i have a feeling this particular can of worms will be difficult to put
back together without some sores and cut fingers
somewhere
rick
Gill, Kathy wrote:
>
> pat wrote:
>
> > In the main I agree but if one is a true
> > free speech advocate one must defend the
> > right of others to speak their minds
> > despite the abhorrent message.
> >
> i don't believe free speech covers incitement to commit criminal acts. disclaimer:
>I'm not a lawyer and I don't play one on TV <smile> -- but we have a few on this list
>-- brett??
>
> > Ref: ACLU defending the Klu Klux Klan
> > right to free speech.
> >
> yes, the right to organize and march. not the right to deface property or kill
>people [ie, break laws]
>
> rich wrote:
>
> > > > I am, however, going to express an opinion about the subject of this
> > > > ruling, which has nothing to with abortion, and everything to do with
> > > > the distinction between speech and conduct, and with constitutionally-valid
> > > > imposed limits on speech (e.g. the old "fire-in-a-crowded-theater" argument).
> > > >
> > > > I think both factors are at work here. It's very clear from the content
> > > > of these sites [I'm aware of two; don't know if either or both are covered
> > > > in this ligitation] that the intent is to pose overt and implied threats to
> > > > physicians and their families, and to encourage and support aggressive
> > > > conduct (including criminal conduct) against them. This intent is made
> > > > unambiguously and undeniably clear by the materials on the sites themselves,
> > > > by the public statements of their creators, and by their endorsement of
> > > > acts (including violent acts) directed against the subjects of these materials.
> >
> i'm not sure how the web material differs from other printed material that may be
>distributed by these groups. it seems that both should be covered.
>
> it will be interesting to see how 'hate sites' or other advocacy groups target
>individuals by putting "private" information online.
>
> for example, there's public information about elected officials, such as how they
>vote on bills and their office phone numbers. but wife's name & children's names &
>ages and where they go to school? what is "private"? I believe that's another point
>of this case -- privacy -- which is a net "biggie."
>
> Kathy
>
> ____________________________________________________________________
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> Join The NEW Web Consultants Association FORUMS and CHAT:
> Register Today at: http://just4u.com/forums/
> Web Consultants Web Site : http://just4u.com/webconsultants
> Give the Gift of Life This Year...
> Just4U Stop Smoking Support forum - helping smokers for
> over three years-tell a friend: http://just4u.com/forums/
> To get 500 Banner Ads for FREE
> go to http://www.linkbuddies.com/start.go?id=111261
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
____________________________________________________________________
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Join The NEW Web Consultants Association FORUMS and CHAT:
Register Today at: http://just4u.com/forums/
Web Consultants Web Site : http://just4u.com/webconsultants
Give the Gift of Life This Year...
Just4U Stop Smoking Support forum - helping smokers for
over three years-tell a friend: http://just4u.com/forums/
To get 500 Banner Ads for FREE
go to http://www.linkbuddies.com/start.go?id=111261
---------------------------------------------------------------------
