Webmaster Forum

Go Back   Webmaster Forum > The Webmaster Forums > Forum Lobby > Controversial Social Issues

Controversial Social Issues Discussions concerning controversial social issues. Topics include politics, religion, culture, social and economic issues, etc. Respect required at all times.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Share |
  #41  
Old 10-04-2008, 05:22 PM
Chad Michealstork's Avatar
Chad Michealstork Chad Michealstork is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: 10-04-08
Posts: 134
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Its clear that the first amendment is the best, but i think there should be an aptitude test for people who want to exercise it.
 
Reply With Quote

Advertisement

Advertisement

  #42  
Old 10-04-2008, 06:59 PM
TechWizard's Avatar
TechWizard TechWizard is offline
v7n Mentor
 
Join Date: 07-26-07
Location: Georgia
Posts: 6,156
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Michealstork View Post
Its clear that the first amendment is the best, but i think there should be an aptitude test for people who want to exercise it.
I have read a few of your posts....where's yours?
 
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 10-04-2008, 10:06 PM
Chad Michealstork's Avatar
Chad Michealstork Chad Michealstork is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: 10-04-08
Posts: 134
iTrader: 0 / 0%
i don't think the amendments should be universal b/c we all have different needs and wants and we all think different there should be a test to determine if you qualify to use the amendment or not
 
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 10-04-2008, 10:31 PM
TechWizard's Avatar
TechWizard TechWizard is offline
v7n Mentor
 
Join Date: 07-26-07
Location: Georgia
Posts: 6,156
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Then why have them?? Why have the Constitution? Or wait I guess you are saying we should have them, we should just limit those that get to enjoy what they offer unless they pass a test first?? If that's what you are saying, who gives the test? What should the test test for?
 
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 10-05-2008, 08:35 AM
Chad Michealstork's Avatar
Chad Michealstork Chad Michealstork is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: 10-04-08
Posts: 134
iTrader: 0 / 0%
i too think yes to both
 
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 10-05-2008, 12:26 PM
TechWizard's Avatar
TechWizard TechWizard is offline
v7n Mentor
 
Join Date: 07-26-07
Location: Georgia
Posts: 6,156
iTrader: 2 / 100%
You didn't answer the questions put to you, these short vague answers are really annoying, either join in the conversation and add meaningful content or sit back and read until you do have something worthy of adding.

So I ask again,
Quote:
Then why have them?? Why have the Constitution? Or wait I guess you are saying we should have them, we should just limit those that get to enjoy what they offer unless they pass a test first?? If that's what you are saying, who gives the test? What should the test test for?
 
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 10-05-2008, 01:03 PM
TechWizard's Avatar
TechWizard TechWizard is offline
v7n Mentor
 
Join Date: 07-26-07
Location: Georgia
Posts: 6,156
iTrader: 2 / 100%
And to bring back the original question of the thread, is it not wrong for Obama's campaign to demand tv, and radio stations to remove ads simply because they don't like what they say? The truth of the matter is, Obama did make the statement about bitter American's clinging to their guns and religion. He has backed legislation to remove ammunition from the shelves and round about legislation that would make it nearly impossible to own a large majority of guns not only fully automatic assault rifles and RPG's but standard rifles used for hunting, and guns that people should be allowed to own for target shooting, hunting, even self protection.

But again I digress, he wants ads removed, by force if necessary, just because he doesn't like them. A proposal I believe has even been made by city officials in St. Louis, Mo. that it be made illegal to make any form of negative statements about Sen. Obama. I would assume unless fully substantiated but not sure.

Reminds me of the Clinton machine strong arming who was it? CBS I think that played the movie about events leading up to 9/11? Much of it covering the Clinton administration, and they forced them to remove scenes from the movie, after they were unable to prevent it's airing after a valiant attempt to do so.

So I ask, what of the First Amendment? Does it only apply to those that have the ability to challenge it?
 
Reply With Quote
Go Back   Webmaster Forum > The Webmaster Forums > Forum Lobby > Controversial Social Issues

Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Some help with interpreting The Fifth Amendment TechWizard Controversial Social Issues 8 09-05-2008 05:44 PM
Supreme Court 5-4 2nd Amendment for Individuals TechWizard Controversial Social Issues 2 06-26-2008 10:38 AM
5th amendment being abused Jonathan VanSchaack Forum Lobby 34 06-29-2005 09:53 PM


V7N Network
Get exposure! V7N I Love Photography V7N SEO Blog V7N Directory


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:03 PM.
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright 2000-2014 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
Copyright © 2003 - 2018 VIX-WomensForum LLC