Re: Attention, parents of CMU students!

"Magi D. Shepley" <magid@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
message news:<3F91867D.30007@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>...
> Barbara Schwarz wrote:
> >>No, it means that there are published children's books that are about 
> >>war, violence and other "criminal" activities.  Even Shakespeare 
> >>promotes criminal activity if you want to use it that way.  So does
the 
> >>Bible.  Free speech is just that: I'll defend your right to say what
you 
> >>want, and you have no right to stop me from saying what I want.
> > 
> > 
> > I never posted that you should believe in any of those works. The best
> > is if you listen to your own conscience, but don't knock it out by
> > listening to above the law crowds.
> 
> How do you "believe" in Shakespeare, Barbara?  How do you "believe" in 
> Dr. Seuss?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >>want, and you have no right to stop me from saying what I want.
> > 
> > 
> > If it is violence, promotes or inspires violence, or if it is
> > completely false, then you can't say it.
> > 
> I can inspire violence all I want.  You can't stop me from saying it. 
> You can't stop me from saying that I want to kill somebody. 

You are right, Magi, I can't stop you, but the police and the FBI can.

 You can't 
> stop me from wi****ng that somebody were dead.  You can TRY... but it 
> won't work.

You are a scary woman.
  
  As long as I don't *DO* it, I can SAY anything I want.

But if you inspire others, as Touretzky does with his website, to
build bombs and blow others up, you sure are guilty as hell.
 
> 
> >>>Freedom of Speech has it's limitations, Magi. Check your law library
> >>>hereto. Teaching others on to blow people up is such a limitation.
> >>
> >>Sorry, Barbara, you're wrong.  The limits on freedom of speech are 
> >>pretty clear:  Yelling "FIRE" in a crowded theatre is a limit;
libelous 
> >>posting is such a limit.  Your statement isn't a limit on the Freedom
of 
> >>Speech.  http://www.wired.com/wired/4.03/no.law.html
> > 
> > 
> > Did you read that article? Prof. Turner said crystal clear that there
> > are limitations to free speech.
> 
> I can't PUBLISH something completely false, nor can I yell "FIRE" in a 
> crowded room.  But the limitations on the First Amendment are not what 
> you're claiming they are.  I can SAY anything I want.  I could say that 
> we have a horrible President who is an idiot and a thief.  I could say 
> that you're an idiot and a thief.

If I challenge you on that, you have to prove it. If you can't I can
get you for libel and defamation. It is not so easy. People really
have to watch what they are saying.

> off a bridge or that Dorothy should stand in front of a car.  Those 
> promote violence, they aren't true, and gee... the FBI isn't knocking on

> my door yet.

I also did not attack your private speech. Remember, that thread was
about that Toruetzky a CMU educator promotes violence on his website.
I also did not like the ***ual harassment. He also sets a bad example
having **** on his website.


  You can't STOP me from saying these things.  I can't be 
> arrested for calling you or Bush an idiot.  I *might* be arrested if I 
> said that I am going to kill the President...  But I probably won't be 
> arrested for wi****ng you were dead.

If you keep it private probably not, but if you go public, it could
become a completely new ball game. Such remarks also would just show
that you are not a nice person.
  
> > 
> > 
> >>>hope you are no fan of Pat Robertson, the Christian Coalition
founder.
> >>>This alleged religious man said a few days ago, during a recent Club
> >>>700 episode, that it would not be a bad idea to plant a nuclear
device
> >>>underneath the U.S. State Department. That man is crazy, he is openly
> >>>advocating terrorism, and he is abusing the First Amendment, free
> >>>speech for his evil intentions and hatred. If he has problems with
the
> >>>State Department, why is he not filing a penal complaint against them
> >>>or why is he not suing them?
> >>
> >>Let me go on record here: Pat Robertson is a venal, evil racist.  But
he 
> >>has the RIGHT to make those statements.  He has that freedom of
speech. 
> >>  You do not have the right to stop them.
> > 
> > 
> > He is evil, and he had no right to preach violence. People have to
> > resolve their disagreements in civilized ways not through promoting
> > explosions and killings.
> > 
> I suggest that you start your theory by talking with President Bush and 
> Saddam Hussein, or al-Quaeda.  I don't think that they agree with you.
> 
> Magi

President Bush? What has he to do with that?

Barbara Schwarz