Stop Coulter's syndicated column from being published--petition from The Human Rights Campaign

[Whoa_Nelly]

Main page:
http://www.hrcactioncenter.org/actioncenter/notice-description.tcl?newsletter_id=6763151


The petition page:
http://www.hrcactioncenter.org/campaign/coulter

[RebelOne]

1. Done

[BOSSHOG]

2. I have mixed thoughts on this

How do we combat cancer unless we expose it? I doubt there is any American who holds that thing in lower contempt then me. But I do believe that good profits from the exposure of evil. And I got that constitutional jones working in me that opposes any kind of suppression. She's an idiot. The way to make more people think that, is by letting her expose herself so to speak.

I'm gonna alter course here folks, They came for coulter and nobody spoke up!! You know the rest of the refrain.

[bryant69]

3. I agree

"The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all." - H. L. Mencken

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[BOSSHOG]

7. I hate her with a passion and I love the constitution with a greater passion

"Conservatives" in this country are incredibly high maintenance but opposing what they do and what they say makes us stronger. As a Marine T-Shirt advertised in the Gym, Pain is weakness leaving the body. If we do not allow them to do and speak, we have no reason to exercise and we become weak because it will remain within. Shit, I oughta be published.

[Ex Lion Tamer]

30. It's not a constitutional issue.

The constitution applies only to government action, so it has no bearing here.

It is a "marketplace of ideas" issue. And in that paradigm, hate speech SHOULD be shut down. It's not contrary to the principle, it is an application of the principle.

[EFerrari]

18. So, how are citizens weighing in passing "oppressive laws"?

Last time I looked, I wasn't a law maker. :wtf:

[bryant69]

20. This will be fun

Point 1 - Criticizing or attacking Ann Coulter is obviously ok.

Point 2 - Trying to create a situation where Ann Coulter is not allowed on the air (say by organizing a boycott of those companies who choose to print her articles, or sponsors of programs that allow her on the air) is censorship.

Point 3 - It's censorship even if you are not the government.

Point 4 - You have every right to create a boycott to punish newspapers/magazines/tv networks and so on for presenting the views of Ann Coulter. Doing so, however, is an attempt to censor her views, and as such is against my values.

Point 5 - Even if you assume that you will fail to get Ann Coulter and her pernicious opinions out of the media, the attempt is still contrary to my values.

Point 6 - Your commitment to freedom of speech is not tested by people saying things you agree with, but by people saying things you hate.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[EFerrari]

21. No, Brent, it's not censorship. I can't censor Ann Coulter.

I can only speak up for my opinion. And if a majority agrees with me and she is fired, that's still not censorship.

If Ann Coulter wants to hang out at a bus station with a sign and a tin can, that's her right. She has no right to be employed by the corporate media.

Was that fun?

[bryant69]

22. Nope

If you got Ann Coulter off the air who would you go after next? Just out of curiousity?

Bryant

[EFerrari]

25. "go after"? Well, how many tickets do I have to express my opinion?

Just curious.

[bryant69]

27. Again there's nothing wrong with expressing your opinion

It's when you make it your goal to stop someone else from expressing theirs that I don't agree with you.

Bryant

[EFerrari]

5. Imho, this isn't censorship. This is a market expressing a preference.

I have no ability to censor this hate filled person. But I can speak up about how destructive I think she is. The Constitution guarantees me that privilege.

[BOSSHOG]

9. Roger that Teammate

The last person who is gonna get in the way of you and your constitutional liberties is me. Wouldn't it be great to be hanging out at the beach drinking a nice cold draft bud instead of having to save democracy from ignorant constitution hating assholes? "Conservatives" are extremely high maintenance (for no good reason.)

[EFerrari]

11. Why don't you come on out to the beach April 28?

We're going to make some more pretty pictures.

[BOSSHOG]

14. Beautiful

I haven't been to San Francisco in more then ten years.

[vireo]

17. Moreover, it's not a balanced playing field

The corporate marketplace of ideas is biased against progressive voices. Money talks and this, along with sponsor boycotts, is a way to make our voice heard.

[EFerrari]

19. You bet. n/t

[karlrschneider]

6. I don't like it, but I agree with you...sharing your reasoning.

Either the First Amendment applies to everyone or it's worthless. I'd never defend what she does but dammit, I have to support her right...to be an ass.

[rkc3]

8. It's part of the Tough Shit Clause.

Freedom for everyone or freedom for none.

[karlrschneider]

10. Yep, in a nutshell. However, after reading the petition, I think it's not censorship

according to its precise definition to appeal to the syndicator. There's a good chance that her insipid and insane
rhetoric will backfire eventually.

[EFerrari]

16. She has every right to be an ass. And we have every right

to say, we don't want to read that ass.

It's a negotiation, not an act of Congress and there's a real difference. One is democracy in action and one is fascism. Or, that's how it seems to me.

The thing I really worry about most isn't that this person makes a living in the way she does but that she's desensitizing the public to hate speech and that is a problem.

[The Stranger]

13. Oh my fucking god.

I simply cannot believe what I am reading.

[BOSSHOG]

26. I think you and I are

teammates. She is the most vile of scum. But pushing her underground will not stop the spread of her poison. Expose her to the light, let her spew her venom for all to see and hear. Those who agree with her will do so regardless of her status. We can't capture the fence sitters with her head under a sheet and in a klavern.

[The Stranger]

28. When Coulter says the things she does, she emboldens others to speak (and think) that way as well.

It is not a coincidence that nearly every press organization and every monitoring organization and every human rights organization is noting a massive spike in White Supremacist groups right now -- arising inevitably out of the racist War Against Terror a/k/a the Arabs, Muslims and Persians and the xenophobia regarding what to do with the wave of Mexican and South American immigrants to the U.S.

She speaks more and more boldly, and racism and hate and xenophobia become okay. It is clear not only with her, but with Arch Racists Bill O'Reilley, Glen Beck, Michael Weiner a/k/a Michael Savage, Sean Hannity and others. They provide cover for the racist comments made under breaths and the wink-wink to those in the know.

And pretending that this is a free speech or Constitutional question borders on what an imbecile might try to think. It isn't even close to being close. Such an assertion reveals such a lack of any conception of law that it would be laughable -- if only it rose to such a level.

No one is filing a lawsuit to have her subject to prior restraint. They are combatting hate speech with free speech -- urging the corporate media to cut off the funds from the bigot. This is infringing her rights under the Constitution? Come on. Come on.

[kestrel91316]

15. Consider every outlet for her venom to be a metastasis, that's how.

[EFerrari]

4. Done.

[Grebrook]

12. Coulter's column has been dropped from 3 newspapers already, hahahahaha

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,257745,00.html

Most humblest of apologies for linking to Fox.

[sarcasmo]

23. Kick.

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

24. First amendment doesn't guarantte you the right to a column and exposure

ann can say whatever she wants, but she shouldn't be shocked when people want their newspapers to be respectful and not carry that shit.

and as far as restricting her views-if your newspaper stgarted carrying a regular feature from a neonazi or klansman, would you do nothing?
no, you'd demand that they drop it.
why the distanction for ann? honestly, there's not much difference in what she does and blatant hate groups. i'm tire of her hiding behind the veil of commentator and 'her views' to spread hate.

[radfringe]

29. let me put it this way

How many newspapers would carry her column if she said lynching should be used as a form of birth control for non-whites?

How many newspapers would carry her column if she wanted to institute concentration camps for Jews?

granted her recent spewing did not say "faggots should be killed" - however
she has advocated violence in the past:

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. We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's war. And this is war.

These broads are millionaires, lionized on TV and in articles about them, reveling in their status as celebrities and stalked by griefparrazies. I have never seen people enjoying their husband's deaths so much.
-on 9/11 widows who have been critical of the Bush administration

"We need somebody to put rat poisoning in Justice Stevens' creme brulee. That's just a joke, for you in the media."

"We need to execute people like (John Walker Lindh) in order to physically intimidate liberals."

“Earth is yours. Take it. Rape it. It's yours.”

“They've hit us and we've got to hit back hard, and I'm not just talking about the terrorists.”

"...a cruise missile is more important than Head Start."

On Islamic extremists: "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity."

"If you don't hate Clinton and the people who labored to keep him in office, you don't love your country."

To a disabled Vietnam vet: "People like you caused us to lose that war."