[MEGoody]

I hate to break the news to you so late in life MEGoody (you are an adult aren't you?), but SODOMY is not a form of "speech", it's a deviant behavior.

However, participation in CPAC is a form of "speech". You DO support freedom of speech, right?

[aSeattleConservative]

However, participation in CPAC is a form of "speech". You DO support freedom of speech, right?

Where have I heard those words before?

ACLU Statement on Defending Free Speech of Unpopular Organizations

August 31, 2000
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

NEW YORK--In the United States Supreme Court over the past few years, the American Civil Liberties Union has taken the side of a fundamentalist Christian church, a Santerian church, and the International Society for Krishna Consciousness. In celebrated cases, the ACLU has stood up for everyone from Oliver North to the National Socialist Party. In spite of all that, the ACLU has never advocated Christianity, ritual animal sacrifice, trading arms for hostages or genocide. In representing NAMBLA today, our Massachusetts affiliate does not advocate sexual relationships between adults and children. What the ACLU does advocate is robust freedom of speech for everyone. The lawsuit involved here, were it to succeed, would strike at the heart of freedom of speech. Link to ACLU and "robust" freedom of speech

I forgot, with child molestation "consent" isn't used. That's what your morality is based on, right?

At least throw the word "robust" in when you're talking about moral degenerates and their supposed "right" to speak freely.

[rob777]

"However, participation in CPAC is a form of "speech". You DO support freedom of speech, right? "


This has NOTHING to do with freedom of speech. Freedom of speech is a limitation on the government from curtailing speech. Private individuals and groups can organize boycotts of organizations who promote a message they are opposed to. That is not a violation of free speech and neither is opposing CPAC's decision to deviate from their original mission statement by providing a forum for groups than are opposed to any of the legs of traditional conservatism. It would only be a free speech issue if that opposition included insisting that the government step in and limit who CPAC could have speak.