Obama Likely To Make Anti-Muslim Speech Illegal & Punishable

[canndo]

Bill Killian, a US attorney, claims that anti-Muslim speech violates Muslim’s Constitutional rights. Therefore, he argues, it should be illegal and punishable by law.
Killian said, “We need to educate people about Muslims and their civil rights, and as long as we’re here, they’re going to be protected.”
At this time, Obama’s DOJ is working to determine what, exactly, is considered illegal speech against Muslims. Guidelines and specific laws are expected to come soon.
Currently, the government is not allowed to prevent speech that is hateful towards a religion, unless a specific threat is made. To prevent speech that is hostile towards a religion is a violation of the First Amendment. The government is allowed to urge people to not engage in such speech — it just cannot punish people for doing so.
If the DOJ does decide to make anti-Muslim speech punishable by law, it could mark the beginning of significantly increased government power.
Do you think this would be a surrendering of our First Amendment rights? Tell us in the comments section below.

 

[NoDrama]

Well, Obama can't make laws, so nothing is going to happen. Whomever told you that Obama was planning on making a law, is a total idiot.

Bill Killian=Idiot

 

[greenlikemoney]

Obama can't make a law ( see Obamacare ) but ask some UK residents about this very issue. They are ahead of the curve when it comes to the NWO and whose rights get trampled and whose don't.

 

[squarepush3r]

Obama is Muslim right?

 

[greenlikemoney]

Obama is Muslim right?

Yes.

 

[Wilksey]

Bill Killian can pound sand up his ass...twice.

The first amendment wasn't designed to protect popular speech, it was designed to protect the opposite.

 

[canndo]

Obama is Muslim right?

No, they think he is muslim left.

 

[canndo]

I posted this in order to see if anyone would read the article and discover that the headline does not reflect the body of the story, where there is no intention to penalize any speech at all.

 

[UncleBuck]

I posted this in order to see if anyone would read the article and discover that the headline does not reflect the body of the story, where there is no intention to penalize any speech at all.

i'm just here to watch greenlikemoney and other bigots out themselves.

 

[Antidisestablishmentarian]

Bill Killian can pound sand up his ass...twice.

The first amendment wasn't designed to protect popular speech, it was designed to protect the opposite.

If you aren't offended twice a day, you don't live in a free country.

 

[canndo]

If you aren't offended twice a day, you don't live in a free country.

I must be in a different country, I don't seem to be offended much at all, bemused perhaps, saddened, definitely, but hardly offended.

 

[Antidisestablishmentarian]

I think it's an in general thing. I'm not usually offended either. I do hear and read things that would offend others daily though, so I try to count that lol.

 

[canndo]

I think it's an in general thing. I'm not usually offended either. I do hear and read things that would offend others daily though, so I try to count that lol.

On the other hand, anyone who does not agree with me in total or on the particular is exremely offensive.

 

[a senile fungus]

On the other hand, anyone who does not agree with me in total or on the particular is exremely offensive.

 

[Pinworm]

Reported for fail use of Star Wars reference.

 

[Dr Kynes]

I posted this in order to see if anyone would read the article and discover that the headline does not reflect the body of the story, where there is no intention to penalize any speech at all.

and as usual, you failed to provide a link to where it came from, making this entire thread a pointless circlejerk.

 

[Pinworm]

and as usual, you failed to provide a link to where it came from, making this entire thread a pointless circlejerk.

Circlejerk. Does that make OP the master link?

 

[abandonconflict]

and as usual, you failed to provide a link to where it came from, making this entire thread a pointless circlejerk.

Kynes knows all about pointless circle jerks.

 

[Doer]

Bill Killian, a US attorney, claims that anti-Muslim speech violates Muslim’s Constitutional rights. Therefore, he argues, it should be illegal and punishable by law.
Killian said, “We need to educate people about Muslims and their civil rights, and as long as we’re here, they’re going to be protected.”
At this time, Obama’s DOJ is working to determine what, exactly, is considered illegal speech against Muslims. Guidelines and specific laws are expected to come soon.
Currently, the government is not allowed to prevent speech that is hateful towards a religion, unless a specific threat is made. To prevent speech that is hostile towards a religion is a violation of the First Amendment. The government is allowed to urge people to not engage in such speech — it just cannot punish people for doing so.
If the DOJ does decide to make anti-Muslim speech punishable by law, it could mark the beginning of significantly increased government power.
Do you think this would be a surrendering of our First Amendment rights? Tell us in the comments section below.

DOJ cannot do that. They can refuse to enforce. But, they cannot enforce laws not on the books.

We don't have hate speech here and the Courts do not recognize the stupidity called Sharia.

It is a technique for arousing the voting base. But, SCOTUS will not go along with Hate Speech, or, technically, they never have,

It is a trial balloon is all.

 

[canndo]

and as usual, you failed to provide a link to where it came from, making this entire thread a pointless circlejerk.

doesn't matter, I posted the article in its.entirety just for you (though I am certain you would have caught it right off)