Regarding the protests.

Debate and discussion on racism and related issues

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
Elijah John
Savant
Posts: 12152
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 8:23 pm
Location: New England
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 5 times

Regarding the protests.

Post #1

Post by Elijah John »

Regarding the protests arising from the killing of George Floyd, several questions and observations for debate.

1) Are protests granted without permits nowadays? Have all these US cities given all these protesters permits to protest? And for how long?

2) Can protesters who block traffic and scream at motorists still be considered "peaceful protestors"? Where is the bar set for a "peaceful protest"? Simply no physical violence, looting or destruction of other people's property? Seems a very low bar indeed. Do "peaceful protesters" even meet this low bar?

3) Is there any such crime as "disturbing the peace" anymore? Are "peaceful protesters" keeping or disturbing the peace?

4) Are folks who chant and scream "no justice no peace" really intent on peaceful protest? Or is this incitement to violence and threatening behavior. Should people who chant this be held accountable for rioting and looting that almost always follows their "peaceful" protests and chanting?

5) Does engaging in protests and rioting confer immunity on people from contracting the Covid 19 virus? Why do so many politicians condone the protests while insisting that opening businesses, visiting relatives or attending other gatherings put everyone at risk for the virus? Is there a vaccine for hypocrisy?

6) Whatever happened to the prayerful, candlelight vigil as a form of protest? Don't prayerful, candlelight vigils really better exemplify the peaceful protest?

7) And finally, is the right to protest and unlimited right? If so, where are the protests for protection of police? For the preservation of Western Civilization and it's monuments? Cant people protest unjust killings on both sides?
My theological positions:

-God created us in His image, not the other way around.
-The Bible is redeemed by it's good parts.
-Pure monotheism, simple repentance.
-YHVH is LORD
-The real Jesus is not God, the real YHVH is not a monster.
-Eternal life is a gift from the Living God.
-Keep the Commandments, keep your salvation.
-I have accepted YHVH as my Heavenly Father, LORD and Savior.

I am inspired by Jesus to worship none but YHVH, and to serve only Him.

Zzyzx
Site Supporter
Posts: 25053
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 10:38 pm
Location: Bible Belt USA
Has thanked: 33 times
Been thanked: 52 times

Re: Regarding the protests.

Post #2

Post by Zzyzx »

.
[Replying to Elijah John in post #1]

1st Amendment to the Constitution: 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.

How should the part in bold be modified to fit present situations?

Require permits (and fees)?
Limit the number of people?
Restrict where citizens may assemble?
Limit hours permissible?

Is it okay for states or cities to abridge the right to peaceably assemble?

If states and cities are legally entitled to ignore the 1st Amendment to restrict free exercise of right of assembly, they are equally entitled to also ignore the 1st Amendment and restrict free exercise of religion.

Fair enough?

I agree that perpetrators of violence and damage should be arrested and prosecuted (just as should 'bad cops'). However, non-violent / non-damaging people have every right to protest.

It seems s though many people are all for the Constitution as long as it protects them and their agenda -- not so much when it protects others or different agendas.
.
Non-Theist

If you stop claiming knowledge of invisible, undetectable unicorns, I will stop challenging your claim. Same goes for gods

ANY of the thousands of "gods" proposed, imagined, worshiped, loved, feared, and/or fought over by humans MAY exist -- awaiting verifiable evidence

For a quick tutorial on science vs. religion, compare modern internet weather radar to ancient religious beliefs and superstitions about weather

"Demand money with the threat of violence and you'll get arrested. Do it with the threat of eternal damnation and it's tax deductible"

AgnosticBoy
Sage
Posts: 758
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 1:44 pm
Has thanked: 17 times
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Regarding the protests.

Post #3

Post by AgnosticBoy »

Zzyzx wrote:
Tue Jun 16, 2020 8:11 pm
.
[Replying to Elijah John in post #1]

1st Amendment to the Constitution: 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.

How should the part in bold be modified to fit present situations?

Require permits (and fees)?
Limit the number of people?
Restrict where citizens may assemble?
Limit hours permissible?

Is it okay for states or cities to abridge the right to peaceably assemble?

If states and cities are legally entitled to ignore the 1st Amendment to restrict free exercise of right of assembly, they are equally entitled to also ignore the 1st Amendment and restrict free exercise of religion.

Fair enough?

I agree that perpetrators of violence and damage should be arrested and prosecuted (just as should 'bad cops'). However, non-violent / non-damaging people have every right to protest.

It seems s though many people are all for the Constitution as long as it protects them and their agenda -- not so much when it protects others or different agendas.
Elijah's questions, 2 thru 7, are not covered by your point. Does "peaceful" only exclude violence or does it exclude any type of unruly or disruptive behavior? I think we can all agree that "threats" of harm should not be covered under the first amendment. Some interpret "no justice, NO peace" (isn't that against "peaceful" protest?) as a threat, especially given all of the looting going on. Yet, that is a common theme expressed during Black Lives Matter protests. We can't also forget the domestic terrorists that have taken over Seattle. Their mayor calls it a "festival". How does a "festival" advocate for Black people? The Liberals are just all over the place.

User avatar
Tcg
Prodigy
Posts: 4274
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
Location: Third Stone
Has thanked: 17 times
Been thanked: 27 times

Re: Regarding the protests.

Post #4

Post by Tcg »

AgnosticBoy wrote:
Tue Jun 16, 2020 10:16 pm

The Liberals are just all over the place.
Which of EJ's questions is this odd proclamation intended to address or is it a mistake to consider it an attempt to provide relevant debate?


Tcg
To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.

- American Atheists


Not believing isn't the same as believing not.

- wiploc


I must assume that knowing is better than not knowing, venturing than not venturing; and that magic and illusion, however rich, however alluring, ultimately weaken the human spirit.

- Irvin D. Yalom

Zzyzx
Site Supporter
Posts: 25053
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 10:38 pm
Location: Bible Belt USA
Has thanked: 33 times
Been thanked: 52 times

Re: Regarding the protests.

Post #5

Post by Zzyzx »

.
[Replying to AgnosticBoy in post #3]

Do you agree with:

"If states and cities are legally entitled to ignore the 1st Amendment to restrict free exercise of right of assembly, they are equally entitled to also ignore the 1st Amendment and restrict free exercise of religion."
.
Non-Theist

If you stop claiming knowledge of invisible, undetectable unicorns, I will stop challenging your claim. Same goes for gods

ANY of the thousands of "gods" proposed, imagined, worshiped, loved, feared, and/or fought over by humans MAY exist -- awaiting verifiable evidence

For a quick tutorial on science vs. religion, compare modern internet weather radar to ancient religious beliefs and superstitions about weather

"Demand money with the threat of violence and you'll get arrested. Do it with the threat of eternal damnation and it's tax deductible"

User avatar
koko
Scholar
Posts: 338
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2016 11:24 pm
Location: Twin Cities
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 26 times

Re: Regarding the protests.

Post #6

Post by koko »







It was literal criminal assault. ⁣




As usual, it is the right wingers who are engaging in criminal violence with police looking the other way. At any other time the police would have stopped it.

Forum right wingers continue to insist it is the left that is violent. The record, however, shows it is the right that are the violent ones.





WARNING: Content matter - posted for informational purposes only, not to offend.

AgnosticBoy
Sage
Posts: 758
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 1:44 pm
Has thanked: 17 times
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Regarding the protests.

Post #7

Post by AgnosticBoy »

Zzyzx wrote:
Tue Jun 16, 2020 11:38 pm
.
[Replying to AgnosticBoy in post #3]

Do you agree with:

"If states and cities are legally entitled to ignore the 1st Amendment to restrict free exercise of right of assembly, they are equally entitled to also ignore the 1st Amendment and restrict free exercise of religion."
Here is another way to look at it. If states, like New York, are willing to allow protests even while there's a viral pandemic, then they should also be willing to allow religious expression such as public gatherings for Church service.

Fair enough?

Post Reply