free speech rules!!! unless you live in a country where hate speech laws exist. we know who promotes them and why.
On Friday, May 2, 2014 9:47:21 AM UTC-5, Travis wrote: > > > > > > > > > *http://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/05/andrew-p-napolitano/what-should-government-do-about-racist-remarks/ > > <http://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/05/andrew-p-napolitano/what-should-government-do-about-racist-remarks/>* > > *Race and Freedom > <http://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/05/andrew-p-napolitano/what-should-government-do-about-racist-remarks/>* > > By Andrew P. > Napolitano<http://www.lewrockwell.com/author/andrew-p-napolitano/?post_type=article> > > May 2, 2014 > > Cliven Bundy should be happy for the public revelation of the private > comments of fellow racist Donald Sterling; the latter has replaced the > former as the person Americans most love to hate. These two bigots recently > spewed racial hatred: Bundy suggesting that African-Americans might do well > to consider slavery over freedom, and Sterling offering disjointed comments > that reveal his evident beliefs in white supremacy. > > Bundy is a Nevada rancher who became a hero to the right for standing up > to the heavy hand of federal suppression of property rights in the West. He > and his family had been grazing their cattle on land they believed was > theirs or the state Nevada’s for more than 100 years, when along came the > federal Bureau of Land Management (BLM), which claimed the land and > assessed Bundy for his use of it. A federal judge upheld the claims and the > million-dollar assessment; yet Bundy refused to pay. Instead of filing the > judgment in a courthouse, as you and I would do if we had a judgment > against Bundy, the feds showed up with 200 camouflage-clad machine > gun-bearing federal agents determined to steal Bundy’s cattle. > > Soon, thousands of Nevadans showed up to support Bundy, whereupon the feds > enacted a “free speech zone.” They ordered the protesters either to > disperse, or to enter the zone and protest there. The zone was a > 25-square-yard patch of earth in the Nevada desert, three miles from the > Bundy/BLM confrontation site. > > Sterling is a billionaire who owns the Los Angeles Clippers of the > National Basketball Association (NBA) and was a hero to the left for his > public support of liberal causes. He has given generously to the Los > Angeles chapter of the NAACP and to the Democratic Party in California. He > is white, married and apparently enjoys the company of a biracial > girlfriend. Recordings of his several wild, weird, disjointed rants > directed to the girlfriend and uttered in the privacy of his own home have > been played publicly. In them, Sterling directs his girlfriend not to > attend Clipper games in the company of her African-American friends. > > Both of these men used hateful and hurtful words that were animated by > truly condemnable attitudes about race. No moral person credibly could > suggest that slavery is preferable to freedom, and no moral person credibly > could suggest that whites are superior to blacks in any respect. Those were > attitudes advanced by antebellum slave owners and 20th-century supporters > of laws that used the machinery of government to harm blacks during the 100 > years following the Civil War. > > All rational people, understanding the colorblindness of the natural law, > have a moral obligation — but not a legal one — publicly to treat persons > of different races with equal dignity and respect. I can morally prefer a > friend or a mate who is of my race, but I cannot morally hate a potential > friend or mate just because the person is not of my race. I do not know > what is in their hearts, but Bundy and Sterling are apparently haters. > > What to do with them because of their speech? Nothing. I mean nothing. > Racially hateful speech is protected from government interference by the > First Amendment, which largely was written to protect hateful speech. > Neither Bundy nor Sterling has been accused in these instances of racially > motivated conduct — just speech animated by hatred. > > In the Bundy case, the feds did suppress speech by keeping it three miles > away from them. Free speech, assembly and the right to petition the > government would become empty and meaningless if the governmental targets > of the speech and assembly could not hear it. The First Amendment will > condone outlawing the use of a bullhorn by protesters in front of a > hospital at 3 o’clock in the morning. But it will not condone free speech > zones for the sake of government convenience. The entire United States of > America is a free speech zone. > > In Sterling’s case, is it fair to punish someone for speech uttered in the > privacy of his home? It would be exquisitely unfair for the government to > do so, but the NBA is not the government. When Sterling bought his > basketball team, he agreed to accept punishment for conduct unbecoming a > team owner or conduct detrimental to the sport. Is speech conduct? For > constitutional purposes, it is not; the Constitution does not restrain the > NBA. It is free to pull the trigger of punishment to which Sterling > consented. > > But it needn’t do so. > > Hateful and hurtful words have natural and probable consequences where the > people are free to counter them. The government has no business cleansing > the public marketplace of hateful ideas. The most effective equalizer for > hatred is the free market. It will remedy Sterling’s hatred far more > effectively than the NBA can. As advertisers and sponsors and fans desert > Sterling-owned properties, he will be forced to sell them, lest his > financial losses become catastrophic. And it has removed Bundy from the > public stage altogether. > > But don’t hold your breath waiting for the forces of freedom to nullify > hatred. Soon the forces of darkness will attempt to do so as creative > prosecutors and hungry litigators bring the government into the fray. I > hope they stay home and follow the natural law principle of subsidiarity, > which mandates that public problems be solved using the minimum force > necessary, not the maximum force possible — and no force at all where > peaceful measures are just as effective. > > I would not invite Bundy or Sterling into my home, nor would I befriend > them. But I will defend with zeal and diligence their constitutional > freedoms. > > > > > __._,_.___ > > > Visit Your > Group<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/grendelreport/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJmNjliY3YxBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzEzOTkwNDExNjI-> > > > > [image: Yahoo! > Groups]<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJlOGl1NDlrBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTM5OTA0MTE2Mg--> > > • Privacy <https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html> • > Unsubscribe <javascript:> • Terms of > Use<https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/> > > __,_._,___ > > > -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
