The government does have a legal right and a obligation to curtail free speech in regards to public safety and public decency. Including vulgar and bigoted material that is publicly viewed. In this case the court has held up what is considered a public decency law. The same kind of laws that prevent you from running nude through the streets, streaming off a massive list of profanity in public, or engaging in sexual conduct in public.
Free speech is not speech free of civic responsibility. You are free to express your views in a civil manner. That does not cause undue harm to others. Nor should you be wishing to cause harm to others. You are not permitted to run into a crowded building screaming fire. Any more then you are permitted to hang a billboard with hate speech that causes mental anguish to others in your community.
Further more those that rent publicly viewed space are liable for the contents. It is a matter of contract law. No entity is required to continue within a contract that has been deemed illegal by the government. Once the pastor was found to be a violation of the law the contract ceased at that point forward. The provider had no obligation to refund said money.
Frankly it was a right call by the court. The material was publicly indecent, and thus not suitable for public viewing. Just as much as a person presented in the nude, or a list of profanity. Further more it is blatantly obvious that the material was intentionally bigoted in nature. Which is the very definition of the intent to cause harm.
Lastly I would say that the title is offensive, and this thread should be locked. Though I would say if your earnest in your interest to discuss this. Create a new thread with a less heinous title, and ask a moderator to lock and link this thread for you. Those words being used have been a rallying cry for the persecution of homosexuals.
Existing User Log In
New User Registration
Register for a free account to gain full access to the VGChartz Network and join our thriving community.
