But when someone criticizes Michael Moore or Cindy Sheehan they hate free speech. Don't you think this is a little bit dishonest?
2006-08-07 06:23:55 · 31 answers · asked by Ethan M 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
"Free speech" as defined by some exsist only when "they" give you a pass to freely say what they agree with, other wise it's labeled hate speech. Wacky isn't?
2006-08-07 06:31:45 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
It's all free speech. Whether it be Bush bashing or Cindy Sheehan bashing. The unfortunate part is the people that scream the loudest and the longest are the ones that get heard. Personally I think anyone over the edge on either side of the debate should get a life and stop bothering the rest of us that would like to have open minded conversations and debates. Although being an independent, I tend to be middle conservative on many issues. I do have very liberal friends and family and we debate regularly. Them I listen to, the screamers get tuned out and I discard anything they say. To bad, what they say may be the truth, but if they have to scream it at me, I automatically discard it.
2006-08-07 13:32:33 · answer #2 · answered by Thomas 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You miss the essential difference.
Saying Sheehan or Moore are wrong, expressing contrary opinions, pointing out where their facts are incorrect, or even calling them idiots because they disagree with you -- those are all free speech, and just as protected as what they are saying.
Telling them to shut up because you don't like what they're saying is not free speech. It's called a Heckler's Veto and it's suppression of speech. And when the government does it, that's a constitutional violation.
That's the difference.
2006-08-07 13:28:28 · answer #3 · answered by coragryph 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It would be, if that were true. Free speech is that which should be applied to any and every aspect of our country. It even allows people to ask or say whatever the want, regardless of merit or triviality. For instance, I can say that your question is fatuous and inflammatory, not to mention narrow in it's focus, for it is highly unlikely that you have done any thorough statistical gathering or analysis to back up your statement. You most likely asked a few people in your area, or, viewed something on one of the Fox news channels and formed your opinion in this way. Whatever the case, your statement cannot be backed up logically or factually.
Better to look at your own critical thinking abilities and ask your self if you are being dishonest by posting these kinds of questions in the first place.
2006-08-07 13:42:56 · answer #4 · answered by Finnegan 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is unfair.
But you do have to admit - the postings stating if Michael Moore or Cindy Sheehan should be executed due to them speaking their views are rather inappropriate as well. So I think that each side of the issue has their faulters. Basically, no one wants anyone to disagree with their view.
2006-08-07 13:36:14 · answer #5 · answered by volleyballchick (cowards block) 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Only if it is the same person expressing the opinion. On the other hand, I dislike Bush intensely, and feel about the same for Michael Moore/Jim Hannity/Ann Coulter. Extremists of any stripe are annoying and do little to solve problems.
2006-08-07 13:30:16 · answer #6 · answered by Mr. October 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, when you consider that many dislike Bush and many dislike Moore you're going to have defenders on both sides making the same claim you're making now.
There are as many conservatives who think it is treason to disrespect the president but have no problem calling Michael Moore a Commie.
It works both ways.
2006-08-07 13:34:55 · answer #7 · answered by Doc Watson 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.
Theodore Roosevelt
That's called being two faced !
They all deserve to be severely criticized!!!
Thrown down kicked, stomped, body slammed, and beaten about the head !
2006-08-08 00:15:25 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely, freedom of speech does not mean being disrespectful to our president. Regardless of whether or not you agree with his policies or agendas, being disrespectful will not change anything. Your right it is a double standard, and I am not sure when Americans decided bashing our president around the world is cool, especially since more than 50% of us voted him into office. Doesn't it make us look like idiots?
2006-08-07 13:33:41 · answer #9 · answered by ? 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well lets clarify the language.....when we speak against the president/government that should be called DISSENT.
Moore and Sheehan should be called CRITICISM.
Both are avenues of FREE SPEECH guaranteed to all of us.
2006-08-07 15:20:31 · answer #10 · answered by Charlooch 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋