Jump to content
Goodbye Jesus

Pastors And Preaching At My University


sparklingphoenix

Recommended Posts

Littlena:

 

Free speech is important but so is the right to not be harassed. If you decide to pursue it, do everything in writing and keep a log of anyone you talked to and what was said. Deliver written communications in person and note the time, date and person you gave it to. Such names and dates are important. Get and keep copies of any U. policies re. the free speech area and any time-place-manner restrictions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one has a right to NOT be offended. 

 

 

I partially agree with this. Though society's rules are a general survey of what on average offends people. :-)  Like public nudity or public masturbation seems to bother Amuricans. If only I could unsubscribe to what offends me in real life as easily as I can unsubscribe to a Facebook feed life, would be grand. :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The problem with restricting speech like this is it allows the law to render it ineffective. 

 

I agree. If the message can be easily ignored, it most likely will be. :-)

 

Imagine if Occupy Wallstreet were limited to protests like "anti-Wall Street info here" or if the Vietnam protestors were only allowed to put up a sign advertising "Anti-war information available upon request".  How effective is this at gaining political momentum? 

 

Yes, I agree. I was just thinking about this yesterday. The Occupy movement was very effective in getting publicity for their cause because of the way they protested. But after a while I began to feel they were just a bunch of lazy people and it was interesting that NYPD (?) told them it's ok to protest, just not camp. In my old age I try to see both sides of the argument. I'm probably not that successful tho. :-)

 

In order to allow political movements to gain momentum, we have to allow a legitimate free exchange of ideas.  Otherwise the only ideas that win will be those commonly accepted, or the status quo.  In this case, the proverbial 'man' is always going to win. 

 

I agree. My wife and I were discussing a gay relative who is frequently talking about her gay love on social media. This irritates some people. On the one hand I can see where people get irritated about this free exchange but on the other hand unless gays can feel free to talk about gay love in public then it will not be commonly accepted.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder what's on their mind tho?

how shoving their stuff to my throat will make me want to join them or be like them?

 

Perhaps they are not trying to get people to join them or be like them. The possibility exists that (in the back of their minds) they are merely confronting passers-by with their sin, so that on judgement day there will be no excuse for being unaware of the sinfulness of their lifestyle, and therefore a worse punishment will be possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

How much does the megaphone, which is louder than my voice, infringe on my own right to free speech (I cant yell that loud) or disturb my peace?

There may be a sound ordinance issue here that can be pursued.

 

Not sure how to measure that, but I believe it does infringe. Having to walk by large pictures of aborted fetuses also violates common decency.

 

 

Common decency is subjective and hugely prone to abuse (is Playboy decent? How about atheist billboards?).  I'd much prefer the courts and police keep a hands off approach here.  No one has a right to NOT be offended. 

 

 

So if I own a billboard I should have the right to put full frontal nudity on public display?  To hell with anybody who doesn't want their kids to see that who just happens to be in the area?

 

 

No thank you.  Free speech is not an absolute right to harass.  This is one reason why I do not disrupt church services with attempts to deconvert people.  (The other reason being that I don't want to be a jerk.)  People have the right to express their views but not to harass others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Littlena:

 

Free speech is important but so is the right to not be harassed. If you decide to pursue it, do everything in writing and keep a log of anyone you talked to and what was said. Deliver written communications in person and note the time, date and person you gave it to. Such names and dates are important. Get and keep copies of any U. policies re. the free speech area and any time-place-manner restrictions.

I agree. Thanks for your advice! If I see anymore harassment I may file a complaint. As for now I'll just look in to my university's policies. I certainly don't want to infringe on anyone's free speech, but I also don't want to be harassed with it either. It seems like a very fine line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I wonder what's on their mind tho?

how shoving their stuff to my throat will make me want to join them or be like them?

Perhaps they are not trying to get people to join them or be like them. The possibility exists that (in the back of their minds) they are merely confronting passers-by with their sin, so that on judgement day there will be no excuse for being unaware of the sinfulness of their lifestyle, and therefore a worse punishment will be possible.

If anyone of them actually thinks like that, they are just cruel! Maybe they are trying to cover their own asses so that when they get to heaven god can't say,"why didn't you witness to all those lost heathens at the university?? No rewards for you!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

on a happier note, my brother showed me this:

 

http://imgur.com/gallery/0w6pPQz

 

zDuivel7.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

How much does the megaphone, which is louder than my voice, infringe on my own right to free speech (I cant yell that loud) or disturb my peace?

 

There may be a sound ordinance issue here that can be pursued.

 

Not sure how to measure that, but I believe it does infringe. Having to walk by large pictures of aborted fetuses also violates common decency.

 

 

Common decency is subjective and hugely prone to abuse (is Playboy decent? How about atheist billboards?).  I'd much prefer the courts and police keep a hands off approach here.  No one has a right to NOT be offended.

 

So if I own a billboard I should have the right to put full frontal nudity on public display?  To hell with anybody who doesn't want their kids to see that who just happens to be in the area?

 

 

No thank you.  Free speech is not an absolute right to harass.  This is one reason why I do not disrupt church services with attempts to deconvert people.  (The other reason being that I don't want to be a jerk.)  People have the right to express their views but not to harass others.

courts have specifically special plead nudity restrictions. Pictures you don't like don't harass you. If I had my drug here, people would be showing pictures of war. Then they might be less inclined to send their kids. People who are against abortion should be lent that same right to shock you. That's the price we pay for a free society.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

courts have specifically special plead nudity restrictions. Pictures you don't like don't harass you. If I had my drug here, people would be showing pictures of war. Then they might be less inclined to send their kids. People who are against abortion should be lent that same right to shock you. That's the price we pay for a free society.

 

 

Wrong.

 

A man wants to look at porn in the privacy of his own home.  By that I mean specifically images where the subject has given legal consent for the images to be distributed.

This is free speech.  It is free speech because all involved are adults and it is all consensual.

 

Same man wants to show the pics to his neighbor's minor children.  Not free speech.

 

Same man wants to put the pic on a billboard where he will force everybody to see it whether they want to or not.  Not free speech.

 

Same man wants to yell fire in a theater.  Not free speech.

 

Same man wants to encourage people to kill a police officer.  Not free speech.

 

 

Free speech is not an unlimited right.  Nobody should have the right to harass you with shocking photos that are indecent in public view on a giant display.  Now if you want to look at any photos on your own that is your business.  Don't confuse the right to have pictures with the right to force everyone to see an image.  They are different things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Same man wants to encourage people to kill a police officer.  Not free speech.

 

Or kill Jews, or blacks, etc etc. At some point we leave the free speech zone and enter the hate crime zone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have some good memories of my fellow college students mocking these guys. It was good sport.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wrong.

 

I and the courts disagree. 

 

I don't know why you're also providing a list of exceptions because showing abortion pics is not one of them. You're trying to equate laws that seek to protect people from real harm with ideas, not illegal, that just piss you off.  Take your local abortion protestors to court and see just how far that gets you. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

No one has a right to NOT be offended. 

 

 

I partially agree with this. Though society's rules are a general survey of what on average offends people. :-)  Like public nudity or public masturbation seems to bother Amuricans. If only I could unsubscribe to what offends me in real life as easily as I can unsubscribe to a Facebook feed life, would be grand. :-)

 

 

 

Tell me where open and public masturbation is accepted in the first world as a normal everday occurance? Nudity yes but masturbation is a different story.

 

If you are offended chances are people are using free speech correctly.

 

 

if those among us who are the worst of us the hated among us the ones that no one wants to hear are given the right to speak their minds then the best among us will be protected in our freedom.

 

I dislike public preaching but if it is in the right spot letting them do it actually protects my right to publicly disagree with them. I do have that right as well as all of you. Walk right up to them and argue them if you want it is your space as well.

 

On the grounds of a state run university in my state they are allowed by law to do this. There are areas for it but they have every right to use state property to express their speech. I do not like the message but I love the act.

 

Either everything is ok or nothing is ok. It sucks that it is that way sometimes but I would rather go to far and have to meter it than have to fight back what was taken from me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Wrong.

 

I and the courts disagree. 

 

I don't know why you're also providing a list of exceptions because showing abortion pics is not one of them. You're trying to equate laws that seek to protect people from real harm with ideas, not illegal, that just piss you off.  Take your local abortion protestors to court and see just how far that gets you. 

 

 

I live across from an abortion clinic that gets protested weekly. last week I saw two of them getting arrested. They just could not listen and stay the crap off of their property on the public sidewalk and went up next to the building and were banging on their windows. Funniest thing about it they were two old ladies... It is the only way they will arrest you is if you trespass on their property.

 

They only seem to show up to protest though when it is sunny and never in the snow ever. Guess god takes days off for weather.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

No one has a right to NOT be offended. 

 

 

I partially agree with this. Though society's rules are a general survey of what on average offends people. :-)  Like public nudity or public masturbation seems to bother Amuricans. If only I could unsubscribe to what offends me in real life as easily as I can unsubscribe to a Facebook feed life, would be grand. :-)

 

 

 

Tell me where open and public masturbation is accepted in the first world as a normal everday occurance? Nudity yes but masturbation is a different story.

 

Nowhere. Because it offends people. :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

No one has a right to NOT be offended. 

 

 

I partially agree with this. Though society's rules are a general survey of what on average offends people. :-)  Like public nudity or public masturbation seems to bother Amuricans. If only I could unsubscribe to what offends me in real life as easily as I can unsubscribe to a Facebook feed life, would be grand. :-)

 

 

 

Tell me where open and public masturbation is accepted in the first world as a normal everday occurance? Nudity yes but masturbation is a different story.

 

Nowhere. Because it offends people. :-)

 

 

so i guess people do have the right to be offended. That still doesn't mean they get to dictate what is and what will be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

No one has a right to NOT be offended. 

 

 

I partially agree with this. Though society's rules are a general survey of what on average offends people. :-)  Like public nudity or public masturbation seems to bother Amuricans. If only I could unsubscribe to what offends me in real life as easily as I can unsubscribe to a Facebook feed life, would be grand. :-)

 

 

 

Tell me where open and public masturbation is accepted in the first world as a normal everday occurance? Nudity yes but masturbation is a different story.

 

Nowhere. Because it offends people. :-)

 

 

so i guess people do have the right to be offended. That still doesn't mean they get to dictate what is and what will be.

 

 

Within the context of people expressing their opinions as a 1st amendment right, nobody has the right to not be offended.

 

Outside that context, there are definitely some things that are offensive and society has outlawed them. :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

No one has a right to NOT be offended. 

 

 

I partially agree with this. Though society's rules are a general survey of what on average offends people. :-)  Like public nudity or public masturbation seems to bother Amuricans. If only I could unsubscribe to what offends me in real life as easily as I can unsubscribe to a Facebook feed life, would be grand. :-)

 

 

 

Tell me where open and public masturbation is accepted in the first world as a normal everday occurance? Nudity yes but masturbation is a different story.

 

Nowhere. Because it offends people. :-)

 

 

It's not illegal because it offends people.  It's illegal because we as a society have determined that allowing such things causes real harm; specifically to children.

 

Sexual activity is quite unique as far as speech goes.  Many other things that offend virtually everyone are still allowed.  For example, Neo Nazis are perfectly within their rights to stand on street corners and preach white power.  They are not free to burn crosses on people's private property as this harms the private individual. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Wrong.

 

I and the courts disagree. 

 

I don't know why you're also providing a list of exceptions because showing abortion pics is not one of them. You're trying to equate laws that seek to protect people from real harm with ideas, not illegal, that just piss you off.  Take your local abortion protestors to court and see just how far that gets you. 

 

 

It's not about me being pissed off.  I wasn't even there.  And you know a lawsuit won't work because the jury will mostly be Southern Baptist.  The Christian majority does not play fair.  While you and I do not agree on where the line on free speech vs. harassment should be drawn at least we both want the protection extended evenly to everybody.  If that had been a muslim billboard you know it wouldn't go to court because the guy who put it up would be dead and the police would have no leads.  Our justice system leaves a lot to be desired.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

State college campuses have to let outsiders come on the campus because its public. Private colleges don't have to allow it.

The university is public, but I think they can still restrict what is allowed on the campus.  When I was at Rutgers, the state univ. of NJ, there were two men from a local church who would hand out Chick tracts and "witness" on campus.  Eventually they were told they could no longer do that.  I think it was because of complaints about the notorious "Gay Blade" tract, which was very anti-gay and displayed demeaning drawings.

 

There might be some mileage in seeing if evangelizing can be restricted on university property.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

No one has a right to NOT be offended. 

 

 

I partially agree with this. Though society's rules are a general survey of what on average offends people. :-)  Like public nudity or public masturbation seems to bother Amuricans. If only I could unsubscribe to what offends me in real life as easily as I can unsubscribe to a Facebook feed life, would be grand. :-)

 

 

 

Tell me where open and public masturbation is accepted in the first world as a normal everday occurance? Nudity yes but masturbation is a different story.

 

Nowhere. Because it offends people. :-)

 

 

so i guess people do have the right to be offended. That still doesn't mean they get to dictate what is and what will be.

 

 

Within the context of people expressing their opinions as a 1st amendment right, nobody has the right to not be offended.

 

Outside that context, there are definitely some things that are offensive and society has outlawed them. :-)

 

 

that is not what i was talking about at all. Masturbation is not free speech. It may be free expression but that is not guaranteed in my country. speech even unpopular speech is by law. hate speech not so much but as long as you can be well spoken civil and refrain from slurs even that is mostly allowed.

 

People can be offended all they want. Christians are often offended by other peoples free speech to disagree with them and their wild claims, we have every right to say it and they have every right to feel offended if they want. it changes nothing. I feel that all humans are born with this right it is not something that governments grant or power bestows. It is something we are born with in my opinion.

 

You are not planning on wanking it in public are you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Wrong.

 

I and the courts disagree. 

 

I don't know why you're also providing a list of exceptions because showing abortion pics is not one of them. You're trying to equate laws that seek to protect people from real harm with ideas, not illegal, that just piss you off.  Take your local abortion protestors to court and see just how far that gets you. 

 

 

It's not about me being pissed off.  I wasn't even there.  And you know a lawsuit won't work because the jury will mostly be Southern Baptist.  The Christian majority does not play fair.  While you and I do not agree on where the line on free speech vs. harassment should be drawn at least we both want the protection extended evenly to everybody.  If that had been a muslim billboard you know it wouldn't go to court because the guy who put it up would be dead and the police would have no leads.  Our justice system leaves a lot to be desired.

 

 

What you are arguing has nothing to do with a flawed justice system.  You just don't seem to understand the principles behind free speech and you are equivocating those few exceptions with what you personally consider harassment.  The fact is, showing pictures of fetuses is protected speech.  A muslim billboard would also be protected free speech, unless it was a call to Jihad or something equally ridiculous and potentially truly harmful to the community.  What would happen to the Muslim who chose to hire a board in the first place is outside the purview of the law.  The courts don't have the power to stop every nutter from overreacting, but they do have the power to legally protect the Muslim's right to display his message. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

State college campuses have to let outsiders come on the campus because its public. Private colleges don't have to allow it.

The university is public, but I think they can still restrict what is allowed on the campus.  When I was at Rutgers, the state univ. of NJ, there were two men from a local church who would hand out Chick tracts and "witness" on campus.  Eventually they were told they could no longer do that.  I think it was because of complaints about the notorious "Gay Blade" tract, which was very anti-gay and displayed demeaning drawings.

 

There might be some mileage in seeing if evangelizing can be restricted on university property.

 

 

In this state they may not restrict public displays as long as they are not lude, violent, or hate speech. Preachers are fully allowed on campuses here although they usually designate a zone for debate and public oratory. I have no issue with this at any level. if they are allowed to talk about god I am allowed to come and refute them publicly. This is really a great thing. It doesn't matter that we don't agree what matters is that you can come together and debate and bullets don't fly and college kids see that. Hopefully seeing nonviolent argument will rub off on them and fewer of them will go to war, want to go to war, and help keep attitudes alive that fuel all the hate and violence world wide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.