Republican Senator: "Freedom of speech is not what it used to be in America"

Milla

Well-Known Member
Apr 24, 2004
2,968
197
20
✟19,230.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
"I think it's high time that we remembered that we have sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution. I think it is high time that we remembered that the Constitution, as amended, speaks not only of the freedom of speech but also of trial by jury instead of trial by accusation...those of us who shout the loudest about Americanism in making character assassinations are all too frequently those who, by our own words and acts, ignore some of the basic principals of Americanism: the right to criticize; the right to hold unpopular beliefs; the right to protest; the right of independent thought..."

U.S. Senator Margaret Chase Smith, June 1, 1950.

Still applicable today?
 

Gaston

The Revealing Science of God
Mar 1, 2005
648
27
✟938.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
CA-Greens
Milla said:
"I think it's high time that we remembered that we have sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution. I think it is high time that we remembered that the Constitution, as amended, speaks not only of the freedom of speech but also of trial by jury instead of trial by accusation...those of us who shout the loudest about Americanism in making character assassinations are all too frequently those who, by our own words and acts, ignore some of the basic principals of Americanism: the right to criticize; the right to hold unpopular beliefs; the right to protest; the right of independent thought..."

U.S. Senator Margaret Chase Smith, June 1, 1950.

Still applicable today?

Only those who label people as anti-American or unpatriotic have anything in common with what she's saying.

Seriously though, in many ways it's better than 1950, in many ways it's totally worse and is going backwards.

And if Bushco continues to take America back even further than the 1950s by destroying the majority of the progressive achievements of the 20th century in favour of their Straussian ideology, it will certainly "not be like it was [today]"


Gaston
 
Upvote 0

Voegelin

Reactionary
Aug 18, 2003
20,145
1,430
Connecticut
✟26,726.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Those are not conservatives in Canada, the UK and the EU who are passing "hate speech" laws. Not conservatives who enact Draconian speech codes on college campuses. It was a Democrat, LBJ, who decided clergy who spoke out on political issues should be taxed (some ministers in Texas were giving him trouble). It was Barry Lynn, a liberal, who complained to the IRS last year that the archbishops and Denver and St. Louis told Catholics to consider church teachings when they cast a ballot.
 
Upvote 0

Vylo

Stick with the King!
Aug 3, 2003
24,732
7,790
43
New Jersey
✟203,465.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Those are not conservatives in Canada, the UK and the EU who are passing "hate speech" laws. Not conservatives who enact Draconian speech codes on college campuses. It was a Democrat, LBJ, who decided clergy who spoke out on political issues should be taxed (some ministers in Texas were giving him trouble). It was Barry Lynn, a liberal, who complained to the IRS last year that the archbishops and Denver and St. Louis told Catholics to consider church teachings when they cast a ballot.


Well maybe they should stop leeching off the government and pay their dues like other organizations ;).
 
Upvote 0

xMinionX

Contributor
Dec 2, 2003
7,828
461
✟18,028.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Voegelin said:
Those are not conservatives in Canada, the UK and the EU who are passing "hate speech" laws. Not conservatives who enact Draconian speech codes on college campuses. It was a Democrat, LBJ, who decided clergy who spoke out on political issues should be taxed (some ministers in Texas were giving him trouble). It was Barry Lynn, a liberal, who complained to the IRS last year that the archbishops and Denver and St. Louis told Catholics to consider church teachings when they cast a ballot.

What was the name of the logical fallacy that argues against one wrong by pointing to another? I forgot it... :scratch:

In any case, the validity of this senators point when applied to those people who shout "Anti-American" as a slur is not affected by your pointing the finger at democrats and liberals.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

TheBear

NON-WOKED
Jan 2, 2002
20,646
1,811
✟296,671.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Jacey said:
Agreed !!!

Of COURSE churches should be taxed, the rest of us have to make up the difference, and I don't even go!

This flies in the face of separation of church and state.

No thanks. I don't want government regulating churches, or churches controlling government.
 
Upvote 0

Vylo

Stick with the King!
Aug 3, 2003
24,732
7,790
43
New Jersey
✟203,465.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
This flies in the face of separation of church and state.


I think you have that reversed. Right now, churches recieve a tax break, as non-profit organizations. Non-profits have to answer to the government. Churches NOT paying taxes flies in the face of separation. It puts the churches at the beckon call of the state. The establishment cause is the only thing holding them back from overtly asserting authority over them.
 
Upvote 0

TheBear

NON-WOKED
Jan 2, 2002
20,646
1,811
✟296,671.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Vylo said:

I think you have that reversed. Right now, churches recieve a tax break, as non-profit organizations. Non-profits have to answer to the government. Churches NOT paying taxes flies in the face of separation. It puts the churches at the beckon call of the state. The establishment cause is the only thing holding them back from overtly asserting authority over them.

Actually, there are different tax-exempt groups, falling under different '501' codes, with different restrictions. Churches fall under 501 (C)(3).

Here's the tax-exempt code churches fall under....

501(C)(3) - Corporations, and any community chest, fund, or foundation, organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, testing for public safety, literary, or educational purposes, or to foster national or international amateur sports competition (but only if no part of its activities involve the provision of athletic facilities or equipment), or for the prevention of cruelty to children or animals, no part of the net earnings of which inures to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual, no substantial part of the activities of which is carrying on propaganda, or otherwise attempting to influence legislation (except as otherwise provided in subsection (h)), and which does not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

TheBear

NON-WOKED
Jan 2, 2002
20,646
1,811
✟296,671.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Jacey said:
TheBear-

I disagree, I mean, how many churches occupy prime territory in the middle of a city? And they don't have to pay taxes?


You're not disagreeing with me. You're disagreeing with the tax-exempt code which applies to churches.

Also, scroll up and read that part of the code which I underlined. ;)
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums