Skip to main content

View Diary: The War on Atheism (185 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Your first sentence (0+ / 0-)

    Is an important distinction, "all but" telling someone to commit lawless action is protected speech.  The requirement is an incitement of "imminent lawless action,"  See Brandenburg v. Ohio.  Imminence is an extremely high bar.  The Brandenburg case involved a KKK rally where a gunweilding Klansman told a crowd that they needed to seek revenge against the government.  This was protected speech.

    •  I'm not arguing legally. (0+ / 0-)

      I'm arguing this put O'Reilly on the same moral plane as Mussolini's brownshirts and the KKK.

      •  This is a legal argument: (0+ / 0-)

        the First Amendment protections of free speech and against state-endorsed religion are apparently from a different country

        Or at least, a legal argument based quip.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site