Megachurch Pastor says ‘gays must be put to death’

[ChriswUfGator]

Words which, ordinarily and in many places, would be within the freedom of speech protected by the First Amendment may become subject to prohibition when of such a nature and used in such circumstances a to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils which Congress has a right to prevent.

-Schenck v. United States 249 U.S. 47   http://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/249/47

Seems to me calling for murder would fit.

Things have changed a wee bit since 1918, you don't get charged for distributing a socialist pamphlet anymore. What you're thinking of is the 'fire in a crowded theatre' example. But pure opinion speech, he has a right to say even if the opinion is something I think is asinine. Solicitation of murder has always been solicitation of murder, just because it's spoken doesn't mean it's a first amendment issue. There's a difference between what you're thinking of and speech that's pure opinion, in this case it's protected.

[coredumped]

Nobody said it was, I said ChrisUFgator's comment was refreshing, after a page of or so of remarks that leaned toward 'kill the pastor' or 'the Christians.' I thought his tolerance is a great example of how to handle these types of thoughtless statements.

Exactly. Just as the gay community is allowed to assemble, have parades, etc, this whack job is allowed to think gays should be put to death, as crazy at that is. He had better not act on it, or even threaten any one specifically, but do you want to live in a country where you can't speak your mind on any topic?

So as I said in my first post, it's best to ignore these idiots. Remember the dumb ass in gainsville burning the koran? It's all for attention. Westboro baptist "church" anyone?

[coredumped]

Im not sure where pushback against an opinion became an example of government interference in free speech, as it happens.

And I think its generally a strategy to stop discussion about bigotry by making the straw man argument that the issue is about free speech.

An argument about free speech must necessarily involve the possibility of government bans on speech, and no where was this suggested.

Just like when someone says that they have a bomb and are planning on killing anyone who eats at mcdonalds, its common sense that the person should be paid enough attention to at least keep a watch on them.  They have, after all, clearly communicated that they have the potential to be dangerous.

The idea that you just simply ignore this kind of thing seems a little silly.

I disagree. I understand this is a post-9-11 world we're living in, but because any idiot says they want to "kill their boss" or "this mcdonalds sucks im going to blow it up" does that mean we need to get out the local militarized police department, have them kick in the (hopefully correct) door and put an assault rifle in the face of someone who typed something online?

Moreover, who do you suggest is the judge in what's acceptable? If I was to say I hate wal-mart and hope they go under, should that be considered a terrorist attack since it would seriously hurt the American economy?

I know it sounds silly and I'm not making light of your point, but I really don't want to live in a country where we can say whatever the hell we want. Again I refer to the westboro baptist "church" as my example. They're absolutely despicable people, but I would never want them to be censored. I would rather they just be ignored.

[coredumped]

Like, "I do" at a wedding to your same sex lover, coredumped?

Exactly like that (except I'm not gay ) The fact the we need a "license" to get married is a whole different discussion all together!

Is there some governmental agency that you see depriving the pastor of his right to free speech?

Not yet, but I'm sure he could fall under the jurisdiction of Homeland Security, the CIA, NSA, FBI or other I'm not thinking of.

I don't think he should be censored, but I certainly think its common sense to pay attention to his activities.

Then by all means do so. Hell, go outside his church and protest if that's what floats your boat. I just think you're playing right in to his hands by paying him any mind. He'll sure enough get members to his church out of this, all due to the publicity.

[ChriswUfGator]

I get it, but what's the remedy other than a law or some form of government action prohibiting him from spewing his bile? Which would be a first amendment issue no matter how you slice it. You can't just go kill him or beat the crap out of him, it would take a government official doing something to get the result you (we all really) want. All I'm saying is it's more damaging to start limiting opinion speech than it is to listen to a bunch of stupid crap from an idiot who probably doesn't even believe it himself and is likely using a current-events political issue as a means to incentivize filling the collection plate, as so many of these assclowns seem to do. After you do that, you're on the slippery slope of who's allowed to say what, it's not a good place to be. We've already lost so many civil liberties I'd hate to lose this one.

[finehoe]

What'e the difference between this

"Megachurch Pastor says 'gays must be put to death'"

and this

"#The_Concept_of_Lone_Wolf_Attacks The time has arrived to respond to Twitter's management by directly attacking their employees and physically assassinating them!! Those who will carry this out are the sleepers cells of death."

http://news.msn.com/science-technology/isil-is-now-threatening-to-assassinate-twitter-employees-1