The march on Selma did require a court order. So you can put that counterpoint away.
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-e...ma-march-protest-doctrine-20150308-story.html
Atheists Pulling no Punches on Veterans
- Thread starter 22*43*51
- Start date
The march on Selma did require a court order. So you can put that counterpoint away.
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-e...ma-march-protest-doctrine-20150308-story.html
The vets would open the 10X10 area to everyone so the net effect would be a $1 boast in revenue for the city. Better than paying the $500,000.
who is a republican? what would be a fair price? wouldnt it be more of a libertarian solution, dont they think that the government shouldnt own or do much of anything?
Look closer. The effort began on March 7th. Why are you defending the right of the government to restrict speech? And it only required an order to be possible, not to be right and correct and justified.
Nope. The streets were not used for commerce, they were being used for government propaganda in the Missouri case. In Selma they were used for commerce and that wasn't a justified reason to limit speech either. I'm not going to give in to your desire to forfeit freedom for order. Please stop defending totalitarianism and act like a good American.
Look closer. While it was being decided there was an injunction that allowed the march.
After, the request was approved on its merits.
The Selma marchers had support of the law.
Best post on the thread. And imagine, and those people defending our freedom to not want anything to do with each other. Or to disrespect each other's views.
I've always thought it interesting how Arlington National Cemetery came to be. Short history:
http://www.arlingtoncemetery.net/history1.htm
Not on March 7th and yet it was still right. Why do you need government to tell you what is just? Especially when you are protesting government. How are you not troubled by your own position. Think this through.
It's time for you to wake up. You're position to denegrate protest because it occupies a street is shameful and anti American.
I am going to make this as simple as I possibly can:
your rights are not > than anyone else's rights
The Selma march.
The protesters followed the law and we rewarded for their efforts with a huge stage to display their plight.
That's how it should be done.
My right to confront a government official is absolutely more real than your right to enjoy a parade on time. That's fundamental.
You don't know the history. Your position on this topic would have outlawed the Selma March on March 7th when it first tired, and again on March 9th when it tried again. Go ahead and own your position. You are arguing MLK was wrong to try to march without government permission. Then let the ramifications of that abdication of individual liberty wash over you.
That's not an issue in the Missouri protests. But the Selma protests would set the president that freedom trumps work.
As the article states, the Selma march wouldn't likely happen today because the duration that the court allowed the expansive stretch of state highway to be closed, was five days.
What an amazing opportunity those marchers were legally afforded.
You floated a falsehood out there several times today. You claimed the the Selma marchers were a lawless band that overtook the streets.
I dispelled your besmirch with facts.
No you didn't, look at your dates. Of course the bigger issue is why are you even defending the right of the government to regulate protest against itself? Protest against the government is every American's right no matter how the government feels about it. Do you even really feel the way you are arguing or are you just locked into that position because you got caught on the wrong side of these Missouri students? Follow your own logic and think about what you are saying. Its scary wrong.
The next time I'm a government official facing an orderly group of peaceful protesters I imagine I will.
You are correct that is our fundamental right to confront and protest our government and its leaders.
Where we disagree is our rights as to time and place. Do you have the right to protest anywhere you want and anytime disregarding the impact you are having on people around you who are neither the target of your protest or a government official?
You want to park yourself right outside their door and protest or protest their meetings to your hearts content go for it. You want to disrupt an event you lose me.
That article 22 linked answers this. Selma set the president that you have the right to disrupt in proportion to the problem being confronted. So the degree of impediment goes up if I'm challenging government institutionalized injustice as was the case in Missouri. Remember these protesters disbursed when cops told them to after just 10 minutes. To have a real problem with that is in fact the real problem here. There is in fact no right of a public official to not be interrupted in public.
The only reason the red-necks were held at bay was due to the deferment caused by the court.
It was a great moment in the Equal Rights movement.
Don't dismiss the black communities' efforts by calling them Anarchists.
How about the rights of the non governmental people?
Can I walk up to the alter and protest at the funeral where a public official is?
I take your word on the legal argument it does not change my mind that protesters are right to pick any time or any place.
I think it's important. They aren't impeding traffic. They are impeding a government march. Government officials are indeed different than a private citizen.
No. The rednecks weren't held at bay on the 9th.
As I said, the government made the march logistically possible by providing protection. That doesn't mean one needs permission to protest. Or that protest in defiance of permission is wrong. That should be self evident.
It wasn't a "government march". It was a bunch of floats created by various community organizations and the college band.
You act like this was some sort of North Korean military review parade.
But, I was talking about you.
So you and your dude's find yourself outside of "Trader Joe's" with your whole grain bread, pesto ravioli and a case of "Two Buck Chuck"
You roll out in your environmentally smart Toyotas, but a bunch of anti-Trader Joes folks say "not over our dead bodies".
Do you stipulate? When is anarchy agreeable to the point where it says is to be kept in check?
Thanks for helping me refute you.
You claimed several times in different threads that the Selma Marches were an unorganized, lawless endeavor.
I have shown several times that the Selma leadership acted deliberately and legally for their cause.
You keep wanting to paint a picture of unabashed lawlessness.
The Africa Amercian march on Selma was well thought out and executed. It was the hallmark effort of the Civil Rights movement. It was intentional and deliberate. Any effort saying otherwise deminishes everyone's efforts.
You are wrong sir.
I didn't say that. I said they didn't have permission when they started on the 7th. I said that didn't make them wrong to protest. You said it did. We disagree on the need to get permission to protest the government.
Your position and your understanding of history are both in error.
Similar threads
