip on their shoulders. The day the government starts censoring Christmas trees and Santa Claus iconography is the day Jay has a legitimate complaint.
I’ve celebrated Christmas all of my life, by the way. For whatever reason I just don’t have the petty hang-ups others do.
“…range of seasonal celebrations.”
What seasonal celebrations would those be, other than Christmas?
“I’ve celebrated Christmas all of my life, by the way.”
Many people ‘celebrate’ Christmas but, to many more… Christmas is a celebration.
Maybe that is why you don’t have the “petty hang-ups”… its just no big deal to you!
Pretty much like the 4th of July. Many fools who have no understanding or appreciation for the sacrifices of our Veterans, can BBQ, get drunk and shoot off fireworks and call it a celebration. What are they celebrating?
Besides…this thread isn’t about Christmas. Its about selective freedom of speech and activist judges.
“What seasonal celebrations would those be, other than Christmas?”
You’ve probably heard of both Thanksgiving and New Year’s Day. Those both fall under the “holiday season” umbrella, which is one more reason why “Merry Christmas” is overly parochial.
Beyond that, I assume there is a rhetorical element to your question, since you probably are aware of other, non-Christmas holidays of a borderline secular and religious nature falling in or near the month of December.
“Many people ‘celebrate’ Christmas but, to many more… Christmas is a celebration…Maybe that is why you don’t have the ‘petty hang-ups’… its just no big deal to you!”
There are plenty of things that are important to me that I might deem underappreciated by society at large. This doesn’t stop me from reverently celebreating these pursuits or matters.
“Besides…this thread isn’t about Christmas. Its about selective freedom of speech and activist judges.”
As I told the other guy, if you can indicate exactly how someone’s First Amendment rights are being shat on here, go for it. And I admit that when I see someone on a site like this mention the phrase “activist judge” I pretty much ignore it, because I know this effectively translates to “judge that does not unconditionally advance a right-wing kook agenda.”
Why don’t I jump in here.
In my book, this is not at all about the right to “target people with hateful messages.” Rather, it is about the right of people to engage in both political and religious speech free from government interference.
The public citation of a verse from the Torah/Old Testament was banned by a government body. Does this not have grave implications for religious liberty? We are not talking about “special rights” here — we are talking about one of the fundamental libertie that is written into the Constitution of the United States.
What next? Will we see prosecutions like the one in Sweden, where a pastor is facing jail time for preaching on this same verse? Will we see a Canadian-style speech regulation regime which costs people jail time, criminal fines, civil damages, and (in some intsnces) employment because they express their moral and religiously based opposition to homosexuality in a non-violent manner?
And dare i suggest, rump pumper, that there is something bitterly ironic abouta situation in which one side of an issue (the normalcy and morality of homosexuality) is freely permitted to speak in denigrating terms about their opponents in the name of freedom of speech and the other is banned from presenting its argument by the government under terms of a vaguely worded statute.
And if you go to my site, rump pumper, you can see the actual billboard that was censored. Four versions of one Bible verse, a reference to the Almighty, and a citation of the source of the quotes. You certainly cannot call this an y sort of incitement to violence.
http://rhymeswithright.mu.nu/archives/134317.php
So I ask again — has the Forst Amendment been eviscerated by government officials kowtowing to the homosexualists (gay equivalent of the Islamists)?