|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
nathanrutledge
Joined: 01 May 2008
Location: Marakesh
|
 Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2011 5:22 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| jodemas2 wrote: |
| nathanrutledge wrote: |
You guys should do some more research.
First, the whole thing was planned. |
It doesn't make a damn bit of difference if it was planned or not. So i only have rights when I do unplanned stuff? |
"Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others" TJ
Of all the places in DC where they could have danced, they choose the few dozen square meters of land that is restricted for the enjoyment of everybody. The courts have routinely upheld restrictions on the "time, place, and manner" of public free speech (which I disagree with, in almost every circumstance). There is a permit system for a reason, so that everyone can enjoy the mall equally without interruption. Considering that the vast majority of people want to go and look at the statue in a quiet, respectful atmosphere, and the vast majority of people would find a small group of people dancing around the statue, appearing to be oblivious to everything around them to ruin that quiet, respectful atmosphere, the park police have deemed the few dozen square meters actually INSIDE the rotunda as a place that requires a permit.
There is nothing to prevent them from dancing around the rotunda itself. There is nothing to prevent them from yelling and screaming and being as First Amendment hyped up as they want to be anywhere else BUT inside in those few square meters.
The rights of everybody must be weighed against themselves, and the right of these 5 people to dance around the statue interfere with the rights of the other millions of people who just want to enjoy the statue quietly. Thus, a permit system which has worked for everyone from MLK to Glen Beck without trouble.
I'm all for free speech, but if you want to challenge the "time, place and manner" doctrine, this is the worst possible group of people to do it at the worst possible place. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
shifter2009
Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Location: wisconsin
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2011 5:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Patrick Bateman wrote: |
| jodemas2 wrote: |
Dress it up, talk circles around it, and rationalize all you want, but in the end, peaceful people got body-slammed. Any liberty-loving decent citizen should be outraged, or at least moved to say something is seriously wrong here. |
So if someone doesn't agree with you and/or see things your way, there is something wrong with that person.
That's an interesting set of democratic principles you have.
|
Well, with his principles people get to dance and not harm anyone. With the set your running with those dancing people get physically assaulted and arrested. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Patrick Bateman
Joined: 21 Apr 2009
Location: Lost in Translation
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2011 6:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| shifter2009 wrote: |
Well, with his principles people get to dance and not harm anyone. With the set your running with those dancing people get physically assaulted and arrested. |
His principles lead to the dancers infringing on the freedoms and rights of others. Again, that's not very democratic. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shifter2009
Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Location: wisconsin
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2011 6:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Patrick Bateman wrote: |
| shifter2009 wrote: |
Well, with his principles people get to dance and not harm anyone. With the set your running with those dancing people get physically assaulted and arrested. |
His principles lead to the dancers infringing on the freedoms and rights of others. Again, that's not very democratic. |
Wait wait wait, when has someone dancing infringed on anyone's freedom? you want the freedom to not see people moving rhythmically? Who even gets to decide what constitutes a dance move?! This is the sort of crap that makes America suck |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nathanrutledge
Joined: 01 May 2008
Location: Marakesh
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2011 6:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| shifter2009 wrote: |
| Patrick Bateman wrote: |
| shifter2009 wrote: |
Well, with his principles people get to dance and not harm anyone. With the set your running with those dancing people get physically assaulted and arrested. |
His principles lead to the dancers infringing on the freedoms and rights of others. Again, that's not very democratic. |
Wait wait wait, when has someone dancing infringed on anyone's freedom? you want the freedom to not see people moving rhythmically? Who even gets to decide what constitutes a dance move?! This is the sort of crap that makes America suck |
Maybe we should let people walk around naked there. Maybe they should be allowed to masturbate or have sex there. The fact is, it's a memorial and society at large has decided that there is proper and improper decorum that is to be observed at a memorial. If a whole group of people decided to show up and rub one out inside the rotunda, would we even be having this discussion? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2011 6:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Wait wait wait, when has someone dancing infringed on anyone's freedom? you want the freedom to not see people moving rhythmically? Who even gets to decide what constitutes a dance move?! This is the sort of crap that makes America suck |
I think the time some guy grabbed that girl at the club and started rubbing and gyrating himself against her on the dance floor in a semi-rhythmic fashion was certainly infringing on her freedom.
That and yeah, a bunch of dancing fools at the Jefferson Memorial infringes on my right to enjoy America's 146th greatest monument in peace and quiet.
Whatever, they can have their dance circle if I can set up my "Bring Back W. Bush in 2012" Drum and Shotgun Cocking Circle in their favorite park and start blasting Toby Keith over the loudspeakers. Maybe grill up some Almost-But-Not-Quite Endangered animals and chop down a tree for no reason.
Or maybe the hippies can stop dancing and frolicking at the monuments and the All-American-Super-Patriots can stay on the ranch like normal people. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2011 7:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| nathanrutledge wrote: |
| shifter2009 wrote: |
| Patrick Bateman wrote: |
| shifter2009 wrote: |
Well, with his principles people get to dance and not harm anyone. With the set your running with those dancing people get physically assaulted and arrested. |
His principles lead to the dancers infringing on the freedoms and rights of others. Again, that's not very democratic. |
Wait wait wait, when has someone dancing infringed on anyone's freedom? you want the freedom to not see people moving rhythmically? Who even gets to decide what constitutes a dance move?! This is the sort of crap that makes America suck |
Maybe we should let people walk around naked there. Maybe they should be allowed to masturbate or have sex there. The fact is, it's a memorial and society at large has decided that there is proper and improper decorum that is to be observed at a memorial. If a whole group of people decided to show up and rub one out inside the rotunda, would we even be having this discussion? |
I don't understand the hullaballoo. Essential freedoms are being violated every time someone is body scanned at the airport. And yet we get upset over a dance protest that didn't bother to fetch a permit (it would have been denied) within the Jefferson Memorial? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shifter2009
Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Location: wisconsin
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2011 7:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Wait wait wait, when has someone dancing infringed on anyone's freedom? you want the freedom to not see people moving rhythmically? Who even gets to decide what constitutes a dance move?! This is the sort of crap that makes America suck |
I think the time some guy grabbed that girl at the club and started rubbing and gyrating himself against her on the dance floor in a semi-rhythmic fashion was certainly infringing on her freedom.
That and yeah, a bunch of dancing fools at the Jefferson Memorial infringes on my right to enjoy America's 146th greatest monument in peace and quiet.
. |
Did you see anyone rubbing themselves up against any other unwilling party? Were they making ANY noise besides arguing with the police who were threatening to arrest them? Nope. Still these people are assualted by the cops. The one guy was cuffed in a ranger choke for the crime of DANCING! It blows my mind you law and order types think this is acceptable.
As to the guys point about the TSA screenings being a rights infringement, I agree and feel there should be more outrage. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nathanrutledge
Joined: 01 May 2008
Location: Marakesh
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2011 7:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| nathanrutledge wrote: |
| shifter2009 wrote: |
| Patrick Bateman wrote: |
| shifter2009 wrote: |
Well, with his principles people get to dance and not harm anyone. With the set your running with those dancing people get physically assaulted and arrested. |
His principles lead to the dancers infringing on the freedoms and rights of others. Again, that's not very democratic. |
Wait wait wait, when has someone dancing infringed on anyone's freedom? you want the freedom to not see people moving rhythmically? Who even gets to decide what constitutes a dance move?! This is the sort of crap that makes America suck |
Maybe we should let people walk around naked there. Maybe they should be allowed to masturbate or have sex there. The fact is, it's a memorial and society at large has decided that there is proper and improper decorum that is to be observed at a memorial. If a whole group of people decided to show up and rub one out inside the rotunda, would we even be having this discussion? |
I don't understand the hullaballoo. Essential freedoms are being violated every time someone is body scanned at the airport. And yet we get upset over a dance protest that didn't bother to fetch a permit (it would have been denied) within the Jefferson Memorial? |
Pick your battles. I would fully support someone standing up for rights at the airport. That is a clear infringement on our rights, IMO. But courts have routinely upheld that freedom of speech has SOME limits. This is just the wrong battle to pick and it's being done in the wrong way.
Had they decided to dance on a public street when the President came by, and refused to enter a "free speech zone," I'd support that 100%. But this, what is the point? Probably because they know it's a BS fight and there is no real danger involved with it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2011 8:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| nathanrutledge wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
| nathanrutledge wrote: |
| shifter2009 wrote: |
| Patrick Bateman wrote: |
| shifter2009 wrote: |
Well, with his principles people get to dance and not harm anyone. With the set your running with those dancing people get physically assaulted and arrested. |
His principles lead to the dancers infringing on the freedoms and rights of others. Again, that's not very democratic. |
Wait wait wait, when has someone dancing infringed on anyone's freedom? you want the freedom to not see people moving rhythmically? Who even gets to decide what constitutes a dance move?! This is the sort of crap that makes America suck |
Maybe we should let people walk around naked there. Maybe they should be allowed to masturbate or have sex there. The fact is, it's a memorial and society at large has decided that there is proper and improper decorum that is to be observed at a memorial. If a whole group of people decided to show up and rub one out inside the rotunda, would we even be having this discussion? |
I don't understand the hullaballoo. Essential freedoms are being violated every time someone is body scanned at the airport. And yet we get upset over a dance protest that didn't bother to fetch a permit (it would have been denied) within the Jefferson Memorial? |
Pick your battles. I would fully support someone standing up for rights at the airport. That is a clear infringement on our rights, IMO. But courts have routinely upheld that freedom of speech has SOME limits. This is just the wrong battle to pick and it's being done in the wrong way.
Had they decided to dance on a public street when the President came by, and refused to enter a "free speech zone," I'd support that 100%. But this, what is the point? Probably because they know it's a BS fight and there is no real danger involved with it. |
For starters, you presume they understand 1st Amendment doctrine as well as you do. I guarantee you they don't, and have only the vaguest notion of what their rights entail, most of which come from their gut. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2011 8:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| nathanrutledge wrote: |
| Pick your battles. |
You mean capitulate. Luckily other people involved refused to do so and instead over 40 of them went back to dance there again and show those scumbag cops that the court ruling against dancing is meaningless. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nathanrutledge
Joined: 01 May 2008
Location: Marakesh
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2011 8:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| nathanrutledge wrote: |
| Pick your battles. |
You mean capitulate. Luckily other people involved refused to do so and instead over 40 of them went back to dance there again and show those scumbag cops that the court ruling against dancing is meaningless. |
No, I mean pick your battles. The cops did. What's the point of the cops continuing to bust these people? They're going to keep coming back.
They let them dance, THEN they cleared the rotunda, AND brought in a police dog. So, who really won? The people who danced won't be coming back to dance again - they think they won. The cops aren't going to lose their power in a court case that had a good chance of going against them.
The cops let them get the dancing out of their system, they didn't cede any real power, and the protesters feel good. But nothing has changed. The judges ruling (which does NOT prohibit dancing, it merely affirms the park polices ability to impose rules for the memorial) still stands.
So, what was the point? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2011 8:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| nathanrutledge wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| nathanrutledge wrote: |
| Pick your battles. |
You mean capitulate. Luckily other people involved refused to do so and instead over 40 of them went back to dance there again and show those scumbag cops that the court ruling against dancing is meaningless. |
No, I mean pick your battles. The cops did. What's the point of the cops continuing to bust these people? They're going to keep coming back.
They let them dance, THEN they cleared the rotunda, AND brought in a police dog. So, who really won? The people who danced won't be coming back to dance again - they think they won. The cops aren't going to lose their power in a court case that had a good chance of going against them.
The cops let them get the dancing out of their system, they didn't cede any real power, and the protesters feel good. But nothing has changed. The judges ruling (which does NOT prohibit dancing, it merely affirms the park polices ability to impose rules for the memorial) still stands.
So, what was the point? |
They danced and got away with it. No arrests and no charges. It sets the precedent and flies in the face of authority. You say the cops didn't cede any power, yet clearly they did (else they would have swooped in and arrested everyone immediately). Those dancers called their bluff and got away with it. They could have forced the issue further and then resisted arrest, but they didn't (that's their call, not mine). At least they made their point. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 09, 2011 6:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Wait, which is it? Are the cops scumbags who had to submit in the face of brave protestors? Or did the cops judiciously decide that, hey, maybe a body slam intervention isn't a proportional response, so let them get it out of their system. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nathanrutledge
Joined: 01 May 2008
Location: Marakesh
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 09, 2011 6:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| Wait, which is it? Are the cops scumbags who had to submit in the face of brave protestors? Or did the cops judiciously decide that, hey, maybe a body slam intervention isn't a proportional response, so let them get it out of their system. |
Visitorq votes A, I vote B. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
