Does 1st Amendment remove responsibility for your actions?

[IndependentinWis]

GOP is out there saying that the religious wing nut from Florida has the right under the 1st Amendment to do as he has done. The real question isn't his legal rights, but his responsibility for the response to his video. He is in my opinion responsible for the deaths his actions have created. We don't live in a vacuum. He does these stupid things to get noticed by other right wing religious wing nuts. But GOP and its followers on this page want to turn this tragedy into a political attack on Obama. Another attempt to appeal to their right wing base that Obama, "doesn't look like us". Another appeal to the worst our country has to offer. Maybe they should appeal to what many of our forefathers came to this country seeking, true religious freedom.

 

[NCmusicman]

What did he do that was illegal? If someone writes something that you do not like, can you kill that person?
Is that where liberals have come to?

 

[connieb]

Yes, apparently.

 

[worldlymrb]

Do you have proof that the Christian pastor incited Muslims to raise the al-Quada flag over U.S embassy's and kill their ambassadors?

 

[IndependentinWis]

We are responsible for our actions. I know you GOPer's don't believe that, but it is true. Remember that the 1st Amendment doesn't allow you to yell fire in a movie theater. That is what this bozo did on purpose. He got the reaction he wanted and will soon be a hero to people like you NC, that will follow their GOP gods without thinking.

 

[Arkady]

I'm proud to live in a country where we're free to speak our minds. But with that absence of government censorship comes extra responsibility to think very hard about the repercussions of what we say. Even if a person isn't legally culpable in a situation like this, there is moral culpability.

 

[worldlymrb]

Nobody yelled fire in a movie theater.

Is govt now going to monitor/regulate all religious speech to make sure no MUSLIMS get offended. Because obviously offending Christians is no big deal.

 

[worldlymrb]

I'm proud to live in a country where we're free to speak our minds. But with that absence of government censorship comes extra responsibility to think very hard about the repercussions of what we say. Even if a person isn't legally culpable in a situation like this, there is moral culpability.

I see, if you strongly believe in something, yet might offend a Muslim, you should just shut up?

Edit: There was nothing in the pastors video that has been proven to be false or not quoted in the KORAN, such as Mohamed being a Pedophile.

 

[connieb]

I don't think anyone was looking for a reaction of a dead ambassador and personnel. It is disturbing though that we have become a bunch of emasculated wusses who worry that we should be concerned about pissing off the wrong person. Nothing is more weak of a position in my opinion than that.

 

[bdtex]

No it doesn't. 11/6/2012 will be the accountability moment. 11/7/2012 will be a "Wtf happened?" moment for the GOP.

 

[BitterPill]

I'm proud to live in a country where we're free to speak our minds. But with that absence of government censorship comes extra responsibility to think very hard about the repercussions of what we say. Even if a person isn't legally culpable in a situation like this, there is moral culpability.

I suspect the people responsible could be legally culpable in civil court. After reading somewhere or other that the movie cost 5 million to produce, I think there could be something there worth taking from the filmmaker along with any money Pastor Jones has or ever intends to make.

 

[BrianDamage]

GOP is out there saying that the religious wing nut from Florida has the right under the 1st Amendment to do as he has done. The real question isn't his legal rights, but his responsibility for the response to his video. He is in my opinion responsible for the deaths his actions have created. We don't live in a vacuum. He does these stupid things to get noticed by other right wing religious wing nuts. But GOP and its followers on this page want to turn this tragedy into a political attack on Obama. Another attempt to appeal to their right wing base that Obama, "doesn't look like us". Another appeal to the worst our country has to offer. Maybe they should appeal to what many of our forefathers came to this country seeking, true religious freedom.

Sorry, but I disagree. The people of the world cannot allow themselves to be held forever hostage by the oversensitivity of a small number of people. The only people responsible for the deaths of our people are those who caused them, through their actions.

Sure, the jackass who made the video, and that other jackass in Florida, are small minded bigots, too. But that doesn't make the fuckwits in the Middle East who created a lot more interest in the video than ever would have existed had they not overreacted any less responsible.

 

[worldlymrb]

Sorry, but I disagree. The people of the world cannot allow themselves to be held forever hostage by the oversensitivity of a small number of people. The only people responsible for the deaths of our people are those who caused them, through their actions.

Sure, the jackass who made the video, and that other jackass in Florida, are small minded bigots, too. But that doesn't make the <img src=images/smilies/animated/censored.gif>wits in the Middle East who created a lot more interest in the video than ever would have existed had they not overreacted any less responsible.

I never even heard of the video, but now Im going to watch it when I can.

 

[UPNYA2]

GOP is out there saying that the religious wing nut from Florida has the right under the 1st Amendment to do as he has done. The real question isn't his legal rights, but his responsibility for the response to his video. He is in my opinion responsible for the deaths his actions have created. We don't live in a vacuum. He does these stupid things to get noticed by other right wing religious wing nuts. But GOP and its followers on this page want to turn this tragedy into a political attack on Obama. Another attempt to appeal to their right wing base that Obama, "doesn't look like us". Another appeal to the worst our country has to offer. Maybe they should appeal to what many of our forefathers came to this country seeking, true religious freedom.

Complete liberal apologetic PC BS...........

"Does 1st Amendment remove responsibility for your actions?"

No, it does not. But why do you ask? Are you honestly of the opinion that we all need to feel a responsibility for the lives of other people we never even have met or seen, whose only possible tie to us happens to be a shared citizenship, if what we do or say is not liked by someone else?

Seriously?

US citizens, if we dare actually exercise our 1st amendment right, have assumed the responsibility for the deaths of complete strangers at the hands of anyone who doesn't like what we say?

So if a group of Catholics get pissed because they believe that because obamicare forces them to fund abortions/birth control and they run off and kill a bunch of liberals somewhere else, THAT responsibility is obami's???????

I think not. This is weak, even for one as weak as yourself, sport.

But THEN you actually out whimpy yourself with this loony, libby jewel; "Maybe they should appeal to what many of our forefathers came to this country seeking, true religious freedom."


Yeah, who wouldn't love the "freedom" to kill anyone from the same country as a person who says things we don't like, right, skippy?

DAM.........

Did you ever make it ONE SINGLE DAY in school without some other kid taking your lunch money, (or in YOUR case more likely your "free" lunch ticket)?????

Based upon your whimpering nature on here whenever faced with a clear cut case of right and wrong I would bet you did NOT.

 

[Arkady]

I suspect the people responsible could be legally culpable in civil court. After reading somewhere or other that the movie cost 5 million to produce, I think there could be something there worth taking from the filmmaker along with any money Pastor Jones has or ever intends to make.

I doubt it. Two of the clear purposes of the first amendment are to protect politically unpopular speech, and to protect the free exercise of religion. This fits clearly under both. I just can't see any of the exceptions being extended far enough to allow a judgment against him.