Posts Tagged ‘Free speech’

Freedom is a lost cause in not so Great Britain. I fear America is trying hard to head in this direction, thanks to the Democrats and Obama.

Here’s an interesting article on it:

When Freedom Isn’t Free
In Britain, compulsory virtue stifles individual liberty.
Theodore Dalrymple

Liberal reformers, who might once have wished to extend the realm of liberty, now wish to restrict it in the name of compulsory political virtue.

There was a perfect recent illustration of this in Britain. An evangelical Christian couple, the Wilkinsons, ran a bed-and-breakfast business in a place called Cookham. They refused a middle-aged homosexual couple, Michael Black and John Morgan, accommodation because they believed that homosexuality was wrong; it is condemned in the Bible.

The spurned couple said that they felt like lepers; moreover, they felt that their legal rights, enshrined in the Equality Act of 2006, which makes it illegal to discriminate in the provision of services on the grounds of “sexual orientation,” had been infringed, and they complained to the police. As yet, no prosecution has followed. But shortly afterward a senior politician, Christopher Grayling, who might be a minister in the next government if David Cameron wins the forthcoming election, said that he thought that the owners of bed-and-breakfasts ought to be allowed to refuse homosexual couples if they so wished.

More

And the assault on free speech continues from the White House. Yeah, it will affect liberal speech as well. Do it to one, you can do it to all. Keep silent at your own peril.

Fox News: WH told us last week Obama won’t do any interviews with us this year; Update: Nixonian?
by Allahpundit

What’s the significance of this, aside from it being your daily reminder that Wallace was right? Go watch the clip of Anita Dunn whining on CNN or just skip ahead here to 2:25. Kurtz specifically asked her whether The One would sit for an interview with one of Fox’s news shows this year. Her weaselly response was to say that he would — eventually — while neglecting to mention one tiny fact revealed below by Rosen: She’d already given Fox a hard no for the remaining three months of this year and pretty obviously didn’t want to acknowledge it on CNN lest it show just how petty The One is. In fact, so coincidental is Kurtz’s question in hindsight that I wonder if some Foxie didn’t tip him to the freeze-out before the interview so that he could put her on the spot about it. Although if that were true, why didn’t he follow up and reveal the freeze-out when she declined to do so?

More

Free Speech

Posted: 9 Feb 2009 in Media, Politics, Stupid People
Tags:

On the free speech front:

The liberals in congress want to take that away too. Keep the masses uneducated about them and they’ll keep swallowing the MSMs bullshit hook, line and sinker. They just proved it in this last election. As long as the media is in the Democrat tank, the Democrats will own the country. No dissent, no opposite view point, perpetual dynasty.

You fuckers that vote Democrat better wake the fuck up. They are your rights as well that these morons are after.

Be Like Mike: Defend Free Expression

by Diana West

This week’s column is an open letter to New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

Dear Mayor Bloomberg,

Last week, in the presence of Dutch dignitaries visiting New York City to mark the 400th anniversary of Henry Hudson’s remarkable first voyage on behalf of the Dutch East India Co. to “Nieu Amsterdam” (New York), you spoke of the need to safeguard freedom of expression. “Of course, I do not appreciate everything I hear,” you said, according to a translated report from the Amsterdam newspaper De Telegraaf. “But when you start restricting that, you step on a slippery slope. Before you know it, you can no longer say what you want.”

More

You can sign a petition against the “Fairness Doctrine” over at WND as well:

PETITION TO BLOCK CONGRESSIONAL
ATTACKS ON FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND PRESS


Stimulus to ban religious worship
‘This isn’t like a convenient oversight, this is intentional’

President Obama’s proposed economic stimulus plan makes a deliberate – and unconstitutional – attempt to censor religious speech and worship on school campuses across the nation, according to a lawyer who argued related cases before the U.S. Supreme Court 20 years ago and won them all.

“This isn’t like a convenient oversight. This is intentional. This legislation pokes its finger in the eyes of people who hold religious beliefs,” Jay Sekulow, chief of the American Center for Law and Justice, told WND today.

His was the organization that decades ago argued on behalf of speech freedom on school campuses, winning repeatedly at the U.S. Supreme Court. Since then, the 2001 Good News Club v. Milford Central School District decision was added, clarifying that restricting religious speech within the context of public shared-use facilities is unconstitutional.

The problem in the proposed stimulus bill comes from a provision that states: “PROHIBITED USES OF FUNDS. – No funds awarded under this section may be used for – (C) modernization, renovation, or repair of facilities – (i) used for sectarian instruction, religious worship, or a school or department of divinity; or (ii) in which a substantial portion of the functions of the facilities are subsumed in a religious mission.”

The wording that specifically targets religious speech already has been approved by the majority Democrats in the U.S. House – all GOP members opposed it. In the Senate, Jim DeMint, R-S.C., proposed an amendment to eliminate it, but again majority Democrats decided to keep the provision targeting religious instruction and activities.

More