33
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 17:
Line 17: + + + + + + + +
Talk:Sedition Act of 1918 (view source)
Revision as of 17:51, November 14, 2009
, 17:51, November 14, 2009→Are they good things?: response
::::Evan, you should try actually reading the text of the laws. Only an unpatriotic liberal would consider doing one of those crimes. [[User:MichaelZ|MichaelZ]] 12:22, 14 November 2009 (EST)
::::Evan, you should try actually reading the text of the laws. Only an unpatriotic liberal would consider doing one of those crimes. [[User:MichaelZ|MichaelZ]] 12:22, 14 November 2009 (EST)
:::::I have. That's what I quoted above. In short, it outlaws "malicious"ly criticizing the government with something that the court believes is "false". It seems like anyone who dislikes the current President is going to do that. In fact, I think [[Barack Obama|we're criticizing the government ourselves]], and a court could easily conclude that what we say is false.
:::::I have. That's what I quoted above. In short, it outlaws "malicious"ly criticizing the government with something that the court believes is "false". It seems like anyone who dislikes the current President is going to do that. In fact, I think [[Barack Obama|we're criticizing the government ourselves]], and a court could easily conclude that what we say is false.
::::::It's called libel, and it's already illegal everywhere against private citizens. Unless the judge in question had been bought by "President" Obama, he would easily find that it was all true, as we've provided citations for everything.
:::::Evidence: Congressman Matthew Lyons accused President Adams of "a continual grasp for power"; he was arrested. Then, he said his imprisonment was unjust; he was almost arrested again. [http://www.fjc.gov/history/sedition.nsf/page/narrative#lyon].
:::::Evidence: Congressman Matthew Lyons accused President Adams of "a continual grasp for power"; he was arrested. Then, he said his imprisonment was unjust; he was almost arrested again. [http://www.fjc.gov/history/sedition.nsf/page/narrative#lyon].
::::::What he was doing was libelous. What patriotic conservatives like us do has nothing to do with him.
:::::Ideally, under a good government, only "unpatriotic" people would criticize it. But, right now, we've got a government made up of [[United_States_Senate|unpatriotic liberals]]. So, we end up being the ones "writing, printing, uttering or publishing... writings against... either house of the Congress of the United States, or the President of the United States, with intent to defame the said government... or to bring them, or either of them, into contempt or disrepute; or to excite against them, or either or any of them, the hatred of the good people of the United States." That's why the United States has the [[First Amendment]]: the Founding Fathers knew the government might go wrong, and people would need to speak against it. --[[User:EvanW|EvanW]] 12:43, 14 November 2009 (EST)
:::::Ideally, under a good government, only "unpatriotic" people would criticize it. But, right now, we've got a government made up of [[United_States_Senate|unpatriotic liberals]]. So, we end up being the ones "writing, printing, uttering or publishing... writings against... either house of the Congress of the United States, or the President of the United States, with intent to defame the said government... or to bring them, or either of them, into contempt or disrepute; or to excite against them, or either or any of them, the hatred of the good people of the United States." That's why the United States has the [[First Amendment]]: the Founding Fathers knew the government might go wrong, and people would need to speak against it. --[[User:EvanW|EvanW]] 12:43, 14 November 2009 (EST)
::::::Yes, they would need to speak the truth against it, not propagate unsubstantiated lies. [[User:MichaelZ|MichaelZ]] 12:51, 14 November 2009 (EST)