It's just one newspaper article, which is not enough information, and it's irrelevant to my reply that they're Muslims, but it sounds like the issue is their behavior - whether they were disruptive - and not free speech. Freedom of speech does not include the right to infringe upon the rights of others - it just means you are free to speak your mind in public.

Actually, the article links to several others, so plenty of info is available.

Its the Muslims who are claiming their right to Free Speech includes shutting up the Jew who is speaking.

And they appear to me to be wrong - it is their behavior that is being responded to, not their free speech. That is the point I was making.

Ouch - touché.

Oh, I agree with that Jack. My point is that the Muslims are saying they have the free speech right to make the Jew shut up.

Like I said, always rushing to defend the Muslims as long as you can attack Christians.

We get it, compguy. O.K.?

And I agree with you, Mike - so we are in agreement.

Compsciguy's point is to show genuine examples of free speech rights being violated because of people speaking for atheism. I don't think he, or I, is defending the Muslims.

I agree with you Jack that "freedom of speech does not include the right to infringe upon the rights of others". I am not defending the Muslims discussed in the original post. Rather, I posted my links to demonstrate that it is a common practice of Christians to do virtually identical things. I can fill pages on this forum with such links, but the point is made.

Not only are you defending Muslims, but you are defending atheists who would like to shut Christians up. Linking to atheist sites does not make your point. It makes my point.

I know plenty of them who would like to eliminate all public expresson of religion, and they have already done a great deal to Shut Up public religious expression in schools, and in support of this they love to quote the first amendment. In part. And there is always one part they leave out.

Can you guess which part?

Hmmm. I didn't look at the links, but my impression was that they were about Christians trying to shut atheists up.

I think one of the issues is the same one that was mentioned at the start of the Mosque thread: there is a difference between the free speech rights of individuals in public venues, and the rights of the government to endorse a religion over other religions, or non-religion. One is a free speech issue, and one is a separation of church and state issue.

So were any of csg's links to situations where atheists were infringing on the free speech rights of Christians?

Mike writes, "and they have already done a great deal to Shut Up public religious expression in schools."

What the law has established is that schools themselves, or people acting in their capacity as school officials, cannot initiate or participate in religious acts, such as having students be led in prayer. Such acts endorse one religion over another, and are prohibited. Individual religious expression by students is strongly protected by the law. Individual religious expression by teachers is protected, but of course there are lines between that individual expression and the teacher acting in his or her official capacity. Therefore, there are sometimes court cases that have to judge whether that line has been crossed.

There are also cases of school officials not properly understanding student's rights to religious expression, and thus incorrectly limiting them. These situations sometimes lead to court cases also.

LOL! Yeah right! You didn't even read the links.

It is not okay to disrupt a public speech by an Ambassador. It is not okay for a street preacher to verbally abuse people. It is not okay to treat wearing a shirt a crime. It is not okay to ban a billboard for questioning religion. It is not okay to bully people.

It isn't? You set a great example. (And you're right, I didn't read all the links. But you did link to an atheist site, now didn't you? And you often simply post a link without comment, as indeed you have dozens and dozens of times, and seem to think that constitutes some kind of argument. I quit paying attention to that kind of spamming long ago. You must be kidding if you expect me to wade throw all those when you don't even bother to comment or provide a context.)