Social Question

JLeslie's avatar

Would America give ISIS a permit to assemble?

Asked by JLeslie (55375points) August 18th, 2017 from iPhone

In America we have the right to assembly, and even groups like the KKK are given permits.

Is the KKK, and groups like it, any different than ISIS?

Should America be rethinking exceptions to freedom of speech and the right to assemble? Other countries outlaw swastikas and hate speech and even what you can name your child, while America has stayed fairly steadfast at protecting these freedoms in one of the broadest interpretations in the world.

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

31 Answers

Tropical_Willie's avatar

No ISIS advocates the overthrow of the USA government. ISIS wants to kill and remove all non-Muslims.
Also the North Koreans couldn’t get a parade permit. Too many missile launchers.

I’m not sure about aliens from Roswell.

JLeslie's avatar

^^I feel like the KKK does the same. I’m sure when Obama was president the KKK probably wanted to “overthrow” the government. They perceive the government to be full of Jewish people who want to control and replace them.

Tropical_Willie's avatar

David Duke knows where he has “Friends”!

elbanditoroso's avatar

It’s unlikely that ISIS representatives would even ask for a permit. ISIS has been designated a terrorist organization, so if someone identified themselves as an ISIS member, they would likely be arrested before the assembly permit would even be issued.

All of that said, we already have laws about assembly. I don’t think those need to be changed. It’s the same slipper slope argument. If we stop ISIS from marching today, what’s the limit – can we stop Jews from marching tomorrow? Atheists from congregating next week? Democrats holding meetings in October?

Muad_Dib's avatar

Nazis. You draw the line at Nazis.

elbanditoroso's avatar

@Muad_Dib – today we draw the line at Nazis.

The problem is that I do not trust US politicians, particularly Republicans. There is nothing to prevent a president next year, or five years from now, to expand the definition of who can and cannot assemble, to match the political needs of that day.

If the religious right had the political power, they would stop Pro-choice people from assembling, because they push for abortion rights. The religious right already blockages Planned Parenthood clinics.

It’s a very very slippery slope.

Muad_Dib's avatar

The Supreme Court has already covered this issue. People who incite violence, and hate speech, are not covered by the first amendment. Period.

JLeslie's avatar

@Muad_Dib We allow the KKK to march/assemble in many cities around the country. Are you saying that’s illegal according to the constitution?

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

They get away with it by using a thin veneer of language that is not laced with what is considered hate speech. It also aides them in indoctrinating new members.
The only good thing to come out of this latest mess is that it will be very easy to deny them permits now out of concerns for public safety.

JLeslie's avatar

^^I wouldn’t be so sure.

Muad_Dib's avatar

The University of Florida in Gainesville has already done so.

JLeslie's avatar

I was just reading up about Florida, the state, not the school, and it seems there are a lot of KKK chapters right near where I live. Supposedly, Florida is number two in the country for KKK chapters. Lovely.

Muad_Dib's avatar

It’s never been different. You used to be able to tell by what color shoelaces they wore on their Docs

seawulf575's avatar

We probably would give ISIS a permit to assemble. But we probably shouldn’t. they are a group that has effectively declared war on us. That would be like inviting the Germans to protest in this country during WWII

gorillapaws's avatar

The right to peaceably assemble should be respected for everyone, even shitheads. Pro-environmental groups protesting the DAPL and many of the people involved with Occupy Wall Street were labeled as “terrorists” or “traitors” by some in government. If we allow the government to choose who are allowed to protest, then that power will eventually be abused and will ultimately lead to tyranny. So yes, even Nazis, and the KKK have a right to protest—as despicable as they are.

Furthermore, look at the legislation aimed at preventing protest of Israel’s illegal occupation and illegal settlement expansion for how these types of restrictions can be abused. It’s possible to disagree with the current Israeli administration’s policies without being anti-Semitic. It’s also easy for politicians to label all protesters against Israel’s policies as anti-Semites, especially when they’re receiving huge donations from AIPAC to ram the legislation through.

Espiritus_Corvus's avatar

LOL. “We don’t negotiate with terrorists.”

flutherother's avatar

In the US they would probably also get a permit to assemble automatic weapons.

janbb's avatar

The ACLU says it is rethinking its policy of defending Nazis and others that incite violence the right to assembly.

JLeslie's avatar

@janbb Interesting.

janbb's avatar

Yes, an article in the NY Times today.

gorillapaws's avatar

@janbb I find that disappointing. A well-known tactic of things that deserved to be protested is to plant a fake protester in the group who acts violently or destroys property to make the entire group of protestors look bad. I’ve always respected the ACLU for being willing to defend groups that they disagree with in nearly every way.

janbb's avatar

@gorillapaws It’s not my understanding although I didn’t read the whole article. I think they will continue to defend freedom of speech for abhorent believers but not if they are promoting violence. It’s the “fire in a crowded movie theater” test I believe. I should read the whole article but it’s a busy day.

JLeslie's avatar

Do we bother to interrogate or research the violent people when arrested to find out who they really represent?

gorillapaws's avatar

@JLeslie Yes, of course. Just like we would for any violent crime if we suspect others may be involved in it.

JLeslie's avatar

Such an awful state of affairs these days. Makes me want to just go on some remote island and not know about any of it.

janbb's avatar

Here’s the whole article. I gave misinformation. It says they are wrestling with the issues of whom to defend.

Jaxk's avatar

Actually, hate speech is protected. Inciting violence is not. Both ISIS and Al Qeada have declared war on us and that in and of itself is inciting violence. I don’t see anyway they could get licensed to protest. The problem with hate speech is that it is too subjective. Once you break down that wall, it’s never clear where it will go. Is the Westboro Baptist Church hate speech? I think so, you may not. I dislike ‘slippery slope’ arguments but this is one that can be dangerous. Hate speech can be defined by those in power and expands over time. Freedom of speech is a big deal for me and I would hate to see it left to the whims of whoever is in power.

janbb's avatar

Got the link?

Jaxk's avatar

I’m not sure what you want linked but try this one

janbb's avatar

^^ That was a mispost. Meant to be a text to someone about something else entirely.. Sorry. (Sardonic LOL.).

kenwor's avatar

Advocating immediate violence is the exception in free speech. Otherwise anything goes. Even violent speech is allowed if it isn’t immediate.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther