Skip to main content

View Diary: UPDATED: Lawsuit to force anti-Islam ad displayed on buses (161 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  They should just be forced to pull the ad (0+ / 0-)

    for false advertising. I'm no Islamic scholar but from what I've read and heard from the Muslim friends is that a fatwa can only be lifted by a respect Islamic leader like an imam. These clowns have no hope of ending a fatwa and would probably only make the matter worse, not better.

    Republican ideas are like sacks of manure but without the sacks.

    by ontheleftcoast on Tue Jun 22, 2010 at 10:38:20 AM PDT

    •  Free speech does (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      enhydra lutris

      require the speech to be true.  Libel laws cover that (if someone is harmed and the claim is known to be false when said), but if I want to say that all Christians believe that world is overseen by a giant beaver named Edger, there is nothin' to stop me.  I don't think God has standing in any US court.

      "Empty vessels make the loudest sound, they have the least wit and are the greatest blabbers" Plato

      by Empty Vessel on Tue Jun 22, 2010 at 11:05:13 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Actually, the advertisement does not (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Catte Nappe, Governor McCheese, yaque

      say they can end a fatwa, just "got questions? get answers." The answer might be as simple as "we can't lift a fatwa but we can tell you why you should not be concerned."

      Done with politics for the night? Have a nice glass of wine with Palate Press: The online wine magazine.

      by dhonig on Tue Jun 22, 2010 at 11:20:52 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  We have no meaningful false advertising (0+ / 0-)

      laws.

      That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt -

      by enhydra lutris on Tue Jun 22, 2010 at 11:29:57 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  That's not true at all (0+ / 0-)

        They just don't apply to claims about religion.  But, tell a furniture store to run an ad for sofas at $1.99 - when there are no such sofas to be had - and see how quickly that gets some unwanted attention.

        •  The falsehood isn't about the religion (0+ / 0-)

          it is about the services that can be provided by the law firm. But they will try to weasel their way out of claiming to offer any real services. But it could tie them up in court and keep this cr*p off the buses in the meantime.

          Republican ideas are like sacks of manure but without the sacks.

          by ontheleftcoast on Tue Jun 22, 2010 at 12:11:00 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  What law firm? (0+ / 0-)

            Is "Refuge from Islam" a law firm?  I think you may be confusing the fact that a law firm has filed suit in this case, but if I'm missing something, just let me know.

            And, I was simply responding to the (ironically false) statement that there are no meaningful false advertising laws in this country.  

            The bigger problem highlighted by this diary may be the fact that there probably shouldn't be advertising on buses and subways at all, to the extent that they are run by state or local governments.  The First Amendment prohibits the government from picking and choosing between messages - deciding which messages are might offend a particular religious group, for example - and there is no reason to force people in close quarters to be subjected to advertisements.

            •  You're right (0+ / 0-)

              I was assuming the Thomas More Law Center that sued to get the ad on the bus was affiliated with the hate group. But while they have the same goals they aren't the same groups. Still, that group is advertising for something they can't really provide.

              I don't see how we can keep ads off buses. City and municipal budgets have been cut so much that buses and other transit providers are forced to use advertisements to make their payrolls. And while they get much of their funding from the government they aren't necessarily government entities. And once you allow ads you pretty much have to allow all of them or you get slapped with a discrimination lawsuit.

              Republican ideas are like sacks of manure but without the sacks.

              by ontheleftcoast on Tue Jun 22, 2010 at 12:55:01 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  Enforcement is negligible, and vast amounts (0+ / 0-)

          of deception and puffery are o.k. thanks to endless gutting of such laws by the courts. Your 1.99 sofa example is aboput what it would take, and if there was a minute asterisk with a footnote explaining that it was a doll house sofa, it might fly too.

          That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt -

          by enhydra lutris on Tue Jun 22, 2010 at 01:13:05 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  There are civil lawsuits as well (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            enhydra lutris

            And it's the threat of enforcement and civil litigation that keep companies somewhat in line.  

            The fact is that Americans want to believe bullshit and because of that, there's not going to be super-strict regulation of ads.  But, that's a long ways from saying that there isn't any meaningful regulation.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site