Any news on the Bartmess case? - Page 22

Jim I do not think that we are that different.   I love Freedom of expression on public places and Forum by its definition which I have provided above is public place. My house is not a public place . Also she was not Pontificating.

 pontificate vb [pɒnˈtɪfɪˌkeɪt] (intr)
1. Also (less commonly) pontify [ˈpɒntɪˌfaɪ] to speak or behave in a pompous or dogmatic manner 
She did not do any such thing. She, as a matter of fact talked about dog topic. It also makes me sick what she did as it does you.
However there is a difference between us and the difference is  that I believe in freedom of speech and such  freedoms dictates  that I must  let people speak and defend their right to speak  even if you do not agree with them an despise them. You obviously do not subscribe to such freedom and would like to shut up  people whom you do not like. That is what dictators do and I lived it,  and I will never suppress anybody's freedom speech.  I think such suppression  is despicable, dangerous and immoral. It is much worse then killing dogs which Janice did. It such  because suppression of freedom of speech killed hundreds of millions people and enslaved whole nations more.
Prager Hans 

Donald Deluxe said

 You worked for the Czechoslovakian state dog breeding program, correct?  Weren't some of those dogs then used to help the state oppress the citizenry?  

I most definitely did not(!!!!!!!!!!!!!!). I have despised use of these dogs for that purpose and was not involved in their breeding. THUS : No I was not involved in such program. I have only rescue these dogs from extinction after communism died and they would otherwise disappear.  During the time these dogs were used against people leaving the country I fought communists and  oppression of my people and subsequently  escaped rather then support such oppressive regime.
NO it was not easy to leave family, friends,  and the home country which I love.
I guess you did not get me on that one.
Prager Hans


I most definitely  I have most definitelly not work for  

I must be confused by the statement on your website that you've been involved with Czech GSDs since 1965, then.  So the state did not control all aspects of breeding or training these dogs under the Communist regime?

Mystere

 Convicted criminals do have strictures on their Constitutional rights, including the First Amendment: their right to vote is taken away, their right to association, privacy, movement, own guns, etc,depending (often) on their crimes. 

Yes that is a function of government. Not mine. If Government rightfully restricts these rights to her, then I will support the government . If she will illegally  post on my forum against govt order then I will not let her talk at my forum.  
Prager Hans
 Yes that is a function of governmant not of my forum.  

Right, as stated in the 1st and 14th Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, to express information, ideas, and opinions free of government restrictions based on content. A modern legal test of the legitimacy of proposed restrictions on freedom of speech was stated in the opinion by Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. in Schenk v. U.S. (1919): a restriction is legitimate only if the speech in question poses a "clear and present danger" — i.e., a risk or threat to safety or to other public interests that is serious and imminent. Many cases involving freedom of speech and of the press also have concerned defamation, obscenity, and prior restraint

http://www.answers.com/topic/freedom-of-speech


Freedom of speech is not a private right and only pertains to governments trying to impose censorship and not private business. Private businesses do not have to allow freedom of speech.

Donald Deluxe

 No it did not. The dogs bred for border patrol were strictly under border patrol control thus gov enforcement. However there were private breeders all over the place. I was not part of any government entity and never could be part of it because my rebellious and anti communist nature  would not pass government scrutiny. I was involved in private training of dogs back then. Also in 1965 I was only 13 years old and was training dogs for fun. When at university  I was forced to join military classes ( not military), but I defected before I was enrolled into military service. The immorality of joining communist military was one of the defining reasons why I have left my home land.
Prager Hans

GSD
I agree with you. However I have put upon myself to respect such right of freedom of speech on my forum. Just like you advocate on PDB censorship ( and that is perfectly OK) then I decided to have there freedom of speech. You decision , my decision.... It was my private decision applied  on my forum as a token of appreciation of such right of freedom of speach and it stemmed and was based on my experience with oppression.  However nowhere do I advocate that every forum should have such provision.  
I am only sorry that many do not understand my motivation and condemn me here for my decision to allow freedom of speach on my forum.
Also
However the freedom of expression in private business is granted by choice people make if they are getting hired. If they do not like such business's restrictions on freedom of speech,  then they can get job elsewhere.
There is no conflict with what I believe and you posted there above.
 And I have stated it here many times.
Hans

Betty

 Hans, like it or not, by allowing her a voice on your board you are giving your approval to what she did and what she will do again just as soon as she has a chance.

I have really hard time to be polite when someone says that  I am giving her approval to what she did.  
As far as forum being my home I have addressed that already.
Prager HansPrager HasI  

But you do not advocate 100% freedom of speech on your forum, Prager.  Ad Hominen attacks are protected according to the First Amendment, even cursing to an extent,  is protected by the First Amendment.  I'm not saying you should, but if your argument for allowing Janice Bartmess to post on your forum is because you believe in the 1st Amendment, Freedom of Speech,  then how in the face of that,  do you legitimize your own exceptions?

I am not going to debate what you do on your forum. That is your right, you own it, but I am trying to show that just because one site decides to do it one way does not make them right or wrong as governments are the reason we have freedom of speech rights/laws and not that this site or your site is breaking freedom of speech rights as private business does not apply to the freedom of speech.  Without governments trying to stifle people we would not need freedom of speech rights.

Hans you know my feelings and I respect your right to run your site the way you feel appropriate, but I also would want others to respect this sites right to do it how we want.

I think most members here are just huge dog lovers and sometimes we only want what is best for the dogs. this site unfortunately played a role in Janices ability to network and abuse more dogs as it gave her a place to legitimize her ongoing sickness and I honestly believe these members do not want her to be able to find more animals and people to victimize or to see her use your site to these ends.

Enjoy the rest of your day,

GSD