Sassy Sally

I'm not sure whether I could speak out as she did.

One thing recent events have pointed out to me, though, is that the world has NOTHING to offer me. So I'd like to think I'm changing a little in that regard.

Yeah...it is when you go on to say it's a fact that homosexuals are a danger to the nation. Even moreso than terrorism. Disagreeing is one thing, going on a tirade about how people threaten the nation is pretty much hate speech.

The indoctrination part is interesting. People like this would like nothing more to indoctrinate their values into today's youth...but when homosexuals want acceptance..oh no! Indoctrination, bad!(unless it's in accordance with my views)

Gay infiltration?...that's not hate? If someone was worried about "black infiltration" they'd be called racist, not celebrated.

"...deadly and spreading, it will destroy our young people, it will destory this nation." An allusion to cancer...that's not hate? What does one do with cancer? We remove it, we kill it. She's just a step away from proclaiming genocide on homosexuals.

You don't have to accept it, you don't have to like it, but you do have to tolerate it. Giving a public speech about the evils of homosexuality is a hate speech. It wasn't "I disagree with homosexuality and here's why"...it was "Homosexuality is evil, it's spreading, it will destroy everything we know." It is hate.

~Zoo

Zoo..

who's the one under police protection? 

 

The KKK gets police protection too...does that make them noble?

~Zoo

you didn't answer my question.  It's not polite to answer a question with a question........didn't you know that? 

Fine, she has police protection. Now for my question: the KKK also gets police protection, does that make them noble for speaking out as well?

~Zoo

Unless she is inciting violence, it is free speech, not hate speech. Unfortunately, the thought police are winning, and free speech is now the most endangered species.

Do you advocate silencing them because they are racists?

BTW: I am not polite.

They do?  For what? From whom?  Are they getting police protection (as you say) because they just speak out as Sally did? 

 

 

You didn't catch the violence part? It was subtle. She compared homosexuals to cancer. What does one normally do with cancer, Doc? Treat it, eliminate it, remove it.

"If you've got cancer or something in your little toe, do you say, 'Well I'm just gonna forget about it, the rest of me's fine?' It spreads. This stuff is deadly and spreading, it will destroy our young people, it will destroy this nation."

Gotta stop the "gay problem" don't we? Yeah...no hate at all there.



They can say what they want...but to be respected and celebrated because they're "brave enough" to speak their mind? No, no freakin' way. Their idiots and everyone can see it...and that has consequences. You can say what you want, but be prepared for the public backlash. Preaching hate will not win you any friends aside for likeminded cronies. So, sure...say what you will, but you're not automatically a hero.



From just about everyone...from the people that disagree with them and their target group of hate- blacks. Why do they? Because someone will end up attacking them because of the vitriol they spout out all the time. Not that I advocate violence but it's bound to happen. So the police hang around and make sure nothing happens.

I don't really care what she says or thinks, but as a public official she should reign in some of her ideas. She's just a stone's throw away from joining up with Fred Phelps and shouting "God hates fags!" Free speech, sure...but noble? respectable? No...not at all. Saying a certain group of people are a blight on the nation is bigotry, it is hate.

How you would feel if someone in a public office started proclaiming that Christians were destroying the nation, were evil, were like a disease and spreading? You don't think their policies would reflect that?

~Zoo

~Zoo

They are not celebrated by the population at large, but then the KKK has its own supporters that cheer them on (fortunately small enough).

Sally has the right to speak her mind. It is her constituents that should decide if they want to hear such stuff. As long as it is speech only, it is free speech. And thus protected.

No less than the ACLU has defended the KKK and Nazis for that right. We dont have to like it, but then do we always hear just what we like?

Europe and now Canada have banned some speech - in the name of hate speech. But all they have done is put censors in control of what you can say. Today you may cheer those who ban speech about Gays, Blacks, Women, or Orangutangs. Tomorrow they may decide that they are banning speech about idiots and morons. As when it comes down to it, it is always subjective. And the ban you support today may bite you tomorrow.

And that is why all speech must be protected. Not just that we agree with or like. NO Censorship. Period.

I agree.  I support free speech.  I don't support some of the crap people say, but if they want to say it...well, good for them.  It's just the idiocy that I hear and when people support that crap...ugh...

Free speech is fine and dandy...but this isn't an issue about free speech.  We didn't censor her, in fact people made sure a lot of people heard what she had to say.  We're just calling her out on her obvious prejudices and hatred towards a group of people.  As an office holding politician this doesn't bode well because her policies will be discriminatory and focused on rooting out those people she doesn't like.  I'm pretty sure that's not cool.

~Zoo

then I would agree.  We must all be protected from the hate mongers that want to kill us for what we are brave enough to speak out on.  Free speech must and should be protected.  But I am afraid we are going to lose this somewhere along the line if we keep going in the direction that we're seeing. 

I agree totally. 

This is not true Zoo.  Did you not read the whole story or did you just get the Youtube version? 

You're way off on this one.  It has nothing to do with hatred at all. 

 

 

Wait...who are the hate mongers here?  The people that accept homosexuals or those who condemn their very existence?

Then enlighten me.  All I seem to be hearing is her spouting off about how homosexuals are destroying America.

~Zoo

I would say the one's trying to kill her for her opinion.



Did you read what I wrote on "The Rest of The Story?" The "agenda" on purpose taped her speech, and edited it out to say what they wanted the world to hear. Not exactly what she said.

She also, after that first speech, was quoted saying this:

"I have said and will continue to say that they have every right to choose that lifestyle and I will defend their right to do so," (Sally) Kern told the homosexual blog "Pam's House Blend. "But I do not have to agree with it and speaking against it is not hate speech."

Where's the hate here?

And that is a big part of free speech. Go for it! But some here did call for her censoring. And that was what that diatribe was about.

ANother part of free speech is that you can say anything you want, but we do not have to listen. As the rallies for some of the hate groups demonstrate, not many are listening to them, and that is good.

That's called an excuse, KFC. To cover her tracks. She said that after she went on a crazy rant to "clear things up." All politians do that: say something offensive and then go try to make it better.

~Zoo

Homosexuals have every right to choose their path, regardless of whether it's wrong or not. It's a free country.

From man's perspective I agree.


From God's perspective I disagree.