# Need a new name for freedom of speech



## Forcast (Apr 15, 2014)

The last few months of infighting in our government, teachers banning Trump teeshirts in school, riots, tearing dowm monument s has me thinking. Why is it wrong for people to have freedom of speech and thought. I'm 60 raised in Baltimore Md. Went to school during busing and waited on my dad and uncle to get home during the Baltimore riots. I don't much care what people do in private. I'm bothered by sex changes in the military. It takes them out of active duty for 288 days. As unfit for duty. Yes they are deemed unfit! I'm bothered by people using drugs, over dose get narcan go about their busness with no consequences. Unless they die. Good riddance. One less strain on are tax dollars. I dont much like to see mixed race babies. I'm bothered by the disrespect for the President of the USA. Who ever the President happends to be. I'm bothered by higher gas prices. My electric charges went up and will again in Oct. As I use less and less. Food prices are way too high a gallon of milk is $3.98 more than a gallon of gas. I think every one has the right to fly the American flag. A Confederate flag.I dont think people should burn a flag . I believe we should build a border wall. Limit who comes into the US. Send people back. I dont think they should get welfare, foodstamps and free medical. No babies born to illegal s get US citizenship. I don't think the US should spend millions of dollars in foreign country's. When all are own citizens are taken care of then we can send some money to the united nations. Most money food and medical never gets to the folks that need it anyway. I bothered by history being changed. So I can't have freedom of thoughts because then Im a racist. Ok then thats me. Too old to want to be bothered to change.
I'm disappointed in our country and our "leaders" for all the crap. Its a wag the dog. Like government news dumps of Friday s. For what hideing wars, North Korea, Afghanistan, ISis. Our country is failing it's own. But goodness forbid if I'm labeled. Think I'll have teeshirts printed.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

There is a lot wrong for sure. I also believe in freedom of speech. I agree with some of what you say and disagree with others. I think mixed race babies tend to have the best of both sides without the stigmas of racism for at least those two races. But in reality, we are all Heinz 57 breed at the end of the day anyway. 

As to the POTUS, I have taken up for many of them I never voted for when others have gave them a raw deal without proof and will continue to do so. But if they are guilty I will hold their feet to the fire. They work for us after all.


----------



## Forcast (Apr 15, 2014)

Ya the baby thought was wrong. You are right.
Had surgery friday so i can blame my rant on the pills. Sorry if i offended


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

Forcast said:


> Ya the baby thought was wrong. You are right.
> Had surgery friday so i can blame my rant on the pills. Sorry if i offended


You didnt offend me. Thats the whole purpose of free speech isnt it? To say what you feel?


----------



## Clem (Apr 12, 2016)

Here's a snappy new name for freedom of speech: First Amendment. 
It guarantees that you can speak without fear of government reaction. For instance, you can babble on while disoriented on medicine without the fear of some dingbat from the government locking you up for doing so. 

Since you take advantage of the first amendment every time you post, or talk about anything political, why shouldn't everyone else? Shouldn't the first amendment work for everyone equally?


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

Clem said:


> Here's a snappy new name for freedom of speech: First Amendment.
> It guarantees that you can speak without fear of government reaction. For instance, you can babble on while disoriented on medicine without the fear of some dingbat from the government locking you up for doing so.
> 
> Since you take advantage of the first amendment every time you post, or talk about anything political, why shouldn't everyone else? Shouldn't the first amendment work for everyone equally?


Well said and I totally agree.


----------



## Bungiex88 (Jan 2, 2016)

The problem is the federal goverment has there hand in to much stuff. The federal goverment should be in charge of the military and national security. Everything else they have no business managing. They screw everything up. Most the problems in today's society is caused by goverment. The goverment can't even handle delivering mail without going bankrupt. They can't handle people's retirement without stealing the money. They got envolved with education now I don't think we are even in the top 10 in smartest countries anymore. We have an EPA that dumps chemicals into rivers. And in all of this we pay billions of dollars to other countries so they will be our friends and we have homeless people on our streets. Everything will be a lot cheaper if the federal goverment wasn't involved. Don't get me started on health care to. I have to pay more because obama put a Cadillac tax to pay for worthless people who don't have jobs so they have healthcare. All while I'm working at least 40 hours a week and paying for my own stuff I have to pay for worthless people's garbage to


----------



## Heritagefarm (Feb 21, 2010)

Freedom of speech goes all ways. The protesters should be free to protest against Christians, statues, pagans, and counter protestors should be free to protest against them, then other protestors can protest because there are too many protestors, and other protestors can protest the very notion of protesting, and so on and so forth. 

What would be better is if everyone learned how to express themselves in a more refined manner.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

Heritagefarm said:


> Freedom of speech goes all ways. The protesters should be free to protest against Christians, statues, pagans, and counter protestors should be free to protest against them, then other protestors can protest because there are too many protestors, and other protestors can protest the very notion of protesting, and so on and so forth.
> 
> What would be better is if everyone learned how to express themselves in a more refined manner.



Agreed. I also believe that people like Anne Coulter and Milo Yiannapolis (sp?) should not have been banned from speaking at Berkeley because of riotous protesters though I am opposed to their beliefs. Freedom of speech goes both ways.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

The 1st A is the freedom to be stupid, obnoxious, boring, uniformed, partisan, boring, and wait for it...offensive.

All without any centralized interpretation, only personal.

That said, absolute freedoms do result in consequences.


----------



## JJ Grandits (Nov 10, 2002)

GTX63 said:


> The 1st A is the freedom to be stupid, obnoxious, boring, uniformed, partisan, boring, and wait for it...offensive.
> 
> All without any centralized interpretation, only personal.
> 
> That said, absolute freedoms do result in consequences.


Freedoms also result in responsibilities.

A concept that is today poorly lacking.


----------



## Heritagefarm (Feb 21, 2010)

Lisa in WA said:


> Agreed. I also believe that people like Anne Coulter and Milo Yiannapolis (sp?) should not have been banned from speaking at Berkeley because of riotous protesters though I am opposed to their beliefs. Freedom of speech goes both ways.


The university however owns the property. They can block whomever they want.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Heritagefarm said:


> Freedom of speech goes all ways. The protesters should be free to protest against Christians, statues, pagans, and counter protestors should be free to protest against them, then other protestors can protest because there are too many protestors, and other protestors can protest the very notion of protesting, and so on and so forth.
> 
> What would be better is if everyone learned how to express themselves in a more refined manner.


Congratulations, I think you just might have just made your best post ever. 

Could not agree more that protesting is over-rated and over-done in today's world. Especially counter protesting which in many cases just gives more attention and the illusion of legitimacy to the other side. There are better and more strategic ways to make your views known or try to bring about change.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

That is the part where the consequences were supposed to fall. The government should not be dictating what is acceptable or offensive. But now we are talking about hypotheticals that do not exist.


----------



## macmad (Dec 22, 2012)

Heritagefarm said:


> The university however owns the property. They can block whomever they want.


Don't know for sure ... is the University publicly funded? If they receive government funds, not sure they should be censoring the expression of ideas. Use to be that University's were the greatest proponents of free speech.


----------



## Heritagefarm (Feb 21, 2010)

MO_cows said:


> Congratulations, I think you just might have just made your best post ever.
> 
> Could not agree more that protesting is over-rated and over-done in today's world. Especially counter protesting which in many cases just gives more attention and the illusion of legitimacy to the other side. There are better and more strategic ways to make your views known or try to bring about change.


On the contrary. Protesting can be a great way to get publicity. I'm not much of a protestor myself. I prefer keyboard wars and financial donations, and living a life in concert with democratic and socially equitable behavior. Counter protesting is to be expected, but it should not turn violent. Please keep in mind that the riot in Charlottesville turned violent because the initial protestors turned violent against the counter-protestors, not the other way around.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Forcast said:


> Ya the baby thought was wrong. You are right.
> Had surgery friday so i can blame my rant on the pills. Sorry if i offended


Glad you re-thought that one. You were many thousands of years too late to be opposed to the notion, anyway, but good for you for figuring that out. The science of DNA is showing us just what mongrels we all are. Even some Neanderthal in many of us, not just different race but slightly different species. More multi race humans than not on this planet, I would bet, maybe not "first generation half and half" but up in the pedigree somewhere.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

macmad said:


> Don't know for sure ... is the University publicly funded? If they receive government funds, not sure they should be censoring the expression of ideas. Use to be that University's were the greatest proponents of free speech.


I agree. The freedom of the expression of ideas, even those that are anathema to us, is paramount. We should all be listening to the viewpoints of the "other side", at any rate. Echo chambers are rarely valuable.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

macmad said:


> Don't know for sure ... is the University publicly funded? If they receive government funds, not sure they should be censoring the expression of ideas. Use to be that University's were the greatest proponents of free speech.


I was wondering that myself when I saw his postb so I looked it up. Turns out he is right. A university does get some of its funding from us. The rest is private money. Even though it still doesn't mean the areas are public access at any and all times. It is at their discretion only. Think of the White House that is all public money and then wonder about how much access you have there. It's the same principle in the eyes of the law. 

Doesn't mean I agree with it though.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

mreynolds said:


> I was wondering that myself when I saw his postb so I looked it up. Turns out he is right. A university does get some of its funding from us. The rest is private money. Even though it still doesn't mean the areas are public access at any and all times. It is at their discretion only. Think of the White House that is all public money and then wonder about how much access you have there. It's the same principle in the eyes of the law.
> 
> Doesn't mean I agree with it though.


Maybe I'm misremembering but I think Berkeley approved Anne Coulter and Milo whatever but ultimately canceled because of protests. 

And that is a shame. Suppression of free speech and ideas is never a win.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

Lisa in WA said:


> Maybe I'm misremembering but I think Berkeley approved Anne Coulter and Milo whatever but ultimately canceled because of protests.
> 
> And that is a shame. Suppression of free speech and ideas is never a win.


Yes I think that's right. In my mind they shouldn't have asked them to come then cancel them. 

I can remember when my son graduated and they had Vincente Fox speak at his graduation. He wouldn't have been my first choice because of some of the corruption he was allegedly associated with. But I thought he did really well. I was impressed. I went in with an open mind.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

MO_cows said:


> Congratulations, I think you just might have just made your best post ever.
> 
> Could not agree more that protesting is over-rated and over-done in today's world. Especially counter protesting which in many cases just gives more attention and the illusion of legitimacy to the other side. There are better and more strategic ways to make your views known or try to bring about change.


 I agree with heritage Farm that's one of the greatest post ever!
But I have to disagree with you here. 
I think I think the right to protest is one of the greatest freedom's ever. 
For some reason we do not value our protesters as highly as we should. 
If it wasn't for the protesters some of which thought their lives were in danger as they protested we would still be stuck in Vietnam. 
These brave men and women were the true heroes of that conflict. Yet you see no memorials to them no records of the great deeds and worse yet unlike almost any military man associated with Vietnam they were not compensated for their service. 
Yet they showed the nation the senseless slaughter being done in our name. 
Eventually they were proved correct and we hung our head in shame and sunk away from that conflict. 
Don't tell me protesters are unneeded when they clearly saved the lives of my father myself and numerous other members of my family. 
Even the cowardly draftees are treated better than these Heros. 

THATS why the right to protest is so important.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

AmericanStand said:


> I agree with heritage Farm that's one of the greatest post ever!
> But I have to disagree with you here.
> I think I think the right to protest is one of the greatest freedom's ever.
> For some reason we do not value our protesters as highly as we should.
> ...


I hope you meant to type something different than "cowardly draftees".


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Heritagefarm said:


> The university however owns the property. They can block whomever they want.


The university didn't block anyone until after the violent protests by those who wanted to deny others the right to speak.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Heritagefarm said:


> Please keep in mind that the riot in Charlottesville turned violent because *the initial protestors turned violent* against the counter-protestors, not the other way around.


The real facts don't support that assertion.


----------



## JJ Grandits (Nov 10, 2002)

Heritagefarm said:


> The university however owns the property. They can block whomever they want.


Very true.

But they should then return all the money paid by the students.

Because basically that University is NOT a University.

It's a private political club, like the KKK or the White Supremacists.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

I would start with reviewing the First Amendment. It enumerates such rights as freedom of speech, press, assembly, petition of the government, and religion. All of these necessarily rest on the implied freedom of thought, which ultimately breaks down to the right to be wrong.

It is also important to have a workable understanding of peaceable assembly. So far as my understanding goes, this does not involve physical assault or shouting down others who are expressing their own freedom of speech, especially if those doing the shouting down crashed the other group's event.

As for Berkeley, I seem to recall that it is a state school. Even if they have manipulated the law to treat it as private property, it isn't and shouldn't be, and should not be conflated with your back yard so far as being able to invoke an argument based on private property rights. There are a select few instances in which restrictions on publicly owned and financed property are appropriate (prisons for example) but treating tax-funded property as 'private' is just about as unacceptable as the way government has come to be treated as a self-existent entity rather than m


----------



## Forcast (Apr 15, 2014)

Don't like paying for protesters. My sons friends make extra money by hireing out for paid protesting. Avg is $150.00 a day they get stipend for food with free bus ride even cross country. Group of the young men went out to N Dakota made $1000. each. but didnt cover bail you if you got arrested. Some do pay bail.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

Forcast said:


> Don't like paying for protesters. My sons friends make extra money by hireing out for paid protesting. Avg is $150.00 a day they get stipend for food with free bus ride even cross country. Group of the young men went out to N Dakota made $1000. each. but didnt cover bail you if you got arrested. Some do pay bail.


What amazes me about this is the number of people, including and especially talking heads on television, who treat these people as if they actually represent public opinion as opposed to being paid actors.


----------



## Clem (Apr 12, 2016)

"Paid protesters" has never been proven. It's "fake news" put out by the usual fake news sources designed to lie to conservatives. The thing is: conservatives would still be conservatives without being lied to. However, Fox news, WND, and so on wouldn't make as much money without the viewers who are drawn by the fake news they hear from their comrades.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

IndyDave said:


> Even if they have manipulated the law to treat it as private property, it isn't and shouldn't be, and should not be conflated with your back yard so far as being able to invoke an argument based on private property rights. There are a select few instances in which restrictions on publicly owned and financed property are appropriate (prisons for example) but treating tax-funded property as 'private' is just about as unacceptable as the way government has come to be treated as a self-existent entity rather than m


The legal reason is simple. If your child goes there you expect a reasonable assurance of safety and can hold them liable for harm _legally_ in court. Both civil and possibly criminal. Therefore, they have the ability to _legally_ make the rules* as they see fit* to minimize this liability and increase the students safety. 

In the case of Berkeley if I were the Dean I would have minimized the risk by putting the violent protesters in jail. No refund on the semester either. Problem there is they would be putting possible alumni kids in jail and would have risked future growth and income. We can see which solution they took so that says a lot about the Dean there.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

mmoetc said:


> I hope you meant to type something different than "cowardly draftees".


Thanks for the heads up I forgot the words "moralless apathetic "


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

Clem said:


> "Paid protesters" has never been proven. It's "fake news" put out by the usual fake news sources designed to lie to conservatives. The thing is: conservatives would still be conservatives without being lied to. However, Fox news, WND, and so on wouldn't make as much money without the viewers who are drawn by the fake news they hear from their comrades.


Sorry Clem, I've been a witness to the rent a mob. I was caught up in the middle of a protests at a gun shop when Jesse Jackson had three school buses drop off folks with instructions, signs and meals on wheels ready to go. Some of these folks had little idea what they were doing and why and were having pleasant conversations with customers and employees of the gun shop in between news cameras and the organizers sweeping thru with the rhetoric.
Just saying, I grafted my ideology long before the media told me how I should think.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

AmericanStand said:


> Thanks for the heads up I forgot the words "moralless apathetic "


So those who were drafted into the armed services, served, fought, were wounded and wound up on The Wall were cowards, had no morals and were apathetic? Thanks for clarifying.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

No courage to join no courage to refuse, no morals to join no morals to refuse, too apathetic to join too apathetic to refuse. 
In short the worst kind of soldier or human. 
The objector who publicly said no I will not sign up I will not go and served his jail time was far braver. The hawk who believed in the cause and signed up was a brave man. 
The protesters who knowingly walked into a situation expecting to be gassed and beaten were brave men. 

But draftees? The best they can say is well I didn't care.

Clear enough ?


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

AmericanStand said:


> No courage to join no courage to refuse, no morals to join no morals to refuse, too apathetic to join too apathetic to refuse.
> In short the worst kind of soldier or human.
> The objector who publicly said no I will not sign up I will not go and served his jail time was far braver. The hawk who believed in the cause and signed up was a brave man.
> The protesters who knowingly walked into a situation expecting to be gassed and beaten were brave men.
> ...


Crystal. It makes broad assumptions about draftees that may or may not be true on an individual basis but it's crystal clear.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

mmoetc said:


> Crystal. It makes broad assumptions about draftees that may or may not be true on an individual basis but it's crystal clear.


Reminds me of Trump's opinion of John McCain a bit.


----------



## coolrunnin (Aug 28, 2010)

AmericanStand said:


> No courage to join no courage to refuse, no morals to join no morals to refuse, too apathetic to join too apathetic to refuse.
> In short the worst kind of soldier or human.
> The objector who publicly said no I will not sign up I will not go and served his jail time was far braver. The hawk who believed in the cause and signed up was a brave man.
> The protesters who knowingly walked into a situation expecting to be gassed and beaten were brave men.
> ...


What about those who didnt have a negative stand on Vietnam, biy had other life plans besides the military?

Those who ran off to Canada, those are some brave souls huh, those like a couple of posters here usimg school deferments judiciously.

Like so manyu of your posts, your short on facts long on opinion, you foist as fact.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Those that ran off to Canada at least had the ambition and and courage to do something about a negative situation perhaps they weren't courageous enough to stand up against the entire government but they did do something rather than do the wrong thing. 
As for those who we're not negative about Vietnam and had other life plans but conceded to go to Vietnam anyway isn't that the height of apathy ?


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

To be fair and honest I must admit there is the possibility that a draft he may have been a good and honorable man I have never met one though. 
I never even met one who is a good soldier but it is possible


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)

AmericanStand said:


> To be fair and honest I must admit there is the possibility that a draft he may have been a good and honorable man I have never met one though.
> I never even met one who is a good soldier but it is possible


People like you are dorks


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

AmericanStand said:


> Those that ran off to Canada at least had the ambition and and courage to do something about a negative situation perhaps they weren't courageous enough to stand up against the entire government but they did do something rather than do the wrong thing.
> As for those who we're not negative about Vietnam and had other life plans but conceded to go to Vietnam anyway isn't that the height of apathy ?





oneraddad said:


> People like you are dorks


Thanks. I was trying to think up some rational response but realized there really isn't one to such irrational thought. You summed it up perfectly.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

I might be irrational and if you would care to explain the fallacies in my logic I am willing to consider. Changing my conclusions. 
But to me it seems irrational to proclaim someone a hero mearly because they served.... But only under threat of inprisionment and public scorn. 
Hardly their choice. 
Yet the protesters that stood up to public ridicule to bring the publics opinion around to do the right thing are scorned and treated a a joke. 
It's easy to go along with the crowd and hardest of all to stand up to your friends. 
I'm sure there were draftees that did heroic things in nam but when the POO had hit the fan and options were limited isn't the same thing as the bravery it takes to stand alone against the nation and evil.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

AmericanStand said:


> I might be irrational and if you would care to explain the fallacies in my logic I am willing to consider. Changing my concussions.
> But to me it seems irrational to proclaim someone a hero mearly because they served.... But only under threat of inprisionment and public scorn.
> Hardly their choice.
> Yet the protesters that stood up to public ridicule to bring the publics opinion around to do the right thing are scorned and treated a a joke.
> ...


First, I never claimed all were heroes. Some were, some weren't. But it's far from apathetic to carry on with ones life but to serve when called. It is irrational to lump all who did so together and denigrate their service.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

mmoetc said:


> First, I never claimed all were heroes. Some were, some weren't. But it's far from apathetic to carry on with ones life but to serve when called. It is irrational to lump all who did so together and denigrate their service.


Umm, if you truly believed in the cause, you were free to volunteer before being drafted. Nothing brave about making choice between prison and serving. But if you volunteered you served a longer sentence, umm mean did longer service than if you were indentured.

Honest I believe anybody running for president of USA should have served minimum of two years as basic grunt in war, not some commissioned officer, but basic grunt, the ones used as cannon fodder. And not because it proves they were some brave hero, but they have at least seen the cost of wars for the benefit of the rich. And argue what you want, ALL war is fought over wealth. Nobody goes to war and spends beaucoup bucks for purely noble purposes.

Oh and the lowest of the low were those like our glorious leader, that were exempted from service cause their family had money and influence. And lawyers that knew every loophole to escape service. ALL conscription laws everywhere, in every age, have loopholes for the wealthy, just way of the world. These folk are somehow better than those fleeing to Canada or those actually going to prison in protest?? Trump condemning McCain that actually served and suffered for it, or claiming to support those that actually serve. But he was too good to serve. Give me a break. The wealthy that institute conscription laws, but write in loopholes to protect their own are the lowest scumbags there are. They are the ones that should be officially lined up against a wall and shot for cowardice.


----------



## Hiro (Feb 14, 2016)

Citizenship and the benefits which flow from that require certain levels of participation. If a nation can effectively defend its interests with a solely volunteer force, that is a wonderful thing. However, to impugn those that are conscripted as someone less noble than protestors is utterly abhorrent to me. Some of those that protested were conscripted and had or were serving. Many of the protests that focused on the service members are and were appalling to me. Your safety and rights are guaranteed by those same people, bear that in mind. They don't get the luxury of choosing where and how they serve within the moral rules which govern all service members, otherwise it ceases to be a functional military.


----------



## Texaspredatorhu (Sep 15, 2015)

AmericanStand said:


> No courage to join no courage to refuse, no morals to join no morals to refuse, too apathetic to join too apathetic to refuse.
> In short the worst kind of soldier or human.
> The objector who publicly said no I will not sign up I will not go and served his jail time was far braver. The hawk who believed in the cause and signed up was a brave man.
> The protesters who knowingly walked into a situation expecting to be gassed and beaten were brave men.
> ...


You really are full of yourself. I bet you were first in line after 9/11 too huh? Served in the first gulf war? Some people had careers and because they didn't volunteer and got drafter they are a POS? Are you serious? Go tell the widow or daughter, son, so forth and so on of a draftee who died I nam that they were cowards! Let me know before I wanna be there to see this go down. Just a friendly tip you should change your handle from American stand to stand for nothing but yourself. Your a real piece of work.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

HermitJohn said:


> Umm, if you truly believed in the cause, you were free to volunteer before being drafted. Nothing brave about making choice between prison and serving. But if you volunteered you served a longer sentence, umm mean did longer service than if you were indentured...........
> 
> .


I agree with your post except for the part about requiring service elected officials. 
I do not believe anyone who is ever worked for the government in any capacity should be allowed to serve as an elected official. 
They cannot be neutral when they have had years of government brainwashing pounded into their head during service.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Hiro said:


> Citizenship and the benefits which flow from that require certain levels of participation. If a nation can effectively defend its interests with a solely volunteer force, that is a wonderful thing. However, to impugn those that are conscripted as someone less noble than protestors is utterly abhorrent to me. Some of those that protested were conscripted and had or were serving. Many of the protests that focused on the service members are and were appalling to me. Your safety and rights are guaranteed by those same people, bear that in mind. They don't get the luxury of choosing where and how they serve within the moral rules which govern all service members, otherwise it ceases to be a functional military.


As great as noble as you try to make drafting people sound , How would it have affected The outcome in Vietnam ?
Lots of good mend lives spared. ? Money saved ? Two nations less damaged ?
You seem to think service members should not have been held to account for their decisions. You seem to think they should've been held in the dark with the government idea that the nation was behind them. 
This brings us back to our original topic the freedom of speech. 
It is important for soldiers and perspective soldiers to know when the nation is not behind them. It is important for them to know but the government you is not necessarily the same as the people of the nations veiw. 

NO my rights have never been better preserved by a draftee than without. In fact they only been in dangered.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Texaspredatorhu said:


> You really are full of yourself. I bet you were first in line after 9/11 too huh? Served in the first gulf war? Some people had careers and because they didn't volunteer and got drafter they are a POS? Are you serious? Go tell the widow or daughter, son, so forth and so on of a draftee who died I nam that they were cowards! Let me know before I wanna be there to see this go down. Just a friendly tip you should change your handle from American stand to stand for nothing but yourself. Your a real piece of work.


I actually signed a contract with Halliburton that day fully expecting to be deployed towards Saudi. 
But no I never felt compelled to defend the rights of Kuwait to gold faucets. I did not see a need to attack Iraq. I feel we should've stayed out of Afghanistan. 
And American were not drafted into those conflicts.


----------



## coolrunnin (Aug 28, 2010)

AmericanStand said:


> I actually signed a contract with Halliburton that day fully expecting to be deployed towards Saudi.
> But no I never felt compelled to defend the rights of Kuwait to gold faucets. I did not see a need to attack Iraq. I feel we should've stayed out of Afghanistan.
> And American were not drafted into those conflicts.


You signed a contract to make money, and equate that with service in the military? 

You sir are a sad excuse for an American.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Well gee whiz what did you do ?

I was far to old to serve in the military again at that time. 
But I was willing to use my rather unique talents in what I thought might be very vicious fight with Saudi Arabia. 
The contract was basically 90 days with paid expenses how much time have you given your country for free?


----------



## coolrunnin (Aug 28, 2010)

Lol I deployed as a track vehicle mechanic in the reserves in desert sheild/storm. 

Yeah I looked into doing a small tour with one of the contractors during Iraq for the money in my case, but my wife said not only no, but are you stupid.

But you keep telling us you were going to work for Haliburton as your patriotic duty, hell you may even convince yourself.


----------



## Texaspredatorhu (Sep 15, 2015)

AmericanStand said:


> I actually signed a contract with Halliburton that day fully expecting to be deployed towards Saudi.
> But no I never felt compelled to defend the rights of Kuwait to gold faucets. I did not see a need to attack Iraq. I feel we should've stayed out of Afghanistan.
> And American were not drafted into those conflicts.


But you felt compelled to fight in Nam? Seriously? That's about like comparing a pot and kettle. I went to Iraq and Afghanistan while in the Marines, I also went back to Afghan as a contractor, I did that for the money, not ashamed of it either. Who cares if they weren't drafted and more importantly who cares if people were drafted, a draftee probably saved your sorry un-American back side and you never knew. You think the government is always out to get you and that everyone is brainwashed, fact is your straight up ignorant and ungrateful. If you think this country is so bad why don't you do something about it and run for office and start setting them all straight, again let me know when you do this I wanna be there!


----------



## Texaspredatorhu (Sep 15, 2015)

AmericanStand said:


> I agree with your post except for the part about requiring service elected officials.
> I do not believe anyone who is ever worked for the government in any capacity should be allowed to serve as an elected official.
> They cannot be neutral when they have had years of government brainwashing pounded into their head during service.


That's explains a lot of your brainwashing too!


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

*PROFILE OF US SERVICEMEN (1941-1945)*

38.8% (6,332,000) of U.S. servicemen and all servicewomen were volunteers
61.2% (11,535,000) were draftees
https://www.nationalww2museum.org/s...tarters/research-starters-us-military-numbers

Just a little something to think about when denigrating draftees. Would you even be here without them?


----------



## Terri (May 10, 2002)

mmoetc said:


> *PROFILE OF US SERVICEMEN (1941-1945)*
> 
> 38.8% (6,332,000) of U.S. servicemen and all servicewomen were volunteers
> 61.2% (11,535,000) were draftees
> ...


A very good point!
My Father has always been devout, and he was of the opinion that God would not want him to kill somebody. He had reason to think long and hard about this, as he was drafted during WW2.

As it turns out, he was blind in one eye and so he was assigned to a military hospital. So he never had to refuse to fight. 

He has had an admirable life. He has firm beliefs and he lives by them.


----------



## Heritagefarm (Feb 21, 2010)

oneraddad said:


> People like you are dorks


Maybe so, but perhaps you could have articulated it a little better.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

coolrunnin said:


> You signed a contract to make money, and equate that with service in the military?
> 
> You sir are a sad excuse for an American.


 Wrong all three times. 
But I've come to expect that from you.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Texaspredatorhu said:


> But you felt compelled to fight in Nam? Seriously? That's about like comparing a pot and kettle. I went to Iraq and Afghanistan while in the Marines, I also went back to Afghan as a contractor, I did that for the money, not ashamed of it either. Who cares if they weren't drafted and more importantly who cares if people were drafted, a draftee probably saved your sorry un-American back side and you never knew. You think the government is always out to get you and that everyone is brainwashed, fact is your straight up ignorant and ungrateful. If you think this country is so bad why don't you do something about it and run for office and start setting them all straight, again let me know when you do this I wanna be there!


 I never said I felt compelled to fight in Nam don't make things up. 
You said you fought for money do you also claim to be a patriot for doing so. ?
I never said a draftee couldn't do a job. Some did excellent work. But they were drafted because the government needed cannon fodder. Sad I know but honestly in a time when we were lowering the IQ standards to mental retardation levels it was pretty clear what the government wanted from draftees. 

I am not ungrateful I thank God every day for the chance to participate in the greatest nation on earth. 
But I think there are those who don't care about our freedoms and would gladly sell us down the river for a hand full of baubles. 

I don't think this nation is "so bad" because those protesters are out there to wake us up when we stray from the path of right. 
Sure they are not all right but what they do helps all of us wake up and look at things.


----------



## coolrunnin (Aug 28, 2010)

AmericanStand said:


> Wrong all three times.
> But I've come to expect that from you.


You said you attempted to sign up with Haliburton as your contribution after 9/11! What else could we think except for you are very perceptive in realizing Haliburton was going to be a major contractor, and that we were going to have a ground war.


----------



## coolrunnin (Aug 28, 2010)

AmericanStand said:


> Wrong all three times.
> But I've come to expect that from you.


You said you attempted to sign up with Haliburton as your contribution after 9/11! What else could we think except for you are very perceptive in realizing Haliburton was going to be a major contractor, and that we were going to have a ground war.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

I did not say that. Wrong again CR.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

AmericanStand said:


> I never said I felt compelled to fight in Nam don't make things up.
> You said you fought for money do you also claim to be a patriot for doing so. ?
> I never said a draftee couldn't do a job. Some did excellent work. But they were drafted because the government needed cannon fodder. Sad I know but honestly in a time when we were lowering the IQ standards to mental retardation levels it was pretty clear what the government wanted from draftees.
> 
> ...


You really need to figure out your message. There are those who would sell us down the river. They have nothing to do with those who were drafted and served honorably and well who you have constantantly denigrated. There were as many reasons for not volunteering but submitting to the draft as there were draftees. It wasn't just about avoiding jail as your broad brush paints. There were as many reasons for protesting as there were protestors. It wasn't all about patriotism as your next brush stoke tries to whitewash. Sometimes it was just the fear of being shot at. Many of those who volunteered for service, men you hold in higher esteem, had low draft numbers and knowing they would likely become combat infantry marched into the recruiters office in an effort to pick and choose their method of service even if it was for a longer term. Yet you lump them in with the 17 year old kid who didn't know what from what but saw being a soldier as something heroic. Or the guy who stood in front of the judge with the actual choice of jail or enlistment. Yet you hold him in higher regard than the young father who was working in the factory to support his family who grudgingly put that aside to do his duty. 

You can make your point about the evils of war and all the wrong reasons they have been fought without denigrating and diminishing those who fought and died in those wars. Try it. It just might make some rational sense.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

mmoetc said:


> *PROFILE OF US SERVICEMEN (1941-1945)*
> 
> 38.8% (6,332,000) of U.S. servicemen and all servicewomen were volunteers
> 61.2% (11,535,000) were draftees
> ...


 Sorry my mistake I was too focused on the. Nam draftees. 

Interesting thing about the WW2 draft 
From wiki. 

] On December 5, 1942, presidential Executive Order 9279 made it so that men from the ages of 18 to 37 could not voluntarily enlist even if they had not been drafted, providing protection for the nation's home front manpower pool.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

AmericanStand said:


> Sorry my mistake I was too focused on the. Nam draftees.
> 
> Interesting thing about the WW2 draft
> From wiki.
> ...


Maybe if you defined what that mistake was?


----------



## coolrunnin (Aug 28, 2010)

AmericanStand said:


> I did not say that. Wrong again CR.


[quote uid=374551 name="Texaspredatorhu" post=7925790]You really are full of yourself. I bet you were first in line after 9/11 too huh? Served in the first gulf war? Some people had careers and because they didn't volunteer and got drafter they are a POS? Are you serious? Go tell the widow or daughter, son, so forth and so on of a draftee who died I nam that they were cowards! Let me know before I wanna be there to see this go down. Just a friendly tip you should change your handle from American stand to stand for nothing but yourself. Your a real piece of work.[/QUOTE]<br /><br />I actually signed a contract with Halliburton that day fully expecting to be deployed towards Saudi. <br /> But no I never felt compelled to defend the rights of Kuwait to gold faucets. I did not see a need to attack Iraq. I feel we should've stayed out of Afghanistan. <br /> And American were not drafted into those conflicts.

Care to revise your statement?


----------



## Texaspredatorhu (Sep 15, 2015)

AmericanStand said:


> I never said I felt compelled to fight in Nam don't make things up.
> You said you fought for money do you also claim to be a patriot for doing so. ?
> I never said a draftee couldn't do a job. Some did excellent work. But they were drafted because the government needed cannon fodder. Sad I know but honestly in a time when we were lowering the IQ standards to mental retardation levels it was pretty clear what the government wanted from draftees.
> 
> ...


Well your pretty high and mighty about volunteering to go to Nam but not willing to go to Kuwait, what's the difference? I went to Iraq and Afghanistan while serving IN THE MARINE CORPS, like I said earlier and went back on a contract. Did I go the first 2 times to be a patriot? No. Did I feel it was my duty? A little maybe, but I would rather be there with my brothers. I also said I went on a contract FOR THE MONEY. Can you read or do you make stuff up as you go? So please continue to twist my words.

Cannon fodder, really? I can only imagine you won't 3 silver stars and 2 MOH because you were so awesome! You probably weren't worth a dang and you still ain't. Duck and run!

As far as protesters go look at PETA, use coercion on a butcher shop in Berkeley because COWS are killed "inhumanely" but killing a fetus is 100% humane and ok. Protesters ain't worth squat anymore so try again.


----------



## Texaspredatorhu (Sep 15, 2015)

Another small statistic for you, at least 32 draftees were awarded the MOH, I guess they are cowards too right?


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

Back to the original thread starter...Free Speech is enshrined in the Constitution, but as somebody has already said, the responsibilities of the individual in a free society are also extremely important. Free Speech is not advanced by shouting down your opponents, beating them with fists or clubs, or burning private property indiscriminately. In order for society to function, one must live peacefully with your neighbor, even if you do not agree with their views on life, their politics or the way they comb their hair.

When you start down the road to violence, you start down the road to anarchy, not simply just espousing Free Speech. Violence begats violence. The ultimate end result of violence is either a cessation of Free Speech and political suppression for security purposes or war. War never occurs in a vacuum, is never the result of a single act and is ultimately an expression of politics using force.


----------



## Texaspredatorhu (Sep 15, 2015)

Forcast said:


> Anyone see a differents between Harvey and Katrina?


The spelling?


----------

