Does 'Innocence of Muslims' meet the free-speech test?

LA Times ^ | 9-18-12 | Sarah Chayes

[null and void]

Yelling “FIRE!” in a packed theater in Tehran, Iran is neither protected or infringed by the US Congress or the US Courts.

Different standards.

St. Yasser Arafat got his start lighting a fire in a crowded theater...

[BenLurkin]

The society from which the Brandenburg ruling emanated was vastly more civilized than any in the Islamic world. To compare the two is pointless. And dangerous.

[SteveH]

keyboard spew alert

[radpolis]

Notice how the liberal thinks:

The First Amendment should be restricted because of unpopular speech, because that speech might hurt somebody’s feelings.

The whole entire fricking point of the First Amendment was to protect unpopular speech, to protect those with unpopular and offensive ideas.

Funny how liberals love the First Amendment when it comes to protecting liberals insulting Christianity, even when tax dollars are subsidizing anti-Christian and pornographic art, but a YouTube video should be banished and the people who make the videos should be arrested to prevent Muslims from rioting in a foreign country.

[texican01]

The LA Times morons start twitching at the thought of a Koran burning.

However the US Army buring 15,000 Bibles in Afghanistan a couple years ago is AOK.

I have faith that the lower pit of Hell, filled with superheated pig fat will be the final repose of subject libtards and other Whores of the Devil.

[Turbo Pig]

is in violation of the 1st Amendment’s separation of church and state.

OK, I am going to pick this nit. The 1st Amendment says absolutely NOTHING about separation of church and state. All it says is that the US government can not elevate one religion over another; i.e. creation of a state sanctioned government.

It's been gone over and over on FR and elsewhere. "Separation of church and state" is a creation of liberals with the intent of removing God from the public forum. Just the fact that someone (you) who is arguing (rightly) that the US government IS promoting one religion over others uses the phrase shows exactly how far the liberals have suceeded in their attack on American mores and values.

As Conservatives, we must fight back, at the very root of the problem. Words have meanings, history can not be re-written, and liberals do not get ot make up the rules as we go along.

Now, I'll get down off my soap box, thank you for your time.

[colorado tanker]

By her definition the Batman movies should be banned because a nutcase used them as pretext to shoot up a movie theater.

She forgets that the standard includes a reasonableness component. Shouting "fire" would send reasonable people rushing to the exits. This 12 minute amateur video would not incite any reasonable person to violence. Just muslim nutcases.

[Wurlitzer]

Only those who’s ultimate goal is the elimination of the restrictions the Constitution places on government are OK with ANY limits on free speech.

Now for those who pull out the old Fire in a theater if there is no fire, Free Speech does not mean freedom from responsibility for your actions. If you yell fire in a theater and people are hurt trying to leave, you should be held accountable for your action but not your speech.

We are guaranteed the right to free speech given to us by our creator and our government MUST NOT be allowed to restrict that freedom.

We also must be willing to accept the responsibility for OUR actions not the actions of a mentally unstable group of moon god believers.

Under this insidious president we could very well lose both the First and Second Amendments. We are well on that path.

[LucianOfSamasota]

Swallow a camel, but strain at a gnat.

A middle school girl is free to get an abortion without parental consent, but if she puts a lemonade stand on her lawn she’ll be fined.

[artichokegrower]

[TurboZamboni]

thanks, long lost cousin, Pig.

yeah, I get it. that whole letter from TJ to the Danbury Baptists.