Censoring Hate On The Internet

It's Wonderful to Find Someone

willing to make the decisions as to what the First Amendment abuse is. I would bet I could find a group of some of your millions of people that can demonstrate the evils of Porn, how it degrades women, how it leads towards violent acts towards women and it is of course not good FOR THE CHILDREN. There are a number of things being done FOR THE CHILDREN and in the NAME OF THE CHILDREN that would make teh authors of the Federalists shudder.

But you have the good idea, of a meaningless disclaimer protecting anyone who advocates hate or love, good or bad. That is why and how web sites proclaim that their stories are not about children, it is age play. That is how Literotica, has their firm rules of 18 and above sex, then has how many high school stories. Once you start the implied threats and actions, there is no ending, unless you count the book burnings in 1930s Germany. Unless you go back in time and count the people burnings for the crime of possessing a Bible in English in England of just a few hundred years ago.

How in your restrictions on web sites that advocate something that displeases you, how does this affect my free speach rights. Peace, Freedom, Open Speech, Democracy, wow these sound good, please explain this to the web censors in the People's Republic of China. Once you start your restrictions there is never an end. he European Trade Organization is working to limit "free speech" on the Internet (World Wide Web) because they do not like certain ideas and ideals.

Direct speech and action, Google the number of conservative speakers who are denied free speech, even in invited forums in the major Universaries. Check the number of universaries that ban military recruiting, which is against the law.

When you start your control of the "bad" stuff and I do not condone your murders, fire bombings, bombings to shut up or stop action by doctors or ministers or who ever where do you stop? Can you stop? The largest producers of kiddie porn in the world is the US Government, all done in the good cause of stopping those who would prey on children, even if this takes producing the materials, searching for buyers, sending advertisements ot potential buyers then arresting them is they buy the government produced merchandise.

I do not have the answers, I am afraid of more answers that are being given. I am sure that some will attack my viewpoints as being pro or anti 1st Admendment.

well done

I thought your article was well written, balanced, and fair.
as you stated in the beginning this is your (well formed) opinion.
I agree with your opinion although I am not sure how we, as a nation, can legislate this without risking the "slippery slope".

Old conumdrum...

no

no, bitch

You made me think....

Ignore anonymous. You raise some v. valid points. I am just not sure how to respond..... #thinking

How would that work?

Every website that provides any clue to a controversial public figure's home or office location could be shut down? That could affect almost every "news" site on the net.
Remember, every power you give the government to "protect" us can be turned around and used to silence or even jail whoever the group who won the last election wants to use it against.
This is the ultimate test of free speech: since someone crazy or violent might do something crazy or violent, do we proactively stop someone else's speech that might encourage or indirectly faclitate it?
After thinking it over carefully, I come down on the side of more speech, rather than less speech. Unless someone makes a direct theat of violence against a specific person or a specific group, then I'll live with the sometimes inadequate protection law enforcement provides us, rather than be subject to a "speech" code" that some court will administer to decide what I can say and when.

Well thought out, however

Who decides? Who do you trust to make these decisions? Therein lies the rub. Everyone has a political axe to grind. Would you trust a gun control advocate to examine 2nd amendment websites? People who are decidedly anti drug to decide about websites that advocate for the repeal of marijuana laws? Too many facets here for the mind to comprehend, and, as I said, far too many people who have a political agenda.
It's one extreme to the other.

talldarkfellow is

Exactly correct. Realtor's websites, perhaps? They have addresses of homes they've sold, and sometimes even the names of people they were sold to. Where does it stop? Speech is an arm, 'tis true. But it is an arm that no legislator can take away, because not only are we guaranteed the right to bear arms, vis-a-vis the second amendment; we are guaranteed the specific right to the most lethal and dangerous weapon of all, dissenting, passionate speech and expression in the first amendment! Hate speech damn well included, the nastier and more distasteful, the better! If it makes you feel sick to hear it? Be thankful it's not illegal. Because the dream speech made some types of people, and they were powerful, feel just as sick. Ponder that. And collecting addresses? Have you heard of door to door campaigns/charity drives? They have websites like that too. Evil sons of bitches, the children's miracle network, right? Heh. Pardon the sarcasm, I'm an irritable SoB.