Judge: Foreigners can sue U.S. pastor over sermons

 A federal judge has backed a homosexual-rights group in its claim that members were injured by an American pastor’s biblical preaching in Uganda against homosexual behavior.  But the ruling from Judge Michael Posner in a case brought by Sexual Minorities Uganda against Pastor Scott Lively of Abiding Truth Ministries could mean much more. It could establish that an international consensus disavowing long-held biblical standards could trump the U.S. Constitution.


SMUG alleges Lively must be punished for criticizing homosexuality, calling his speech a “crime against humanity” in violation of “international law.”  The plaintiffs allege that the Alien Tort Statute in the United States allows them to make the charge in the U.S.
 
Lively’s attorney, Horatio Mihet of Liberty Counsel, said his client’s preaching is protected by the Constitution.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/08/judge-foreigners-can-sue-u-s-pastor-over-sermons/#r6KG3ZglKyJpr82v.99

Have we completely lost Freedom of Speech now?

Hmm

I would tell you if I could tell you, but it is illegal to do so, so I won't.

Dennis324 wrote:
Have we completely lost Freedom of Speech now?

I thought the whole point of America was that you could sue anyone over anything you wanted - or try to sue them at least? :-P

No, seriously, the outcome of the trial depends (or should depend) on whether or not what Lively has said constitutes "hate speech". And given that he is seen as one of the driving forces behind a Ugandan bill that called for the death penalty for gays (although he said later that he didn't support the death penalty part, he was OK with the part where gays would get life imprisonment) , and co-authored a book that effectively blamed gays for Nazism and the Holocaust, there's probably a good case to be heard for that.

Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from responsibility. If you say something inflammatory that could result in other people getting hurt or even killed, then yup, you have the right to say it, but you also have the responsibility not to say it.

So we shouldve sued hitler for hate speech? Lol. WWII rewrite

Dennis324 wrote:

 A federal judge has backed a homosexual-rights group in its claim that members were injured by an American pastor’s biblical preaching in Uganda against homosexual behavior.  But the ruling from Judge Michael Posner in a case brought by Sexual Minorities Uganda against Pastor Scott Lively of Abiding Truth Ministries could mean much more. It could establish that an international consensus disavowing long-held biblical standards could trump the U.S. Constitution.


SMUG alleges Lively must be punished for criticizing homosexuality, calling his speech a “crime against humanity” in violation of “international law.”  The plaintiffs allege that the Alien Tort Statute in the United States allows them to make the charge in the U.S.
 
Lively’s attorney, Horatio Mihet of Liberty Counsel, said his client’s preaching is protected by the Constitution.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/08/judge-foreigners-can-sue-u-s-pastor-over-sermons/#r6KG3ZglKyJpr82v.99

Have we completely lost Freedom of Speech now?

The man went to Uganda and advocated that the country create a law that allows for the systematic execution of homosexuals. This isn't free speech, its murder, its genocide. Look into this man's history. It isn't that he simply made some bigoted statements in a sermon, he traveled overseas and advocated for the killing of gays. He's got blood on his hands. All the world can hope for is that some criminal charges are brought against him and that he gets put away where he cant do any more harm. Or is this the kind of man that you and the Christian right want to stand behind.

Is soliciting someone to kill your ex-wife now protected under the freedom of speech?

Miles1 wrote:

Dennis324 wrote:
Have we completely lost Freedom of Speech now?

I thought the whole point of America was that you could sue anyone over anything you wanted - or try to sue them at least? :-P

No, seriously, the outcome of the trial depends (or should depend) on whether or not what Lively has said constitutes "hate speech". And given that he is seen as one of the driving forces behind a Ugandan bill that called for the death penalty for gays (although he said later that he didn't support the death penalty part, he was OK with the part where gays would get life imprisonment) , and co-authored a book that effectively blamed gays for Nazism and the Holocaust, there's probably a good case to be heard for that.  

Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from responsibility. If you say something inflammatory that could result in other people getting hurt or even killed, then yup, you have the right to say it, but you also have the responsibility not to say it.

You know what we should do??? We should require speech safety classes and ensure everyone who wants to enjoy free speech carries a registration card. We can also tax words and disallow any and all high capacity sentences.

That should be a start to help curb hate speech, but we also need to be proactive in our approach. We need to build a central registry of all those that use free speech in public and use that list to perform no-knock raids to take that free speech away if the ndividual suffers from things like ADD, Goes through a divorce or had a misdemeaner drug charge back in the 1970's. We can also compile a terror watch list and include all ex-military and anyone we think is proConstitution. Those people will only use free speech for things we don't like anyway.

Marconius wrote: We need to build a central registry of all those that use free speech in public and use that list to perform no-knock raids to take that free speech away if the individual suffers from things like ADD, Goes through a divorce or had a misdemeaner drug charge back in the 1970's.

Or has Tourettes, don't forget about those troublemakers.....

Miles1 wrote:

Marconius wrote: We need to build a central registry of all those that use free speech in public and use that list to perform no-knock raids to take that free speech away if the individual suffers from things like ADD, Goes through a divorce or had a misdemeaner drug charge back in the 1970's.

Or has Tourettes, don't forget about those troublemakers.....

Damnit Miles........that is why I hate it when you disappear for days or weeks. You do a damn good job of catching the sarcasm the rest of us miss  

Bryant wrote:

Dennis324 wrote:

 A federal judge has backed a homosexual-rights group in its claim that members were injured by an American pastor’s biblical preaching in Uganda against homosexual behavior.  But the ruling from Judge Michael Posner in a case brought by Sexual Minorities Uganda against Pastor Scott Lively of Abiding Truth Ministries could mean much more. It could establish that an international consensus disavowing long-held biblical standards could trump the U.S. Constitution.


SMUG alleges Lively must be punished for criticizing homosexuality, calling his speech a “crime against humanity” in violation of “international law.”  The plaintiffs allege that the Alien Tort Statute in the United States allows them to make the charge in the U.S.
 
Lively’s attorney, Horatio Mihet of Liberty Counsel, said his client’s preaching is protected by the Constitution.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/08/judge-foreigners-can-sue-u-s-pastor-over-sermons/#r6KG3ZglKyJpr82v.99

Have we completely lost Freedom of Speech now?

The man went to Uganda and advocated that the country create a law that allows for the systematic execution of homosexuals.  This isn't free speech, its murder, its genocide.  Look into this man's history.  It isn't that he simply made some bigoted statements in a sermon, he traveled overseas and advocated for the killing of gays.  He's got blood on his hands.  All the world can hope for is that some criminal charges are brought against him and that he gets put away where he cant do any more harm.  Or is this the kind of man that you and the Christian right want to stand behind.

What we ought to do with him, is employ him as a political pole watcher.

Bryant wrote:

Dennis324 wrote:

 A federal judge has backed a homosexual-rights group in its claim that members were injured by an American pastor’s biblical preaching in Uganda against homosexual behavior.  But the ruling from Judge Michael Posner in a case brought by Sexual Minorities Uganda against Pastor Scott Lively of Abiding Truth Ministries could mean much more. It could establish that an international consensus disavowing long-held biblical standards could trump the U.S. Constitution.


SMUG alleges Lively must be punished for criticizing homosexuality, calling his speech a “crime against humanity” in violation of “international law.”  The plaintiffs allege that the Alien Tort Statute in the United States allows them to make the charge in the U.S.
 
Lively’s attorney, Horatio Mihet of Liberty Counsel, said his client’s preaching is protected by the Constitution.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/08/judge-foreigners-can-sue-u-s-pastor-over-sermons/#r6KG3ZglKyJpr82v.99

Have we completely lost Freedom of Speech now?

The man went to Uganda and advocated that the country create a law that allows for the systematic execution of homosexuals.  This isn't free speech, its murder, its genocide.  Look into this man's history.  It isn't that he simply made some bigoted statements in a sermon, he traveled overseas and advocated for the killing of gays.  He's got blood on his hands.  All the world can hope for is that some criminal charges are brought against him and that he gets put away where he cant do any more harm.  Or is this the kind of man that you and the Christian right want to stand behind.

Not at all.  He doesn't represent me or the Christian Right.  but that isn't the issue.  The issue is...can the Fed govt or an international body prevent US citizens from speaking freely here in the USA?
 
The first amendment, ratified, December 15, 1791, states:
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.
 
Hollywood and Secularists groups have leaned heavily on this amendment to attack the fabric of our society via the media.  Groups like CAIR, Westborough Bapt Church and Louis Farrakhan use this amendment to say pretty vile things.  And the liberals and progressives defend their right at practically every turn.  Their cry is 'you don't have to listen to it'.
 
But now...are churches in America going to have to omit portions of the Scriptures for fear of getting sued?

Miles1 wrote:

Dennis324 wrote:
Have we completely lost Freedom of Speech now?

I thought the whole point of America was that you could sue anyone over anything you wanted - or try to sue them at least? :-P

No, seriously, the outcome of the trial depends (or should depend) on whether or not what Lively has said constitutes "hate speech". And given that he is seen as one of the driving forces behind a Ugandan bill that called for the death penalty for gays (although he said later that he didn't support the death penalty part, he was OK with the part where gays would get life imprisonment) , and co-authored a book that effectively blamed gays for Nazism and the Holocaust, there's probably a good case to be heard for that.  

Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from responsibility. If you say something inflammatory that could result in other people getting hurt or even killed, then yup, you have the right to say it, but you also have the responsibility not to say it.

Agreed.  And if this suit was in Uganda I wouldn't have said a thing.  People must obey the laws of the country they are visiting.  But a FEDERAL judge ruled in this case.  Why is a Federal Judge ruling on this unless the suit is being brought here in the USA? 

Just saying, advocating for a law, any law, is a protected fundamental right at least here, and surely under international law.

Dennis324 wrote:

Bryant wrote:

Dennis324 wrote:

 A federal judge has backed a homosexual-rights group in its claim that members were injured by an American pastor’s biblical preaching in Uganda against homosexual behavior.  But the ruling from Judge Michael Posner in a case brought by Sexual Minorities Uganda against Pastor Scott Lively of Abiding Truth Ministries could mean much more. It could establish that an international consensus disavowing long-held biblical standards could trump the U.S. Constitution.


SMUG alleges Lively must be punished for criticizing homosexuality, calling his speech a “crime against humanity” in violation of “international law.”  The plaintiffs allege that the Alien Tort Statute in the United States allows them to make the charge in the U.S.
 
Lively’s attorney, Horatio Mihet of Liberty Counsel, said his client’s preaching is protected by the Constitution.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/08/judge-foreigners-can-sue-u-s-pastor-over-sermons/#r6KG3ZglKyJpr82v.99

Have we completely lost Freedom of Speech now?

The man went to Uganda and advocated that the country create a law that allows for the systematic execution of homosexuals.  This isn't free speech, its murder, its genocide.  Look into this man's history.  It isn't that he simply made some bigoted statements in a sermon, he traveled overseas and advocated for the killing of gays.  He's got blood on his hands.  All the world can hope for is that some criminal charges are brought against him and that he gets put away where he cant do any more harm.  Or is this the kind of man that you and the Christian right want to stand behind.

Not at all.  He doesn't represent me or the Christian Right.  but that isn't the issue.  The issue is...can the Fed govt or an international body prevent US citizens from speaking freely here in the USA?
 
The first amendment, ratified, December 15, 1791, states:
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.
 
Hollywood and Secularists groups have leaned heavily on this amendment to attack the fabric of our society via the media.  Groups like CAIR, Westborough Bapt Church and Louis Farrakhan use this amendment to say pretty vile things.  And the liberals and progressives defend their right at practically every turn.  Their cry is 'you don't have to listen to it'.
 
But now...are churches in America going to have to omit portions of the Scriptures for fear of getting sued?

I ask again, is asking a hitman to off your political rival protected speech?

Did the guy ask anyone to murder anyone and actually oay them to do it? Of course not. He would be protected here in the states advocating the same law. HE WAS ADVOCATING A LAW not starting riots. It doesnt matter what your opinions are on the law, anymore than it matters what your opinions are on onamacare. Youvan legally advocate for any law.

Dennis324 wrote:

Not at all.  He doesn't represent me or the Christian Right.  but that isn't the issue.  The issue is...can the Fed govt or an international body prevent US citizens from speaking freely here in the USA?
 
The first amendment, ratified, December 15, 1791, states:
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.

Well what about libel and slander laws then? How do you square them with the whole freedom of speech thing?

Miles1 wrote:

Dennis324 wrote:

Not at all.  He doesn't represent me or the Christian Right.  but that isn't the issue.  The issue is...can the Fed govt or an international body prevent US citizens from speaking freely here in the USA?
 
The first amendment, ratified, December 15, 1791, states:
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.

Well what about libel and slander laws then? How do you square them with the whole freedom of speech thing?

Who has been slandered? 

If a minister says that Gay's are sinning in the yes of God, and a protester says The United States is torturing people, which one is slander?  If a Christian group protests outside an abortion clinic and a protest movement burns the US flag in from of the Supreme Court, which one is slander or libel?  Are not both acts protected?

Or at least they were.

Bryant wrote:

Dennis324 wrote:

Bryant wrote:

Dennis324 wrote:

 A federal judge has backed a homosexual-rights group in its claim that members were injured by an American pastor’s biblical preaching in Uganda against homosexual behavior.  But the ruling from Judge Michael Posner in a case brought by Sexual Minorities Uganda against Pastor Scott Lively of Abiding Truth Ministries could mean much more. It could establish that an international consensus disavowing long-held biblical standards could trump the U.S. Constitution.


SMUG alleges Lively must be punished for criticizing homosexuality, calling his speech a “crime against humanity” in violation of “international law.”  The plaintiffs allege that the Alien Tort Statute in the United States allows them to make the charge in the U.S.
 
Lively’s attorney, Horatio Mihet of Liberty Counsel, said his client’s preaching is protected by the Constitution.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/08/judge-foreigners-can-sue-u-s-pastor-over-sermons/#r6KG3ZglKyJpr82v.99

Have we completely lost Freedom of Speech now?

The man went to Uganda and advocated that the country create a law that allows for the systematic execution of homosexuals.  This isn't free speech, its murder, its genocide.  Look into this man's history.  It isn't that he simply made some bigoted statements in a sermon, he traveled overseas and advocated for the killing of gays.  He's got blood on his hands.  All the world can hope for is that some criminal charges are brought against him and that he gets put away where he cant do any more harm.  Or is this the kind of man that you and the Christian right want to stand behind.

Not at all.  He doesn't represent me or the Christian Right.  but that isn't the issue.  The issue is...can the Fed govt or an international body prevent US citizens from speaking freely here in the USA?
 
The first amendment, ratified, December 15, 1791, states:
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.
 
Hollywood and Secularists groups have leaned heavily on this amendment to attack the fabric of our society via the media.  Groups like CAIR, Westborough Bapt Church and Louis Farrakhan use this amendment to say pretty vile things.  And the liberals and progressives defend their right at practically every turn.  Their cry is 'you don't have to listen to it'.
 
But now...are churches in America going to have to omit portions of the Scriptures for fear of getting sued?

I ask again, is asking a hitman to off your political rival protected speech?

I would imagine that would be highly illegal.  But was I defending that?  I don't think I said anything about that.

Hitman comparison doesnt hold water. If that were the case, he'd have been arrested for conspiracy to commit murder. I could advocate for a law making it legal to kill unborn infants, oh nevermind, too late. I could advocate for a law to execute all democrats, and thats protected. Now onviously such a law would never hold up in court, butthe advocation of it is legal

Sir Pun wrote:Hitman comparison doesnt hold water. If that were the case, he'd have been arrested for conspiracy to commit murder. I could advocate for a law making it legal to kill unborn infants, oh nevermind, too late. I could advocate for a law to execute all democrats, and thats protected. Now onviously such a law would never hold up in court, butthe advocation of it is legal

  Yep.  Just don't say homosexuality or gay marriage is wrong.

Dennis324 wrote:

Sir Pun wrote:Hitman comparison doesnt hold water. If that were the case, he'd have been arrested for conspiracy to commit murder. I could advocate for a law making it legal to kill unborn infants, oh nevermind, too late. I could advocate for a law to execute all democrats, and thats protected. Now onviously such a law would never hold up in court, butthe advocation of it is legal

  Yep.  Just don't say homosexuality or gay marriage is wrong.

He didn't simply say they were wrong, he consulted with the Ugandan government and convinced them to take draconian action against homosexuals.

Dennis324 wrote:

Bryant wrote:

Dennis324 wrote:

Bryant wrote:

Dennis324 wrote:

 A federal judge has backed a homosexual-rights group in its claim that members were injured by an American pastor’s biblical preaching in Uganda against homosexual behavior.  But the ruling from Judge Michael Posner in a case brought by Sexual Minorities Uganda against Pastor Scott Lively of Abiding Truth Ministries could mean much more. It could establish that an international consensus disavowing long-held biblical standards could trump the U.S. Constitution.


SMUG alleges Lively must be punished for criticizing homosexuality, calling his speech a “crime against humanity” in violation of “international law.”  The plaintiffs allege that the Alien Tort Statute in the United States allows them to make the charge in the U.S.
 
Lively’s attorney, Horatio Mihet of Liberty Counsel, said his client’s preaching is protected by the Constitution.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/08/judge-foreigners-can-sue-u-s-pastor-over-sermons/#r6KG3ZglKyJpr82v.99

Have we completely lost Freedom of Speech now?

The man went to Uganda and advocated that the country create a law that allows for the systematic execution of homosexuals.  This isn't free speech, its murder, its genocide.  Look into this man's history.  It isn't that he simply made some bigoted statements in a sermon, he traveled overseas and advocated for the killing of gays.  He's got blood on his hands.  All the world can hope for is that some criminal charges are brought against him and that he gets put away where he cant do any more harm.  Or is this the kind of man that you and the Christian right want to stand behind.

Not at all.  He doesn't represent me or the Christian Right.  but that isn't the issue.  The issue is...can the Fed govt or an international body prevent US citizens from speaking freely here in the USA?
 
The first amendment, ratified, December 15, 1791, states:
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.
 
Hollywood and Secularists groups have leaned heavily on this amendment to attack the fabric of our society via the media.  Groups like CAIR, Westborough Bapt Church and Louis Farrakhan use this amendment to say pretty vile things.  And the liberals and progressives defend their right at practically every turn.  Their cry is 'you don't have to listen to it'.
 
But now...are churches in America going to have to omit portions of the Scriptures for fear of getting sued?

I ask again, is asking a hitman to off your political rival protected speech?

I would imagine that would be highly illegal.  But was I defending that?  I don't think I said anything about that.

This man asked the Ugandan government to execute or imprison all homosexuals. How is this different? He asked and they did. This man is the definition of evil.

Well..he shouldn't have done that. A case might be made then that he conspired with someone to murder.  But as I understand it, SMUG alleges Lively must be punished for criticizing homosexuality.  Not conspiring to murder.

The implication then in America is that we cant criticize anyone or anything.

Dennis324 wrote:

Miles1 wrote:
Well what about libel and slander laws then? How do you square them with the whole freedom of speech thing?

Who has been slandered? 

I didn't mean in this particular case, I meant in general.