In line with two of my last blog entries, let's take a look at hate-monger Ann Coulter's exercise of free speech. Here are some of the things she has said:
My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times building.
We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. (after 9/11)
We need somebody to put rat poison in Justice [John Paul] Stevens' crème brulée.
Liberals hate America, they hate flag-wavers, they hate abortion opponents, they hate all religions except Islam, post 9/11. Even Islamic terrorists don't hate America like liberals do.
Isn't she advocating the assassination of a Supreme Court Justice?
If I were to declare that someone should blow up the White House, wouldn't I be investigated by the Secret Service? Wouldn't I be guilty of advocating the assassination of the President of the United States? I think that is a crime.
Why is it not a crime for Ann Coulter to suggest that someone kill a Supreme Court Justice?
Or is this free speech, protected by the Constitution?
Where do we draw the line?
3 comments:
Depends who you are. If you're in favour of the government, there is no line your comments were merely 'taken out of context' however, if your are not in favour you can barely open your mouth.
In Europe we have had the same debate, after the mohammad cartoons and a recent case where a man was found guilty over holocaust denial. Freedom of speech seems to always come with many contradictions.
Being something of a free speech purist, I would not want even Coulter legally silenced, despite the danger her hatefull rhetoric might do.
The proper response to Coulter is to answer her and expose her every time she opens her hateful mouth.
I need more maalox if we are going to discuss Annie...pukegagbarf.....urghhhhh....the nerve of that anorexic bitch deciding I hate America if I am a liberal....
Post a Comment