Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Monday, June 07, 2021

It was supposed to be the celebration of a grand career as the American Civil Liberties Union presented a prestigious award to longtime lawyer David Goldberger. He had argued one of its most famous cases, defending the free speech rights of Nazis in the 1970s to march in Skokie, Illinois, home to many Holocaust survivors. Goldberger, now 79, adored the ACLU. But at his celebratory luncheon in 2017, he listened to one speaker after another and felt a growing unease.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

More from the article...

...A law professor argued that the free speech rights of the far-right were not worthy of defense by the ACLU and that Black people experienced offensive speech far more viscerally than white allies. In the hallway outside, an ACLU official argued it was perfectly legitimate for his lawyers to decline to defend hate speech.

Goldberger, a Jew who defended the free speech of those whose views he found repugnant, felt profoundly discouraged.

"I got the sense it was more important for ACLU staff to identify with clients and progressive causes than to stand on principle," he said in a recent interview. "Liberals are leaving the First Amendment behind."...


#1 | Posted by LampLighter at 2021-06-07 11:00 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

It is true. When 'free speech' starts to mainly mean far rightwing hate-speech, lots of liberals are the ones feeling left behind. I am not interested in donating money to allow some uber rightwing Trump fascist have the right to spout any lies they want anywhere they want. I pass.

#2 | Posted by moder8 at 2021-06-07 02:49 PM | Reply

They have just as much free speech rights as you do. Remember the 1st Amendment does not protect the 99 from the 1. It protects the 1 from the 99.

#3 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2021-06-07 03:27 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Yeah. But don't ask me for a financial donation to protect the hate speech rights of uber rightwing Trumpists.

#4 | Posted by moder8 at 2021-06-07 03:36 PM | Reply

I like you moder8 but if you are not willing to protect speech you hate you are not really for free speech.

#5 | Posted by TaoWarrior at 2021-06-07 04:26 PM | Reply

Categories of speech that are given lesser or no protection by the First Amendment (and therefore may be restricted) include obscenity, fraud, child pornography, speech integral to illegal conduct, speech that incites imminent lawless action, speech that violates intellectual property law, true threats, and commercial speech such as advertising. Defamation that causes harm to reputation is a tort and also an exception to free speech.

#6 | Posted by bored at 2021-06-07 04:37 PM | Reply

"but if you are not willing to protect speech you hate you are not really for free speech."

I don't see why hate speech ought to be protected.

I don't see why hate speech is any more worthy of protection than death threats.

#7 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-06-07 04:40 PM | Reply

I like you too Tao. I don't donate money to support libelous or lie-filled speech. Feel free to donate in my place.

#8 | Posted by moder8 at 2021-06-07 04:50 PM | Reply

@#7 ... I don't see why hate speech is any more worthy of protection than death threats. ...

If hate speech crosses over into threat speech, then I agree with you.

But the operative question seems to be: when does hate speech leave the realm of being an opinion and enter the realm of being a threat?

#9 | Posted by LampLighter at 2021-06-07 04:55 PM | Reply

Why must hate speech be protected?? In a free society everyone must have the absolute right to express his or her opinions freely without restriction.

#10 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2021-06-07 05:24 PM | Reply

"In a free society everyone must have the absolute right to express his or her opinions freely without restriction."

So why can't I get cuss words on my license plates?

Are we not free?

#11 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-06-07 05:29 PM | Reply

Technically speaking license plates are government property therefore you don't own them. NOw they don't want your old plate usually. That's why they can restrict what's on them.

#12 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2021-06-07 05:41 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

So then my right isn't absolute. It's being curtailed by the government, on government property.

#13 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-06-07 06:21 PM | Reply

You have a right to free speech. You don't have a right to a licence plate.

#14 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2021-06-07 06:55 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#14 - you are saying I don't have a right to register my vehicle? It's the law that I have to if I want to drive it. That's like saying I don't have a right to pay taxes which vehicle registration basically is.

#15 | Posted by jakester at 2021-06-07 07:31 PM | Reply

You can put any bumpersticker on your car you want to express your free speech.

One I saw frequently was

TRUMP:
---- Your Feelings.

#16 | Posted by bruceaz at 2021-06-07 07:44 PM | Reply

"I am not interested in donating money to allow some uber rightwing Trump fascist have the right to spout any lies they want anywhere they want. I pass."

Then you should donate money to organizations that promote progressive values. Not organizations that promote the first amendment.

#17 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-06-07 09:19 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"Defamation that causes harm to reputation is a tort and also an exception to free speech."

They are subject to civil law, not criminal law.

You can't be put in jail for defamation unless you've been previously ordered by a judge to keep your mouth shut, and even then it's contempt of court for violating an order.

#18 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-06-07 09:21 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"I don't see why hate speech ought to be protected."

Because "hate speech" is subjective. Bernie Sanders and the left flank speak of the wealthy in much the same way that the Nazis spoke of the jews. Should that be considered hate speech? If not, why?

#19 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-06-07 09:23 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#15

There is nothing in the constitution that provides you with the right to drive a car. The government could stop you from being able to do so without being subject to constitutional barriers.

#20 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-06-07 09:26 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"Goebbels was in favor of free speech for views he liked. So was Stalin. If you're really in favor of free speech, then you're in favor of freedom of speech for precisely the views you despise. Otherwise, you're not in favor of free speech."

Noam Chomsky

Today that old socialist would be raked over the coals for being insensitive to and not prioritizing the feelings or experiences of marginalized communities.

#21 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-06-07 09:29 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

Hell, the ACLU began as an organization to support leftists, who were at the time despised by most of society.

#22 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-06-07 09:30 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

@#11 ... So why can't I get cuss words on my license plates? ...

Good question.

Talk to the ACLU, maybe the will help you in your endeavor.

#23 | Posted by LampLighter at 2021-06-07 09:49 PM | Reply

@#19 ... Because "hate speech" is subjective. Bernie Sanders and the left flank speak of the wealthy in much the same way that the Nazis spoke of the jews. Should that be considered hate speech? If not, why? ...

In some respects i agree with your comment.

But I also would say that your "left flank" comment is also subjective. :)


(labels suck, eh?)

#24 | Posted by LampLighter at 2021-06-07 09:53 PM | Reply

@#10 ... Why must hate speech be protected?? ...

Give me a good definition of what you call "hate speech" and then let's discuss it.

#25 | Posted by LampLighter at 2021-06-07 09:55 PM | Reply

@#22 ... Hell, the ACLU began as an organization to support leftists, ...

A history of the ACLU defending the Confederate flag, the tea party, the KKK and Rush Limbaugh (2015)
www.washingtonpost.com

#26 | Posted by LampLighter at 2021-06-07 09:57 PM | Reply

"But I also would say that your "left flank" comment is also subjective. :)"

It absolutely is.

Consider Noam Chomsky. Few would consider to be anything other than far left, yet on this topic his is in diametric opposition even to those who would consider themselves moderate left.

#27 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-06-07 11:16 PM | Reply | Funny: 1


@#27 ... Consider Noam Chomsky. Few would consider to be anything other than far left ...

Yet your comment proffers yet another label "Noam Chomsky." instead of discussing specific issues.

Gigolo Aunts - Everyone Can Fly
www.youtube.com

#28 | Posted by LampLighter at 2021-06-08 01:19 AM | Reply

"There is not gray area."

With apologies to the Sith:
Only a Sith deals in absolutes.

#30 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-06-08 08:55 PM | Reply

#29

The article is literally about a Jewish lawyer defending Nazis' free speech. He is afraid of the ACLU becoming exactly what you fear it is.

NOT that it always has been but is turning into. So instead of supporting him you attack the whole organization? Do you have a cognitive deficiency?

#31 | Posted by TaoWarrior at 2021-06-08 08:57 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Hell I defended the 1st Amentment rights of Fred Phelps and his merry band of haters. You don't have to agree with their message to defend their right to say it.

#32 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2021-06-08 09:07 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

[The ACLU] never once fought for the 2nd amendment.

The ACLU opposed Obama's proposal to report SS "disability benefit" recipients to NICS. www.aclu.org

Never assume, never say never.

#34 | Posted by et_al at 2021-06-08 09:45 PM | Reply

What are mental disabilities and who gets to decide.

All the voices in my head have free speech.

#36 | Posted by bruceaz at 2021-06-08 10:20 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"What are mental disabilities and who gets to decide."

The the Soviet Union, many dissidents had what few rights they had removed on the grounds that only the mentally unstable would be against the socialist state.

#37 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-06-08 10:28 PM | Reply

Basically, they are arguing for mentally people to own guns because ...

Didn't read the link, didja? You just assumed to know why the ACLU opposed the rule. Then blew it.

In this era of "alternative facts," we must urge politicians to create laws based on reliable evidence and solid data.

The thousands of Americans whose disability benefits are managed by someone else range from young people with depression and financial inexperience to older adults with Down syndrome needing help with a limited budget. But no data " none " show that these individuals have a propensity for violence in general or gun violence in particular.

To the contrary, studies show that people with mental disabilities are less likely to commit firearm crimes than to be the victims of violence by others.

Data show that young, white men are most likely to be mass shooters " the issue that politicians care about most, despite accounting for a tiny fraction of gun violence. And men under 35 commit most murders. Shall we enter all young men into the national database? The statistical correlation with gun violence would be stronger.

The ACLU and 23 national disability groups did not oppose this rule because we want more guns in our community. This is about more than guns. Adding more innocent Americans to the National Instant Criminal Background database because of a mental disability is a disturbing trend " one that could be applied to voting, parenting or other rights dearer than gun ownership. We opposed it because it would do little to stem gun violence but do much to harm our civil rights.

One more time. Never assume, never say never.

#39 | Posted by et_al at 2021-06-08 10:35 PM | Reply

"Nearly 50% of liberals under the age of 30 have been diagnosed as having a mental health issue"

What makes conservatives and independents immune?

Is it genetics?

#41 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-06-08 10:55 PM | Reply

Yeah, well I think you show signs of mental illness.

Or your a wiseass who thinks he's clever.

Either way you are a parody of a useful thinker.

#43 | Posted by bruceaz at 2021-06-08 11:10 PM | Reply

You're a wiseass, I know how your and you're can send folks over the edge,sorry.

#44 | Posted by bruceaz at 2021-06-08 11:12 PM | Reply

"The prevailing theory is that people pre-disposed to mental illness are drawn to liberal ideas"

Was that a yes to the genetics question then?

Let's see a link to this prevailing theory please. Was this a case-control study, cross-sectionial, or cohort analysis.

I'm secretly hoping for a literature review meta-analysis encompassing all of the above!

#45 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-06-08 11:16 PM | Reply

Hope in one hand
--- in the other.

#47 | Posted by bruceaz at 2021-06-08 11:22 PM | Reply

The first paragraph thats not in bold claims they tend to vote along with the general population.

I'm sure you can cut and paste something in there that will suit your needs but I am not going to wait up for it, got to work in the morning.

#49 | Posted by bruceaz at 2021-06-08 11:33 PM | Reply

If you've never suffered a bout of what could be described as mental illness you are either extremely lucky or unaware of yourself or full of ---- or so effed up you don't even know it

Or haven't had a very eventful life.

But let's get back with your extreme problems with yours and everyone else's sexual preferences, shall we.

#51 | Posted by bruceaz at 2021-06-08 11:42 PM | Reply

Voting for parties that they believe to represent their best interests.

HOLY ---- THAT IS INSANE!!!

#52 | Posted by bruceaz at 2021-06-08 11:46 PM | Reply

"A classic German controlled study so we can trust the results."

I didn't see where the study said it was genetic.

I'm trying to see how this supports liberalism itself is a mental disorder.

Well, I can think of one way.

These unfortunate mentally ill people are conservative, and their mental disorder makes them vote liberal.

#53 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-06-08 11:46 PM | Reply

We conclude the psychiatric patients are well aware....

But do go on.

#54 | Posted by bruceaz at 2021-06-08 11:57 PM | Reply

Hey liberals, just snap out of it.

#55 | Posted by bruceaz at 2021-06-08 11:59 PM | Reply

I recommend that you learn to comprehend.

#56 | Posted by bruceaz at 2021-06-09 12:06 AM | Reply

God there's some dumb ---- on this thread. Who is this wiseacre? Chisn_1991? What a boof. I mean the logical fallacies alone are so obvious and incoherent that I just can't believe this guy is serious.

He's a troll looking to get a rise from people not any kind of a good faith poster.

And not very good at it as well.

#57 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2021-06-09 02:39 AM | Reply

#57

Unfortunately I meet way too many people just like him in RL. He might be a troll but I suspect he is for real. He sounds way too serious and convinced of his own beliefs, probably too much time on Facebook and YouTube.

Chisn I have to ask: Have you ever considered that the people who have told you the American Civil Liberties Union is bad might not have your civil liberties at heart? I'm not saying the ACLU is perfect but they do have a pretty solid history of defending liberty of all Americans. Try reading more about them than what your racist uncle posts on Facebook and see if you still feel like they only work for "liberals".

#58 | Posted by TaoWarrior at 2021-06-09 05:59 AM | Reply

Nearly 50% of liberals under the age of 30 have been diagnosed as having a mental health issue by an authorized mental health authority. . . .

But the 50% diagnosis rate is straight from Pew so it a fact.
#42 | POSTED BY CHRISN_1991 AT 2021-06-08 11:03 PM

Link?

#59 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2021-06-09 08:30 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The prevailing theory is that people pre-disposed to mental illness are drawn to liberal ideas

#42 | POSTED BY CHRISN

No it's not.

You make this ---- up as you go along.

#60 | Posted by Zed at 2021-06-09 09:57 AM | Reply

Why are Trumpites such freaking liars?

#61 | Posted by Zed at 2021-06-09 09:58 AM | Reply

The "prevailing theory" is that 50% of conservatives sleep with their mothers.

#62 | Posted by Zed at 2021-06-09 10:00 AM | Reply

Why are Trumpites such freaking liars?

They're following Trump's lead.

#63 | Posted by ClownShack at 2021-06-09 03:09 PM | Reply

100% of Republicans are okay with racism.

As long as it's not directed at white peoples.

#64 | Posted by ClownShack at 2021-06-09 03:10 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2021 World Readable

Drudge Retort