jump to last post 1-8 of 8 discussions (19 posts)

Do you think people should be prosecuted for anti-Muslim speech?

  1. profile image0
    LoliHeyposted 2 years ago

    Do you think people should be prosecuted for anti-Muslim speech?

    Loretta Lynch wants to prosecute anyone who talks smack about Muslims.  I am NOT saying that it is okay to do that, or that I would, because I don't do that, but the point I am trying to make is that--1. Is this not a violation of the 1st amendment? 2. What about other groups, like Christians, Jews, and even gays, other races, etc--where does it stop, and should it stop?  and 3.  As long as nobody is planning to physically hurt anyone, should it be punished with such severity?  Are people becoming too thin-skinned?

  2. tsadjatko profile image67
    tsadjatkoposted 2 years ago


    Speaking to the audience at the Muslim Advocates' 10th anniversary dinner Thursday, Lynch said her "greatest fear" is the "incredibly disturbing rise of anti-Muslim rhetoric" in America and vowed to prosecute any guilty of what she deemed violence-inspiring speech. She chose this place and time to say such a thing solely to pander to Muslims hoping to court their votes for the Democrat party.

    Now you know that, like her predecessor Eric Holder, Lynch is far more concerned with promoting the social justice agenda than protecting the Constitutional rights of American citizens. What exactly is speech that "edges toward violence"? What exactly are "actions predicated on violent talk"?

    In the end, it is whatever she decides it to mean. Once again we see the agenda of the Obama administration covertly being instituted though a government department that is supposed to be apolitical.

    If she is serious then why doesn't she start with the militant gays who threatened the lives of the owners of the cake baking co. who refused to cater a gay wedding? I guess she couldn't find the meeting of Cake baker Advocates' 10th anniversary dinner to address their audience?!

    1. profile image0
      LoliHeyposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Or what about Black Live Matter chanting "What do we want?  Dead police!  When do we want them?  Now!" or "Pigs in a blanket, fry like bacon."  Thank you for your answer.  You made some good points.

    2. fpherj48 profile image76
      fpherj48posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      T~who's the dude in the blue jacket & earrings?Is that Loretta B-4 laser hair removal?  I don't see a rise in anti-muslim rhetoric , but if I did it wouldn't be incredibly disturbing.  What IS disturbing is that THIS is our AG's greatest fear.

    3. tsadjatko profile image67
      tsadjatkoposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      That's just a pic of Lorreta Lynch taken with a new technology camera which shows the real personage behind her motivations, in this case Eric Holder. Don't you just love technology! It's called the DCRC (digital channeling revealed) camera.

    4. fpherj48 profile image76
      fpherj48posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      You just made that up.   But, it's pretty clever anyway.  LOL

    5. tsadjatko profile image67
      tsadjatkoposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Well the liberals here just make things up&expect people to believe their fantasies,why can't I?Oh i know the answer,that's like when they point to other's bad behavior to justify their own bad behavior, maybe someone can point that out to them.

  3. wrenchBiscuit profile image84
    wrenchBiscuitposted 2 years ago

    It is not "freedom of speech" to incite violence and to encourage discrimination against any particular race or religion. Anyone  engaging in such activity should be prosecuted.

    1. jlpark profile image85
      jlparkposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      I agree! - Regardless of who it is directed at, or spoken by, if one is inciting violence and discrimination against any particular race/religion/orientation - should be prosecuted.

    2. tsadjatko profile image67
      tsadjatkoposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      SO then you think Loretta Lynch is discriminating by only calling for prosecution of those spewing anti-Muslim rhetoric (her "GREATEST fear"), & not saying same about inciting violence against other religions or beliefs. Bravo, good point!

    3. fpherj48 profile image76
      fpherj48posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      So, let me get this correct. You claim Muslims who not only INCITE violence (Death to America!) against Christians & all Non-Muslims, but attack, torture & murder, should be prosecuted.  I agree. They must be locked up for LIFE.

  4. tsmog profile image81
    tsmogposted 2 years ago

    Who is first in line to be prosecuted? Trump?

    With free speech many times I just apply Newton's third law - "For every action, there is an 'equal' and opposite reaction".

  5. aguasilver profile image80
    aguasilverposted 2 years ago

    All censorship is wrong.

    There are already existing laws which would prosecute anyone inciting violence, and those incited to commit it, no other law is required.

    If people get insulted by free speech, they should move to a country where it does not exist.

    1. gmwilliams profile image86
      gmwilliamsposted 2 years agoin reply to this


  6. Faceless39 profile image94
    Faceless39posted 2 years ago

    People should not be prosecuted for *ANY* speech. After all, freedom of speech means the freedom to speak your mind, whatever it is. If you don't believe in freedom, then please go ahead and start limiting what we can say and what we can't. While you're at it, please light the Constitution on fire. People have become way too thin-skinned.

    1. wrenchBiscuit profile image84
      wrenchBiscuitposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Not a very good idea. In such a "free" society , anyone could yell "fire" in a crowded theatre with impunity. You could tell a retarded person to jump out of a window and let the Easter Bunny (waiting 10 stories below) catch them, etc.

    2. profile image0
      LoliHeyposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      It is a very good idea.  Many, many people would be in jail if they were prosecute for free speech.   People shouldn't be control, thought controlled, or afraid to say anything and have to keep emotions bottled up.

  7. aliasis profile image93
    aliasisposted 2 years ago

    What does "anti-Muslim" speech entail? Is it criticism about Islam as a religion? Sure, that's perfectly legal, just as it's legal to criticize Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, etc. Is insulting people legal? Depends on the time and place (can count as verbal abuse and harassment) but generally, while it's cruel, it's not something the US prosecutes.

    Is saying "Death to Muslims" or otherwise encouraging violence or other severe harassment legal? NO. And THAT'S what Muslims in America fear, that people will want to "take revenge" on them, even though they are innocent, after terrorist attacks from Islamic terrorist extremists. Considering these kinds of crimes actually do happen, Muslims have the right to be afraid of violent rhetoric.

    But the point is, it's not about Muslims, or any other group - the same standards apply to ANY group or individual. Violent and hate speech is NOT protected by the first amendment (freedom of speech doesn't actually mean you're allowed to say anything, that's why threatening to hurt/kill someone or bomb threats and such are still illegal). Considering the large amount of anti-Muslim attacks (on people, and mosques) in the US, it's an issue worth talking about specifically, but the legalities are no different when applied to Christians, or atheists, etc.

    Again, criticizing religion is and will always be 100% legal. By all means, tear apart Islam, Christianity, etc. Just don't threaten people or property (or severely harass anyone).

  8. tamarawilhite profile image92
    tamarawilhiteposted 17 months ago

    Let's turn it around. Should anyone be prosecuted for anti-Christian speech? If the answer is no for one faith, the answer should be no for ALL faiths.