According to the left. It's ok to let gays mock a sacrilegious event in the "Last Supper", it's ok to let the president of a nation that supports terrorists and fights our troops in a proxy war speak at an American University, but it is NOT ok to allow the Marines to film in San Francisco?!
2007-09-26 17:25:25 · 28 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Yea, they sure value the 1st amendment!
2007-09-26 17:25:43 · update #1
Libels only value the first amendmant when it coincides with their agenda. anyone else who uses it is a "bigot" "homophobe","hatemonger", "vast right wing conspiracy", etc,etc,etc,
2007-09-26 17:29:24 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 8⤊ 6⤋
I found a link for the story.
Marines Denied Permission To Film Commercial On The Streets Of San Francisco
http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=i_team&id=5673526
2007-09-26 17:36:06 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Where and when did gays mock a sacrilegious event in the Last Supper? Are you talking about Leonardo da Vinci's Last Supper painting. Everyone knows he was gay. So was Michaelangelo and Donatello who did the first David bronze statue. As far as the The Iranian president is concerned, he addressed the UN too, that happens to be in the U.S. Is that o.k with your heinass too? BTW, it's called free speech and that American University, as liberal as it is, gave that man hell. It's called the free flow of ideas and that is what our country is founded on. If you don't like it, move to your buddy Bush's Saudi Arabia where the vaste majority of terrorists are from in Iraq and around the world.
2007-09-26 18:01:11 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
I am a liberal and am a staunch supporter of the first amendment.
I have not heard of the story that you are referring to, please provide a link so that I may comment further. Thank you.
After a little search I found the story you are referring to and I think you are reading a story that has been proven false. Apparently the city did give the permit to shoot for a certain day however the Marines were not scheduled to be in on the day that the film crew acquired the permit for. Neither the actual film crew or company had any complaints about how the city handled the request. The crew asked for the permit to be reissued, but were denied because of traffic concerns and time constraints.
Next time do a little research before you post questions and you may turn up a little dirt yourself.
http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2007/09/city-officials-.html
2007-09-26 17:31:11 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 2⤋
The Marines were allowed to film alright, but not with any actual Marines in the picture; they had to be superimposed into the scenes during the editing process.
And just yesterday, a leftist lawyer who was disbarred and imprisoned for 28 months for providing material support to terrorists was invited to speak at Hofstra Law School's legal ethics conference.
This traitor, Lynne Stewart, has more to offer humanity than those brave Marines?
Far left libs are just as dangerous as the fundies.
2007-09-26 19:02:39 · answer #5 · answered by Kubla Con 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Don't forget the leftist 1st amendment hating fairness doctrine. They agree with the amendment only if you agree with them . Sick isn't it. These are the same people who uses power to knock crosses off of hospital because they find it offensive. But then turn around and try to let 1000s of illegals amnesty. And people vote for these people?
But my favorite is that Bush is an idiot. The most stupid idiot to ever get elected, and yet not only did they lose, twice to him, they have the idea in their head that he cooked up 9-11 for a personal gain. HUH? Make up your crooked lil minds.
Then you get the minute men booed off stage at columbia, and cheered the iranian president. HOW DOES THAT HAPPEN.
2007-09-26 18:50:58 · answer #6 · answered by The Angry Elephant 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I highly suspect it's the fault of other issues, not non-support fo the 1st amendment, that led to the Marines not being able to film.
2007-09-26 17:54:30 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Nathan Ballard, a spokesman for the mayor of San Francisco, says he takes issue with the KGO-TV story.
"You're running a story that is not accurate. We actually provided the Marines with a permit," he says in a voicemail message. In another message, Ballard demanded a retraction. When we finally spoke, Ballard repeated his claims that the story was inaccurate and said: "We welcome the Marines to San Francisco. They were terrific guests and we welcome them back any time."
2007-09-26 18:17:41 · answer #8 · answered by wyldfyr 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Who knew the left ruled all of America! Personally, I found the Folsom Street Fair poster humorous. Seems interesting that you consider a painting by a gay man sacred in the first place though. Hint: Leonardo Da Vinci was gay. As for the rest, I thinking you're spinning the thread a little thin and exaggerating at worst. And it seems to me, you are the one with the problem with free speech.
2007-09-26 17:39:09 · answer #9 · answered by God 6 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Could you please explain who or what said it wasn't OK for the Marines to film in San Francisco?
Edit: OK I googled it--this was just a case of a power-hungry nut with a city job, not anything to do with 1st amendment rights!
2007-09-26 17:29:49 · answer #10 · answered by Petrushka's Ghost 6 · 5⤊ 2⤋
sure, I do. I question the place the form ensures the main dazzling to possess a closet finished of attack weapons and that i ask your self why those human beings with a documented background of psychosis are able to possess firearms, yet I do help gun possession. i won't own one by way of my background of psychological ailment, yet you choose for it.
2016-11-06 11:54:08 · answer #11 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋