God

[NJCubScouter 1389]

Just to clarify my last paragraph: Under the First Amendment you of course have the RIGHT to act discourteously. But you take have taken an oath (the Scout Oath) not to.

[Rooster7 11]

I wonder what is more discourteous -

 

Forcing others to hear your opinion (or prayer as the case may be)?

 

Or

 

Forcing others to keep their opinions to themselves?

 

In a free society where ideas are encouraged and opinions shared, I prefer the former over the latter. AND, in my opinion, this country needs more prayer, not less.

 

[NJCubScouter 1389]

Rooster inquires:

 

I wonder what is more discourteous -

 

Forcing others to hear your opinion (or prayer as the case may be)?

 

Or

 

Forcing others to keep their opinions to themselves?

 

Who said anything about forcing anyone to keep their opinions to themselves? You mean a noise ordinance? That doesn't force anyone to keep their opinion to themselves. It just places a limit on how and where and when the opinion can be expressed. These kinds of restrictions are all around us, and as long as they are reasonable, it's ok. If I want to express my political opinions, it's usually ok, but if it happens that at the time I want to do so I am sitting in a courtroom watching a trial, and I want to do so in a loud manner, the nearest representatives of authority will force me to keep silent -- quite properly, if discourteously.

[packsaddle 753]

FOG, I got it at least, and had a good laugh too!

[Rooster7 11]

NJ,

 

Yes, I understand. Nor is it acceptable to yell fire in a crowded theater or scream obscenities in a church. However, there was a time in this country, when many individuals literally found a soapbox and stood on a corner off of Main Street, or in a public square, or in the middle of a city park, and loudly proclaimed their opinion. Sometimes the message was religious, sometimes it was political, and sometimes it was just non-sense. Nevertheless, I believe they exemplified the free society that our founders fought for, and it was not only legal, it was celebrated. I think in the name of political correctness, many individuals have taken this country backwards. I don't think our forefathers would be pleased. I know I am not particularly happy about it. Freedom works both ways. Yes - everyone has a right to ignore the message of others. BUT - everyone should also have the right to proclaim the message of their own choosing in public squares. Otherwise, our freedom is only a faade.

 

[packsaddle 753]

Rooster7, It is my observation that we continue to have that right. The guy I wrote about wasn't there Friday. But there are also other persons in my town who walk the streets saying strange, irrational things to passersby. We just smile and wave and go on about our business, no harm done. If you feel the need but are not allowed in your town, please come here and join the society that gives John Grisham the material for his novels. You might be surprised at how well you fit in.

 

Merlyn, take a gander at this one I just found today:

http://greenvilleonline.com/news/2004/08/07/2004080736612.htm

I'll see what else I can find on it.

Edited part: Yep, here's another:

http://greenvilleonline.com/news/2004/08/07/2004080736614.htm(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

[NWScouter 9]

Rooster,

That was not always the case. Back in the early 1900s a group called the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW) or the Wobblies came to many towns out west and held free speech fights. What would happen a local union would be out on strike and the town would pass a law banning or restricting free speech. The Wobblies would come into town to support the strike. One of them would then violate the law and would get hauled off to jail, another would then step up and do it again. They would keep doing this until the jail was full and the town was bankrupt from care for the prisoners.

 

[Fuzzy Bear 12]

One silent voice rising from the depths of the darkest jungle in the deepest hole in the furthest corner of the globe should suffice. If it doesnt, then the whole multitudes voice spoken in unison from the middle of the largest city from the top of the highest building magnified with the loudest microphone wont make a difference.

 

FB

 

[evmori 11]

NJ,

My loudspeaker, my property and I am within the noise ordinance. Makes no difference if there is a school nearby. Makes no difference if there is a hospital nearby. According to the 1st Amendment, I have the right to do this! Seems a little odd, though, that when the Islam temple had a call to prayer announced over a loudspeaker in a town that none of these questions you are posing me were posed of them!

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[packsaddle 753]

Ed, some of the churches in this area have loudspeakers that broadcast hymns or carols (depending on season). One is Catholic and others are Baptist and Episcopal (not sure about that last one). The local Temple plays Hava Nagila until sundown on Friday (just kidding, I made that last one up - but hey, it's a great idea).

I am guessing that thousands hear these and to my knowledge, they haven't been shut down (except for the odd power outage). The university has a bell tower from which occasional really bad players toll their attempts to additional thousands of ears. OK, some grumbling but these players seem to be like the pink bunny.

So you'd be safe here. I think you need to go for it. Discover the exciting world of civil disobedience if you feel it necessary. Push the envelope, hang ten, walk on the cutting edge. You might want to look up the number for your local ACLU affiliate first, though.

 

Edited part:

NWscouter, I have always wondered how the Wobblies got that name. Do you know?(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

Ed writes:

Seems a little odd, though, that when the Islam temple had a call to prayer announced over a loudspeaker in a town that none of these questions you are posing me were posed of them!

 

 

Ed, I realize you're ineducable, but just for the other people reading this thread:

 

1) The mosque asked permission from the city council.

 

2) in response, the city council passed an amendment to the city's noise ordinance. Previously, houses of worship were COMPLETELY EXEMPT from the noise ordinance; the council changed the law specifically to have the mosque subject to the SAME noise limits as everyone else. Without such a change, the mosque could have made as much noise as they liked.

 

3) Later, a popular vote on the issue passed 55%-45% in favor of allowing the call to prayer.

 

Now Ed, I realize that you have no comprehension of what religious freedom means; you can only see Christians vs. everyone else as a zero-sum game, where any benefit to any non-Christian religious group MUST mean that Christians are being discriminated against, somehow.

 

Your continued ignorant harping on the mosque in Hamtramck shows that, and your attitude is reprehensible. The mosque is subject to the SAME laws as all other churches, yet that isn't good enough for you; you, apparently, think other people's religions must be subject to laws that restrict them, while your religion must receive government favoritism.

 

And EVERY time you bring this mosque up, you reveal how you do not care about other people's religious rights.

[boleta 10]

Merlyn,

Surprisingly, I agree with most of your ideology about approaching the issue of religious freedom in the U.S. This has nothing to do with the BSA's ability to define itself, though.

 

I do not agree with your continued manner of making your points by insulting the members of the Forum. I know I have been guilty of this myself. But with the recent bannishment of several members of the Forum because of their boorish behavior, I think we should all have a higher level of consideration and make our points without the insults. Words like ignorant and ineducable to describe a person here are not necessary to make your point. It is the attitude that is reprehensible to you. Maybe that's OK. But I don't think it is necessary to describe the person you are conversing with the way you do.

[packsaddle 753]

Or to put it a little differently, a person can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. But, I tested this concept once with an experiment and the vinegar did pretty well. It may depend on whether it is made from apple cider or wine. But one thing, concentrated acetic acid doesn't work as well, at least not in my trial. The honey attracted more bees than anything else and, of course, they are a different order from the flies. The very best is something entirely different. When my mother cooked cabbage late in the summer or early fall, we had to open the doors to our house it smelled so bad. The screen doors accumulated so many flies that it looked like one of Moses' plagues. Oops, I've probably said too much.

Just a little more blathering: Boleta, who else besides Jason was banished? Or are we counting him more than once in his multiple personalities? Whew, this stuff is getting confusing.

[evmori 11]

Merlyn,

Since you know nothing about me your statements regarding my education are nothing more than a moronic tirade.

 

Freedom of religion is freedom of all religion. But this is never applied equally! Take down the manger in front of city hall but what about the menorah?

 

The rest of your post is baseless rambling.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[Fuzzy Bear 12]

It was Wheeler who came close to redefining the words, baseless blathering. Jason's blathering was blistering even when he resurfaced in other crude forms. We haven't established a Hall of Belching Blathering Infamy, yet but these two were the icons that set the standard. To even be considered, one must cross that indisputable line of insult and babble that sets people's hair on fire when their name is read.

FB