Things to avoid, the complete list

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Feb 16, 2004 | 09:02 AM

#11

PLYRS 3

Registered User

Joined: Jul 2001

Posts: 23,749

Likes: 3

From: Erock's my boat!

what is the definition of "unwilling recipient"??

Apr 6, 2004 | 10:44 AM

#12

Russian

Registered User

Joined: Jan 2004

Posts: 772

Likes: 0

From: Boston

Quote:

Originally posted by PLYRS 3
what is the definition of "unwilling recipient"??

I'd like to respond to that, but taking into account your background, education, and intelligence, I am quite sure that you would not be able to understand.

Jun 22, 2004 | 05:52 PM

#13

Nicotunes

Joined: May 2004

Posts: 34,533

Likes: 0

From: San Clemente

Quote:

Originally posted by cthree
As a follow-up to those who say that having a post removed is contrary to their 1st amendment rights under the US constitution and impedes their free speech:
Written about SPAM but as easily applicable to anyone and any communication. Note: Nothing in the Constitution compels us to listen to or view any unwanted communication, whatever its merit...no one has a right to press even 'good' ideas on an unwilling recipient.

Mmmm...when do Berger's meds arrive? And last I heard, there were 9 Supreme Court Justices. To quote one, even the Chief Justice's, and use it as law or Gospel is ludicrous. Granted, an "unwilling recipient" need not listen. That is a far cry from giving him or her the right to decide what others hear or read.

Don't like Howard Stern? Change the channel. Don't like Rush Limbaugh? Change the channel. But don't anyone DARE decide for me what I can read or hear. THAT, my friend, is the spirit of the 1st Amendment.