What do with think of China killing the Brit drug runner?

[rhineoshott]

Well there you have it my friends. We differ in one of our viewpoints. Please don't see any of this as a major disagreement. I see eye to eye with all of you on 98% of political opinions. This is just one fine point of what makes up what we I believe.

I don't see the Bible as a religous text, rather the fundamental fiber of how we ought to live. Homosexuality no more a perosnal choice than two friends helping each other commit suicide. It's a crime.

Now, I don't have a whole lot of time to work on long responses. Please forgive me in advance for not defending adaquately, my position.

[jake]

I doubt it is difficult to give orders out of prison. You talk to a guy, he tells his girl that visits him, shit gets done on the outside. Easy as that.

I know in the UK right now they're finding more and more criminals with cell phones that have been smuggled in to them. There have even been a couple of cases of prisoners updating their facebook pages while inside. I imagine it's possible that it's happened here too.

[jake]

I don't see the Bible as a religous text, rather the fundamental fiber of how we ought to live. Homosexuality no more a perosnal choice than two friends helping each other commit suicide. It's a crime.

With respect, you probably want to be careful if you are going to use the Book of Leviticus as a moral guide. There's more in there than just putting homosexuals to death.

[rhineoshott]

With respect, you probably want to be careful if you are going to use the Book of Leviticus as a moral guide. There's more in there than just putting homosexuals to death.

I know

[rhineoshott]

This guy describes perfectly what I believe. If you're really interested, you might want to check him out. His radio show was on AM 670 but this morning was the last air over the radio. He's still going to record and "air" new shows over the web.

http://generationswithvision.com/def...ookieSupport=1

[Aloha_Shooter]

Pornography, no matter how one might revile it, is protected by the pesky 1st amendment.

To be completely accurate, pornography might or might not be protected by the First Amendment if it wasn't for revisionism by the ACLU and Warren/Berger Supreme Courts. The Founding Fathers wrote the First Amendment to protect political speech (as is indicated extensively by their discussions about it). Of course the irony today is that the ACLU and various parties want to restrict that pesky Right Wing speech with the inconvenient citations of what left wing politicians have actually said or done while they want to use the First Amendment to protect sex of all kinds and promote it to minors.

[earplug]

I thought that Christmas guy was suppose to fix the rules on the old books.
I dislike Drug laws, but this guy choose to break the law and he lost.
What bad is the West is more upset that they killed him and I haven't read anything about a change in the War on Drugs being part of the problem. They boost the price and the risk.
Such is the same with the tougher immigration rules. We be people.

[mutt]

To be completely accurate, pornography might or might not be protected by the First Amendment if it wasn't for revisionism by the ACLU and Warren/Berger Supreme Courts. The Founding Fathers wrote the First Amendment to protect political speech (as is indicated extensively by their discussions about it). Of course the irony today is that the ACLU and various parties want to restrict that pesky Right Wing speech with the inconvenient citations of what left wing politicians have actually said or done while they want to use the First Amendment to protect sex of all kinds and promote it to minors.

The 1st Amendment makes no distinction between political and non-political speech:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The text expressly forbids Govt from passing laws that restrict speech and the press. Now there's nothing stopping private individuals from suppressing free speech. This is why the moderators of this board can forbid certain topics or remove posts without facing legal recourse. Only the Govt is forbidden from such activity.

Pornography, like it or not, cannot be suppressed by the Govt unless it was created using illegal means (eg child porn). We The People however have the power to essentially outlaw porn by not consuming it, voting with our wallets so to speak. Apparently a good chunk of We The People see no problem with it.

Careful trying to use The Constitution to stifle ideas you don't agree with. Freedom is the right to offend, not the right to not be offended. Would you feel the 1st Amendment only protected political speech if the Govt suddenly passed a law forbidding the discussion of 'dangerous' firearms and related topics? Last I looked discussing the internal workings of an AR15 isn't 'political'. My 2 cents.